Question about video archiving on my Mac

[kealolo]

Hi, I'm new to the forum but it seems like a good group of people.

I'm generally pretty tech-competent, but am some years off the cutting edge when it comes to the intersection of video and computing.

My task: I volunteer for a nonprofit group I started decades ago, and the video archives have fallen to me; which is appropriate since I'm the only one who knows what they are. They are currently on various sorts of analog tape - and by various sorts I mean BetacamSP, Betacam, U-maticSP, U-matic, 1" reel, 2" reel, various lesser formats, Hi8, SVHS... and all of these in both PAL and NTSC. Getting the machines just to play them is the toughest part, but some of the footage only exists in this archive and is important stuff.

My general intention is to archive it to hard drive, and then back those up to blu-ray and other hard drives. What I'm wondering about is the format. Whether just saving as a DVcam QT movie, using Quicktime Pro, will capture enough of the original quality. I've had people suggest that I capture it with a dedicated card to do a fatter signal lest I lose a bit of the quality on the Betacam masters, but I'm not sure whether I care that much; and I don't want some proprietary format or to drop a bunch of money on new equipment.

Advice appreciated!

Thanks.

[edDV]

Hi, I'm new to the forum but it seems like a good group of people.

I'm generally pretty tech-competent, but am some years off the cutting edge when it comes to the intersection of video and computing.

My task: I volunteer for a nonprofit group I started decades ago, and the video archives have fallen to me; which is appropriate since I'm the only one who knows what they are. They are currently on various sorts of analog tape - and by various sorts I mean BetacamSP, Betacam, U-maticSP, U-matic, 1" reel, 2" reel, various lesser formats, Hi8, SVHS... and all of these in both PAL and NTSC. Getting the machines just to play them is the toughest part, but some of the footage only exists in this archive and is important stuff.

My general intention is to archive it to hard drive, and then back those up to blu-ray and other hard drives. What I'm wondering about is the format. Whether just saving as a DVcam QT movie, using Quicktime Pro, will capture enough of the original quality. I've had people suggest that I capture it with a dedicated card to do a fatter signal lest I lose a bit of the quality on the Betacam masters, but I'm not sure whether I care that much; and I don't want some proprietary format or to drop a bunch of money on new equipment.

Advice appreciated!

Thanks.

How are you capturing these SD formats to your Mac? What hardware? You should be using a high quality TBC/Frame Sync except for Betacam SP which should have a TBC built in.

DV format is adequate for anything up to Betacam SP.

I capture with Canopus ADVC to DV and also export save to DVD MPeg2 (max bitrate 720x480i or 720x576i). The DV gives the a high quality archive. DVD MPeg2 is easily accessed for distribution. I'm not as happy with interlace h.264 yet and would never deinterlace this type of material.

The only higher quality option is to capture uncompressed.

[edDV]

For 2" Quad, or 1" Type C I suggest you use a pro transfer service. I'd have them transferred to uncompressed 4:2:2 YCbCr AVI files (and then convert these to uncompressed Quicktime, DV and MPeg2 for user access).

[kealolo]

Thanks for the comments.

I haven't started the archiving yet, that's why I'm asking backup questions.

I'll probably be using my stock macs - an intel mini and a G4 867DP. I do have an expensive box that converts it from component into a TBC DV stream to feed into the mac - if it's still working.

There's not much stuff on 1" or 2" and I may just let that sit on the shelf with the 16mm (yes, that's how old the archives are - we were shooting on 16mm when I started the group).

Good to hear that DV format is OK up to betacamSP quality... that's what my eyes tell me. I think in theory part of the 4:2:2 signal is lost, but I think I can live with it. Plus DV is easy to edit in imovie or FCP.

For the SVHS tapes I have been xferring to a DVD deck in 1-hour-per-disk mode for some and 2-hours-per-disk mode in others, and then backing up the DVD's to hard drive, and for duplication.. there are hundreds of those. Nice to be able to feed them into a stand-alone deck.

OK, so I'll probably just use QT Pro to capture the DV stream out of the converter box... are there any tweaks I should know about to optimize the QTP quality?

Thanks gang.

[edDV]

SVHS to a DVD recorder (1Hr mode) is fast and easy but is a lower quality solution vs. DV format and even worse if you use 2 hour mode.

For Hi8, you can use a Digital8 Camcorder/deck (e.g.GV-D200) for direct conversion to DV.

What is this magic hardware capture box?

There is no 4:2:2 resolution in Betacam SP. It has lower bandpass than DV 4:1:1 so DV is more than good enough.

A pro transfer would adjust for luma/chroma levels before A/D conversion. There is greater loss making these adjustments in the 8 bit digital domain.

Also, you should get those 2" and 1 " tapes transferred now while there are still working playback machines (more important competent operators) and before the tapes go bad.

[kealolo]

the box is a datavideo dac-10

I stand corrected on the betacamSP resolution, thanks.

For the important footage on Hi8, I do use a D8 camcorder to convert to a DV signal and record it as a QT file, works well. Actually, some of those old camcorders will convert an incoming signal as well, such as an SVHS in, but I'll probably use the dac-10 if the results seem OK.

For some of the unimportant/marginal vhs, it's nice to just be able to set it on 2-hour mode for a 2-hour tape and walk away.

I think I can live without the stuff on the 1" and 2" tapes, for the hassle involved, at least for now. I transferred most of them 20 years ago, and glad I did.

thanks

[Alessandro Machi]

SVHS to a DVD recorder (1Hr mode) is fast and easy but is a lower quality solution vs. DV format and even worse if you use 2 hour mode.

For Hi8, you can use a Digital8 Camcorder/deck (e.g.GV-D200) for direct conversion to DV.

What is this magic hardware capture box?

There is no 4:2:2 resolution in Betacam SP. It has lower bandpass than DV 4:1:1 so DV is more than good enough.

A pro transfer would adjust for luma/chroma levels before A/D conversion. There is greater loss making these adjustments in the 8 bit digital domain.

Also, you should get those 2" and 1 " tapes transferred now while there are still working playback machines (more important competent operators) and before the tapes go bad.

I don't agree with your statement about betacam sp. Ideally, the DVC-50 codec is probably the perfect match for betacam sp material. However, if the person running the betacam sp machine does not pay attention to make sure the tracking knob is optimally set, any effort at highest quality becomes pointless.

As for S-VHS, there were higher end S-VHS decks with special TBC and digital noise reduction cards that allowed the operator to make approximately 10 different adjustments for picture quality improvement.

[lordsmurf]

While Betacam is 3:1:1, isn't it generally regarded as better than many 4:2:2 tape formats?
Would it not retain fidelity better at 4:2:2 than 4:1:1, which is known to compress?
I'd think so.

DVC50 (4:2:2) would be my initial thought, too, using a Blackmagic or Matrox card.

[edDV]

You may be thinking Digital Betacam which is 4:2:2.

Betacam SP was the analog format and had the following bandwidth specs.
Luminance 4.5 MHz (~ 300 lines)
Color Difference (B-Y) (R-Y) 1.5 MHz (~120 lines)

http://www.broadcaststore.com/pdf/model/5218/5218.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betacam#Betacam_.2F_BetacamSP

The chroma resolution spec was only realized with a ccomponent Y, (B-Y), (R-Y) or RF dub connection.

Composite or S-Video would limit chroma bandwidth to ~ 0.7-1.2 MHz NTSC.

DV Format is 4:1:1 sampled. Nyquist luminace bandwidth 6.75 MHz, Chroma 1.7 MHz.

DV25 (DV, DVCAM, DVCPro) had much better video performance vs. Betacam SP especially for luminance resolution and signal to noise.

[Alessandro Machi]

You may be thinking Digital Betacam which is 4:2:2.

Betacam SP was the analog format and had the following bandwidth specs.
Luminance 4.5 MHz (~ 300 lines)
Color Difference (B-Y) (R-Y) 1.5 MHz (~120 lines)

http://www.broadcaststore.com/pdf/model/5218/5218.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betacam#Betacam_.2F_BetacamSP

The chroma resolution spec was only realized with a ccomponent Y, (B-Y), (R-Y) or RF dub connection.

Composite or S-Video would limit chroma bandwidth to ~ 1.2 MHz NTSC.

DV Format is 4:1:1 sampled. Nyquist luminace bandwidth 6.75 MHz, Chroma 1.7 MHz.

DV25 (DV, DVCAM, DVCPro) had much better video performance vs. Betacam SP especially for luminance resolution and signal to noise.

But Dv is COMPRESSED, Betacam sp is not so comparing these numbers is not that easy. Betacam sp is considered a better format for doing matte work versus mini-dv, DV, or DV-CAM.

DVC-Pro 50 better approximates betacam sp than dv 25.

[lordsmurf]

The Blackmagic can input via component.
I wouldn't really want to input B-SP via composite ever, and only s-video if forced.

I just don't like DV as a tape conversion format.
It was fine for shooting,
It's fine for old home film, 8mm, 16mm, etc.
But it doesn't seem to carry the color fidelity well at all on tapes, even VHS ones.

[edDV]

You may be thinking Digital Betacam which is 4:2:2.

Betacam SP was the analog format and had the following bandwidth specs.
Luminance 4.5 MHz (~ 300 lines)
Color Difference (B-Y) (R-Y) 1.5 MHz (~120 lines)

http://www.broadcaststore.com/pdf/model/5218/5218.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betacam#Betacam_.2F_BetacamSP

The chroma resolution spec was only realized with a ccomponent Y, (B-Y), (R-Y) or RF dub connection.

Composite or S-Video would limit chroma bandwidth to ~ 1.2 MHz NTSC.

DV Format is 4:1:1 sampled. Nyquist luminace bandwidth 6.75 MHz, Chroma 1.7 MHz.

DV25 (DV, DVCAM, DVCPro) had much better video performance vs. Betacam SP especially for luminance resolution and signal to noise.

But Dv is COMPRESSED, Betacam sp is not so comparing these numbers is not that easy. Betacam sp is considered a better format for doing matte work versus mini-dv, DV, or DV-CAM.

DVC-Pro 50 better approximates betacam sp than dv 25.

DV is only intraframe DCT compressed 5x. I don't see how this would affect chroma bandwidth.

For matte work the reason Betacam SP works better for alpha is the low S/N which tends to blend or soften the edge. DV is low noise and too sharp. The difference between DV luma and chroma resolution can result in stepped edges for high chroma saturation edge transitions. A good chroma keyer will handle this by resampling 4:1:1 or 4:2:2 to 4:4:4* for calculation of alpha. The poor man's solution is to use an analog camera or an analog recorder for chroma key foreground.


* The missing chroma pixels need to be interpolated, not simply replicated.

[kealolo]

Interesting checking back and seeing the discussion.

FWIW, the dac-10 digital transfer box accepts component inputs from the analog betaSP and outputs a DV stream. How good a job it does, I can't say just by eyeballing it.

My guess is that it's a DV25 stream, which is what I thought DVcam used... or am I wrong about that? I think consumer digital video tapes were a 25 stream. I'm not planning to use a special card, just import using quicktime pro... I'll try to set the tracking as well as I can on the betaSP deck, but that too will be just by eyeballing.

any advice appreciated.

thanks

[edDV]

Interesting checking back and seeing the discussion.

FWIW, the dac-10 digital transfer box accepts component inputs from the analog betaSP and outputs a DV stream. How good a job it does, I can't say just by eyeballing it.

My guess is that it's a DV25 stream, which is what I thought DVcam used... or am I wrong about that? I think consumer digital video tapes were a 25 stream. I'm not planning to use a special card, just import using quicktime pro... I'll try to set the tracking as well as I can on the betaSP deck, but that too will be just by eyeballing.

any advice appreciated.

thanks

I think you must be talking about the Datavideo DAC-100. It does not accept component, only composite or S-Video. If not confirm the correct model number. http://datavideosv.com/pdf_and_msword/manuals/dac_100_manual.pdf

I think the least expensive Betacam-SP component to DV converter was the $1600 Canopus ADVC-700.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/428371-REG/Grass_Valley_602074.html

Consumer DV25 was electronically the same as DVCAM and DVCPro. They differed only by tape recording media. DVCAM was recorded with wider tracks on ME tape media, DVCPro used MP metal particle tape.

DV50 was a 4:2:2 high end production format. Digital Betacam (aka DigiBeta) was 10 bit 90Mb/s 4:2:2.

[kealolo]

No, Dac-10. It's now discontinued, but it's easy to google - here's one link - http://www.expandore.com/product/Datavideo/Converter/DAC10.htm

Thanks for the excellent review of vid standards.

[milatchi]

I just don't like DV as a tape conversion format.
It was fine for shooting,
It's fine for old home film, 8mm, 16mm, etc.
But it doesn't seem to carry the color fidelity well at all on tapes, even VHS ones.

I think you nailed it with "color fidelity." Casually, I had noticed this too when doing test captures on from old VHS tapes. I thought maybe it was just me or the age of tapes -- also tried it with more recent tapes . Regardless, I didn't go the DV route.

[edDV]

There is nothing wrong withn DV "color fidelity" however you define it. The majority of non-film SD TV broadcasts you see were shot on DV format (DV, DVCAM, DVCPro). Do you see color fidelity problems with TV broadcasts? If so, the problem is at your end.

The "color problems" need futher definition. I've posted in the past how many PC software programs incorrectly handle 4:1:1 sampling by simple CbCr pixel replication instead of interpolation to make 4:4:4 YCbCr or RGB or to convert 4:1:1 to 4:2:0.

[lordsmurf]

Shooting DV and converting to DV are not the same, however.
Shooting is fine.
Conversion is where color seems to get cooked along the way.

[edDV]

Shooting DV and converting to DV are not the same, however.
Shooting is fine.
Conversion is where color seems to get cooked along the way.

That would depend on how it is done. I suspect the method of 4:1:1 to 4:2:0 color space conversion.

Conversion of 4:1:1 or 4:2:0 to 4:4:4 RGB are also problematic. If done incorrectly, undersampled chroma can contaminate Y luminance with pixelation when RGB is converted back to YCbCr. All of this seems to be worse with high chroma saturation especially on edge transitions.