VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Consider supporting us by disable your adblocker or Try ConvertXtoDVD and convert all your movies to DVD. Free trial ! :)
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2
1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 35
Thread
  1. I am new to video and this user group. Like so may others, my objective is to convert some 1980s VHS tapes to DVD. It seems, however, that Iím a little late to the game, as most who have wished to do so have already done so. But here I am.

    Having done some reading, I believe my learning curve should be broken into segments. I have, therefore, been focusing on learning matters of CAPTURE.

    I have a good condition standard VHS player and I intend to purchase an A-to-D converter such as the Grass Valley/Canopus ADVC 55 or 110.

    Since these 1980s tapes were made on standard VHS machines (not S-VHS), I had thought that for my intended purposes, a high-quality S-VHS machine with S-video-cable output would be of no particular benefit, as composite quality, through a composite output cable, is all one is going to get in any event. But from what I am reading here and there, it appears that many recommend one of the high-quality JVC S-VHS machines (with TBC and certain filtering capabilities). Ok, I believe I can find one on ebay. Nonetheless, on these standard VHS tapes as I have described, will the S-VHS machine really make a difference ó or is it not the S-VHS per se, but all the other capabilities that may render a better output?

    A related question: I believe the Canopus ADVC 55 and 110 have both composite and s-video inputs. Given the old/standard-VHS signal on the tape, it seems that nothing more can be coaxed off these tapes than might be squeezed through a composite cable from the VHS player to the Canopus box. On the other hand, if it is true that the high-end JVC S-VHS players may, in fact, be able to impart their magic to the signal, perhaps running an S-video cable (which I can purchase for just a few dollars) from the playerís S-video output to the Canopus A-to-D box may provide some benefit over a composite output cable? Can someone comment?

    Thank you,

    Howard
    Quote Quote  
  2. Originally Posted by Avagadro1 View Post
    It seems, however, that Iím a little late to the game, as most who have wished to do so have already done so.
    Plenty of people, including me, are still doing it.
    ..on these standard VHS tapes as I have described, will the S-VHS machine really make a difference
    Yes, you'll get slightly better output when using an S-VHS machine and S-Video cables. Not to mention those are the only VCRs with the TBC capabilities you mentioned.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    manono knows his business here, but I'll add this: don't expect VHS to "look like" SVHS. It can't. Definite benefits result from using s-video output and TBC. Keep in mind that SVHS is a tape format, but s-video is a type of cable that can transmit many media, including VHS, SVHS, DVD, cable box output, etc., but s-video cannot transmit HD.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 24th Mar 2014 at 12:30.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
    manono knows his business here, but I'll add this: don't expect VHS to "look like" SVHS. It can't. Definite benefits result from using s-video output and TBC. Keep in mind that SVHS is a tape format, but s-video is a type of cable that can transmit many media, including VHS, SVHS, DVD, cable box output, etc., but s-video cannot transmit HD.
    Thank you for your response.

    Yes, I would never expect these old VHS tapes to produce an S-VHS-quality output, but, of course, I would like the best possible results at something in the reasonable-cost range.

    But note from the core of my original question: I already own a standard VHS player and have lots of cables that may be used for composite video. So if I were willing to purchase one of the hi-end JVC S-VHS players (currently at no less than about $300 on ebay, and some $350), and another, say, $10 to $15 on an S-video cable, (and I am absolutely willing to do so) I would expect some discernible improvement over using a standard VHS player and composite cable.

    Well, what's "discernible"? Being brand new to the endeavor and to this user group, I don't know. So I placed the question in front of the collective experience and wisdom of this very helpful forum.

    Thanks again,

    Howard
    Quote Quote  
  5. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    The improvements with better gear would definitely be discernible, and immediately. On the other hand, VHS recorded at 6-hour rates don't behave well with JVC players. Look for a high-end Panasonic.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 24th Mar 2014 at 12:30.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
    The improvements with better gear would definitely be discernible, and immediately. On the other hand, VHS recorded at 6-hour rates don't behave well with JVC players. Look for a high-end Panasonic.
    I believe these old family tapes were recorded at "standard" speed, each being about 1 hour to 1-1/2 hours long.

    This, by the way, raises the next question in the chain of learning:

    I was going to purchase a program such as Adobe Premier Elements for executing all phases of the project --- capture, editing and burning to DVD. However, NOBODY on this user forum seems to use one of the comprehensive editing programs for capture. It appears that WinDV is the capture program of choice, and from what I gather, it's free. I am too new to all of this to understand how one capture program differs from another, but most seem to suggest that WinDV does a good job is is not overly complex to learn.

    The only question is the following: I understand that one of the advantages of WinDV is that it can capture the entire video stream as one digital file, or capture it into segments. Having never done any of this before, would I be better off to capture an entire hour-long tape as one file and edit it as such, or capture the tape as a few segments, edit the shorter files, and then reassemble to whole in Premier Elements (or other editor program)?

    Thanks,

    Howard
    Quote Quote  
  7. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    AFAIK, WInDV is used mostly for capturing via Firewire from devices such as camcorders. It's for sure your VCR won't connect directly to Firewire. The Canopus is used my many, but capturing tape to losslessly compressed AVI is the way hobbyists get better results. There is too much good software around (lots of it free that can be used for every phase of VHS->DVD transfer. Premier Elements in particular has its limitations, and there are far better encoders around.

    Capturing directly to compressed video such as MPEG2 or DivX is not the best way to do it (but many do and they like the results), but there are worse methods. Unfortunately, editing/cutting/joining/color correction/adding features, etc., using compressed video captures involves quality loss. It depends on what you're willing to accept.

    Capture the video in its entirety. Then work from there. Plenty of ways exist to work part by part if you want.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 24th Mar 2014 at 12:30.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
    AFAIK, WInDV is used mostly for capturing via Firewire from devices such as camcorders. It's for sure your VCR won't connect directly to Firewire. . . .
    I do not yet own a A-to-D converter, but I believe the VHS player connects to the Canopus via composite or s-video cable, and the Canopus connects to the computer via firewire.

    If so, would WinDV be an appropriate capturing software?

    Thanks,

    Howard
    Quote Quote  
  9. Originally Posted by Avagadro1 View Post
    If so, would WinDV be an appropriate capturing software?
    Yep.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Originally Posted by manono View Post
    Originally Posted by Avagadro1 View Post
    If so, would WinDV be an appropriate capturing software?
    Yep.
    Thanks.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Separate tools for separate jobs. Break down the process into stages of work flow, evaluate at each stage. Capture, Edit, Encode, Author, Burn. Excellent tools available for free for each stage.

    Remember that playback on the PC will be slightly different than playback on a TV from a standalone player. Get some RW disks and do test playbacks at various stages.

    You can also test your process with a hi-quality, repeatable source such as a DVD. You won't be able to get this quality from VHS, but it can help pinpoint problems in your process and give you an idea of what to look for.

    The SVHS player with S-Video cable will Probably give best results, HOWEVER - tapes and players can be tempermental, and various combinations should be tried. With any particular tape, or series of tapes, it is possible that a "lesser"player, or using the "inferior" composite cable, could yield "better" results.

    "Better" is a subjective thing, I would strongly recommend you look through MANY samples of video quality problems and corrections to get a handle on this. If at all possible, keep your original capture files for later re-processing.

    On the subject of editing family video - if you want to produce a stylish movie, that's fine. However, my advice would be to also make a copy with no editing at all. I have about 10 seconds of video of my Great-Grandfather, our first known family member who I am named after. We have no other pictures and very little info on this man. If my dad had edited this video, which would have been with a razor blade and scotch tape, this scene would have been cut out.

    There were also many others, away from the "main action", which were the most interesting and caught my son's attention. It's not a movie, it's history, keep it all.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Oregon, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Nelson37 View Post
    On the subject of editing family video - if you want to produce a stylish movie, that's fine. However, my advice would be to also make a copy with no editing at all. I have about 10 seconds of video of my Great-Grandfather, our first known family member who I am named after. We have no other pictures and very little info on this man. If my dad had edited this video, which would have been with a razor blade and scotch tape, this scene would have been cut out.

    There were also many others, away from the "main action", which were the most interesting and caught my son's attention. It's not a movie, it's history, keep it all.
    Great advice IMO.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Also don't make a DVD your only copy.

    I suggest keeping high bitrate MPEG-2 files on a drive.
    SD MPEG Blu-ray is another option, too. (The same thing, really.)

    Since you have a DV workflow, I'd just keep the DV footage. It's only 13GB/hour.
    Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
    FAQs: Best Blank Discs ē Best TBCs ē Best VCRs for capture ē Restore VHS
    Quote Quote  
  14. Thank you for your responses.

    In the mentioned series: Capture, Edit, Encode, Author, Burn, I must admit that I do not (yet) know what "encode" and "author" mean, but I assume I will learn at some point. For the present, I have decided to focus on learning step one: capture.

    My original plans were to use something like Adobe Premier Elements for everything. From what I've read here, that appears to be a poor course of action. So, it's back to focusing on capture.

    In terms of capture, it seems that two programs are the most commonly used and recommended: WinDV and VirtualDub. I have no knowledge of either. But having years of photo-restoration experience with the full version of Photoshop, and knowing the importance of getting an optimal scan of the original (especially no clipped shadows or highlights), it seems that the video capture process should allow some such settings in the capture process, as post-capture editing cannot fully address clipped shadows and highlights. Indeed, in one detailed review of the Canopus ADVC-300 A-to-D converter box, an apparently quite knowledgeable user, while not liking all aspects of the unit, highly praised the unitís capability of correcting shadows, highlights and while balance, so that none is clipped, in the capture process. This makes me, a beginner whoís never captured anything (except a rabid racoon on my property), wonder whether WinDV or VirtualDub will allow for some such adjustments during the capture process. And more generally, which program provides the overall better balance of functionality and usability?

    Can someone comment, or point to a review or source of information that a beginner would understand.

    Thank you,

    Howard
    Quote Quote  
  15. Originally Posted by Avagadro1 View Post
    ...it seems that the video capture process should allow some such settings in the capture process, as post-capture editing cannot fully address clipped shadows and highlights. Indeed, in one detailed review of the Canopus ADVC-300 A-to-D converter box, an apparently quite knowledgeable user, while not liking all aspects of the unit, highly praised the unitís capability of correcting shadows, highlights and while balance, so that none is clipped, in the capture process.
    I have the ADVC-300 and that's about the only advantage it has over its much cheaper cousins. You can do the brightness/contrast/levels etc. adjustments later on, though, so no big loss. No, WinDV doesn't have such settings to play around with. And as far as I know VDub doesn't cap DV AVI. But I could be wrong about that.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Romania
    Search Comp PM
    Canopus boxes are for those who like simple solution. No video adjustments are possible with DV devices like Canopus boxes. Capture cards are more verstatile. You can choose the compression codec and brightness, contrast, saturation and sharpness can be set to fit your needs/tape.

    I forgot about ADVC-300. Very expensive box for adjustements sliders.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Originally Posted by manono View Post
    Originally Posted by Avagadro1 View Post
    ...it seems that the video capture process should allow some such settings in the capture process, as post-capture editing cannot fully address clipped shadows and highlights. Indeed, in one detailed review of the Canopus ADVC-300 A-to-D converter box, an apparently quite knowledgeable user, while not liking all aspects of the unit, highly praised the unitís capability of correcting shadows, highlights and while balance, so that none is clipped, in the capture process.
    I have the ADVC-300 and that's about the only advantage it has over its much cheaper cousins. You can do the brightness/contrast/levels etc. adjustments later on, though, so no big loss. No, WinDV doesn't have such settings to play around with. And as far as I know VDub doesn't cap DV AVI. But I could be wrong about that.

    Thank you, manono.

    You stated that "VDub doesn't cap DV AVI."

    Well, I must acknowledge that I do not yet know what that means or why that is good or bad.

    If possible, parhaps you can suggest a site or thread that explains and compares these two programs, and how I might decide which, if either, would better fit my purposes (capturing old VHS, editing, burning to DVD).

    Thanks again,

    Howard
    Quote Quote  
  18. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    encoding & authoring: encoding refers to converting the source video+audio to an appropriate format for the intended final output: DVD, BluRay, or some other encoded fianl form such as DivX or WMV, etc. DVD is encoded using MPEG2 compression, BluRay is encoded with AVCHD. That's for future reference as obviously capture comes first.

    The capture can be either directly to DV digital format, or to losslessly compressed AVI using huffyuv compression. Frankly, if your source video requires repair, denoising, color correction and grading, etc (and old tapes and analog sources almost always do), huffyuv AVI would be the way to go. But many capture to DV and then post-process the video in AVI using lossless compression like huffyuv or Lagarith (Lagarith is apparently becoming favored these days, but is a bit too slow for real-time capture). These AVI's are intermediate steps, just as Photoshop image versions (or intermediate layers) are intermediate steps toward the final output. AVI and/or DV are then encoded for DVD or BluRay.

    The authoring step organizes the encoded video into the file setup used by players, which expect certain files and information to be in specified locations and formats on the burned disc. Authoring includes creating menus, chapters, thumbnails, etc., and all that stuff you see on DVD/BD menus.

    I mention the post-processing step because of this: home made analog/DV sources are notoriously uneven in their exposure and color areas. In addition, I cannot tell you how difficult it is if not impossible to correct the many mistakes made by auto-white and auto-gain controls during capture, not to mention how much trouble they cause when recording in-camera. Many old sources also have noise, frame and line-timing problems that an encoder sees differently than do other devices. What most picky hobbyists would do is capture an analog source with brightness and contrast settings that would accommodate the worse case scenario in various portions of an original video, then post-process to make up the differences. If necessary, some portion or other of a particularly difficult or damaged source might have to be captured separately, repaired, and blended into the final result.

    The brief answer: make a capture using the method you want, then check the results. Otherwise, the number of early-on recommendations and don't-do-this info you'll see will be more confusing than the results of a tangible capture that gives you something to consider in detail.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 24th Mar 2014 at 12:30.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Originally Posted by Avagadro1 View Post
    You stated that "VDub doesn't cap DV AVI. Well, I must acknowledge that I do not yet know what that means or why that is good or bad."
    You mentioned getting a Canopus box. If you do, you commit yourself to capturing your tapes in DV (=Digital Video). No lossless, MPEG or anything else other than DV AVI. That's not necessarily a bad thing, although I cap PAL DV which has better color than does NTSC DV. Many prefer to cap in some lossless codec, as sanlyn just described. For that you'll need the right kind of capture card.

    And no, I know of no comparisons done of the various capture programs. By looking around this site, though, you'll find an awful lot of information. lordsmurf's site is very good too:

    http://www.digitalfaq.com/
    Quote Quote  
  20. Sanlyn, thanks so much for your explanations. There were truly helpful.

    Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
    encoding & authoring: encoding refers to . . . .
    As to "encoding", thanks, Iíve now got it. For my purposes that will be taking my edited material and converting it to MPEG2, as that will allow me to burn it to DVD. Got it.



    The capture can be either directly to DV digital format, or to losslessly compressed AVI using huffyuv compression.
    As to a lossless capture format, I do, indeed, understand your point. As a long-time photo restorer who uses the full version of Photoshop, of course I would never work on an image in other than ".PSD" or ".TIFF" format. Even if, for whatever reason, I needed a JPEG, it would be the last step in the process, never an editing-appropriate format. However, I donít know anything about "huffyuv", or how to get there . . . though perhaps it is one of the options for selection in the WinDV or VirtualDub capturing software.

    By contrast, I was of the understanding that DV-AVI is a slightly lossy compression format that (i) is the output of the easy-to-use Canopus A-to-D converters and (ii) works well with editors such as Adobe Premier Elements, Sonyís equivalent and Corelís equivalent, to name a few.

    As a point of interest, I have noticed that members on other video website user forums seem to like DV-AVI and Canopus A-to-D converters for VHS conversion, while a good many members of this user forum, perhaps the majority, VERY MUCH disfavor DV-AVI and Canopus products, notwithstanding their ease of use.



    The authoring step organizes the encoded video into the file setup used by players . . . .
    As to "authoring", thanks, I now understand what that means as well. Of course, I would be jumping through those hoops for many, many months, after I become at least reasonably proficient at the capture and editing steps.



    I cannot tell you how difficult it is if not impossible to correct the many mistakes made by auto-white and auto-gain controls during capture . . . .
     

    I agree, even though I have no experience at all. Specifically, in Photoshop I NEVER use the Auto-Adjust functions. I do it manually. It takes longer, but the output can be made spot-on, which is unlikely using Auto adjustments. I ask, however, in capturing video, cannot auto-anything be turned off. In other words, when using the capture software --- whether WinDV, VirtualDub or the capture function within a program like Adobe Premier Elements --- canít one adjust white point, black point, some colors or contrast, and perhaps other adjustments as well, view that on a TV screen using the analog output from oneís A-to-D converter, then, when satisfied, capture the entire VHS tape to oneís hard drive?



    What most picky hobbyists would do is capture an analog source with brightness and contrast settings that would accommodate the worse case scenario in various portions of an original video, then post-process to make up the differences. If necessary, some portion or other of a particularly difficult or damaged source might have to be captured separately, repaired, and blended into the final result.
     

    Yes, I believe I understand what you mean. The Photoshop analogy would be scanning an old image (using the "levels" function) so that much of the original contrast is brought back, but no shadows or highlights are clipped, as unwanted clipping of pixels into pure black or white cannot be repaired in Photoshop. When the properly scanned file is then imported in to Photoshop, there is "room" on each side of the graph to perfect the image.

    With all of that, I'll continue to try to learn the techniques of capture.

    Thanks again,

    Howard
    Quote Quote  
  21. [QUOTE=manono;2199043]
    Originally Posted by Avagadro1 View Post
    You stated that "VDub doesn't cap DV AVI. Well, I must acknowledge that I do not yet know what that means or why that is good or bad."
    You mentioned getting a Canopus box. If you do, you commit yourself to capturing your tapes in DV (=Digital Video). No lossless, MPEG or anything else other than DV AVI. That's not necessarily a bad thing, although I cap PAL DV which has better color than does NTSC DV. Many prefer to cap in some lossless codec, as sanlyn just described. For that you'll need the right kind of capture card.

    Manono, you're going to laugh, but in my previous post I did not realize that your use of the word "cap" meant capture. Now it's obvious.

    Having said that, and from what you wrote, I now further interpret what you meant as: If I go the Canopus A-to-D converter route, which outputs only DV-AVI, then I MUST capture with WinDV or one of the comprehensive programs such as Adobe Premier Elements, but VirtualDub will not be an option as it doesn't work with DV-AVI.

    By contrast, if I purchase a high-end capture card and intend to capture as huffyuv, then VirtualDub may be the better product. Have I got it correct?

    Thanks,

    Howard
    Quote Quote  
  22. Originally Posted by Avagadro1 View Post
    Have I got it correct?
    Yes, although I'm not positive that VDub doesn't capture in DV AVI. I never had any luck. Someone else will have to confirm or deny.

    If I go the Canopus A-to-D converter route, which outputs only DV-AVI, then I MUST capture with WinDV...
    I've never used anything but WinDV and can't comment on other methods. It works easily and well. That's on a Windows7 32-bit computer
    Quote Quote  
  23. I've never used anything but WinDV and can't comment on other methods. It
    works easily and well. That's on a Windows7 32-bit computer.
    Any reason to believe there will be problems on my Windows 7, 64-bit machine?

    By the way, I understand that WinDV can be configured to automatically capture a large file into shorter segments. Inasmuch as my VHS tapes are an hour to hour-and-a-half long, would it be better to capture the whole length to one file, and edit from there. Or would it be better to capture each tape divided into some smaller segments, edit, then paste together?

    Thanks again,

    Howard
    Quote Quote  
  24. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    Capture perhaps several minutes of tape, or the whole thing if you want. You don't need a long video to check early results in detail. It's a good idea to start with short captures; there's not much sense recording for 90 minutes and discovering your overall settings were too dark to begin with, or you forgot to set up audio. Whatever capture method you use, you'll discover most of that method's pros and cons quickly. You'll likely find as well that the way you're accustomed to seeing your tapes played on TV will differ from the way they look as digital recordings.

    Setting white points (and black points): Unless you have a video source with severe color problems, manually trying to color grade an analog source during capture is an exercise in futility. Playback white balance changes from minute to minute, often scene by scene, at least via playback variations if not from variations in the source that escape your eye in earlier viewings. The capture card you mention and VirtuaDub have capture filters available (VirtualDub will likely access brightness/contrast controls that are actually located in your graphics adapter, which are basically the only capture filters you really need).

    Huffyuv and Lagarith are lossless compressors for AVI. Huffyuv is faster for real-time capture. Lagarithg is a bit slower but gives slightly smaller files. The advantage with huffyuv is capture speed; the advantage with Lagarith is wider compatablity across systems and media players. They are small installer downloads that setup one .dll each and a few registry entries.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 24th Mar 2014 at 12:31.
    Quote Quote  
  25. Since I have the ADVC-300 I make some short captures first and check the brightness, contrast, and levels. As sanlyn says, though, that's far from final. I'm just making sure nothing is too much out of spec that it can't be fixed later on. Then I capture the whole thing at one go. For me that means 3 hour long tapes. If they're to be split (and they often are), I do that later.

    I have no idea if WinDV works on a 64-bit system. I don't know why it shouldn't, though.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Originally Posted by manono View Post
    Since I have the ADVC-300 I make some short captures first and check the brightness, contrast, and levels. As sanlyn says, though, that's far from final. I'm just making sure nothing is too much out of spec that it can't be fixed later on. Then I capture the whole thing at one go. For me that means 3 hour long tapes. If they're to be split (and they often are), I do that later.

    I have no idea if WinDV works on a 64-bit system. I don't know why it shouldn't, though.
    First, I thank you both, sanlyn and manono. You have been most helpful.

    Separatly, I could not help but to notice that you, manono, use an ADVC-300. So many members of this user forum seem to VERY MUCH disfavor Canopus products and DV-AVI generally, while other user forums strongly favor Canopus products and DV-AVI for VHS to DVD projects. As far as your technique, it is quite similar to my PHOTOSHOP work where I test scan an image a few times and set the rough parameters of the Levels function (so as to improve contrast but not clip any highlights or shadows, which cannot be fixed in Photoshop), then I do the final scan. At that point Photoshop can fix almost anything.

    Interesting, this morning I went to the website of the fellow who created WinDV. The version for download has a year 2003 date on it. The author also states on his website that all development on WinDV has ceased, as that codec has long since been superceded by more modern codecs. I downloaded the file anyway and took a brief look (though i have not actually used it.) Though I do not know what all the options mean or how they should be used, I can nevertheless see that it is quite simple.

    Thanks again,

    Howard
    Quote Quote  
  27. Member hiptune's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Los Angeles California
    Search Comp PM
    Canopus A to D boxes are wonderful things to behold. I have an original ADVC 100 (the one with secret macrovision removal) and the ADVC 500 which has more input formats than the 300. I did notice that sound capture was a bit hot in level coming from the 100, so the manual setting for L & R levels on the 500 was just the ticket. I kept the 100 when I bought the higher priced 500.

    Anyway, since we are talking analog tape capture, and going to eventual DVD-Rs (in general), there is really nothing to not like about Canopus devices. These boxes also have a audio lock feature in them that prevents out of sync audio which can be very common when capturing long length analog to AVI.

    I would also agree that sometimes the lesser VHS deck is the better choice for playback to capture device. I have several Mitsubishi VHS decks, and the one with the fewest features (lower model number) locks into the tapes the best. It just shows cleaner and less bleeding of colors picture for some reason. These are the old late 80s early 90s models, and not the later plastic junk. One benefit of using SVHS deck output over S-Video is that my machine removed macrovision when that output is used. Not sure if all do, but mine does. (good to know)

    Anyway, I took a break from tapes, and have been doing Laser Disc captures in recent years. I came across a LD that has mild rot that effects only the audio, and has almost all perfect picture. I am going to be capturing that Laser Disc, and syncing it with audio from the factory VHS issue. This could be painless, or a long tedious project, I shall see. It is a film that has not been issued on DVD or any format since the early or mid-80s issue. I will be doing the capture / edit in Sony Vegas. Should be fun.

    Best,
    Jeff
    Quote Quote  
  28. Thank you Jeff. And again to the others.

    Since my last post, I purchased a used JVC 9800 S-VHS VCR on ebay. I paid plenty! I tested it and it seems to work fine. The automatic tracking works well; the machine takes a few seconds to adjust at the beginning of each tape. Whether the picture quality (old standard-VHS tapes) is truly better than my $40 used Sony remains to be seen.

    I also just purchased on e-bay a used Canopus ADVC-110. It hasn't arrived yet.

    I also purchased Adobe Premier Elements 11 for editing. I installed it. I see a HIGH learning curve ahead of me! I also downloaded the free WinDV software for capture.

    I'll begin work as soon as the ADVC-110 arrives.

    Thus far, and yet have no basis for any judgment, I'm reading that Adobe Premier Elements 11 incorporates a capture function, so I don't yet understand what benefit I would derive froim the separare WinDV program. I suppose I'll have to figure that out.

    Howard
    Quote Quote  
  29. Member hiptune's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Los Angeles California
    Search Comp PM
    Keep in mind that automatic tracks can be helpful, and works well on fresh good quality tapes, it can screw up in the middle of a capture and start looking for the plot.

    I would turn it off once you got it to lock in. So if a bad patch, or weak signal comes along on the tape, nothing bad will happen to the locked tracking.

    Does this make sense? Most of the time auto tracking will stay locked, but it can lose its place and have to start looking again, and this can happen during capture.
    Quote Quote  
  30. I have to acknowledge that, being so new here and having not yet begun even my first project, I do not fully understand your advice.

    I think your saying that either the Canopus ADVC-110 or the JVC 9800 VCR incorporates "automatic tracking" as an optional function, but that that function is not always reliable.

    Since I don't know anything more, I assume you are suggesting that I look out for the problem your described.

    Once I begin to learn how to use Adobe Premier Elements 11, will I be able to identify and correct the tracking problem you mentioned?

    Thanks,

    Howard
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads