Recommendation for S-VHS Component Capture Device or Card

[manono]

The Original_Workflow.avi, that's the one that was originally the MPEG? Before being converted to DV? Why convert it? Do you realize it was deinterlaced at some point? Is that one reason you think it looks better?

The Current_Workflow.avi has slightly higher levels (as well as being interlaced). The Original_Workflow.avi does have less noise, but that might be accounted for by the lower bitrate MGEG capturing originally, being converted to another lossy codec, the deinterlacing, and/or because it's also slightly darker. I'd say having more noise is a good thing in that it's closer to the noisy VHS tape source. The noise can be removed after capturing. Just my opinion, worth about what you paid for it.

[timothyd_1975]

I don't currently have a program that chops MPEG2s effectively. I tried VD v 1.6.19 (for MPEG) but the file it created was 350MB in size. Too big.

If the consensus is that I should get such a program, will do so. Though as I said, to my eye, the Original_Workflow.avi looks exactly like the source MPEG2 it was generated from.

[manono]

Though as I said, to my eye, the Original_Workflow.avi looks exactly like the source MPEG2 it was generated from.

You're saying the original MPEG had been captured deinterlaced? Then you're comparing apples to oranges.

I don't currently have a program that chops MPEG2s effectively.

Ask and ye shall have. Try MPEG2Cut2 (or the older MPEG2Cut, found on the same page).

[SixFiftyThree]

Womble software is also great for MPEG2 lossless cutting (or smart-rendering, actually). It's not free but very affordable.

Are there analog proc amps? I thought the popular ones were all analog->digital->analog devices.

I could've explained it better. The problem is the proc amp works after DV conversion, in which case it is quite limited in its ability. This is not based on my own observations but rather Juhok's, who I trust is correct. Basically, the ADVC-110 (which I do own) with free Enosoft real-time proc amp accomplishes the same thing.

I don't have the knowledge to discuss proc amps in detail but standalones are always the recommended choice. Perhaps the ones bundled in pro TBCs too, but that's a bit out of place here.

[timothyd_1975]

Okay so in order to create a better comparison...

I have created and uploaded Original_Workflow_MPEG2.mpg to mediafire. It is a segment of the original
MPEG2 file - exported using VideoReDo (MPEG2Cut2 wouldn't preview the clips tho thanks for suggesting it).
No transcoding here...

It is true that the original Compro capture card deinterlaced the video. Thus, to compare
'apples with applies' Current_Workflow.avi should be viewed thorough an app like VLC with a
deinterlace mode chosen. (If I apply one of the standard deinterlace filters in VirtualDub,
the clip becomes 1000% bigger for some reason. Aint no one gonna download a file that big...).
Nb I do not know what deinterlace method the Compro card used.

- Original_Workflow_MPEG2.mpg
- http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?pfadvkzcs3pe9vw

- Current_Workflow.avi (view with a deinterlace filter in VLC)
- http://www.mediafire.com/?cu55kyvnv3c5n2v

If it is true as manono has stated that noise is not a bad thing and can be toned down with filters later
on, then all is right with the world. If on the otherhand it indicates something dodgy in my setup
(like a pro deck in need of some tlc) then not so good.

Feedback from those with more experience would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks again,

Tim

[manono]

I didn't have any trouble seeing the sample video in both MPEG2Cut2 as well as the older MPEG2Cut, but maybe VideoReDo did something to it that made it possible and maybe there was something peculiar about the original MPEG that prevented seeing the preview so you could cut where you wanted.

Even though the original MPEG was encoded with a fairly high bitrate, I'd take the Current_Workflow.avi hands down, if for no other reason than it hasn't been (poorly) deinterlaced already. Also, the older MPEG has MP2 audio while your Current_Workflow.avi would have uncompressed WAV audio. Others may have different opinions.

[jagabo]

Your current workflow has many dropped and duplicated fields. The ADVC 300 is missing fields and substituting a copy of the last field. I'm pretty sure all the dropped fields are bottom fields. And all the green glitches at the top of the frame are in the bottom fields. A head cleaning might be in order.

Some other observations:

10 bit capture is pretty useless for VHS. All you'll be doing is capturing the noise more precisely. Especially with all the camcorder's high gain noise in the sample.

I don't have any direct experience with component output from VHS but with only about 40 lines of chroma resolution across the full width of the frame, and all the noise in your source, I doubt it would make any difference over s-video.

Analog PAL video is essentially YV12. Capturing as YV12 won't cause further blurring of the chroma.

[Brad]

10 bit capture is pretty useless for VHS. All you'll be doing is capturing the noise more precisely.

Lately I've been doing some captures with raised brightness to avoid clipping and lowered contrast to avoid blooming, then correcting after capture when I can seek through quickly with a histogram up (because all the scenes don't match each other). Wouldn't 10-bit capture be better for that sort of expansion?

[timothyd_1975]

I have gathered from numerous sources that 10 bit capture would be overkill. For the purposes of this exercise, it will be 8 bit.

So far one member of this forum has suggested that noise is truer to the source; and another has implied it isn't so great (implied by stating that 10 bit would only 'improve' it's presence).

Obviously dropped fields is bad. I have found a place who will service the SVO5800 for me and tell me if it's okay or knackered.

Noise - good or bad?

[jagabo]

10 bit capture is pretty useless for VHS. All you'll be doing is capturing the noise more precisely.

Lately I've been doing some captures with raised brightness to avoid clipping and lowered contrast to avoid blooming, then correcting after capture when I can seek through quickly with a histogram up (because all the scenes don't match each other). Wouldn't 10-bit capture be better for that sort of expansion?

Since reducing the contrast is essentially reducing the bit depth of your source (eg, reducing the contrast by half reduces your bit depth from 8 to 7), starting with 10 bit might be helpful. Or starting with 8 bit, but working in 10 bit, might give better results than working entirely in 8 bit.

[SixFiftyThree]

I have gathered from numerous sources that 10 bit capture would be overkill. For the purposes of this exercise, it will be 8 bit.

Good. Forget the capture card discussion too, for now. The source is your priority.

So far one member of this forum has suggested that noise is truer to the source; and another has implied it isn't so great (implied by stating that 10 bit would only 'improve' it's presence).

It's a commonly debated topic. I personally prefer to filter what I can before capture, as it's more practical IMO. Also recommended if capping to anything but lossless; DV is solid but it does have its limits. I suggest you at least use hardware chroma NR.

Obviously dropped fields is bad. I have found a place who will service the SVO5800 for me and tell me if it's okay or knackered.

Yes, your capture has serious issues, as identified by jagabo. How does it look through a different VCR into the ADVC? Either way this isn't good - your current unit is either faulty, or is doing nothing to stabilize the video whatsoever. The service may cost more than just buying another VCR, actually, so there is that alternative. Plenty of info on recommended models on this forum.

Noise - good or bad?

Bad - but necessary, to a degree. The less noise, the softer and/or more artificial your video looks, depending on the filters used. The more noise, the harder it will be to encode without artifacts, as it demands more bitrate. The source quality is the deciding factor, however - typical home video contains a lot of noise, playback errors, and far less detail than is perceived. Much filtering is usually required, and preferred.

[manono]

Noise - good or bad?

Bad - but necessary, to a degree. The less noise, the softer and/or more artificial your video looks, depending on the filters used. The more noise, the harder it will be to encode without artifacts, as it demands more bitrate. The source quality is the deciding factor, however - typical home video contains a lot of noise, playback errors, and far less detail than is perceived. Much filtering is usually required, and preferred.

It's neither good nor bad. It's just there on the tapes as a fact of life. Sure, you want to minimize it without losing too much detail. Me, I'd rather use an up-to-date AviSynth temporal denoiser than some old and obsolete hardware denoiser from a VCR or even an ADVC unit. So I do all my denoising after the capture. Most of my stuff is black and white so I don't have to worry about chroma noise. But I think your advice about turning on the chroma denoisers in the ADVC-300 is sound.

Ignoring the duped fields because of a faulty VCR for the moment, one can't deny that the Current_Workflow.avi is more true to the source. timothyd_1975 seems to be implying there's something wrong with it - that maybe the ADVC-300 or VCR added noise of their own (something dodgy in my setup, as he put it) which, of course, isn't true at all.

[jagabo]

I'd rather use an up-to-date AviSynth temporal denoiser than some old and obsolete hardware denoiser from a VCR or even an ADVC unit. So I do all my denoising after the capture.

I agree. The noise reduction function built into a VHS deck or capture device is usually pretty crude. I would only use them if going directly to a DVD recorder or just watching the video. If you're willing to invest time in AviSynth you can do much better.

[SixFiftyThree]

It's a first to read that noise isn't bad - this is home video after all. I'm not just talking about grain, which is up to preference, but an issue regardless. There are many other defects that can be effectively minimized with hardware. Avisynth, NeatVideo and the like are great, but they take time; I'm just offering a more efficient alternative. A VCR's Edit mode isn't ideal either, it's just amplifying noise to compensate for dubbing to analog. But each to their own.

If taking advantage of popular VCR options, like JVC Digipures or prosumer Panasonics, some NR is unavoidable anyway. Either it's non-defeatable, or linked with the TBC which is of course preferred. There's the various line TBC passthrough options which I'm mostly unfamiliar with, but I'd say they have their own trade-offs too. IMO some pre-filtering is a must if capping to any compressed format, including DV.

As always though, the methods change depending on source quality, and individual expectations. Not everyone is as uncompromising. My thoughts are that for 20 S-VHS tapes, it's not worth making a hobby of it.

[manono]

It's a first to read that noise isn't bad - this is home video after all.

I don't like it any more than you do and do my best to get rid of it. But all the tapes have it so one reduces it as best as one can. As you said earlier, it kills encoding quality by just chewing up the bits.

If taking advantage of popular VCR options, like JVC Digipures or prosumer Panasonics, some NR is unavoidable anyway. Either it's non-defeatable, or linked with the TBC which is of course preferred.

Maybe on some of the Panasonics, but not all. On my NV-HS860 the '3D DNR' is independent of the TBC and I always keep it off. A couple of times I had it on by mistake, didn't like what I saw, and redid the capture.

[SixFiftyThree]

Maybe on some of the Panasonics, but not all. On my NV-HS860 the '3D DNR' is independent of the TBC and I always keep it off. A couple of times I had it on by mistake, didn't like what I saw, and redid the capture.

True, some Panny models do keep them independent. But then you are working with B/W, so you don't require chroma NR, and probably capping to lossless so the noise isn't an issue.

Don't really have much else to say, it's up to the OP to decide which route he wants to take.

[dvd3500]

I have been using an ADVC 300 for uses and have used multiple DV codecs. Never had a problem.

[Brad]

Dropped fields in the capture made from this VCR make me wonder whether the TBC board is not installed or malfunctioning somehow (in which case turning it off might be better). With my big JVC deck I wouldn't have known initially that the TBC wasn't there had the seller not told me, since all the menu options and switches are there regardless.

[jagabo]

Dropped fields in the capture made from this VCR make me wonder whether the TBC board is not installed or malfunctioning somehow (in which case turning it off might be better). With my big JVC deck I wouldn't have known initially that the TBC wasn't there had the seller not told me, since all the menu options and switches are there regardless.

Since it's always the bottom field that's dropped (or otherwise screwed up) it's likely there's something wrong with one of the heads of the VCR.

[SixFiftyThree]

@vaporeon800 The SVO-5800 appears to be the same kind of pro VCR as the JVC you mention, with the TBC card and so forth. If I'm correct then it's entirely possible the TBC isn't installed as you say. Not that it's necessarily the problem, I trust jagabo is right about the faulty head.

I've never used the pro stuff myself, it's too risky and apparently not ideal for consumer tapes due to head width differences.

[timothyd_1975]

As always a wealth of infomation from the various members.

SixFiftyThree I think you are right in that I may be getting to a tipping
point and risking over investing here. Oursourcing may be a
sensible decision at this stage. From the outset I wanted to ensure I get
a high quality capture from my 20 tapes. An outcome of this forum is that
I would be in a better position to specify parameters to somebody else
doing this for me.

Im going to get some quotes for doing the encoding in Sydney.
SixFiftyThree you don't happen to live in NSW and have any recommendations
do you? Not sure if videohelp forum rules prohibit promoting
commercial enterprises. If so, would it be possible to email you about
this? I am timduncan@iinet.com.au. I have been dealing with a place in
Bondi Jn and requested a quote from them. Waiting to hear back...

Failing that, I recall the last time I tried to buy a second S-VHS deck in Australia
it was quite tough. I bought one off e-bay that turned out to be a piece
of c r a p. If you have any recommendations as to how to go about acquiring
a second hand deck in Australia besides e-bay, I'd be greatful to hear.

Failing that, I can try and get my SVO up to speed. Sony will replace
the head unit for $6000 (thanks the sales rep politely, hangs up the
phone). Sending it in for a clean and service is another option.
But I agree any lifting the covers off a decommissioned pro deck is
a scary exercise. Notwithstanding sending it in for a head clean, which
I have been quoted a modest sum for by another guy in Bondi Jn.

[SixFiftyThree]

From the outset I wanted to ensure I get a high quality capture from my 20 tapes. An outcome of this forum is that I would be in a better position to specify parameters to somebody else doing this for me.

Probably, IMO. Many people come here asking for the best quality, and though they do get the right answers, they quickly get ahead of themselves. Some learning is required to even know what best is. You either settle for good/decent quality using more practical methods, or you start a new hobby. Or...you save yourself the trouble and let someone else do it.

Im going to get some quotes for doing the encoding in Sydney. SixFiftyThree you don't happen to live in NSW and have any recommendations do you?

I live in Sydney. I haven't used any services so can't outright recommend any, but know a couple off the top of my head. There's DVD Infinity, well known, but I doubt they'd supply you with video in an intermediate format. Likely just a DVD or BD, which isn't ideal for editing. There's also a service I found on the GrassValley forums a while back, Antons Video, which may be a viable option for your purposes and is in NSW. Wouldn't hurt to make some calls.

Otherwise, if you're willing to ship internationally, I'd go with DigitalFAQ. They basically wrote the book on all the recommended methods you'll find discussed here, and I'm sure would provide you with what you want and how you like it.

If you have any recommendations as to how to go about acquiring a second hand deck in Australia besides e-bay, I'd be greatful to hear.

Nowhere. Well, certainly not Gumtree or the like. eBay is great, you just need to figure out the right sellers. Don't expect to find anything on the Aussie eBay, though, there is nothing 99% of the time. Look on the UK and German sites, good models are plentiful there (condition is a different matter). Some don't have shipping available to Australia, but there's ways around that too. I've never been refused after a polite message, but usually chose a mail forwarding service instead, due to lower costs than those specified by sellers.

But if you can get your current unit cleaned for a reasonable price, do that first. Even if you don't end up using it, you can at least sell it in a condition other than "for parts".

[2Bdecided]

Many years ago I captured these tapes to MPEG2 using a consumer S-VHS deck and a Compro Mate TV
card. A cheap and cheerful capture solution.

At least that consumer deck seemed to be working properly and like your tape. Do you still have that VCR?

As SFT said, German eBay is a plentiful source for S-VHS machines still, but not "cheap", and with no real guarantee of quality.

Cheers,
David.

[timothyd_1975]

I have actually found a place at Bondi Junction - Dr What at 562 Oxford St. They deserve a plug because they
can deliver whatever format you request, are modestly price, and are happy to talk shop to a lesser educated person like myself.
They suggested they encode a single tape to see if I like the results before proceeding to encode all 20.

2Bdecided - no I don't still have that deck alas. It was a hire job.

I do still have the SV05800P. Dr What has recommended a place that can perform a headclean,
again for a modest sum. I will hold on to the SV05800 and ADVC300 until the encoding has been completed
(just incase) then sell them both off. This should cover the cost of oursourcing the transcoding.
I will test the unit post clean to make sure it isn't still dropping fields and advise potential buyers in my add.

One more question now remains: what resolution to pick for the encode? The guys at Dr What detected I knew
something more than nothing and asked me to choose a resolution. In researching this topic today,
it seems to me most people converting from VHS are happy to go to 720 X 576 for PAL. Indeed the ADVC300 unit is
locked to 720 x 576.

I have some questions regarding this:-
- If the original shooting ratio was 4:3 (1.33), woudn't this mean I should choose 765 x 576 (also 1.33)?
- If SVHS has improved horizontal luma bandwidth, should I not consider a horizontal digital resolution
greater than that considered to be adequate to regular VHS?
- If regular PAL VHS translated to approx. 335 horizontal pixels, why has 720 x 576 become the standard where
720 seems to be approx. doulbe the amount of resolution required to accomodate the 335 at source?
- Is there some rule of thumb people follow when it comes to matching a digital destination to an analogue source
- ie take the 335 horizontal VHS lines and double it? (to achive doulbe the amount of square pixels presumably)
- Am I overthinking this?!

I'm sure somebody has covered this off well in an article or forum somewhere. I didn't seem to have any joy
looking for an info source today. If anybody knows of one, I would really appreciate you sharing it.

Tim

[Brad]

720x576 was standardized for 625-line analog signal digitization by engineering people for various reasons. You should use it, because it has proliferated everywhere thanks to DVD. There is no reason to capture more than 720 (good analog-to-digital converters already oversample internally and then downscale the result for the output).

It is overkill for VHS, SVHS, and LD. The DVD-Video standard supports 352x576, which is overkill for VHS but not enough for decent SVHS or LD. Blu-ray's support for SD video only includes the full-width formats, so that's one reason to stick to the most common resolution.

[jagabo]

Indeed the ADVC300 unit is locked to 720 x 576.

If DV is your delivery format 720x576 is your only choice.

- If the original shooting ratio was 4:3 (1.33), woudn't this mean I should choose 765 x 576 (also 1.33)?

The DV video stream includes flags that tell the player that the display aspect ratio is 4:3. In general, any frame size can encode any display aspect ratio by using non-square pixels.

- If SVHS has improved horizontal luma bandwidth, should I not consider a horizontal digital resolution greater than that considered to be adequate to regular VHS?

720x576 is more than is necessary for VHS and S-VHS. The top half of the following image is a VHS tape captured at 720x480 (NTSC). The bottom half is the same tape captured at352x480 and stretched to 720x480:



As you can see, the 720x480 capture has very slightly more detail.

- Is there some rule of thumb people follow when it comes to matching a digital destination to an analogue source

At least 2x the bandwidth of the source. Less than that and you will not get all the detail. Much more than that and you will be wasting storage space.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist_rate

- If regular PAL VHS translated to approx. 335 horizontal pixels, why has 720 x 576 become the standard

The BT-601 digital video standard was developed around studio video tape, not VHS. 720 (really about 702 for the active picture content, plus padding to 720) was considered adequate for studio usage. I believe this takes into account the bandwidth of the tape and the Kell factor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kell_factor

- ie take the 335 horizontal VHS lines and double it? (to achive doulbe the amount of square pixels presumably)

335 is already double the bandwidth if the signal on the tape. Actually with VHS it's closer to 360.

[Brad]

Nyquist doesn't apply to choosing the capture resolution since you don't have control over the internal oversampling. I don't need to capture 1440x480 to capture all the detail of a DVE test pattern because my capture card takes Nyquist into account for me.