VCR/Hi8 capture tests; help evaluate?

[jagabo]

Yes, interlaced video twitters when there are sharp horizontal edges and lines.

[sanlyn]

My other videos don't. You don't see it in either of the OK interlaced frames I posted, and one of them has plenty of "lines" and angles in it including the camera trucking down the hallway and the figures in the room both moving.

Is there some kind of timing parameter in these captures that causes the problem? I have plenty of interlaced/telecined captures. Their playback is smooth, no jaggies. In an editor you see the obvious combing when interlaced, but not jaggies. They don't play like these caps. Perhaps it's the way the original camera worked the interlacing. We've had that problem in a couple of other threads, even worse.

[dianedebuda]

Wow, flurry of posts since I went to bed. Read through them 3 times & think I follow most of conversation, but I'm a newbie...

I think you're going to have to decide for yourself whether you prefer the look of R3 on or off.

I like R3 on rather than off per se. I only intended to post 2 guitar videos: vhs guitar jvcs svideo +tbc+r3+svhs, vc500 vdub clip1.avi and vhs guitar jvcs svideo +tbc-r3+svhs, vc500 vdub clip1.avi for the sole purpose of seeing what R3 did & hoped for feedback about whether I could get as good or better with post-capture processing of the -r3 version as what I was seeing with the +r3 version. Sadly, I don't know which version sanlyn used in his attempt. Unfortunately, he also spent time on the AIW clip. I put an Edit moments after the post that the AIW was an accident and should be ignored since I've decided against using the AIW. So sorry, sanlyn. I did try to delete it, but couldn't.

I purposely did not attempt to tweak any proc amp settings with the guitar clips so that the new +r3 one could be compared to the older vhs guitar jvcs svideo +tbc+r3+svhs, 550 vdub clip1.avi that I linked as relevant. Trying to limit to 1 change at a time. Hope was that the two clips would show enough to decide between VC500 & 550.

Since I'm leaning towards the VC500, I used the hi8 tapes to experiment with proc amp settings. My fault for not being more explicit in what I was thinking.

I have no idea what version of huffyuv the O.P. uses

I'm using the huffy from LordSmurf's site. I asked before if there was another version that would be better, but IIRC, the answer was, more or less, it's as good as any. Advantage for me was that he'd included some filters, so I'd have a "known" base to start with. I did notice a weird thing with it though - the captures I made when MMC 9.02 was installed would only play on that capture machine. I restored the system to before MMC & then installed huffy & vdub. Captures made with huffy then worked elsewhere.

crap from consumer cameras

The camera used for the vhs capture was a very early model for consumer cameras, circa 1980. Didn't even have the cassette in the camera - the recording was done by a vcr. Yeah, low level. Needed a lot of light for anything. The guitar recording was probably 1986. May be a crappy camera, but we have video from those years. Lot better than nothing.

My VLC player won't play

I couldn't get my VLC to play them either, but my primary player, PowerDVD 10, and mpc-hc both work fine. Most of the details in the comments about the players are over my head. At this point, avisynth and ffdshow are complete unknowns for me. Beyond here lies dragons.

Should I look at the Hi8 stuff now, or wait until after new VHS clips?

Since it was mentioned that Sharpness should be set to 0, it'd probably be a waste to look at the hi8 for anything other than checking for TRV480 settings. If I can overcome my "tape damage" paranoia, will try for some new hi8 captures. With the hi8 tapes, I was testing the TRV480's TBC and DNR settings.

As for new vhs guitar clips, what's worthwhile? Obviously proc amp Brightness/Contrast/Sharpness settings. The svideo cable, as sanlyn pointed out, is suspect. I have other cables that I can try. Would a reference capture with composite be of use? Not opposed at all to buying a new svideo cable, but other things are suspect too - like the svideo port on the vcr and the svideo to capture device adapter cables. I like test sets with only 1 difference per instance; maybe that is too much for posting here.

One VHS issue you're going to want to fix post-capture, which I had never heard of until reading a random post yesterday, is that your hue differs between the odd and even fields (each is recorded and played by its own corresponding video head). Half of the fields are green-tinted and the others are more pinkish.

Hubby wants to know if this is "normal" or a sign of a problem with the vcr. How do we see this?

[Brad]

I did try to delete it, but couldn't.

In the Upload files/Manage attachments window you should see Remove next to the filename, assuming the long filename doesn't mess with that somehow.

Hope was that the two clips would show enough to decide between VC500 & 550.

I get your line of thinking, but the only purpose of buying the VC500 was to see whether it offers wider proc amp range than the 550. Though it involves changing multiple variables, I don't see a reason to keep using variables that we know are wrong.

Downside with the VC500 is that its comb filter sucks. What this means is that there will be rainbowing on your Hi8 captures, as they contain sharp details and your camcorder only outputs composite. If you had one of the earlier models that offered S-Video, it wouldn't be an issue. The internal DV conversion or 550 with proc amp adjustment won't have this problem and may offer a better picture overall.

The svideo cable, as sanlyn pointed out, is suspect.

I don't know what he's basing this on.

Hubby wants to know if this is "normal" or a sign of a problem with the vcr. How do we see this?

It was recorded onto the tape that way; both VCRs show it. Open one of your captures in VirtualDub and do Video -> Filters -> Add -> deinterlace -> Yadif, Double frame rate, Top field first. Squish the input pane to get it out of the way, and zoom the output pane to 200%.

It's practically invisible during playback, because each field is only on screen for 16.7 milliseconds. But you can try to make them more similar with Avisynth post-processing, so may as well.

[sanlyn]

With VCR playback, both fields will seldom look exactly alike. With some machines the difference is noticeable, with others it's too subtle to notice. An extreme example is in a year-old thread where even fields were quite greenish, while red in the odd fields continually "flashed" and blinked. With your captures, the differences in circuit tuning are far from being severe.

[dianedebuda]

Upload files/Manage attachments window

Didn't think about manage after upload complete. Sure would have saved sanlyn a lot of grief. Feel bad about that.

The svideo cable, as sanlyn pointed out, is suspect.
I don't know what he's basing this on.

If nothing else, it did remind me that hubby thought composite looked better sometimes than svideo. Will try another cable.

Hope was that the two clips would show enough to decide between VC500 & 550.

So it's likely that vhs capture and hi8 capture will use different devices then. Obviously I've been trying to post too many flavors at a time. Guess I just didn't expect responses this quickly. I'm blown away.

Ok, let's continue only with the vhs/guitar one now. This time I'll just target for selecting vhs capture device. For both the 550 and the VC500, I will adjust the proc amp Brightness & Contrast settings to get the histogram "blued"; Sharpness=0. Suggestions for TBC & R3 for these test? Waiting to hear before making tests.

[sanlyn]

I recall buying some cables at HomeDepot and Radio Shack, and compared them to the OEM cheapies that came with my equipment. They were all alike. I had name-brand (Acoustic Research) audio and video that looked and sounded better. It was certainly made better, no doubt. It's also true that some s-video circuits aren't designed so well. But watch out for composite: it can hit you with dot crawl and excessive chroma problems such as rainbows that can drive you batty. Best to stick with s-video. Don't waste money on overhyped garbage like Monster or the $80 stuff. I found nice connecting cables from AR and BlueJeansCable -- the latter uses pro-grade wire and excellent construction; never been disappointed there, and they're not ovepriced. If Belden is good enough for the broadcast studios, it's probably good enough for us. The core wire maker is Belden (with an "L"), not "Belkin".

All that aside, the R3 circuit is a sharpener. Likely you can do without it, but it might help some videos. As far as I know, however, JVC's R3 enhancement and its TBC work together. Correct me on this, but I think if you shut off R3 you shut off the TBC. But it's a while since I used a JVC, so I might not have that correct.

I found the 550 to have a rather "cleaner" look to it as far as color goes (it's a subtle difference, admitted), and shadow detail held up better. But the captures that used it were a bit bright and clipped highlights. When you make histogram adjustments keep an eye on what the brightest details are doing, such as brightly-lighted faces, white shirts, etc., and see if the details hold up when you adjust levels correctly. Of course sometimes brights get blown up when they're photographed, so keep that in mind.

[dianedebuda]

sanyln, AFIK the svideo cables that I have are what came the flavors of ATI capture cards that I have. Most were new & never used, not that it makes any real difference now. Familiar with Belden.

With this JVC, the TBC is tied to NR. There's also a Video Stabilizer, but it's mutually exclusive to the TBC/NR. I know R3 is a sharpener. It can be turned off/on independently from the TBC/NR. What I don't know is: if I capture with R3 off, can I do post processing to get to at least the same level as if I had R3 on? If so, the side effects of each can be compared. Sound reasonable?

Loaded GraphStudio & got the 550 proc amp up. Hard to control. Only with mouse; cannot use arrow keys to step. Yuck.

[jagabo]

What I don't know is: if I capture with R3 off, can I do post processing to get to at least the same level as if I had R3 on?

You can sharpen better, and with less artifacts, in AviSynth.

[dianedebuda]

Ok, so it sounds like it'd be better to turn off R3. Done.

[Brad]

I guess there's simply no way to prevent the JVC from flattening out bright areas. Sony vs JVC in greyscale, to show that it's a levels issue and not chroma:



His hand becomes a solid object with the glowing guitar, even though the histogram shows no clipping.

[jagabo]

I guess there's simply no way to prevent the JVC from flattening out bright areas... His hand becomes a solid object with the glowing guitar, even though the histogram shows no clipping.

Yes, when you look at a waveform monitor it becomes obvious the JVC has clipped all the peaks before final output. From the unprocessed videos:

Sony:


JVC:


You can see that the circled peaks are crushed down the the level of the smaller peak to the left.

I would look at the JVC's output with all its processing turned off. See if that makes any difference.

[dianedebuda]

Ok, will do. Worthwhile checking the Sony again with the adjusted proc amp settings?

[jagabo]

Ok, will do. Worthwhile checking the Sony again with the adjusted proc amp settings?

Yes, even the sony cap has crushed brights, and brights above IRE 100. The latter can be fixed in software but the former can't.

[dianedebuda]

JVC with TBC off & R3 off
Sony with APC off & Sharpness at lowest level

[Brad]

I'd like to see a Sony capture with sharpness at the minimum setting and APC off. [EDIT: Haha, should have refreshed the page first.]

[dianedebuda]

[Brad]

Turning off the JVC's TBC seems to slightly recover the very brightest parts, but it's still doing it to almost the same degree.

Sony doesn't have those washouts/blowouts, and VC500 retains all highlights while 550 still clips briefly. But the VC500's composite rainbowing is soooo awful and there seems to be luma detail loss also due to the comb filter.

The 550, shockingly, seems to line TBC almost as well as the JVC itself while the VC500 is horizontally jittering all over the place.

I don't see a reduction in haloing from Sony Sh2 to Sh1.

Maybe it's best to take some amnesia pills so you forget all these artifacts you learned about and flip a coin to decide which to use.

[sanlyn]

Sony doesn't have those washouts/blowouts, and VC500 retains all highlights while 550 still clips briefly. But the VC500's composite rainbowing is soooo awful and there seems to be luma detail loss also due to the comb filter.

The earlier 550 captures, as I mentioned, did seem t have a subtely cleaner image -- I'm talking bout an overall impression, not 300% blowups and vectorscopes. In any case, do you notice that the darks in the VC500 look dense and grimy, but they're claner in the 550? I wonder if it has occurred to anyone that the VC500 is a darker image than the other card.

The 550, shockingly, seems to line TBC almost as well as the JVC itself while the VC500 is horizontally jittering all over the place.

I don't see a reduction in haloing from Sony Sh2 to Sh1.

Maybe it's best to take some amnesia pills so you forget all these artifacts you learned about and flip a coin to decide which to use.

Now you know why many users avoid JVC. Stick with the SONY. Note: all budget VCR's of all brands in all countries at all times under all circumstances have the defects you mention, and many of them are inherent to VHS and simply come with the territory. Pretty much the same can be said about above-budget VCR's as well, but it gets to be a matter of degree. Stay with the 550 for a while, but adjust levels during capture to prevent obvious problems. I don't think it has a TBC, but in any case you're better off with an older Panasonic or Toshiba DVD recorder used as a pass-thru tbc device; none of them create the etching, hard edges, digitally enhanced analog noise and color loss that comes with VHS->DV capture. But suit yourselves there; DV is lossy encoding regardless of high bitrates (lossy, per the dictionary, does not mean lossless), is designed for PC-only playback, has to be decoded to be processed properly for VHS cleanup, and will have to be re-encoded anyway for DVD or BluRay players and for many web applications.

It's a good set of experiments and tests. Everyone should get something from these posts. In some ways there is confirmation more than surprise, but it's good that we have examples of many results that users have experienced elsewhere, as well as examples of how specific component mixes perform. Why your AIW gets short-changed here is something of a surprise. If you don't care for it, give it a listing in other forums or vid-related sites and many will jump at it, even if it's 32MB (my original Win98 AIW had a "massive" 16MB of RAM. I copied about 100 hours of VHS to lossless AVI with no problem using my old SONY SLV-585HF and Panasonic PV-9668 VCRs, and a PC whose RAM maxed out at 64MB). The SONY '585' still lives today, if only because of a rebuild some years back and for the sake of capturing tapes I recorded with it 15 years ago. Later AIW's like my 7500 and 9600XT disappeared from auction sites a long time ago, although one pops up now and then. There is a continuous but diminishing stream of Panasonic upper-end PV-4600 series and SVHS machines from 1995/1996/1998, and Mitbsubishi's and non-TBC but better performing upper-echelon JVC's from the pre-1998 period. But searching them out gets to be a lottery at this point: you'd end up buying 2 or 3 at cheapo prices to get one well performing unit that the owner maintained properly or the seller has refurbished. But you do have components now that work well when properly set up during capture. Cleanup later with Avisynth/VirtualDub, and encode with a good encoder. There's nothing unusual about this procedure. A VHS collection of amusing TV shows is one thing, but family tapes having special value ought to deserve special consideration beyond magic-button automated budget apps.

At this point no one has mentioned how to improve these captures. It's something that some people never attempt -- and then complain about 5 years after they ditch the tapes, when it's far too late for improvement.

[jagabo]

The color difference between top and bottom fields is mostly in the U channel. And since it appears with both playback decks the problem is in the recording.

[sanlyn]

Yes, there was a recent thread with a severe problem there. Turned out to be a defective camera playing the tapes. It was fixed in post processing, but what a hassle!

@dianedebuda, your recent captures look better with the levels adjusted. Note that your caps are rather bright and look a little washed-out. That's far preferable to having crushed darks and blown out brights. But apparently you're adjusting the histogram and not noticing that the thick black borders in the frames are throwing off the 'gram. Black borders will usually show up as a small "spike" at the far left-hand edge of histograms (because, of course, they are really at about zero-black). If you crop the capture image you'll prevent having to make corrections for grayed-out darks. But don't forget to disable cropping when you start the capture. It's too embarrassing to tell you how many times I forgot to do that and didn't notice until I'd capped 2 hours of video (!!!!!).

I still think the SONY and the 550 look better. As for murky shadows and rather stressed-out brights (but without clipping): these are inherent with VHS. We all thought at one time that VHS was really "great", but if you could play those same tapes with your old CRT you'll see that those problems were always there.

[dianedebuda]

posted instead of preview - still working on it

[dianedebuda]

Let me begin by thanking you all so much for all of your time and effort on my "set up" decision process so far. When I look back at my beginning posts in this thread and the others (some with my old, 2004 login name, msdiane), it's hard to grasp how far i've come: newbie -> newbie. My hubby said, and I agree, that we're getting a first class education here. I've spent hours and hours reading posts in an effort not to have advice repeated, but still fall into the trap.

I'm going to have to step back and look at this tape yet again, but with the eye of what bothers me the most. I think it's going to be the color bleed. But even that is relatively minor because, when I watch this tape, I see my son picking up a guitar and attempting to perform after just a few days instruction while the other kiddos had weeks. Guts. Or on the hi8 one, recording his tap practice on the 1 day he forgot his tap shoes. Funny. And I try to take in account that this is vhs, not hd, and with a rudimentary video camera. There are just some things that can't be fixed without "repainting" every frame. I can easily get into analysis paralysis and not getting anything done or end up getting a Rolls Royce to run to town for milk and bread.

Before the re-view, the things that stick in my mind are:

VCR: I liked that the JVC "straightened" things like the music stand, a line TBC correction, yes? I said I didn't want to get another vcr earlier. Probably paid too much for this JVC, but it seemed to have some pedigree. I've been heavily influenced by LordSmurf (which I still hold in extremely high regard). If I end up with the Sony, chalk it up to a learning experience worth the time, money & effort. I'd like to see what difference a panny would make, but my gut feeling is that I'd be examining inches where distances are measured in miles.

Capture device: I initially started with the expectation that the AIW would be the end choice. At that point, I was really expecting to go to directly to mpg2. There's so little info about the 550. It hardware encodes to mpg2. My original searches found that it couldn't natively do avi - found one place where the ATI rep actually seemed to say that the mpg2 was being decoded back to avi. Didn't seem to "fit" with first attempts here. Later I found a wonderful entry in the VHS Restoration thread by mammo1789 that said, effectively, that software could switch off the mpg2 step in that class of chips. Eased my mind considerably, because by then, we'd pretty much decided to go to avi instead of mpg in the vhs capture step. We got the VC500 on the chance that 550 was clipping signals from the JVC. Looks now like it's actually the JVC that's doing it, not the 550, if I'm understanding the analysis correctly.

Why your AIW gets short-changed here is something of a surprise.

Back in post 28, vapereon800 said "looks like you may as well sideline the AIW because it's clipping too much of the bright highlights". I took that to mean that the 550 was better than the AIW. Rereading, it could have just been because the proc amp levels were still at default and messing up the capture. I never made an AIW capture with adjusted settings. I'm game to try again, if you folks are and think it's worth it, before moving on to the hi8.

family tapes having special value ought to deserve special consideration

Whole point of this effort, of course.

At this point no one has mentioned how to improve these captures.

In this thread, I'm just hoping to build a good capture foundation. Feel handicaped with such a lack of knowledge of what can be fixed post-capture via software, so heavily relying on you folks here. Really plan to do some post-capture clean up on the vhs, but nothing extensive or out of the ordinary. 80/20. I'm just starting to search for beginner's vdub/avisynth leaning stuff. Probably start another thread with stupid "improvement" questions & posts. Maybe I shouldn't say that for fear of being boycotted. Think it's easier for other newbies when threads aren't intimidatingly long and somewhat have a single purpose. Actually am hoping the oldretiredguy thread will continue so I can continue to learn from it.

Note that your caps are rather bright and look a little washed-out. That's far preferable to having crushed darks and blown out brights. But apparently you're adjusting the histogram and not noticing that the thick black borders in the frames are throwing off the 'gram.

There is a small, solitary red spike on the left side of the histogram that I attributed to the borders. As for washed out, dunno. In another part of this recording, a girl's white shorts and the man's white shirt under the spotlight made me pull the right side down, but maybe I'm not pulling it down far enough. Maybe the camera originally washed it? When you do a 2 hour tape with a variety of captures (indoor, outdoor, day, night, bright stage in dark auditorium), how do you handle setting levels?

[jagabo]

From what I've see the Sony deck and the 550 are giving you the best results so far. I think it's worth investigating whether the proc amp can fix the AIW caps.

[Brad]

The AIW doesn't have a 3D comb filter like the 550 does. It also stretches the image slightly, not that it particularly matters.

EDIT: I would be interested in seeing how it handles the line timing of either of the VCRs sans TBC, however.

[sanlyn]

As far as I've seen from my own AIW's since 1999 and from other caps in the forum, the AIW's don't stretch anything. They do fill more of the frame -- although some cards make a "Smaller" image ith bigger borders, some have smaller borders, some VCR's give different size borders and a smaller bottom-border slit of head switching noise. Recording via the AIW and its MMC application, the image is usually cropped somewhat (MMC has seen its day, so don't bother with MMC -- in fact, don't even install it. Not needed. Haven't installed MMC since 2004). Anyway, you can give the AIW another try if you wish. I'd say the 550 is giving you the best results so far.

Chroma bleed: a VHS trademark, sometimes a little worse without a line tbc, sometimes not. There are post-process filters for it. Even with tbc, you'll always have some measure of it.

TBC: You've undoubtedly seen threads on using certain DVD recorders as a tbc pass-through. Other components are available, including one DENON a/v receiver that has line tbc on one of its analog outputs (for the going price of several Franklins, of course, not in its budget units). My experience with the recommended pass-thru units is that they're as able or better than legacy consumer VCRs, some of whose designs are 15 years old and relatively primitive. My misgiving about DV cameras used as tbc pass-thru is that only the most pricey of them can do it cleanly, and you have the DV problem of having to decode for cleanup and re-encode anyway, so you may as well go to lossless with a recorder for pass-thru. This isn't to say that those pass-thru's compete with pro or shop-grade units, but you'd be amazed at what they can do. Another advantage of pass-thru is that you're not tied down to one card or one player to get tbc. Yet another advantage is that some of those pass-thru's have very good composite/s-video converters and somewhat better y/c filters. You're free to take your choice among these tips, but I've had excellent results with my Panasonic (preferred) and Toshiba units using several VCR's.

As noted earlier, the process starts with becoming familiar with how your components perform during capture. It's impossible to get a perfect, finished, ready-to-encode capture from VHS, even with the best of components. Many retail tapes might be easier: they're professionally produced and of much higher quality than we mere home-bound mortals can muster. Most home VHS tapes are damaged, played-out, dirty, crummy, noisy affairs; not the fault of the owner if the owner has done their best, but simply the fault of the limitations of home-made stuff. I have a few dozen retail tapes I recorded directly to MPEG with a DVD recorder. They look pretty decent. But the home-made stuff, even with quality VCR's -- well, you work with what's there. You won't get full DVD quality if for no other reason than VHS lacks the resolution and precision of commercial DVD's; but you can certainly capture a decent permanent lossless archive, and it's well within possibility to make it look better rather than worse.

Nit-picky Dept.: those black borders, being zero-black most of the time, can safely remain in the "red" left-hand area of a setup histogram. If you try a couple of very short captures and let that little "spike" stay in the red, you'll very quickly see the difference. Crushing doesn't occur until a big blob of the "real" information ends up in the red. Consider that consumer cameras with AGP turned on will create a problem somewhere, either at the dark or the bright end or both. AGP is the work of the devil, I always say; most of the time it does exactly the wrong thing. Rescuing some detail 10 years later is sometimes difficult. Keeping the majority of image data out of the red helps a lot.

I think you're getting the hang of what a decent capture entails. You might be expecting this Step 1 to yield perfection, but it seldom will. The purpose of these tests is to learn to inflict a minimum of damage at the outset. It's the best one can hope for with source like VHS or even digital home-made video. It can always be improved later. There are a ton of filters and procedures developed by video geeks to address those issues. I have played a bit with chroma bleed filters and some denoisers with these caps, but can't post now because my wife has undertaken yet another redecorating frenzy in our home, so I'm stuck with this laptop of mine for a few days. Rest assured, you've made great progress. Most of the defects you notice are in the source media, not in your improved methods. Your recent captures are miles ahead of your first posts.

[dianedebuda]

I have a Polaroid 2001G that I was going to try as a pass-through TBC, but it has apparently succumbed to leaking caps.

It's impossible to get a perfect, finished, ready-to-encode capture from VHS... You might be expecting this Step 1 to yield perfection

Not aiming for impossible goal of perfection at capture. A while back, someone said it's easier to fix some things at capture time rather than later, so that's really all I'm concerned about at this stage. Do the best I can with reasonable effort with what I have. Good 'nuff.

As I'm sure you know, the AIW does not have a Sharpness proc amp control.

[Brad]

the AIW's don't stretch anything. They do fill more of the frame

... by stretching the image compared to the others. If you know of a way to fill the frame without stretching, I'm sure the black bar haters would love to hear it!

The AIW 9800 matches the ATI 600 rather than the early AIW cards, so they corrected the issue at some point.

although some cards make a "Smaller" image ith bigger borders, some have smaller borders

There are standards for this. The cards that deviate violate them, and if you feed in a DVD image as a known reference you can see the issue (people even came up with a way to measure it exactly). As I said, it's not a big difference ultimately.

some VCR's give different size borders

I don't think that's possible with the nature of the analog signal, but I could be wrong. I've yet to see two VCRs vary when fed into the same capture device.

Consider that consumer cameras with AGP turned on

AGC, I assume.

[sanlyn]

Uh, yes. AGC. I'll correct that one.

I don't do typos. The characters move around and change when you're not looking.

[sanlyn]

I have a Polaroid 2001G that I was going to try as a pass-through TBC, but it has apparently succumbed to leaking caps.

It's also possible that it can't be used for pass-thru. Many DVD-R's won't work as pass-thru tbc's.

It's impossible to get a perfect, finished, ready-to-encode capture from VHS... You might be expecting this Step 1 to yield perfection

Not aiming for impossible goal of perfection at capture. A while back, someone said it's easier to fix some things at capture time rather than later, so that's really all I'm concerned about at this stage. Do the best I can with reasonable effort with what I have. Good 'nuff.

Do you refer to removing noise and other problems during capture, or to simply adjusting levels and contrast? Good denoisers and other filters for major problems are far too slow and complicated for real-time capture.

As I'm sure you know, the AIW does not have a Sharpness proc amp control.

Good. Sharpening VHS noise during capture and then trying in vain to clean it later is a frequent newbie mistake. Many users think that sharpeners increase resolution. Sometimes it's difficult to imagine how people can be so misled and far-fetched.