Transfering Mini DV to PC with no loss

[jcikal]

I have over 200 mini DV and Hi8 tapes I want to transfer to my PC but without any loss of video quality. I have heard of both Fire Wire, the Blackmagic Intensity Shuttle USB or Thunderbolt as well as the Blackmagic Intensity Pro 4K, and the Canopus capture devices. Out of all of these which is the best one to use for what I want or is there a better way?

Thanks.

[jagabo]

Firewire will get you an exact copy of the data on the tape. All the other options you mention will subject the video to a digital to analog to digital conversion, reducing quality.

[jcikal]

I thought Thunderbolt or USB 3.0 was faster than Fire Wire?

[Cornucopia]

Has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with speed. It's coming off a tape (at ~36Mb/sec counting overhead), which plays in realtime (1x). Can't get it any faster than that.

Plus, the protocol for the isochronous transfer is permanently aligned with the FW400 technology (which is what was available at the time of its creation).

There are a few FW800<-->FW400 and USB3<-->FW400 and Thunderbolt<-->FW400 solutions, but the ones that consistently work are rare. Caveat Emptor.

Scott

[johnmeyer]

I thought Thunderbolt or USB 3.0 was faster than Fire Wire?

Speed has nothing to do with your original question. MiniDV and Digital 8 were both designed to transfer, bit-for-bit, the exact bits recorded on tape. They do that through their Firewire (1394) connection. Some of these camcorders also have a USB port, but it is for transferring still photos. You most definitely do NOT want to try to use this to transfer the video using USB because you will not get an exact copy of what is on the tape. I'm not even sure it is possible with most camcorders, and even if it is, don't do it.

USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt were developed a decade after most of these cameras were manufactured. Every one of these cameras uses USB 1.0 or 2.0, and none of them use Thunderbolt or USB 3.0. Thus, the superior speed of both of these technologies cannot be used with these cameras when transferring still photos (which is all you can do over USB on most miniDV camcorders).

Finally, you cannot transfer faster than real time, since you are playing a tape and it must play at its playback speed. Therefore, a connection faster than Firewire would be a complete and total waste, even if it technically was able to handle the video.

So, use Firewire. That is how the transfer system was designed. It works extremely well.

[edit]Cornucopia beat me to it while I was writing

[jcikal]

Does it make a difference if I use FW400 or FW800 in terms of loss of image quality? Also, which program is better for capturing with FW?

[aedipuss]

all miniDV and HDV cams are firewire 400. you don't need and they sometimes won't work with fw800.

[Brad]

Note that for your Hi8 tapes, Firewire capture is not ideal.

[johnmeyer]

Does it make a difference if I use FW400 or FW800 in terms of loss of image quality? Also, which program is better for capturing with FW?

All it is doing is copying bits, so the transfer speed makes zero difference to quality. And, as I already stated, since the transfer cannot happen any faster than the tape can play, faster transfer speed won't make it go any more quickly.

By far my favorite software for capturing miniDV via Firewire (1394) is Scenalyzer. You are in luck because Andi (the developer) realized that no one was buying DV anymore, and the sales of his shareware had all but dried up, so he put the program in the public domain. Go to that site and download the program. It is a wonderful utility, and even permits timed captures, time lapse, rapid scan (to create thumbnails, prior to capture) and lots more. Brilliant piece of software.

[flashandpan007]

Note that for your Hi8 tapes, Firewire capture is not ideal.

Why not? I personally do not have one, but I am interrested

[jagabo]

DV camcorders can only send the data in real time -- 1 hour to transfer 1 hour of video.

[JVRaines]

Note that for your Hi8 tapes, Firewire capture is not ideal.

Why not? I personally do not have one, but I am interrested

Because you will get DV25 compression at a lower quality than uncompressed capture.

[Cornucopia]

Yes, theoretically an uncompressed/lossless digitization, capture & encode of an analog source (such as Video8 and Hi8) should give improved quality over lossy captures such as DV.
Practically speaking, especially with less than ideal content or cameras, it may not make much/enough difference.

Scott

[johnmeyer]

Note that for your Hi8 tapes, Firewire capture is not ideal.

Why not? I personally do not have one, but I am interrested

Because you will get DV25 compression at a lower quality than uncompressed capture.

Absolutely true. However, given the crummy spatial and color quality recorded by this format (and Beta, VHS, 8mm, and S-VHS), as Cornucopia already stated, I really don't think most people would ever notice the 4:1:1 (NTSC) colorspace compression, and certainly not the DV compression artifacts. I always recommend that people do their analog transfers using the DV passthrough or using one of the external DV converters.

Why?

Because they work flawlessly.

By contrast, this forum and every other forum that deals with capture cards that permit saving the files in less compressed or uncompressed formats, at higher resolutions and with better color fidelity, often cause problems, most notably dropped frames, but also audio sync issues. Don't get me wrong, these other capture methods can (and do) work, but it just seems that a lot of people have posted, over the past fifteen years, about problems they have had.

By contrast, if you hook up your DV camcorder via Firewire and use Scenalyzer, you will not get dropped frames or other problems. It is about as bulletproof as any transfer system devised.

And, since the capture setup for the Hi8 will be identical to DV (for which you must use Firewire and the DV format because it is already recorded in that format), you don't have to mess with setting up new capture hardware.

[jcikal]

If I convert my VHS tapes using my D8 Camcorder thru the Firewire output of the Camcorder, would I get dropped frames? So FW800 might cause more problems than solutions? These tapes are basically from the 90's and early 2000's, and contain precious memories. I have to assume their imminent destruction so I want to make sure to preserve them for my kids (who are in their late teens now) by converting them to lossless digital format from which I can easily make exact duplicates for each of them.

[johnmeyer]

I don't how many times and in how many ways various people in this thread have to say the same thing: Firewire 800 makes no difference to anything. It is backward compatible with the Firewire in your D8 camcorder and will work just fine.

Instead of asking, over and over, whether faster Firewire makes a difference to anything, I recommend that you simply hook everything up and actually start doing some of the transfers. Get some familiarity with the process. Transferring DV via Firewire isn't just the best way to do things; it is the only way to accomplish what you want to do.

So, at the risk of sounding like a Nike ad: just do it!

[Cornucopia]

"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is."

-- YogiBerra

In theory, Firewire800 is totally backward compatible (with FW400); in practice, there are enough issues that it appears as a constant source of problems for troubleshooting on this forum.

Scott

[johnmeyer]

"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is."

-- YogiBerra

In theory, Firewire800 is totally backward compatible (with FW400); in practice, there are enough issues that it appears as a constant source of problems for troubleshooting on this forum.

Scott

Thanks, I didn't know that.

[SameSelf]

Does nobody have any experience with the Blackmagic capture devices the OP asked about?

[jcikal]

Is there a difference between using the Blackmagic Intensity Shuttle with USB 3.0 vs Firewire 400 as far as final video image quality is concerned? Note I'm not concerned with speed of transfer, just final image output.

[JVRaines]

However, given the crummy spatial and color quality recorded by this format (and Beta, VHS, 8mm, and S-VHS), as Cornucopia already stated, I really don't think most people would ever notice the 4:1:1 (NTSC) colorspace compression, and certainly not the DV compression artifacts. I always recommend that people do their analog transfers using the DV passthrough or using one of the external DV converters.

That's what I used to think. But after doing a couple thousand hours of DV conversion, I have changed my mind. Hi8 and S-VHS, in particular, benefit visibly from the higher color resolution of a 4:2:2 capture. And there are a few artifacts that even amateurs will notice, such as dancing colors on an image of a chain-link fence. The smaller file size and guaranteed audio sync of DV are still attractive. But disk space and processing have become cheaper and faster over the past several years. Now I'm using the free AmaRecTV application for captures and experiencing no audio problems.

[flashandpan007]

Note that for your Hi8 tapes, Firewire capture is not ideal.

Why not? I personally do not have one, but I am interrested

Because you will get DV25 compression at a lower quality than uncompressed capture.

I live in PAL land - bavaria and I looked at some old footage. It's 4:2:0. Same here?

[JVRaines]

PAL DV is 4:2:0 while NTSC DV is 4:1:1. Both are 25 Mbps. Either way, they will be lower quality than uncompressed video.

[johnmeyer]

I live in PAL land - bavaria and I looked at some old footage. It's 4:2:0. Same here?

NTSC DV is 4:1:1; PAL DV is 4:2:0.

[edit]Oops, I don't know how I didn't see JVRaines' post. Sorry for the duplication.

[johnmeyer]

Hi8 and S-VHS, in particular, benefit visibly from the higher color resolution of a 4:2:2 capture. And there are a few artifacts that even amateurs will notice, such as dancing colors on an image of a chain-link fence. The smaller file size and guaranteed audio sync of DV are still attractive.

I need to do a new DV capture test, using the standard Firewire capture and then using the video output into a capture card capable of 4:4:4 color captured with a lossless codec. I did this test a decade ago, but I wasn't yet as critical about all things video. After all these years, I certainly am now aware of the problems the DV codec can cause but when I first did the test, while I could see a difference, it did not seem like a big thing. The reason I didn't stick with my ATI capture card is I could never get the thing to capture reliably. I'd think that I finally had it working, using a certain combination of software and settings, but then I'd "lose the recipe," and find that I had dropped frames, audio sync issues, aspect ratio changes, and more.

If you've ever had to "rip out the knitting," and re-do a 6-hour capture, it won't take you long to stick with the workflow that doesn't force you to backtrack.

DV capture has always been, for me, bulletproof. I place a pretty big value on being able to get through a project without having to go back and re-do things. And, like most other people who post these questions about converting DV and analog tapes to DVD or MP4, my conversion projects tend to be really big. People bring in boxes full of old tapes, with sometimes 100+ hours needing to be captured just for one project. If I have to constantly be nursing the setup in order to get it to work, that's no good.

But, perhaps I've never gotten the right equipment. All I know is that I've seen a lot of posts where people have had similar problems to mine, and these problems seem to plague capture setups other than my ancient ATI Radeon 8500 DV card.

So, I completely agree with your post, but I still stick with DV capture for the reasons I just gave.

BTW, these comments apply generically to the Blackmagic USB capture vs. capturing the native DV output via Firewire. However, I've never used the Blackmagic product, so I cannot give you a side-by-side comparison.

Also, one question I would have of anyone who has used this for capturing the output of a Digital 8 camcorder is whether capturing the analog output of the camcorder (which is how it would have to be hooked up) would bypass the Digital 8 camcorder's internal TBC? If so, the lack of that circuit would so dramatically reduce the quality of the capture that any improvements from getting better than 4:1:1 (NTSC) or 4:2:0 (PAL) color, and avoiding DV's compression artifacts would be more than wiped out.

[JVRaines]

I'll tell you one thing to watch out for is incorrect black level converting analog 8 to DV on a Sony D8 camera. I've tried it with a couple of cams and black is suspiciously about 8 IRE too high, as though the engineers thought they had to add NTSC setup.

[johnmeyer]

I'll tell you one thing to watch out for is incorrect black level converting analog 8 to DV on a Sony D8 camera. I've tried it with a couple of cams and black is suspiciously about 8 IRE too high, as though the engineers thought they had to add NTSC setup.

I'm glad to hear that because I've experienced this and was never able to avoid it. It's easy to fix in my NLE, and I have a preset for it, but I always have to remember to do it.

[Brad]

4:1:1 is overkill for capturing all of the chroma present on any consumer analog tape format. Any decrease in color quality must be due to something else (like heavy chroma compression).

Also, one question I would have of anyone who has used this for capturing the output of a Digital 8 camcorder is whether capturing the analog output of the camcorder (which is how it would have to be hooked up) would bypass the Digital 8 camcorder's internal TBC?

The TBC can be used, but IMO it isn't very good compared to the likes of Panasonic's old DVD recorders. Unfortunately, external devices can't be used to improve he horizontal stability with these camcorders: based on my own NTSC captures and someone else's PAL captures, the video is passed through the Digital8's ADC even if TBC and DNR are both "disabled". The errors get baked in.

Additionally, the Digital8 cams all seem to add undefeatable edge enhancement.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/376837-DV-conversion-vs-lossless-capture-comparison...-auto-load!%5D

[JVRaines]

Oh, yeah, there's the sharpness problem. Another thing that I prefer about my Hi8 deck is that it has a sharpness control I can dial in instead of getting stuck with bright halos around everything.

[jcikal]

How come it's so easy to convert 60yr old material (8mm film) to digital and yet 15yr old material is so complicated, convoluted and seems like there is no one clear answer or solution? Anyway, to simplify my question: Is there a difference in picture quality between capturing in FW400, FW800 or thru the Blackmagic Intensity box? I just want to preserve my kids and wife memories of yesteryear for future generations, like my father did back in the 50's, for which I thank God that he did, as he was a film & photo enthusiast. I always like to say that if a picture is worth a thousand words, then video is worth a thousand pictures.

If someone knows how to get Digital 8 and Mini DV to the PC looking the same (or as close to it as possible), please let me know, as I realize that this is a very frustrating field, as opposed to just ripping a DVD or Blu Ray disc which is children's stuff, compared to the nuclear physicist degree one appears to need to just transfer personal videos from a camcorder.

BTW, thanks to all who have wisely contributed so far, it made me realize just how much knowledge needs to be distributed out there for those of us who are new to this field.