Capture 1080i50 with minimal quality loss. Advice please!

[poisondeathray]

2. Don't forget There atlease always two streams coming in and being written to the drive. Then if you start to stack other things that rate will start to increase (Overlays, Camera - Extra Video stream, Extra audio channels, etc...). There allot of data coming in not just Video stream.

In the blog example, the combined STR of video,audio/container overhead is still less than 6MB/s . This is nothing. We're talking about compressed streams .

We're not talking about recording 100 simultaneous streams. It's 1 AV stream.

Sorry, there has to be another explanation. It's just not plausible with a modern properly functioning HDD . Just do the math

4. Studios are starting to shoot movies with VRF now of days then old Constant. VRF does have it benefits as well. Allot of people prefer VRF when recording or encoding. Specially with Videogame material.

Even software like ShadowPlay use VRF.

No, this is incorrect about the studio and movies . Unless you're talking about some "ma and pa" studio using an iphone to record home videos

Nobody in their right mind would want acquisition in VFR . It's very problematic to edit in a NLE. Editing timeline is always CFR. Just do a bit of research. This means you need to convert VFR to CFR before you even start. It's a lot of hassle and problems with sync. CFR is ALWAYS preferred, 100% of the time for acquisition scenarios where you plan to edit or do something to the stream.

The only valid place for VFR, is in some end distribution formats. There is some minor benefit because of dropped frames (fewer frames to encode, a minor compression benefit in static sequenes) . That's the only minor benefit. It is dwarfed by the potential problems and headaches caused by VFR. It usually has no place for acquisition, unless you don't plan to do anything with it. (Keep it as is, no editing)

I hope you are not confusing VBR (variable bitrate) with VFR (variable frame rate)


Thanks for sharing your experiences

[Revan654]

Some interesting discussion here. This reminds me of the situation I was in many years back with analog capture. There's pros and cons of everything and it's nigh on impossible to find something that ticks all the boxes.

I've made a decision to jump in and test the water, so to speak. I've started with the box that (picture quality excluded) ticks my boxes - the Hauppauge PVR 2 Game Edition Plus.
I picked one up 2nd hand on eBay, so if I don't get on with it I can sell it on and not lose much. At least this way I'll have a basis for comparison. I will of course update here with my findings.

Thanks everyone for your input. Much appreciated!

Just depends how much money your willing to spend to get what you want. Allot of these cards are designed for a certain crowd. Certain features are left out since they could not be used.

--------

I tried that card before, I had to return. The device would freeze the picture while it was recording, and not resume until you rebooted the card(Hauppauge, altease the earlier editions, had a habit of overheating). It usually happens within the first 30 minutes. Hopefully it was a driver/heat issue and it's been fixed by now.

One small bit of information: Don't use the 5.1 if you there some kind of video break during the recording. The device will drop the picture and audio for about 5 to 10 seconds. The SPDIF in my experience is bit unstable.

[Revan654]

2. Don't forget There atlease always two streams coming in and being written to the drive. Then if you start to stack other things that rate will start to increase (Overlays, Camera - Extra Video stream, Extra audio channels, etc...). There allot of data coming in not just Video stream.

In the blog example, the combined STR of video,audio/container overhead is still less than 6MB/s . This is nothing. We're talking about compressed streams .

We're not talking about recording 100 simultaneous streams. It's 1 AV stream.

Sorry, there has to be another explanation. It's just not plausible with a modern HDD . Just do the math

4. Studios are starting to shoot movies with VRF now of days then old Constant. VRF does have it benefits as well. Allot of people prefer VRF when recording or encoding. Specially with Videogame material.

Even software like ShadowPlay use VRF.

No, this is incorrect about the studio and movies . Unless you're talking about some "ma and pa" studio using an iphone to record home videos

Nobody in their right mind would want acquisition in VFR . It's very problematic to edit in a NLE. Editing timeline is always CFR. Just do a bit of research. This means you need to convert VFR to CFR before you even start. It's a lot of hassle and problems with sync. CFR is ALWAYS preferred, 100% of the time for acquisition scenarios where you plan to edit or do something to the stream.

The only valid place for VFR, is in some end distribution formats. There is some minor benefit because of dropped frames (fewer frames to encode, a minor compression benefit in static sequenes) . That's the only minor benefit. It is dwarfed by the potential problems and headaches caused by VFR. It usually has no place for acquisition, unless you don't plan to do anything with it. (Keep it as is, no editing)

I hope you are not confusing VBR (variable bitrate) with VFR (variable frame rate)


Thanks for sharing your experiences

It was Framerate, Maybe it was HFR. I read so much on HDR, Some of it right now is confusing at times.

[poisondeathray]

It was Framerate, Maybe it was HFR. I read so much on HDR, Some of it right now is confusing at times.

HFR and HDR, yes, they are more common now for acquisition. But HFR in CFR mode

But VFR, definitely not. VFR is like "green kryptonite" for editing. Massive potential for problems , compatibility and sync issues. It has to be properly converted to CFR (insert the missing frames in approx. the correct locations) before editing in a NLE . The problem is it's "approximate". Some parts might be slightly in and out of sync . Not to mention more work , more time wasted, generation loss (unless you use a lossless workflow), and more storage space for intermediates. Big headache.

If an acquisition device cannot record CFR, and that usage scenario includes real editing (in a NLE) , it should automatically be excluded from consideration

[Revan654]

It was Framerate, Maybe it was HFR. I read so much on HDR, Some of it right now is confusing at times.

HFR and HDR, yes, they are more common now for acquisition. But HFR in CFR mode

But VFR, definitely not. VFR is like "green kryptonite" for editing. Massive potential for problems , compatibility and sync issues. It has to be properly converted to CFR (insert the missing frames in approx. the correct locations) before editing in a NLE . The problem is it's "approximate". Some parts might be slightly in and out of sync . Not to mention more work , more time wasted, generation loss (unless you use a lossless workflow), and more storage space for intermediates. Big headache.

If an acquisition device cannot record CFR, and that usage scenario includes real editing (in a NLE) , it should automatically be excluded from consideration

VFR is all Software based. Most cards can tweak it in the settings(or the .ini files), or atlease create a directshow filter with CRF.

[nick1977]

Thanks for the tips. I'm sure I've got some fun times ahead! 😄

[poisondeathray]

VFR is all Software based. Most cards can tweak it in the settings(or the .ini files), or atlease create a directshow filter with CRF.

all these acronyms

CRF is something different. It's a method of rate control with some encoders. Constant Rate Factor



When people post reviews or samples, they should always post the CFR version if that device is capable. It's important information for people considering purchasing recording devices. Otherwise you assume it's not capable.

[Revan654]

VFR is all Software based. Most cards can tweak it in the settings(or the .ini files), or atlease create a directshow filter with CRF.

all these acronyms

CRF is something different. It's a method of rate control with some encoders. Constant Rate Factor



When people post reviews or samples, they should always post the CFR version if that device is capable. It's important information for people considering purchasing recording devices. Otherwise you assume it's not capable.

I was just typing to fast and didn't see it was in the reverse order.

[rat killer]

I also tried the Hauppauge HDPVR2 GE Plus because I wanted the 5.1 audio. It flat does not work. Not stable anyway and cannot produce an hour long recording of 1080p video with AC35.1 audio. After two weeks of thrashing and trying LOTS of different combinations. I gave up and went back to the Avermedia Live Gamer 2. It just works. Records to an SD card without connection to a pc. The files are in great form, 1080p60 video, no missed frames, the device does not even get warm recording for hours on end. It does lack 5.1 audio but the stereo audio works and is in perfect sync.

Perhaps one day a standalone product like this will exist that does 5.1 audio and perhaps even 4k. For now, this is about as good as it gets without mega buck setups.

[nick1977]

Hello everyone.
We'll, I finally got around to playing with the Hauppauge HD PVR 2 this evening. I was pleasantly surprised by the picture quality, and think at max bitrate it may be acceptable for me. What I'm struggling with however is the audio. It only supports AAC (which I can live with) but despite me setting 384 bitrate in the settings, it keeps recording at around 120. Is this a software bug? The sound is not where I thought my concern would be, but it is noticeably harsh sounding.
Is there another capture software that will give me more flexibility with the audio?

[Revan654]

Hello everyone.
We'll, I finally got around to playing with the Hauppauge HD PVR 2 this evening. I was pleasantly surprised by the picture quality, and think at max bitrate it may be acceptable for me. What I'm struggling with however is the audio. It only supports AAC (which I can live with) but despite me setting 384 bitrate in the settings, it keeps recording at around 120. Is this a software bug? The sound is not where I thought my concern would be, but it is noticeably harsh sounding.
Is there another capture software that will give me more flexibility with the audio?

Most capture software use AAC now of days. I would make sure your settings are being saved to the .ini file.

VirtualDub (Not sure if Hauppauge works on it), Make sure you go with VirtualDub 2. There is also OBS (It supports both local recording and streaming). You can also also build a graph in Graphedit as well.