Is Ezcap.tv still trading?

[Gameshow Host]

I was all set to buy one of their capture devices (www.ezcap.tv/usb-video-capture/ezcap116-capture-card) but I don't see any "Buy" or "Add to trolley" button. I contacted them yesterday but no reply yet.

I notice their other capture devices say "sold out". Makes me wonder if they're no longer trading? Would be a shame as I have very little money and £21.95 was the perfect price for me. The alternatives seem much more expensive.

[DB83]

From the main page, this one also appears 'sold out'

[lordsmurf]

EZCrap cards shouldn't be used if quality matters.
There are multiple issues with that card, and it's cheaply made Chinese junk.
The same POS is found in other low-end brands like Roxio.

Being unavailable for purchase did you a favor.

[Gameshow Host]

EZCrap cards shouldn't be used if quality matters.
There are multiple issues with that card, and it's cheaply made Chinese junk.

Thanks for the warning! I'm glad I asked! I'm planning to use it for my precious home videos, so I don't want any compromise on quality!

Ezcap was recommended to me a couple of years ago by a user here called PuzZLeR.

Being unavailable for purchase did you a favor.

Could you recommend a good quality capture device that doesn't cost the earth? (I'm happy to buy second hand.) PuzZLeR's other recommendations were Hauppauge USB-Live2 and StarTech SVID2USB2. Are these any good?

[DB83]

Since the Ezcap116 seems no longer available then these comments are not really useful but.....

There are a lot of products called 'Easycap' out there and many are indeed cheap knock-offs with suspect drivers etc.. However the Ezcap116 was promoted as the genuine product and the name was changed from Easycap to highlight this. And since you were also buying from the official source then you should get a good product.

Unfortunately, and it never takes long for this to happen, the pirates got in on the act and inferior, cheaper, copies of the Ezcap were also appearing which could have compromised the official product.

I actually own a Hauppauge USB-Live2 and it does the job for me

[Gameshow Host]

Thanks, DB83, that's helpful

[jagabo]

Also the Diamond VC500.

[usually_quiet]

The I-O DATA GV-USB2 is another capture device that seems to be a quality product worth looking at. This device is somewhat popular for SD and retro game capture but some members here have used it for analog tape capture. Amazon.co.uk and ebay have listings for it. The documentation and software provided with the device is in Japanese but there is a setup guide for English speakers here: https://iotku.pw/gvusb2-guide/

The I-O DATA GV-USB2 can be used with AmaRecTV for capture. This thread has some screenshots showing the settings offered by the I-O DATA GV-USB2 proc amp: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/384329-Do-these-settings-look-good-in-AmaRecTV-for...-and-Hi8-tapes. Available settings for PAL resolutions are also shown in some screenshots, so it is likely that they are supported.

[Gameshow Host]

Thanks for the replies, everyone. I've taken it all into consideration, and also really dug through a lot of old threads and reviews to get more info, so I would like to share with you my notes (below) where I've tried to create an overall rank of all the capture devices.

Please tell me if I've got anything wrong here, or if you disagree with my order. This is only what I can work out from reading a few old threads…

Video capture devices ranked by quality

1st place: Elgato Video Capture £30 (lowest UK price + postage)

• Gives very similar capture results to the Hauppauge
• Virtually no dropped frames, even better than Hauppage
• A little too much contrast (too extreme darks and lights)
• Can use with Windows, but primarily a Mac-oriented company
• Doesn't capture above 640x480 (making it useless), but I presume this limitation only applies to bundled software? <-- Can anyone confirm?

2nd place: Hauppauge (610) USB-Live2 £35

• Generally well-received
• Seems like the all-round best for something that "just works", though some people had problems with drivers
• Virtually no dropped frames
• Like the Elgato, a little too much contrast (too extreme darks and lights)
• Crushes blacks at Y=16
• Inferior internal isolation, report of a quiet high-pitched noise
• Picture is offset left, leaving a black bar down the right
• Less picture noise than the Elgato - seems to have built-in noise reduction (not good)
• Updated software can be downloaded that's far better than older versions
• "There's nobody at Hauppauge anymore that knows anything about video, so it's just OEM reference designs in a box (same as all the other cheap Chinese manufacturers)."—jagabo

3rd place: Diamond VC500 £47

• Some rave reviews
• Some reports of poor quality compared to original video
• Drops significantly more frames than Hauppage and Elgato (from Amazon and Newegg reviews)
• Terrible instructions and bundled software, but can use other software
• Reportedly bypasses macrovision without a frame-based TBC <-- Really? Confirm?
• May not work on Windows 8
• "Color resolution is better than my ATI 600"

4th place: ATI TV Wonder HD 600 £25

• Well-received, recommended
• Picture is a little sharper than the Hauppauge/Elgato devices (not necessarily a good thing, could be artificially sharpened)

5th place: Ezcap 116 £29

• Bad reputation ("Ezcrap")
• Some say these devices work fine if you get authentic ones

6th place: StarTech SVID2USB2

• Works well with VirtualDub
• Must be SVID2USB2 - not SVID2USB23, which had bad reviews!
• Model name isn't normally listed, therefore almost impossible to find right model
• Requires updated drivers, hard to get hold of

7th place: TOTMC USB 2.0 Video Capture £25

• Reported problems with audio breaking up

Unsure: I-O DATA GV-USB2

• Seems to be a quality product

Unsure: Total Recorder

• Doesn't support USB, only firewire

Unsure: KWorld DVD Maker USB

Bad: Canopus (aka Grass Valley) ADVC110

• Mixed reviews
• Only outputs to DV format
• Doesn't support USB, only firewire
• Loses 50% of color data for NTSC (4:1:1)
• "Only decent for PAL"

Bad: SABRENT USB-ECPT

Bad: SIIG JU-AV0012-S1

Bad: StarTech SVID2USB23

Bad: Blackmagic cards

• "Too many flaws to be worth considering" —lordsmurf

[lordsmurf]

I'd not put an Elgato on any recommended list.

I have no major issue with the VC500, but it does have oddities that can appear, and thus it's not a top ranked device to me, either.

ATI 600 USB has no issues with Win7/8/10. Noting that Win10 itself has issues with capture in general, and updates often fubar the capturing ability until you tweak the OS. And that's not always a quick process. Win10 is for games and web browsing, not serious work like video.

[Gameshow Host]

Lordsmurf, thanks for your input. I have edited my above post to removed the point about Win 7 problems for the ATI 600, thanks.

I'd not put an Elgato on any recommended list.

I would love to know why you feel this way. From what I can understand, the only significant problem is reports of it only capturing 640x480. That would make it completely useless for most people, but I presume this restriction must be limited to the bundled software. It says "captures PAL" on the box, which would be an outright lie if it only captured 480 lines!

the VC500 [is] not a top ranked device to me

I would love to know what your rankings would be, and why. I don't want to make a mistake with my purchase, the videos I'm capturing are really precious to me.

Win10 is for games and web browsing, not serious work like video.

Windows 10 is for people who don't care about privacy and don't care how an operating system looks. I truly cannot understand why anyone would want to downgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10.

[medeamajic]

Your best bet would be a used generic DV-25 Fire wire converter. The BMD Intensity Shuttle works great for everything except VHS. I hope the video links help.

https://youtu.be/kszzHAj8I_U

https://youtu.be/xdw9_DETrqE

[lordsmurf]

Your best bet would be a used generic DV-25 Fire wire converter. The BMD Intensity Shuttle works great for everything except VHS. I hope the video links help.
https://youtu.be/kszzHAj8I_U
https://youtu.be/xdw9_DETrqE

That's terrible advice.
DV loses 50%+ of color data quality.
Blackmagic has known issues capturing SD video.

BTW, that guy on Youtube doesn't know what he's doing, says stuff that is not true. The lack of quality input is obvious, no TBCs in use. I'm amused that the Canopus DV in the 1st video is just as bad on timing, as we sometimes get members that insist it has a line TBC inside: it does not. Clearly, obviously, does not. But that guy claims it does. His own samples show that to be BS. The DV loss is also extremely obvious in places.

[godai]

so whats its the best for capture then? ati usb 600 with [HuffYUV] lossless codec?

honestly this one discourage me, i read its recommended in your forum, but size of file its insane like 100gb per hour? im getting 16 gb with dv.

im wondering how you deal with those size of files , couple years ago when hard drives go up to 250 gb max

[lordsmurf]

honestly this one discourage me, i read its recommended in your forum, but size of file its insane like 100gb per hour? im getting 16 gb with dv.
im wondering how you deal with those size of files ,

Lossless files are not 100gb. Even uncompressed YUY2 is only 75gb/hour.

Huffyuv is about 35gb/hour.
And Lagarith is 25gb/hour ... though Lagarith has much higher CPU needs, so Huffyuv is leaner for capture.

couple years ago when hard drives go up to 250 gb max

I had 200gb+ drives back in 2003, and had 4+ installed in a single system with a PromiseTX2 card.

15+ years ago, you mostly captured direct to DVD MPEG specs, using ATI AIW on XP. Or DV 13gb/hour, but it actually lost more color fidelity than high bitrate (15mbps) MPEG capturing. Lossless was saved for restoration projects, and space limits (and CPU limits) meant 1 video at a time. Back then, filters were also pretty inferior to what we have now, as several really matured in the late 2000s and early 2010s.

We've had 1tb+ drives for at least a decade now.

[medeamajic]

Your best bet would be a used generic DV-25 Fire wire converter. The BMD Intensity Shuttle works great for everything except VHS. I hope the video links help.
https://youtu.be/kszzHAj8I_U
https://youtu.be/xdw9_DETrqE

That's terrible advice.
DV loses 50%+ of color data quality.
Blackmagic has known issues capturing SD video.

BTW, that guy on Youtube doesn't know what he's doing, says stuff that is not true. The lack of quality input is obvious, no TBCs in use. I'm amused that the Canopus DV in the 1st video is just as bad on timing, as we sometimes get members that insist it has a line TBC inside: it does not. Clearly, obviously, does not. But that guy claims it does. His own samples show that to be BS. The DV loss is also extremely obvious in places.

Lordsmurf,

You are very very confused. I never stated the ADVC 110 has a Line TBC built in.

I see you have made several post about the Canopus products and TBCs. Not everyone seems to agree with you. Why do you think that is Lordsmurf? In fact many people have stated they never had a problem capturing worn out VHS tapes with the ADVC 110. Having said that all generic DV-25 based Fire Wire converters will compress the video into the Mini DV-25 codec. No one would say other wise but when a person is thinking about getting a cheap $60.00 USB capture card most people would admit a DV converter might be a better option. The original post was not about spending $500.00 in hardware for the best solution money can buy. Learn to put things in perspective Lordsmurf. Having said that have you ever used a Datavideo DAC-100 or a DC 10 Plus? When I capture uncompressed 10 bit HI-8 tapes using the S-Video input on my Intensity Shuttle the image quality does look better than using the Canopus ADVC 110 but it uses up a lot of hard drive space. Just for the record Mini DV-25 is 5:1 compression. It is not heavily compressed or lightly compressed. It is in the middle. A lot of people using the old Avid Media Composers based on the Targa 2000 capture cards would capture at 5:1 compression. It was considered the best option to have decent quality and not use more hard drives space than needed.

I also mentioned in my video that the Intensity Shuttle has a hard time capturing VHS so there is no need for you to repeat it in your response. The Intensity Shuttle does need a TBC. There is obviously a huge difference between the ADVC 110 and the Intensity Shuttle. Why do you think that is Lordsmurf? Having said that forget about the word TBC and instead realize many of the older PCI capture devices and Fire Wire based DV converters have a chip to process the incoming video and clean it up. Can you admit that Lordsmurf? A TBC probably will not clean up the video signal any better than a cheap $300.00 PCI based capture card from 1998. The only thing the TBC will do is continue to record if there is a really bad portion in the tape. A DC 10 Plus capture card and a generic DV-25 Fire Wire converter would probably loose sync but who cares? That bad portion of the tape would have to be edit out anyway. Having said that I don't care about your opinion. Anyone can watch the video links and see that the ADVC 110 and the ADS A/V Pyro Link are cleaning up the video signal. Every PCI capture card I ever had did the same thing. The Cheap USB capture card are hit or miss in regards to quality. Having said that the Intensity Shuttle and ADVC 110 are broadcast compliant and have been used at several post production houses for tape conversion regardless if they get your personal seal of approval or not.

Everyone can watch the video link below. The only thing the TBC did was allow the capture card to record a really bad portion of the tape. The guy doing the video admitted he tried to make a glitch in the tape so the capture card would loose sync but the quality was the same. Some capture cards need a TBC and others do not. End of story!

https://youtu.be/qJKInMUw3A8

[godai]

[QUOTE=lordsmurf;2546042]

Lossless files are not 100gb. Even uncompressed YUY2 is only 75gb/hour.

Huffyuv is about 35gb/hour.
And Lagarith is 25gb/hour ... though Lagarith has much higher CPU needs, so Huffyuv is leaner for capture.

thank you , i dont know then im using Huffyuv and im getting 100gb, one hour, with virtualdub and ati 600 usb.

i just upload a pic. 12 gbs x 10 minutes. looks like its 75 gb case.

[medeamajic]

honestly this one discourage me, i read its recommended in your forum, but size of file its insane like 100gb per hour? im getting 16 gb with dv.
im wondering how you deal with those size of files ,

Lossless files are not 100gb. Even uncompressed YUY2 is only 75gb/hour.

Huffyuv is about 35gb/hour.
And Lagarith is 25gb/hour ... though Lagarith has much higher CPU needs, so Huffyuv is leaner for capture.

couple years ago when hard drives go up to 250 gb max

I had 200gb+ drives back in 2003, and had 4+ installed in a single system with a PromiseTX2 card.

15+ years ago, you mostly captured direct to DVD MPEG specs, using ATI AIW on XP. Or DV 13gb/hour, but it actually lost more color fidelity than high bitrate (15mbps) MPEG capturing. Lossless was saved for restoration projects, and space limits (and CPU limits) meant 1 video at a time. Back then, filters were also pretty inferior to what we have now, as several really matured in the late 2000s and early 2010s.

We've had 1tb+ drives for at least a decade now.

A lot of different capture cards (Fast, Dazzle, True Vision, Canopus, Matrox, Avid, Pinnacle) were being used 15 years ago as well a DV converters. The DV Converters allowed for real-time playback using Avid, FCP, Premiere Pro and Sony Vegas. I don't think the ATI AIW did that. I know Pinnacle's Liquid Edition used a modified ATI AIW but they dropped that after a year and opted for a USB device that worked great on desktops and laptops. Avid had the MOJO back then although a lot of Avid user used Avid DV Express software with the Canopus ADVC products. There were a lot of cool options back then depending on your needs.

I used a Promise Fast Track in 1998 but by 2002 the hard drives we fast enough for me to edit several layers of DV-25 so I stopped using it.

[flashandpan007]

Is there a capture device which supports RGB over Scart?

[lordsmurf]

You are very very confused. I never stated the ADVC 110 has a Line TBC built in.

I forget which, but one of the videos stated exactly that.

I see you have made several post about the Canopus products and TBCs. Not everyone seems to agree with you. Why do you think that is Lordsmurf?

Some people also think the world is flat. Some people are just dipshits.

In fact many people have stated they never had a problem capturing worn out VHS tapes with the ADVC 110.

Some people are completely oblivious to video errors. Or worse, for whatever reason, think "that's just the way it is", which is why we have the myth that "VHS = bad quality" when in fact it's usually simply 100% user error.

Having said that all generic DV-25 based Fire Wire converters will compress the video into the Mini DV-25 codec. No one would say other wise but when a person is thinking about getting a cheap $60.00 USB capture card most people would admit a DV converter might be a better option.

Why use DV compression -- a technology that is literally from the era of Pentium III computers, and the entire reason the bandwidth/size sacrifice was made (4:1:1, 13gb/hour) -- when better 4:2:2 (equivalent) lossless is available? It's almost hard to find a drive less than 1th these days, so why compromise quality using a compromised format that was made to save space? Even 4:2:0 MPEG compression at 20mbps is better than DV, and the only reason it wasn't done is because CPU was sorely underpowered in the stone ages of video.

The original post was not about spending $500.00 in hardware for the best solution money can buy. Learn to put things in perspective Lordsmurf.

It also wasn't about baking cookies. But nobody said to spend $500 anymore than they said to use chocolate chips.

Having said that have you ever used a Datavideo DAC-100 or a DC 10 Plus?

Yep.

When I capture uncompressed 10 bit HI-8 tapes using the S-Video input on my Intensity Shuttle the image quality does look better than using the Canopus ADVC 110 but it uses up a lot of hard drive space.

Why would you capture 10-bit? The color of Hi8 is more like 6-bit dithered, 8-bit at most. And again, it's seemingly about space with you, not quality. There is a middle ground between those two options.

Just for the record Mini DV-25 is 5:1 compression.

5:1 is a random ratio.
Uncompressed YUY2 is about 75gb/hour, and DV (DV25) is 13gb/hour. That'd be 5.7:1 (or 1:5.7, depending on what you're trying to say).

It is not heavily compressed or lightly compressed.

The chroma is heavily compressed, to the point that visual data is being very obviously lost. Sure, the data rate is not much different than MPEG, but the compression algorithm is wholly inferior. Professionals hated it, because it wreaked havoc with chrome keying. Consumers liked it at the time -- but as displays have grown larger, they've come to realize it wasn't all that much better than VHS. And in fact, when used to convert VHS, it would often actually look worse than the tape did. There's a reason that DV devices haven't been made in almost 15-20 years.

old Avid Media Composers based on the Targa 2000 capture cards would capture at 5:1 compression. It was considered the best option to have decent quality and not use more hard drives space than needed.

It was also about CPU, and sometimes RAM. Targa was 90s tech, not much different from MJPEG and MPEG-1. Amusing, since DV was the successor to it. MPEG-2 is really the only old format that is viable, because the revisions expanded it over the years. By the early 2000s, we could capture lossless, uncompressed, and well into the full DVD-Video spec MPEG bitrate range. I should know, I was doing it.

I also mentioned in my video that the Intensity Shuttle has a hard time capturing VHS so there is no need for you to repeat it in your response. The Intensity Shuttle does need a TBC.

Yep, you mentioned that in your first reply in this thread as well.

There is obviously a huge difference between the ADVC 110 and the Intensity Shuttle. Why do you think that is Lordsmurf?

Age.
BM is HD hardware, with SD as poor afterthought feature.
Canopus was about marketing more than true video quality, and has been defunct from well over a decade now.

Having said that forget about the word TBC and instead realize many of the older PCI capture devices and Fire Wire based DV converters have a chip to process the incoming video and clean it up. Can you admit that Lordsmurf?

No. If there were PCI devices that cleaned the signal, I'd be using them. All we have is marketing and false promises, not hardware that actually corrects incoming video.

A TBC probably will not clean up the video signal any better than a cheap $300.00 PCI based capture card from 1998.

Nonsense.

The only thing the TBC will do is continue to record if there is a really bad portion in the tape.

More nonsense. As I stated in my last reply, you don't really know what you're doing (at least with VHS), and much of what you're saying is poppy**** (as it related to VHS conversion). Maybe you know some other aspect of video, but clearly not this.

A DC 10 Plus capture card and a generic DV-25 Fire Wire converter would probably loose sync but who cares?

Why would it lose sync?

That bad portion of the tape would have to be edit out anyway.

What?

Having said that I don't care about your opinion. Anyone can watch the video links and see that the ADVC 110 and the ADS A/V Pyro Link are cleaning up the video signal.

Your own sample videos show timing errors. In some spots, yeah, sure, it's "not as bad" with some cards, but it still sucks. That's what you get when you fail to use proper equipment, in a proper workflow. You end up with crappy video. If you like it, good for you, I just hope you're not subjecting others to that sort of miserable work.

The Cheap USB capture card are hit or miss in regards to quality.

Every capture card is. Cheap or not. It's about chipsets more than anything else.

Having said that the Intensity Shuttle and ADVC 110 are broadcast compliant and have been used at several post production houses for tape conversion regardless if they get your personal seal of approval or not.

I've never come across a professional post house using a Canopus DV box, just small shops where the person has zero background in video. Or, at worst, a videographer that is Mac-centric, and the DV box is one of the few options since Mac is a DV-center workflow. They use BM boxes, sometimes, but mostly for HD work. And I've met many that had varying levels of disappointment from using it.

I'm not completely anti-DV, but am a pragmatist about it. It's old tech, loses quality, and should be avoided. But sometimes, it's the only option. It's not as bad as an Easycap (Easycrap), but you have to be aware of the loss. It's when somebody insists it's the best capture card that I get irritated, as it's nonsense.

Everyone can watch the video link below.

I'm starting to think your only goal here was to spam Youtube links.

The only thing the TBC did was allow the capture card to record a really bad portion of the tape. The guy doing the video admitted he tried to make a glitch in the tape so the capture card would loose sync but the quality was the same. Some capture cards need a TBC and others do not. End of story!

False.

[medeamajic]

Lordsmurf

I think you like to argue with people.

I stated in my response about quality VS hard drive space.

You talk about chroma loss at 5:1 compression. That is not so much compression but 4:1:1 Vs 4:2:2 Vs 4:4:4 color space. Also using 10 bit will look better than 8 bit when capturing Hi-8 if someone needs the best image quality available from my hardware. Having said that I don't recommend it. 5:1 compression is not random. It was chosen for having decent (not the best) quality without using a lot of hard drive space. Hard drives didn't store much data back in 1995 but they were expensive. If the hard drives were less expensive and offered more storage they probably would have opted for 3:1 compression. As is we got 5:1 compression.

Have you ever used an ADVC 110 or the Intensity Shuttle? Please answer the question.

Canopus has not been defunct for ten years. They were bought out by Grass Valley.

You claim they stopped making DV devices 15-20 years ago. That is pure BS. I bought my DAC-100 in 2003. My ADS Pyro A/V link in 2009 and my ADVC 110 in 2014. DV-25 did not even come to market until 1995 but it did not get much acceptance until 1998. That is only 20 years ago that it started to be used for broadcast. The DVCPRO25 was used for ENG until DVCPRO50. DV-25, DV-50 and HDV were all going strong in 2006. If it was good enough for broadcast it is probably good enough for most people here don't you think? No one is arguing MJPEG is better than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 but DV-25 will work for VHS capture.

If there is a really bad part in a tape most DV converters and capture cards will loose sync. I provided a link of someone trying to create a really bad glitch so there capture card would loose sync.

https://youtu.be/qJKInMUw3A8

This guys TBC did not make the video quality better. It simply stopped it from loosing sync.

All my DV converters and PCI capture cards cleaned up the video. Anyone other than you can watch the video link below for proof that the DV converters can clean up old worn out VHS tape. If the DV converters didn't work would I buy three of them? Wouldn't I have bought a TBC by now? Wouldn't we all have bought a TBC? I wouldn't mind having a TBC for the Intensity Shuttle but I don't need one because I have an ADVC 110 for VHS capture.

https://youtu.be/xdw9_DETrqE

You claim I am trying to spam YouTube links. I am providing proof. The guys TBC did not clean up the video. It only allowed the capture card to continue to record in a really bad part of the tape. Having said that why don't you show us your system? If you have time to post in these forums you have time to make a video. I want to see your awesome equipment in action because talk is cheap. Show us how it should be done.

[davexnet]

I think it's a matter of luck, unless you can get a direct recommendation on a device based on someone's
actual experience.
A number of years ago I posted a clip showing how my Avermedia PCIe M780
was able to keep on recording and stay in synch over a bad section of tape.
I don't think my card had a TBC built in, the specs never mentioned it, but there must have
been something that stabilized the signal
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/371293-capture-device-doesn-t-show-tracking-issues#post2385018

[lordsmurf]

You talk about chroma loss at 5:1 compression.

I never wrote that.

That is not so much compression but 4:1:1 Vs 4:2:2 Vs 4:4:4 color space.

It's colorspace compression. The native color exceeded the 4:1:1. The conversion was downsampled.

Also using 10 bit will look better than 8 bit when capturing Hi-8

Nonsense. Throwing more bits doesn't make a difference when the source bit depth (digital equivalent) was already lower than even 8-bit.

5:1 compression is not random. It was chosen for having decent (not the best) quality without using a lot of hard drive space.

"5:1" doesn't mean anything. It's video technobabble.

Hard drives didn't store much data back in 1995 but they were expensive. If the hard drives were less expensive and offered more storage they probably would have opted for 3:1 compression. As is we got 5:1 compression.

I can only guess that you're referring to the compression algorithms here. But again, 13gb/hour DV is more like 6:1, in reference to uncompressed YUY2 @ 720x480. However, the data compression wasn't the issue. The colorspace quartering is the problem. MPEG-2 can alternating halve it, which leads to far less artifacts, and it can go even harder on the compression ie DVD-Video) with adequate CPU.

Have you ever used an ADVC 110 or the Intensity Shuttle? Please answer the question.

Again, yes. I currently have several DV boxes here for testing.

Canopus has not been defunct for ten years. They were bought out by Grass Valley.

Canopus ceased to exist long ago. It was a "merger" where the Canopus brand was liquidated for assets. They've been completely gone since the mid/late 2000s. The last death throes of the company was Procoder 3, then under the Grass Valley name. Pretty much everything after that ceased entirely.

You claim they stopped making DV devices 15-20 years ago. That is pure BS. I bought my DAC-100 in 2003. My ADS Pyro A/V link in 2009 and my ADVC 110 in 2014.

The ADVC-110 was almost entirely NOS (new old stock) after the 2000s. The device itself was a 90s design, with the mid-2000s "110" revision being partly cosmetic, and partly to prevent defeating anti-copy. When you buy something doesn't change the fact that it's an old device. I can buy a MOC (mint on card) Star Wars figure from the 70s, but it doesn't change the fact that it's from the 70s.

DV-25 did not even come to market until 1995 but it did not get much acceptance until 1998. That is only 20 years ago that it started to be used for broadcast.

When was DV used for broadcast? (Rhetorical: Never.)

The DVCPRO25 was used for ENG until DVCPRO50. DV-25, DV-50 and HDV were all going strong in 2006. If it was good enough for broadcast it is probably good enough for most people here don't you think? No one is arguing MJPEG is better than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 but DV-25 will work for VHS capture.

MPEG-4 doesn't exist. It's a wrapper.
MJPEG is almost essentially MPEG-2 anyway.
DVCPRO is not DV.
DV was never used in broadcast.

If there is a really bad part in a tape most DV converters and capture cards will loose sync. I provided a link of someone trying to create a really bad glitch so there capture card would loose sync.

That's your own fault for not using TBCs. Such things never occur to me, nor anybody following my advice.

https://youtu.be/qJKInMUw3A8
This guys TBC did not make the video quality better. It simply stopped it from loosing sync.

He's not using a TBC. He's using a video mixer that claims to have TBC, which usually is not the case. "TBC" is a loose term, often an abused term, so you must be careful with the exact device being used for VHS conversion. He also clearly lacks line TBC. And based on the jumps I see, he has transport issues with the VCR. It's not just TBC there, either a use or lack thereof. Nothing there surprises me at all.

All my DV converters and PCI capture cards cleaned up the video. Anyone other than you can watch the video link below for proof that the DV converters can clean up old worn out VHS tape. If the DV converters didn't work would I buy three of them? Wouldn't I have bought a TBC by now? Wouldn't we all have bought a TBC? I wouldn't mind having a TBC for the Intensity Shuttle but I don't need one because I have an ADVC 110 for VHS capture.
You claim I am trying to spam YouTube links. I am providing proof.

Honestly, I think you have a minimal understanding of video. Because, again, you're saying things that are just not accurate, or outright false. And your video samples are actually disproving some of what you say, not proving it.

The guys TBC did not clean up the video.

Logical fallacy, you leapt to a bad conclusion.

It only allowed the capture card to continue to record in a really bad part of the tape. Having said that why don't you show us your system? If you have time to post in these forums you have time to make a video. I want to see your awesome equipment in action because talk is cheap. Show us how it should be done.

I've been doing that for 15+ years. Search the forum. Search several forums. At VH alone, I probably have 35,000+ posts.

[medeamajic]

I think it's a matter of luck, unless you can get a direct recommendation on a device based on someone's
actual experience.
A number of years ago I posted a clip showing how my Avermedia PCIe M780
was able to keep on recording and stay in synch over a bad section of tape.
I don't think my card had a TBC built in, the specs never mentioned it, but there must have
been something that stabilized the signal
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/371293-capture-device-doesn-t-show-tracking-issues#post2385018

I agree. In 1978 you needed a TBC to do A/B editing from deck to deck. Many capture cards have a chip that acts like a TBC to clean up the video signal to make it broadcast compliant. Your Avermedia device may work great. I myself showed the ADS Pyro A/V link cleaning up the video in real-time with multi-cam. The ADVC 110 does the same thing. Having said that it is up to the viewer to decide who's advice to take and reject. The best thing to do is post a demonstration video. I know some of the cheap USB cards work and some don't. My Intensity Shuttle was not cheap but it does not record VHS tapes that well. For $180.00 it should but I bought it for playback not recording.

[medeamajic]

Also using 10 bit will look better than 8 bit when capturing Hi-8

Nonsense. Throwing more bits doesn't make a difference when the source bit depth (digital equivalent) was already lower than even 8-bit.

It does make a difference with the Intensity Shuttle. Some people try use software to capture uncompressed with the cheap USB 2.0 capture cards but the bandwidth is not there. The Intensity Shuttle has the bandwidth.

Hard drives didn't store much data back in 1995 but they were expensive. If the hard drives were less expensive and offered more storage they probably would have opted for 3:1 compression. As is we got 5:1 compression.

I can only guess that you're referring to the compression algorithms here. But again, 13gb/hour DV is more like 6:1, in reference to uncompressed YUY2 @ 720x480. However, the data compression wasn't the issue. The colorspace quartering is the problem. MPEG-2 can alternating halve it, which leads to far less artifacts, and it can go even harder on the compression ie DVD-Video) with adequate CPU.

No one is saying DV-25 is better than MPEG, Pro Res. H.264 or Cineform. I am saying Mini DV was good enough for broadcasting. Can you argue that?

Have you ever used an ADVC 110 or the Intensity Shuttle? Please answer the question.

Again, yes. I currently have several DV boxes here for testing.

Then do a video demonstration for us. Compare your ATI AIW to the Canopus ADVC 110. I want to see that ASAP.

Canopus has not been defunct for ten years. They were bought out by Grass Valley.

Canopus ceased to exist long ago. It was a "merger" where the Canopus brand was liquidated for assets. They've been completely gone since the mid/late 2000s. The last death throes of the company was Procoder 3, then under the Grass Valley name. Pretty much everything after that ceased entirely.

They still sell Edius and Grass Valley still makes a lot of broadcast hardware. They continued the ADVC products until 2015.

https://www.grassvalley.com/products/

You claim they stopped making DV devices 15-20 years ago. That is pure BS. I bought my DAC-100 in 2003. My ADS Pyro A/V link in 2009 and my ADVC 110 in 2014.

The ADVC-110 was almost entirely NOS (new old stock) after the 2000s. The device itself was a 90s design, with the mid-2000s "110" revision being partly cosmetic, and partly to prevent defeating anti-copy. When you buy something doesn't change the fact that it's an old device. I can buy a MOC (mint on card) Star Wars figure from the 70s, but it doesn't change the fact that it's from the 70s.

Not true. DV-25, DV-50 and HDV were all still being used in 2007. The ADVC products were still being manufactured in 2014. I did not say they made new ADVC devices for the product line each year. You stated they stopped making DV devices 15 to 20 years ago. Read the following below.

It is not heavily compressed or lightly compressed.

The chroma is heavily compressed, to the point that visual data is being very obviously lost. Sure, the data rate is not much different than MPEG, but the compression algorithm is wholly inferior. Professionals hated it, because it wreaked havoc with chrome keying. Consumers liked it at the time -- but as displays have grown larger, they've come to realize it wasn't all that much better than VHS. And in fact, when used to convert VHS, it would often actually look worse than the tape did. There's a reason that DV devices haven't been made in almost 15-20 years.

Reread your comment above about chroma

You talk about chroma loss at 5:1 compression.

I never wrote that.

Yes you did.

DV-25 did not even come to market until 1995 but it did not get much acceptance until 1998. That is only 20 years ago that it started to be used for broadcast.

When was DV used for broadcast? (Rhetorical: Never.)

There were several video production houses that used DV-25 cameras for broadcast work in the late 1990s and early 2000s. I remember reading about in forums and video magazines. You didn't know that? Today some will try to use an iPhone for broadcast work although I would not recommend it

The DVCPRO25 was used for ENG until DVCPRO50. DV-25, DV-50 and HDV were all going strong in 2006. If it was good enough for broadcast it is probably good enough for most people here don't you think? No one is arguing MJPEG is better than MPEG 2 or MPEG 4 but DV-25 will work for VHS capture.

MPEG-4 doesn't exist. It's a wrapper.
MJPEG is almost essentially MPEG-2 anyway.
DVCPRO is not DV.

We all know MPEG 4 and AVCHD use h.264.
Motion JPEG (MJPEG) and MPEG 2 are not the same thing.
DVCPRO is not the exact same things as MINI DV-25 from consumer cameras but it is still DV. I mentioned the DVCPRO25 and DVCPRO50 because you stated they stopped making DV devices 15-20 years ago and that is not true. Having said that I want to see your awesome ATI AIW in action. Just so you know a lot of people bought Fire Wire DV converters for NTSC compliant playback when using Edius, FCPX, Avid and Premiere Pro. In fact most people bought them for playback as opposed to video capture. Having said that what video capture card do you use for real-time playback?

[joeandmarg0]

I bought the genuine EzCAP116,version 3.2A from SZForwardvideo.com,many years ago and it works without a problem.The mix I've given of upper and lower case is the genuine version.If it wasn't any good,it would never have been pirated.

[lordsmurf]

I bought the genuine EzCAP116,version 3.2A from SZForwardvideo.com,many years ago and it works without a problem.The mix I've given of upper and lower case is the genuine version.If it wasn't any good,it would never have been pirated.

Quality had nothing to do with it. It was likely just cheap to clone, probably stolen R&D (as IP theft is big in China, especially last decade). In fact, I'm not even sure the EzCAP came first, and wasn't itself a clone of other earlier devices. The 116 was just based on the eMPIA bridge, which had been used by ATI and Hauppauge years before it. If anything, I'd bet it was just a KO of ATI/Hauppauge, a reverse engineering with cheaping out on components. The "official" card was from Shenzhen Forward Video, a Chinese company. The Easycap KOs were using whatever parts they could locate. The EzCap116 was aimed at capturing video games, so video levels are skewed from accurate, and the audio chipset was tinny. The "real vs. genuine" was mostly marketing, when it came to quality differences.

As I wrote years ago: "Even a 'good' EzCap is crap. The fake ones are doubly crap."
Read more on this topic: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/354096-What-is-the-true-genuine-EzCap

Some people try use software to capture uncompressed with the cheap USB 2.0 capture cards but the bandwidth is not there.

USB 2.0 has sufficient bandwidth for uncompressed/lossless capturing.

No one is saying DV-25 is better than MPEG, Pro Res. H.264 or Cineform. I am saying Mini DV was good enough for broadcasting. Can you argue that?

Chroma keying problems alone kept it out of any serious broadcast use. Something low-end like DV, had it ever been used (which it wasn't) would have been deployed in newscasts more than anything else. Lack of easy chroma keying would have nuked the format right there. I guess DV could have been used in-house at a small cable operator, for public access channels. Public access channels did a lot of stuff, some very bad and low quality.

Motion JPEG (MJPEG) and MPEG 2 are not the same thing.

Hence the words "almost essentially".
Most of you last post was attempts to play semantics. I choose not to play that game.

Having said that what video capture card do you use for real-time playback?

In 2019, what's the point of that? Some of your statements are just truly odd.

[medeamajic]

I bought the genuine EzCAP116,version 3.2A from SZForwardvideo.com,many years ago and it works without a problem.The mix I've given of upper and lower case is the genuine version.If it wasn't any good,it would never have been pirated.

Do you have an image of your EZCAP? It might be helpful considering it is buyer beware. Some work some don't. My EZcap knock off works but the quality is not that good. All my DV converters and PCI capture cards worked just fine. I have been in other discussion forums where they did have a USB capture card that worked OK but they stated the image quality did not look as good when compared to their ADVC 110. I never heard of bad capture cards until the last two years.

[lordsmurf]

quality did not look as good when compared to their ADVC 110.

Of that, I have no doubt. While the ADVC devices cook color, mostly due to the 4:1:1 loss, it's still generally more accurate than a cheap USB POS. But again, there are other devices that are better than either of these. Canopus was selling the ADVC for $$$ mostly due to marketing and undeserved reputation (ala Sony), not actual quality. The Chinese USB junk was going after cheapskates, but still enough to make a profit. You'll notice the landscape for cheap hardware like that has changed in the past decade or so, less of it being made, or for a much higher price, as their economy has changed.

I never heard of bad capture cards until the last two years.

I remember bad capture cards in the 90s. Conexant and BT based cards were often dreadful, and into the 00s.

This forum goes back 20 years. Perhaps read some archived posts, and enlighten yourself.

[medeamajic]

quality did not look as good when compared to their ADVC 110.

You

Of that, I have no doubt. While the ADVC devices cook color, mostly due to the 4:1:1 loss, it's still generally more accurate than a cheap USB POS. But again, there are other devices that are better than either of these. Canopus was selling the ADVC for $$$ mostly due to marketing and undeserved reputation (ala Sony), not actual quality. The Chinese USB junk was going after cheapskates, but still enough to make a profit. You'll notice the landscape for cheap hardware like that has changed in the past decade or so, less of it being made, or for a much higher price, as their economy has changed.

Maybe you can show us your system in action and do a demonstration video comparing the ATI AIW, the Canopus ADVC 110 and the Intensity Shuttle. That would be much more helpful then simply criticizing everyone wouldn't it? We can even have video capture contest using old worn out VHS tapes. Perhaps your method is the best but I would like some proof of this. Do you see my point? I would also like to know what video capture card you use to output to broadcast compliant monitors while editing. I don't think the ATI AIW allowed for timeline playback to an NTSC monitor using FCP, Avid, Edius and Premiere. The DV converters could. The Fire Wire DV converters were bought for playback more often than for video capture. I don't know of anyone using Avid, FCPX or Premiere Pro with an ATI AIW.

ME

I never heard of bad capture cards until the last two years.

You

I remember bad capture cards in the 90s. Conexant and BT based cards were often dreadful, and into the 00s.

This forum goes back 20 years. Perhaps read some archived posts, and enlighten yourself.

Don't get me wrong there might have been driver glitches and bugs in Premiere, FCP and Speed Razer but overall the cards from Fast, DPS, True Vision, Matrox, Pinnacle and Canopus worked. Where as of now some of them don't work at all.