VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Consider supporting us by disable your adblocker or Try ConvertXtoDVD and convert all your movies to DVD. Free trial ! :)
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2
1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 46
Thread
  1. My issue is I used the Roxio Easy VHS converter to transfer my VHS tapes to digital. Mpeg2 (654x480) is what QuickTime is telling me the format size is. I want to convert the file to an mp4 or mov file... My question is can I convert it to 640x480 without screwing up the ratio? Or do I need to start over and capture it in 640x480?

    Thanks in advance!
    Image Attached Images  
    Quote Quote  
  2. 1. You shouldn't be using Roxio software for anything ever. You shouldn't be capping as MPG, especially if you intend to work on the video afterwards.
    2. You should be capping at 720x480.

    Having said that, it looks to me like you really did cap at 720x480 and when resized it's 654x480. You can check the MPG in MediaInfo to be sure. If you want to resize to 640x480 then crop a total of 16 columns of pixels from the sides, perhaps 8 and 8 from left and right. If you're lucky the black bars will total 16. That will leave you with 704x480 and that can properly be resized to 640x480, keeping the aspect ratio.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Thanks for the response. Do you have a suggestion for a good capture method? Elgato Video Capture or buying a Canopus ADVC-110?

    Also below are the specs from the app your suggested.
    Image Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2019-03-27 at 2.41.13 PM.png
Views:	40
Size:	120.3 KB
ID:	48499  

    Quote Quote  
  4. As I suspected, it's 720x480, not 654x480. Also, the audio is crap and you should be capping WAV audio. I expect even Roxio has that ability. If for DVD, you can convert to AC3 audio later on.

    If you plan on editing your captures, then it's usually recommended to cap as lossless AVI. I use Lagarith or sometimes HuffYUV. You would do that using either Virtual Dub or AmarecTV as the capturing program. A special free version of AmarecTV is required, one that doesn't need their proprietary codec. I don't have the link to that one.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Memphis TN, US
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by gloubu View Post
    Do you have a suggestion for a good capture method? Elgato Video Capture or buying a Canopus ADVC-110?
    Eeks, you've gone from one bad method to two more bad ones. Manono is correct. if you intend on any modification or filtering, resizing, etc.) you should capture to lossless media. I don't know where people get all this misinformation about lossy codecs being great for video work, but in this case lossy is very bad advice.
    - My sister Ann's brother
    Quote Quote  
  6. What would be a good means of capturing VHS?
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member dellsam34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Paris Ca, 92345 Mexico
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by gloubu View Post
    What would be a good means of capturing VHS?
    If your Roxio capture device has a mpeg2 hardware encoding chip then you won't be able to capture lossless with that capture device, In that case you will be forced to capture in mpeg2. You can get decent captures with mpeg2 hardware just use a different software or use Roxio software and change the setting to the highest quality to get higher video bitrate and PCM audio.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by gloubu View Post
    Thanks for the response. Do you have a suggestion for a good capture method? Elgato Video Capture or buying a Canopus ADVC-110?
    Those are both terrible capture cards.
    Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
    FAQs: Best Blank DiscsBest TBCsBest VCRs for captureRestore VHS
    Quote Quote  
  9. Yeah I'm getting rid of the Roxio. Back to square one...
    Quote Quote  
  10. You've only mentioned Roxio Easy VHS converter. They include it with a lot of different capture devices. You're saying your hardware capture device is also made by Roxio?

    If Roxio provided the software for a different brand capture device you can cap losslessly. My own USB capture device came with some garbage Roxio MPEG capture software but I easily was able to switch to capping losslessly.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    Originally Posted by gloubu View Post
    Thanks for the response. Do you have a suggestion for a good capture method? Elgato Video Capture or buying a Canopus ADVC-110?
    Those are both terrible capture cards.
    The ADVC 110 may not have the best quality but it has better quality that many other options. If your goal is to burn a DVD or upload to social media the Canopus ADVC 110 will work just fine and will probably be the easiest method but feel free to make a tutorial of your super easy and superior method. If you say you are unable to create a video tutorial then you have no business giving advise in a video help forum do you?

    Perhaps your method is better and much easier but you need to prove it. Is that asking to much?
    Quote Quote  
  12. Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    Originally Posted by gloubu View Post
    Thanks for the response. Do you have a suggestion for a good capture method? Elgato Video Capture or buying a Canopus ADVC-110?
    Those are both terrible capture cards.
    The ADVC 110 may not have the best quality but it has better quality that many other options. If your goal is to burn a DVD or upload to social media the Canopus ADVC 110 will work just fine and will probably be the easiest method but feel free to make a tutorial of your super easy and superior method. If you say you are unable to create a video tutorial then you have no business giving advise in a video help forum do you?

    Perhaps your method is better and much easier but you need to prove it. Is that asking to much?
    I'm just trying to get video from the VHS to a harddrive. I don't need to edit them or fix them, they are as they are. Also, I have a mac and can't justify building a PC. The Canopus ADVC 110 sounds like my only option besides cheap usb dongles that I shouldn't be using.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Search PM
    The cheap dongles aren't a bad option for VHS so long as you avoid the few stinkers. For example, the Startech USB converter is quite decent.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    If you say you are unable to create a video tutorial then you have no business giving advise in a video help forum do you?

    Perhaps your method is better and much easier but you need to prove it. Is that asking to much?
    This is a joke, right? Do you honestly believe advice is no good at all unless accompanied a "video tutorial"? I expect if you checked his web site you'd find tutorials on how to capture properly. Although I've used a Canopus box many times for capping, at least partly because it's easy and it works, I do recognize capping losslessly is better and eventually gives better results.

    Originally Posted by gloubu View Post
    I'm just trying to get video from the VHS to a harddrive. I don't need to edit them or fix them, they are as they are.
    You've already said you want to resize. Resizing (and the cropping you should also perform) is filtering (aka editing) and involves a reencode. Cutting extraneous video is editing. Anything you do to the source video besides a straight reencode to your final format is editing.

    And, as JVRaines mentioned, cheap doesn't necessarily equate with poor quality. Good USB capture devices can be had for $30-40.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Originally Posted by gloubu View Post

    And, as JVRaines mentioned, cheap doesn't necessarily equate with poor quality. Good USB capture devices can be had for $30-40.
    Ok so I can get a good usb device... That plus using VirtualDub is what I need to do?
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by gloubu View Post
    Originally Posted by gloubu View Post

    And, as JVRaines mentioned, cheap doesn't necessarily equate with poor quality. Good USB capture devices can be had for $30-40.
    Ok so I can get a good usb device... That plus using VirtualDub is what I need to do?
    I prefer AmaRecTV. I could never get the audio to sync up in VDub.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by manono View Post
    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    If you say you are unable to create a video tutorial then you have no business giving advise in a video help forum do you?

    Perhaps your method is better and much easier but you need to prove it. Is that asking to much?
    This is a joke, right? Do you honestly believe advice is no good at all unless accompanied a "video tutorial"? I expect if you checked his web site you'd find tutorials on how to capture properly. Although I've used a Canopus box many times for capping, at least partly because it's easy and it works, I do recognize capping losslessly is better and eventually gives better results.
    It is no joke. If I came here looking for a solution that works I would give much more consideration to a person who did a demonstration video then I would to someone who simply criticizes everyone else. Wouldn't you? You just stated you have used the Canopus DV converters many times. You yourself stated they are easy to use. Lordsmurf could easily have stated the DV converters are easy to use and have good quality compared to other options but not they are not the best. I would be OK with that but Lordsmurff does not simply state that does he? I am not saying the DV converters have the best quality. I am saying they will work great for most people. No driver issues, no out of sync audio, no odd aspect ratios etc. Some people are frustrated and just want an easy solution. There are good USB devices but the USB devices are hit or miss and get returned. DV converters are not hit or miss. Do you kind of see my point? You didn't respond by saying the ADVC 110 is a horrible capture card. Why not? You know it works great. Maybe not the best but it works great.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member dellsam34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Paris Ca, 92345 Mexico
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    It is no joke. If I came here looking for a solution that works I would give much more consideration to a person who did a demonstration video then I would to someone who simply criticizes everyone else. Wouldn't you? You just stated you have used the Canopus DV converters many times. You yourself stated they are easy to use. Lordsmurf could easily have stated the DV converters are easy to use and have good quality compared to other options but not they are not the best. I would be OK with that but Lordsmurff does not simply state that does he? I am not saying the DV converters have the best quality. I am saying they will work great for most people. No driver issues, no out of sync audio, no odd aspect ratios etc. Some people are frustrated and just want an easy solution. There are good USB devices but the USB devices are hit or miss and get returned. DV converters are not hit or miss. Do you kind of see my point? You didn't respond by saying the ADVC 110 is a horrible capture card. Why not? You know it works great. Maybe not the best but it works great.
    Are you late to the party? There are countless of threads here debating DV vs USB just pick one and revive it. Why would the OP throw away a device that he already owns and go invest in an expensive and obsolete capture device that runs a MAC proprietary codec when he can just try to make the one he has work?
    And by the way Lordsmurf has a whole website dedicated to capture editing and restoration digitalfaq.com, He wrote several guides about VCR's, TBC's and capture devices.
    Last edited by dellsam34; 27th Mar 2019 at 20:19.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by dellsam34 View Post
    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    It is no joke. If I came here looking for a solution that works I would give much more consideration to a person who did a demonstration video then I would to someone who simply criticizes everyone else. Wouldn't you? You just stated you have used the Canopus DV converters many times. You yourself stated they are easy to use. Lordsmurf could easily have stated the DV converters are easy to use and have good quality compared to other options but not they are not the best. I would be OK with that but Lordsmurff does not simply state that does he? I am not saying the DV converters have the best quality. I am saying they will work great for most people. No driver issues, no out of sync audio, no odd aspect ratios etc. Some people are frustrated and just want an easy solution. There are good USB devices but the USB devices are hit or miss and get returned. DV converters are not hit or miss. Do you kind of see my point? You didn't respond by saying the ADVC 110 is a horrible capture card. Why not? You know it works great. Maybe not the best but it works great.
    Are you late to the party? There are countless of threads here debating DV vs USB just pick one and revive it. Why would the OP throw away a device that he already owns and go invest in an expensive and obsolete capture device that runs a MAC proprietary codec when he can just try to make the one he has work?
    And by the way Lordsmurf has a whole website dedicated to capture editing and restoration digitalfaq.com, He wrote several guides about VCR's, TBC's and capture devices.
    I have went to lordsmurfs website and I am not impressed. Not everyone agrees with lordsmurf do they? Why do you think that is? The website might be helpful information to you but I was not impressed.

    I am late to the party? Really? People are still posting about VHS capture as opposed to reading old threads that might have miss information. Having said that someone confused you into thinking DV is a Mac proprietary codec. It is not. See what I mean about miss information of the past? Having said that DV is not an Apple proprietary codec either which is what I think you intended to say. The Mac is a computer Apple is a company. Having said that Apple is responsible for the Fire Wire port. DV and Fire Wire are not the same thing. DV-25, DV-50 and HDV are video formats while IEEE Fire Wire ports are connections that can be used for audio and video. Who cares if Fire Wire is an Apple product? Sony, Canon, Adobe, Avid etc all seemed to have adopted it. Why do you think that is? I am guessing they did so because it works. If it is good enough for Sony it should be good enough for most people shouldn't it? Having said that USB capture devices and DV converters have been around a long time and both can work for VHS capture. DV converter just work while USB capture cards can work but they are hit or miss and can be a pain in the butt at times.

    Having said that ask lordsmurf what products he would use if he had to do a documentary for NASA using old 3/4" tapes and Betacam (not Betamax) tapes. Would he use his ATI AIW? What about RS 422 deck control? What about BNC and SDI connections? Would he use a Taranex? What would he use for broadcast compliant previews while editing? I have simply asked for a quick video demo of his equipment that he could do with a cellphone in two minutes and he has refused. Yet in other forms people will post images of their facilities. They will have 3/4" decks, Betacam decks and Intensity Shuttle, Canopus ADVC 3000, AJA io4K and a Taranex. I would simply like to see the guys awesome equipment. Is that to much to ask?

    As far as capturing with an ATI AIW wonder back in 2003 I don't think the ATI AIW wonder gave you a real-time broadcast compliant preview using FCP, Avid or Premiere Pro. The DV converters did. You had a good idea of what to expect if you went to DVD or output to tape for broadcast using the DV converters. No one was up-scaling to HD for broadcast back then. In lordsmurf's own article he mentions the ATI AIW might get dropped frames if the computer is not powerful enough. You can capture video with a DV converter using a Pentium III. You know why? Because the hardware does all the work.

    Lordsurf can complain until he is blue in the face (smurfs are always blue in the face : ) about the DV converter not working but there are many people that have used them without fail. Lordsmurf has not convinced me or anyone else to stop using the ADVC 110 and switch to an ATI AIW. I also don't think Lordsmurf has an ADVC 110. I think he has preconceived notion about the ADVC 110 which in incorrect. Having said that he could simply do a demo between the products because talk is cheap. If a picture is worth a thousand words then a video must worth a million.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member dellsam34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Paris Ca, 92345 Mexico
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    someone confused you into thinking DV is a Mac proprietary codec. It is not. See what I mean about miss information of the past?
    Someone confused me? I was transferring DV to PC 20 years ago. DV has less problems because it is hardware based, Doesn't rely on computer CPU, USB capture device with on board MPEG-2 chip did the same thing, locked audio, no dropped frames ...etc
    But a lot of people now want to edit, restore and clean their precious videos, Neither DV nor MPEG-2 can allow for that without a significant loss of quality.
    Last edited by dellsam34; 28th Mar 2019 at 11:33. Reason: added details
    Quote Quote  
  21. Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by dellsam34 View Post
    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    someone confused you into thinking DV is a Mac proprietary codec. It is not. See what I mean about miss information of the past?
    Someone confused me? I was transferring DV to PC 20 years ago. DV has less problems because it is hardware based, Doesn't rely on computer CPU, USB capture device with on board MPEG-2 chip did the same thing, locked audio, no dropped frames ...etc
    But a lot of people now want to edit, restore and clean their precious videos, Neither DV nor MPEG-2 can allow for that without a significant loss of quality.
    I never said you were not transferring DV to PC 20 years ago but you stated DV was proprietary to Mac in your prior post. It is not.

    I just stated the DV converters do all the work in my prior post. You are simply repeating what I just posted.

    I had an MPEG 2 PCI capture card with dedicated hardware but as of now some capture cards don't work as well as the capture card from the past. People want to know what works. DV converters work but I am not saying it is the best option.

    Even though the Intensity Shuttle could get a good image using HI-8 I would still recommend the ADVC 110 over the Intensity Shuttle because DV-25 is not bad and it is just easier to use. You can clean up crappy shot VHS and HI-8 tapes when converted to DV-25 but you cannot expect miracles.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    Not everyone agrees with lordsmurf do they? Why do you think that is?
    Lack of VHS capturing knowledge?

    Having said that ask lordsmurf what products he would use if he had to do a documentary for NASA using old 3/4" tapes and Betacam (not Betamax) tapes. Would he use his ATI AIW?
    For that exact project, unlikely.

    I have simply asked for a quick video demo of his equipment that he could do with a cellphone in two minutes and he has refused.
    You're a troll, you want to argue. No matter what I'd do, you'd find something to gripe about. I decline to play your game. I'm not feeding the troll. I have more pressing tasks.

    As far as capturing with an ATI AIW wonder back in 2003 I don't think the ATI AIW wonder gave you a real-time broadcast compliant preview using FCP, Avid or Premiere Pro. The DV converters did.
    AIW wasn't an NLE card. It was for capture, period. Nor are all DV converters NLE cards.

    In lordsmurf's own article he mentions the ATI AIW might get dropped frames if the computer is not powerful enough. You can capture video with a DV converter using a Pentium III. You know why? Because the hardware does all the work.
    All capture cards can drop frames. That includes DV boxes.

    smurfs are always blue
    Indeed.

    Lordsmurf has not convinced me or anyone else to stop using the ADVC 110 and switch to an ATI AIW.
    I don't care what you do. If you want to throw away 50% of your color data, then go ahead. I just hope you don't subject others to such a miserable lossy capture. DV was never intended for conversion, it was intended purely as a shooting format. The lousy idea for capture seemingly came from Canopus, copied by Matrox (and quickly abandoned), same quick copy/abandon from some other brands. Uncompressed was always the intention for consumer analog formats. Lossless was the fix to RAID not needed. MPEG was an acceptable compromise in latter years. MJPEG, JPEG2000, ProRes422 and some others were a blend of lossy and lossless, differing in I/O, CPU, RAM use, etc. Different approaches.

    Again, I'm not completely anti-DV. I'm a pragmatist. If you can get a better card, do so. If you're stuck using DV, usually due to Mac-centric workflow, then you just need to understand what's happening. Because later editing/restoration can look even worse, if not paying attention to the colorspaces and filters. The 4:1:1 cannot afford to take another hit, whereas 4:2:2 could squeak by.

    I also don't think Lordsmurf has an ADVC 110.
    DAC-100, ADVC-100, ADVC-300, plus many more cards. Many, many, many more cards.

    I suggest you leave me out of your tirades.
    Last edited by lordsmurf; 29th Mar 2019 at 11:44. Reason: re-phrase
    Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
    FAQs: Best Blank DiscsBest TBCsBest VCRs for captureRestore VHS
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Memphis TN, US
    Search PM
    The lossy DV crowd has never developed a concept of clean video quality. They'll watch anything that moves, and the less knowledge and skill it takes to get a coherent piece of video out of typical analog sources, the more proud they are of their half-baked output. They're failures or bah-humbug's at lossless capture and have never handled a lossess video, so their "advice" is strictly off the wall and insupportable.

    uh, Yep, I did some analog to DV capture. Tried 2 different DV cards, too. What crap that was. And what a total waste. Thank heaven I got my money back for those cards and saved the tapes. I never made that mistake again and never will.
    But the DV crowd never learns. And they still think DV is something "new" from Canopus. Amazing.


    You just go right out get yourself a Canopus setup, gloubu, or similar. Read the instructions, which should take you about 10 minutes because you won't have to learn anything about video properties, capture glitches, colorspaces, or anything else. No doubt you'll capture something and you'll see a moving image that even makes sounds if sounds are on the original source. Canopus or some other DV card will handle everything for you. It might even deinterlace, if you want to call it that, and you can even afford a BM to make some ugly transfers with oddball signal levels that they can't handle from analog source. The only thing that equipmenrt won't do is help clean up the compression artifacts, the inherent tape defects, the fried colors and blown-out highlights and other illegal level problems, and the lame etched-in-plastic look. The DV guys will be only too glad to help you with that, but most of them know very little about it and a lot of them don't even see it.

    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    as of now some capture cards don't work as well as the capture card from the past. People want to know what works. DV converters work but I am not saying it is the best option.
    Not all of today's analog-to-lossless devices work so well, true, but a few of them do. LS's site has covered those that do and recommended against those that don't. And, again, we're getting advice from a DV fan who failed at lossless capture or who doesn't want to learn how. It's so typical of the DV crowd that I'm never surprised when I see it.

    @gloubu, let us know how it turns out. I've already seen how this sort of thing goes, many, many times.
    Last edited by LMotlow; 28th Mar 2019 at 23:12.
    - My sister Ann's brother
    Quote Quote  
  24. Member dellsam34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Paris Ca, 92345 Mexico
    Search PM
    The last thing you want to do is apply compression to a noisy video format like VHS, The compression algorithm goes nuts in dark scenes. And the thing that you will never do is apply 4:1:1 color space to a video with 30 lines of color resolution like VHS especially if you are capturing it from composite and not S-Video.
    Quote Quote  
  25. Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    [QUOTE=lordsmurf;2546634]
    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    Not everyone agrees with lordsmurf do they? Why do you think that is?
    you
    Lack of VHS capturing knowledge?
    You can simply end the debate by demonstrating your method is better.



    Me
    I also don't think Lordsmurf has an ADVC 110.
    you
    DAC-100, ADVC-100, ADVC-300, plus many more cards. Many, many, many more cards.
    Then why not demo the quality of each capture device and method and put an end to the debate? I want proof! I imagine other people would as well before investing money.



    me
    Having said that ask lordsmurf what products he would use if he had to do a documentary for NASA using old 3/4" tapes and Betacam (not Betamax) tapes. Would he use his ATI AIW?
    you
    For that exact project, unlikely.
    Then what would you use and what device do you use to preview your editing on broadcast compliant hardware? What do use use to capture 3/4" tapes and Betacam tapes? Do you have a Taranex?


    me
    In lordsmurf's own article he mentions the ATI AIW might get dropped frames if the computer is not powerful enough. You can capture video with a DV converter using a Pentium III. You know why? Because the hardware does all the work.
    you
    All capture cards can drop frames. That includes DV boxes.
    The DV converter wouldn't drop frames because of the computer's CPU.



    me
    As far as capturing with an ATI AIW wonder back in 2003 I don't think the ATI AIW wonder gave you a real-time broadcast compliant preview using FCP, Avid or Premiere Pro. The DV converters did.
    you
    AIW wasn't an NLE card. It was for capture, period. Nor are all DV converters NLE cards.
    DV converters will let you output the timeline previews of FCP, Premiere and Avid to broadcast compliant hardware which is much better than using a computer monitor.



    me
    Lordsmurf has not convinced me or anyone else to stop using the ADVC 110 and switch to an ATI AIW.
    you
    I don't care what you do. If you want to throw away 50% of your color data, then go ahead. I just hope you don't subject others to such a miserable lossy capture. DV was never intended for conversion, it was intended purely as a shooting format. The lousy idea for capture seemingly came from Canopus, copied by Matrox (and quickly abandoned), same quick copy/abandon from some other brands. Uncompressed was always the intention for consumer analog formats. Lossless was the fix to RAID not needed. MPEG was an acceptable compromise in latter years. MJPEG, JPEG2000, ProRes422 and some others were a blend of lossy and lossless, differing in I/O, CPU, RAM use, etc. Different approaches.
    Matrox, Canopus? Uncompressed? 50% of your color? Who was capturing uncompressed in 1998 or even 2006 ? We captured at about 5:1 with our Avid back when I worked for the City Of Detroit. Everything was played back over local cable. My friend working for the local news station said they used about 5:1. 5:1 compression will look just fine for broadcast and was broadcasted. The news stations are not trying for the best quality possible. They just need it to look good enough for broadcasting the local news.

    you
    Again, I'm not completely anti-DV. I'm a pragmatist. If you can get a better card, do so. If you're stuck using DV, usually due to Mac-centric workflow, then you just need to understand what's happening. Because later editing/restoration can look even worse, if not paying attention to the colorspaces and filters. The 4:1:1 cannot afford to take another hit, whereas 4:2:2 could squeak by.
    There are horrible capture device out there. The ADVC 110 is not one of them. That is my point. Wouldn't it be better to say the ADVC 110 is easy to use and will work OK. The quality is good but not the best. That would be much better than saying the ADVC 110 is horrible.

    My BMD Intensity Shuttle can produce better quality than the ADVC 110 using HI-8 tapes. If I had to capture HI-8 tapes of OJ Simpson for a Newscast the ADVC 110 would work just fine for that. If I needed to capture HI-8 tapes for an OJ Simpson documentary then I would opt for the best quality using the Intensity Shuttle. That is also kind of my point. Not all projects would require the best quality.

    me
    I have simply asked for a quick video demo of his equipment that he could do with a cellphone in two minutes and he has refused.
    you
    You're a troll, you want to argue. No matter what I'd do, you'd find something to gripe about. I decline to play your game. I'm not feeding the troll. I have more pressing tasks.
    It is a video discussion forum. We should feel free to ask each other what equipment is being used and we should be willing to share the information.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    [QUOTE]
    Originally Posted by LMotlow View Post
    The lossy DV crowd has never developed a concept of clean video quality. They'll watch anything that moves, and the less knowledge and skill it takes to get a coherent piece of video out of typical analog sources, the more proud they are of their half-baked output. They're failures or bah-humbug's at lossless capture and have never handled a lossess video, so their "advice" is strictly off the wall and insupportable.

    uh, Yep, I did some analog to DV capture. Tried 2 different DV cards, too. What crap that was. And what a total waste. Thank heaven I got my money back for those cards and saved the tapes. I never made that mistake again and never will.
    But the DV crowd never learns. And they still think DV is something "new" from Canopus. Amazing.


    You just go right out get yourself a Canopus setup, gloubu, or similar. Read the instructions, which should take you about 10 minutes because you won't have to learn anything about video properties, capture glitches, colorspaces, or anything else. No doubt you'll capture something and you'll see a moving image that even makes sounds if sounds are on the original source. Canopus or some other DV card will handle everything for you. It might even deinterlace, if you want to call it that, and you can even afford a BM to make some ugly transfers with oddball signal levels that they can't handle from analog source. The only thing that equipmenrt won't do is help clean up the compression artifacts, the inherent tape defects, the fried colors and blown-out highlights and other illegal level problems, and the lame etched-in-plastic look. The DV guys will be only too glad to help you with that, but most of them know very little about it and a lot of them don't even see it.
    Were you dropped on your head? I never said DV-25 is the best codec. You have created a strawman argument and you are arguing with yourself? Having said that I said the ADVC 110 is easy you use. You are proving my point by saying the DV converters take 10 minutes to setup. Thank you for letting everyone know I am right : )

    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    as of now some capture cards don't work as well as the capture card from the past. People want to know what works. DV converters work but I am not saying it is the best option.
    Not all of today's analog-to-lossless devices work so well, true, but a few of them do. LS's site has covered those that do and recommended against those that don't. And, again, we're getting advice from a DV fan who failed at lossless capture or who doesn't want to learn how. It's so typical of the DV crowd that I'm never surprised when I see it.
    I am not saying the website is not useful to some people but here is a simple challenge.

    Use any device you want. Capture HI-8 with whatever device you prefer. Upscale the HI-8 to 1080P and post it. Post a 640 X 480 version as well. I want to see if the 640 X 480 version with people's hair looks like hair. It should. I then want to see if the 1080P version look like human hair or rabbit fur. If you retain all the details at a resolution of 1080P that you did at 640 X 480 I will be impressed.

    I have stated several times Lordsurff's method might work very well. I am simply asking for a demonstration of his method? What is the problem? You can feel free to accept the challenge. Show us how awesome you method is. I want to learn form the best. That is all I have ever stated. If your method works we will all be enlightened and have you to thank. Having said that now you must either put up or shut up because talk is cheap!
    Quote Quote  
  27. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    Matrox, Canopus? Uncompressed? 50% of your color? Who was capturing uncompressed in 1998 or even 2006 ? We captured at about 5:1 with our Avid back when I worked for the City Of Detroit.
    Do you know what chroma subsampling is and how it applies to DV? As for uncompressed digital conversion, we have come a long way in computing platforms since 1998 or 2006.

    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    Were you dropped on your head?
    Here you cross the line from argument to abuse. Knock it off or get reported.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by JVRaines View Post
    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    Matrox, Canopus? Uncompressed? 50% of your color? Who was capturing uncompressed in 1998 or even 2006 ? We captured at about 5:1 with our Avid back when I worked for the City Of Detroit.
    Do you know what chroma subsampling is and how it applies to DV? As for uncompressed digital conversion, we have come a long way in computing platforms since 1998 or 2006.

    I know what chroma sub-sampling is. My point is your TV signal is not an uncompressed signal at 4:4:4. Are you upset that your TV programs are not of the best quality available?

    NO ONE IS SAYING DV-25 IS THE BEST VIDEO CODEC. Stop using a strawman argument.


    The problem with this forum is that the anal folks need to accept not everyone is trying to restore a bad VHS tape or upscale VHS to 1080P (I would not do it myself). A lot of people who have HI-8 or VHS tapes with a decent white balance and decent lighting want a simple solution with decent quality. They know some of the video capture devices loose audio sync, have aspect ratio problems and even bad video quality. The DV converters can avoid all of that an are easy to use. I demonstrated the problem with using a cheap USB capture card. DV-25 is not the best video codec but if it is good enough for broadcast it should be good enough for most people. If someone stated I want the best quality possible because I want to upscale HI-8 to 1920X1080 then the DV converter might not be a good choice. Do you kind of see my point?
    Quote Quote  
  29. Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    East Coast, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    DV-25 is not the best video codec but if it is good enough for broadcast it should be good enough for most people. If someone stated I want the best quality possible because I want to upscale HI-8 to 1920X1080 then the DV converter might not be a good choice. Do you kind of see my point?
    "I like DV Codecs. They're comfy and easy to use!"

    Is there a section of the forum where users who settle for less can go to tell newcomers that inferior methods are "good enough?"
    Quote Quote  
  30. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
    Stop using a strawman argument.

    your TV signal is not an uncompressed signal at 4:4:4.

    people who have HI-8 or VHS tapes with a decent white balance and decent lighting want a simple solution with decent quality.

    They know some of the video capture devices loose audio sync, have aspect ratio problems and even bad video quality. The DV converters can avoid all of that

    DV-25 is not the best video codec but if it is good enough for broadcast it should be good enough for most people.

    If someone stated I want the best quality possible because I want to upscale HI-8 to 1920X1080
    You're the one using "straw man arguments" with your posts.

    We're already aware that broadcasts are 4:2:2 -- not 4:4:4, not 4:1:1.

    A lossless capture with a quality USB card is a simple quality solution for consumer analog formats -- assuming you also have the playback hardware, meaning known-quality camera/VCR + known-quality external TBC. Quality transfers can't just use random hardware.

    DV converters are not magic boxes.
    - You can setup software wrong, hence get wrong aspect ratio, etc.
    - 4:1:1 is already arguably bad quality, losing 50%+ of the color data.
    - DV boxes can lose sync, all capture cards can. (That "audio lock" is pure marketing that is nonsensical jabberwocky technobabble. "Audio lock" is indeed a jargon term, and existing in the realm of DV, but it means something completely different than what Canopus claims. I've written on this many times, and at least one VH post from the past 3 years extensively explained this, search for it, read it.)

    Not mentioned is also how much of a PITA DV is in 2019, since Firewire is a legacy connection (that was never really popular, I might add). If you have to build a legacy system for video, then DV is not the best option. If you insist on using a modern computer, especially a laptop, DV is probably not an option at all. There are ways to add Firewire to some modern/recent desktops, but the driver/software half of the equation is sometimes still a PITA.

    DV (MiniDV, DV25) is not, and has never been, used for broadcast. Yes, perhaps a low-budged infomercial or commercial used it, but who here is wanting "infomercial quality" on anything? And that's not really want I'd consider "broadcast", since those are paid spots. Broadcasters would probably run a test pattern for an hour, if paid handsomely for it.

    Upscaling SD to HD is not the best quality. The deinterlace alone poses issues and challenges.

    Originally Posted by JPMedia View Post
    "I like DV Codecs. They're comfy and easy to use!"
    That reminds me of this kid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMNry4PE93Y
    Last edited by lordsmurf; 30th Mar 2019 at 08:45.
    Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
    FAQs: Best Blank DiscsBest TBCsBest VCRs for captureRestore VHS
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads