Capturing Tapes to ProRes vs DV

[medeamajic]

WTF dude?

Don't try and swap our positions.

Your are the one claiming you can avoid the DV conversion and capture into MPEG 2 when using a DV device. I am the one asking how the end result would be better than DV when the VHS tape has already been converted to DV to go through the Fire Wire port? I think you were unaware of that. Am I correct?

Now you are asking me what DV device converts to DV after going through the Fire Wire port? As I already stated don't try and swap our positions.

I am the one that told you the the analogue source would have already been converter to DV to go through the Fire Wire cable. I asked you how would your MPEG 2 video be better than DV when it was already converted to DV to be sent through the Fire Wire cable.

Below is your original post and your MPEG 2 video from Fire Wire source that you claim is much better than DV because MPEG 2 is better than DV. The video is no better in quality than DV because it was already in DV format as it went through the Fire WIRE port. You could capture in uncompressed 4:4:4 but the video source would still be DV if you used Fire Wire.

Swap positions ????? I hope you are not talking dirty. This has nothing to do with Lordsmurf, You quoted me I responded.

Lordsmurf did however explained to you in another thread before that Firewire is a digital port it is not a video codec, So you can connect a hard drive, an optical drive, Stream DV, Stream MPEG-2 .....etc
Second, D-VHS has absolutely nothing to do with DV.

You have confused Lordsmurf with myself.

I am the one that stated Fire Wire is a connection not a video codec. Lordsmurf did not. Not only did I say hard drives can be connected using Fire Wire but I also stated the high-end audio interfaces can use Fire Wire. Don't you remember me posting this? Lordsmurf didn't post it.



What ever compression or format D-VHS uses it would have been done prior to being sent through the Fire Wire port wouldn't it? That is why I stated the DV converter does it prior to sending it through the Fire Wire port. I then asked what exactly are you doing? Your D-VHS may not use DV-25 but it is still a Fire Wire DV device. More than just DV-25 products can use Fire Wire. That is why I posted the audio interface in the other thread. Remember me doing that? Having said that what are the specs of D-VHS? I know it is not as good a Digital S which used VHS tapes and DV-50 codec and was competition for Digital Beta.

[medeamajic]

Now he and Lordsmurf are trying to act like

You really like to argue. I was quoting a snippet, and agreeing, I had the same raised eyebrow.

Perhaps we agree but it was a misleading quote and should not have been used.

[Cornucopia]

I do believe there have been in the past a few capture devices that convert analog to digital in mpe1 or mpeg2 format and then live transfer that via firewire to a pc host. Yep, looks like LaCie Capty might be one of those.

And then there's HDV, which belies its name, as it caps to HD mpeg2 and transfers via firewire. No DV.

Face it, medeamajic, you're digging yourself a hole. DV is an option, yes, but while it made sense 2 decades ago, maybe even a decade, there are so many better quality options now, even for SD material, it's not funny. It's time has past.
My studied recommendation again is to use DV only for existing dv-originated material, unless you are in a MAJOR hurry or are using seriously antiquated systems, and don't plan to do anything but cap and save.

Scott

[lordsmurf]

Digital S which used VHS tapes

No.

It had the same size, but that's it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital-S

Such a rare format that I don't remember the last time it was mentioned in a conversation. And so long ago that my memories are hazy as to whether I'd ever seen a tape.

[TimA-C]

I don't know what kind of person chooses to put an older operating system on newer hardware, but my contacts tell me there are those out there who still choose to do so, even in this late age.

When the latest version of Windows is either Millennium or Vista then I guess you'd call that kind of person sensible . . . ?

I'm sure that there are also many Win10 users who are fed up with feeling like they're playing Russian Roulette every time they turn their PCs on, would add Windows 10 to that list - will it work straight off or will I have to twiddle my thumbs for upwards of half an hour while the latest dungheap of updates install? (I think that's the family-friendly collective noun for a bunch of largely unwanted Windows updates, isn't it?) And then there's always the chance that the latest dungheap of updates will actually brick your system, and you're then looking at spending half the morning rolling back the latest dungheap (if you're lucky) or the next couple of days getting your data off the hdd before resetting and then possibly formatting and re-installing . . .

[medeamajic]

[QUOTE]

I do believe there have been in the past a few capture devices that convert analog to digital in mpe1 or mpeg2 format and then live transfer that via firewire to a pc host. Yep, looks like LaCie Capty might be one of those.

MPEG 1 and MPEG 2 are not guaranteed to give a good image. What if the bit rate is capped at 2 megabits per second? I am not saying it is but you never know what you will get until you try it.

Face it, medeamajic, you're digging yourself a hole. DV is an option, yes, but while it made sense 2 decades ago, maybe even a decade, there are so many better quality options now, even for SD material, it's not funny. It's time has past.

DV converters are old but you know what? So is VHS. I never stated the DV converters are the best choice for everyone. I will say it is an easy method to use with good results but not the best. I have never said otherwise.

If you have a decent budget, I'd suggest getting an Aja or Blackmagic device/card, as those are high quality & known to work well with Macs. And...you get what you pay for, so GIGO.

I am digging myself a whole? You should talk. The AJA and BMD products are not a good choice for VHS capture.

My studied recommendation again is to use DV only for existing dv-originated material, unless you are in a MAJOR hurry or are using seriously antiquated systems, and don't plan to do anything but cap and save.

Keep in mind you recommended products by AJA and BMD. That is not a wise recommendation is it? I have an Intensity Shuttle but it is not a good option to capture VHS. The ADVC 110 does a better job. You would say the same thing if you had both products but you will argue with me until you are blue in the face. Why is that? I admit the Shuttle would work much better with a TBC but that is yet another added cost. I love my Intensity Shuttle but I am willing to bet Christina would hate it. I bet you would hate it even though you recommended it. Why do you think that is? Why did I buy the Intensity Shuttle if it cannot capture VHS tapes that well? The link below can answer that question.

https://youtu.be/barrJWuBzCA

[medeamajic]

Digital S which used VHS tapes

No.

It had the same size, but that's it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital-S

Such a rare format that I don't remember the last time it was mentioned in a conversation. And so long ago that my memories are hazy as to whether I'd ever seen a tape.

I admit you are correct. I have not heard D-VHS or Digital S mentioned in years. I remember they were about the same size yet Digital S is better than D-VHS for quality and Digital S uses the DV-50 codec. I am not sure what quality of D-VHS is. I am thinking it might be on par with DV-25 but I don't know.

[dellsam34]

You have confused Lordsmurf with myself. I am the one that stated Fire Wire is a connection not a video codec. Lordsmurf did not

Nope, Lordsmurf too told you firewire is not DV here:

DV is not Firewire, DV is DV. Firewire surely could have supported a lossless device, but none were made. USB was chosen, mostly because even Mac abandoned Firewire before USB cards were popular and being made.

What ever compression or format D-VHS uses it would have been done prior to being sent through the Fire Wire port wouldn't it? That is why I stated the DV converter does it prior to sending it through the Fire Wire port.

Again what capture device does otherwise? You cannot send analog video thru firewire or USB, It has to be converted to a digital format first, Whether it be DV, MPEG-2, MPEG-4 or plain lossless AVI. They ALL convert to digital prior to sending the signal to cable.

Your D-VHS may not use DV-25 but it is still a Fire Wire DV device

No, It is not a DV device, It is a MPEG-2 SD/HD digital VCR.

Having said that what are the specs of D-VHS? I know it is not as good a Digital S which used VHS tapes and DV-50 codec and was competition for Digital Beta.

No, D-VHS HD 1920x1080 @ 28Mbps is far more superior than Digital S, Which is a SD format.


Obviously you had no clue what D-VHS stands for and you kept arguing thinking that it had to output to DV first and converts to MPEG-2. Again as Lordsmurf said Firewire is not DV, You can send MPEG-2 thru firewire, You can send 8 channels audio thru firewire but none of the two is called DV.

[lordsmurf]

I admit you are correct. I have not heard D-VHS or Digital S mentioned in years. I remember they were about the same size yet Digital S is better than D-VHS for quality and Digital S uses the DV-50 codec. I am not sure what quality of D-VHS is. I am thinking it might be on par with DV-25 but I don't know.

D-VHS and Digital-S really are not the same whatsoever, except in size. D-VHS is often mentioned, due to working with S-VHS and VHS tapes. I don't like D-VHS decks, the tracking/alignment is often shallow, but they work. Whereas Digital-S isn't usable for most people at all.

The link below can answer that question.

Seriously, just stop. This is a site for discussing video, not whoring links every other post. I'm not wasting 10 minutes because you can't edit yourself into several sentences. I'm not trying to be mean, but I really don't have time for that. And as wise advice once stated, from the Pickles comics, if you can't explain it quickly and simply, you really don't understand it yourself.

[Cornucopia]

[QUOTE=medeamajic;2547210]

I do believe there have been in the past a few capture devices that convert analog to digital in mpe1 or mpeg2 format and then live transfer that via firewire to a pc host. Yep, looks like LaCie Capty might be one of those.

MPEG 1 and MPEG 2 are not guaranteed to give a good image. What if the bit rate is capped at 2 megabits per second? I am not saying it is but you never know what you will get until you try it.

Face it, medeamajic, you're digging yourself a hole. DV is an option, yes, but while it made sense 2 decades ago, maybe even a decade, there are so many better quality options now, even for SD material, it's not funny. It's time has past.

DV converters are old but you know what? So is VHS. I never stated the DV converters are the best choice for everyone. I will say it is an easy method to use with good results but not the best. I have never said otherwise.

If you have a decent budget, I'd suggest getting an Aja or Blackmagic device/card, as those are high quality & known to work well with Macs. And...you get what you pay for, so GIGO.

I am digging myself a whole? You should talk. The AJA and BMD products are not a good choice for VHS capture.

My studied recommendation again is to use DV only for existing dv-originated material, unless you are in a MAJOR hurry or are using seriously antiquated systems, and don't plan to do anything but cap and save.

Keep in mind you recommended products by AJA and BMD. That is not a wise recommendation is it? I have an Intensity Shuttle but it is not a good option to capture VHS. The ADVC 110 does a better job. You would say the same thing if you had both products but you will argue with me until you are blue in the face. Why is that? I admit the Shuttle would work much better with a TBC but that is yet another added cost. I love my Intensity Shuttle but I am willing to bet Christina would hate it. I bet you would hate it even though you recommended it. Why do you think that is? Why did I buy the Intensity Shuttle if it cannot capture VHS tapes that well? The link below can answer that question.

https://youtu.be/barrJWuBzCA

I did mention those products. Know why? Because they work very well with Macs and they put out a good clean result, IF you give it a good signal to start with. In the case of VHS, this may require an intermediate TBC. Because they're picky. For a reason. As I stated in my original post, GIGO. You want to just let crap slide by without cleaning it up properly, that's your perogative, but that is NOT a great position to be representing yourself as any kind of authority when recommending processes.
If you think they put out a bad result due to inherent flaws in how they were built, you just aren't using them right. That's on you, not the product.
I know they aren't cheap, nope, especially if you are needing to get a TBC as well (but for many VHS sources, you should be anyway), but I stand by my recommendation.

Scott

[Christina]

Whew! Hopefully that’s settled now.

Anyway - there is so much info on this thread. It think this might be the 100th reply (do I get a prize?)

For my own knowledge and testing purposes, I want to try capturing lossless with my windows 7 laptop via USB.

I know someone said the startech device I linked somewhere in here was ok for that.

What program should I use (preferably a free one since I’m experimenting) to do the capture that will allow me to use HuffYUV?

[Christina]

I just went back through the posts and someone suggested AmaRecTv too which I think is a codec, not a program, right? When wanting to use a particular codec, do I have to install the codecs separately or do they come bundled with the capture software?

I’ve also heard good things about scenalyzer.

[ozymango]

OK... here is the infamous basement PC... Drumroll please!

(Just tilt your head for #2-4. I guess the upload files feature here doesn't pay attention to which way is up.)

Hi, Christina;

Thanks for the pics, I didn't realize one could post pics here uploaded to the forum, I always thought you needed to do outside links. See, after all these years a person can still learn something new.

I would love to "quote" the photos as I go along here so onlookers could see immediately what I'm talking about, but being I can't figure out how to do that, I'll just briefly describe the pertinent features I can pick out just at a glance. I feel like I'm taking a CompTIA A+ certification test again. Gads, that takes me back. Anyway, here goes --

Photo #1: Wide shot of the open case. This nice, you've got a standard tower case (or midtower, whatever), easy access to everything inside, no sharp edges to cut your fingers on whilst pulling cards. See the red cables sorta sticking out in the bottom middle of the shot? Those are SATA (serial ATA) cables, this immediately shows us that this motherboard has some sort of SATA bus and that means it's not miserably ancient. The wider flat gray cables you see sort of behind the various power cables in the middel of the photo, those are your PATA (parallel ATA) drive cables, "IDE" drive cables, I see one going to the CD (DVD?) drive, and maybe one going to a hard drive, but it's bit visually confusing here, I'm not sure what's connected to what. But important point -- your machines supports SATA in some form so we can definitely use it as a video capture machine, if you want to beat on it for video purposes.

Photo #2: Wow that drives takes me back -- that's a Western Digital WD2000 (200gb) SATA drive, with dual SATA/molex power connections. This was one of your first generation SATA drives, the smaller red cable is the SATA connection, the big translucent white connector (right side of the drive, looking down) is your vintage standard 4-pin Molex (brand name) power connector, which was the de factor standard in the PATA/IDE days. It's interesting the motherboard support for SATA often appeared ahead of power supply support for SATA, and the WD drives were nice because you could use either the PATA power connection or the SATA power connection, saved having to purchase Molex 4-pin to SATA power cables. I've still got a drawer full of Molex 4-pin to SATA power cables, you never know when you might need one.

That drive is on the small side nowadays, but it's a damn tough drive and you could probably still use it for the boot OS.

Oh, yeah, drive is dated August 2004 so that possibly helps us date this rig, assuming most/all of the parts were purchased about the same time.

Photo #3: Another angle inside the case, revealing another SATA hard drive. Again we see the SATA data connection, with the Molex power connector, so I'll venture it's another WD drive (because if you or whomever bought all the guts for this thing about the same time, most people tend to stick with certain brands and WD drives are quite excellent).

I believe there may be a floppy drive (3.5") mounted above the hard drive, I recognize the smaller power connector that's common to floppy drives.

Photo #4: There's a bit going on in this shot of the inside of the case, revealing the CPU and the slot architecture and there's some wires in the way of a really accurate diagnosis, but I'll venture that what we' re looking at here, is a processor mounted in an LGA-775 socket (this is just a hunch based on the "look" of the CPU/fan assembly, plus the 2004 date on the hard drive), so that's some form of Intel CPU, could be Pentium 4, could be Celeron (I hope it's a Pentium 4 as why go cheaper on the CPU if you're springing for 2 SATA drives?), or, if we're really lucky, could be a Core 2 Duo. But I seriously doubt that as I think the Core series didn't come out until 2006.

Or the CPU could be an AMD, in which case it's a Socket 754 CPU ... or maybe a Socket 939. Okay I'm just guessing here. Anyway I still vote Intel.

Oh and good news for add-on capture card, I see 4 PCI slots, looks like 3 are currently in use but 1 is open, so you can drop your capture card in the open slot. Also depending on what's in those other 3 slots -- depending on what kind of USB outputs are on the board, and if the Ethernet port is on the motherboard or on one those PCI cards -- you could put a gigabit Ethernet card in one PCI slot, and a USB 3.0 card in another slot, and that would greatly facilitate moving big video files here and there between systems.

So I think this system is definitely worth considering upgrading. If you can get us the make/model number off the motherboard (it's most likely hidden under some wire or connector there, usually silk-screen letter and numbers running parallel to the RAM slots, but could maybe be in small letters in some hidden place), that would help a great deal. If you can't easily find a make/model number on the board, it's possibly a semi-generic Intel board that you could sometimes get cheap with a matching OS if you were a PC dealer, sort of an slightly cheaper "all-in-one" package that at least made sure everything you got worked together properly without having to mess around with little tiny DIP switches for the BIOS on the motherboard. But hopefully you can find some sort of identifying marks on it that'll help give us a baseline on what we can do with this PC.

Hope that helps!

EDIT: Oh man, almost forgot: The video card! That's gotta be an AGP video card, as I don't see the little "tab" towards the front (case-side) of the card slot that would indicate PCI-E (PCI Express). Plus there's really no chance you're gonna see a PCI-E slot/bus on a system with internal PATA connectors, that's just not done. AGP is fine for our purposes, in fact it may even be to your advantage as this allows for the installation of an ATI AGP video input/output card, e.g. the "All-In-Wonder" card that some people swear by (and other people swear at). You don't have to get an AGP video input card, just that it's nice having that option.

[dellsam34]

I just went back through the posts and someone suggested AmaRecTv too which I think is a codec, not a program, right? When wanting to use a particular codec, do I have to install the codecs separately or do they come bundled with the capture software?

I’ve also heard good things about scenalyzer.

AmaRecTV is a capture application and I believe it has HuffYUV support. You can still capture pure AVI but the files are going to be huge that's where plugins like HuffYUV and Lagarith come in handy, They act like a zip file, They compress but never loose a single bit of quality.

[lordsmurf]

...

To add:

200gb is really small, seeing as how lossless Huffyuv is 35gb/hour. (Even 13gb DV would fill it quickly, just as a comparison.) Lots of drives means lots of heat + noise, so ideally replace with a single 2tb (max size allowed by XP). Those are cheap usede, about $50 for a good Seagate on eBay.

Old CPUs are usually cheap, sometimes just $5 to $10, so max out the board with the best.

Older pre-2006 (approx) system USB2 was suspect speeds, due to chipsets, drivers, and how USB routes through CPU. So the older the system, the less likely USB2 will works well. In that era, AGP/PCI cards were for video. So using that system, XP, assuming AGP, max out CPU, new HDD, probably a better $35 CPU cooler, remove anything unneeded (floppy!) -- use ATI AIW AGP (DVI) for capture with Turtle Beach Santa Cruz audio.

Forget the USB3 card, since XP can't see most 2tb+ USB3 drives anyway, and go for eSATA (also using 2tb max drives). Use an eSATA/USB3 2tb drive from Fantom (~$125), then you can dump anything to the Mac for advanced editing, since it has your editing software, and is your modern system of choice. Let the capture box only capture. Later reuse the drive for archiving, off-site archives, whatever. It's never a bad thing to have an extra external 2tb drive laying around.

The system can probably be re-habbed for a capture box without a huge investment. These days, motherboards, RAM, cases, and power supplies tend to be the more expensive parts for legacy builds, and you already have all of those.

Wipe, clean install, remove background tasks/services, unzip VirtualDub to a folder, install Huffyuv, and start capturing*.

* Good VCR and TBC still needed.

[medeamajic]

I admit you are correct. I have not heard D-VHS or Digital S mentioned in years. I remember they were about the same size yet Digital S is better than D-VHS for quality and Digital S uses the DV-50 codec. I am not sure what quality of D-VHS is. I am thinking it might be on par with DV-25 but I don't know.

D-VHS and Digital-S really are not the same whatsoever, except in size. D-VHS is often mentioned, due to working with S-VHS and VHS tapes. I don't like D-VHS decks, the tracking/alignment is often shallow, but they work. Whereas Digital-S isn't usable for most people at all.

You love to argue don't you!

You also love miss represent my statements.

I have never claimed Digital S and D-VHS are the same thing. I stated Digital S was superior. Digital S used DV-50 and was supposed to be competition for Digital Beta but they never caught on. I simply remember D-VHS being more for consumers and and Digital S being for professionals.

I simply stated D-VHS maybe on par with DV-25 for quality which is not the same thing as DV-50 from the Digital-S.

What is the quality of D-VHS compared to DV-25? Keep in mind I am not saying they are the same. I am asking which one is better.

The link below can answer that question.

Seriously, just stop. This is a site for discussing video, not whoring links every other post. I'm not wasting 10 minutes because you can't edit yourself into several sentences. I'm not trying to be mean, but I really don't have time for that.

Video links should be encouraged not discouraged.

I simply demonstrated using the Intensity Shuttle as an output device. I am sure there are people who don't really know the true purpose of AJA and BMD products. Those products work well for somethings but VHS capture is not one of them.

Posting links should be encouraged because talk is cheap. Some one can recommend an AJA or BMD product but a video link could demonstrate why it is not a good option for VHS capture.

And as wise advice once stated, from the Pickles comics, if you can't explain it quickly and simply, you really don't understand it yourself.

Your quote is useless because many people learn better visually. Also people can say or write things that are not true.

[lordsmurf]

I simply stated D-VHS maybe on par with DV-25 for quality which is not the same thing as DV-50 from the Digital-S.

Well, then it's a stupid statement.

There really is no "D-VHS format", it's just MPEG-2 TS, and with 4:2:0 (4:2:2? I forget), using 14mbps max SD, or HD. It's much better than DV, or even DVD, on par with Blu-ray SD specs. The problem with D-VHS was it's still tape, VHS-type at that, and lots of functions and features didn't quite work correctly. It wasn't a mature product, and failed before maturity. It had promise. Some folks have found narrow uses for the machine, mostly as S-VHS replacements (often with issues playing EP/SLP, even more than normal JVC), but that's really it.

Posting links should be encouraged because talk is cheap.

Youtube = talk (blah, blah, blah, blah). This site uses written words.

Your quote is useless because many people learn better visually.

I'm referring to you, not others learning. You can't explain anything concisely, and when you do, it's inaccurate or false. You try to lose people in blah-blah and puffery. That may work in politics, especially when talking to the uneducated, but not a niche site full of deep concepts and jargon. You can't BS your way through this topic, when you're surrounded by pros and serious hobbyists. We'll call bullsh!t when we see it.

I'm usually extremely nice, but you're really being a pain the @ss now, taking a dump on threads, straying far off-topic, with your little rants and ramblings, and Youtube links, and apparent erections for the DV format. Yeah, you like DV, want to marry it. Great, we get it. STFU now. Some of us are trying to help people, not pontificate.

[medeamajic]

[QUOTE=dellsam34;2547212]

You have confused Lordsmurf with myself. I am the one that stated Fire Wire is a connection not a video codec. Lordsmurf did not

Nope, Lordsmurf too told you firewire is not DV here:

DV is not Firewire, DV is DV. Firewire surely could have supported a lossless device, but none were made. USB was chosen, mostly because even Mac abandoned Firewire before USB cards were popular and being made.

You are simply quoting LordSmurf. That does not prove LordSmurf told me anything new. I have used Fire Wire audio interfaces as well as HDV cameras. I never claim Fire Wire is DV-25 only.

You picked a bad quote form Lordsmurf because the Avid Mojo did allow uncompressed SD through Fire Wire. It was not a generic DV device. It required drivers. You could create a Fire Wire device to make use of MPEG 4 and motion MJPEG if you wanted to. It would require drivers because it would not conform to the protocol of generic DV devices.

What ever compression or format D-VHS uses it would have been done prior to being sent through the Fire Wire port wouldn't it? That is why I stated the DV converter does it prior to sending it through the Fire Wire port.

Again what capture device does otherwise? You cannot send analog video thru firewire or USB, It has to be converted to a digital format first, Whether it be DV, MPEG-2, MPEG-4 or plain lossless AVI. They ALL convert to digital prior to sending the signal to cable.

I agree the conversion is done prior to going through the Fire Wire port. I have never said other wise. That is my point. In your test you claimed to capture in MPEG 2 from Fire Wire and stated it is much better than DV. I sated your MPEG 2 sample isn't any better than DV-25 as far as quality is concerned because it was compressed to some type of digital codec (MPEG 2) before being sent down the Fire Wire cable.

Originally Posted by medeamajic View Post
Your D-VHS may not use DV-25 but it is still a Fire Wire DV device
No, It is not a DV device, It is a MPEG-2 SD/HD digital VCR.

I think this is more or less a matter of equivocation. DV stands for Digital Video. DV-25 is a codec. MPEG 2 is a codec but the device is still a Digital Video Device. So is a DVD player as opposed to analogue VHS VCR. The Avid Mojo was considered a DV device but it could capture uncompressed using Fire Wire.

Having said that what are the specs of D-VHS? I know it is not as good a Digital S which used VHS tapes and DV-50 codec and was competition for Digital Beta.

No, D-VHS HD 1920x1080 @ 28Mbps is far more superior than Digital S, Which is a SD format.

I have not heard Digital-S or D-VHS mentioned in over 15 years back when SD was still king (although HD was used). Having said that I thought we were focusing on SD (VHS). I agree D-VHS can play HD. Digital S cannot but the SD quality of Digital S was better. Digital S was implemented for the broadcast market.

Obviously you had no clue what D-VHS stands for and you kept arguing thinking that it had to output to DV first and converts to MPEG-2. Again as Lordsmurf said Firewire is not DV, You can send MPEG-2 thru firewire, You can send 8 channels audio thru firewire but none of the two is called DV.

You are being dishonest. I was the one who mention the audio interface (MOTU, Presonus) not Lordsmurf. I am also well aware of The Avid MOJO capturing uncompressed. HDV uses MPEG 2.

I want to clarify I never claimed to know everything about D-VHS. I had asked questions like how does it compare to DV-25.

I will also admit I was not sure what type of codec D-VHS used. I thought you had simply captured to MPEG 2. I now see you are saying it is MPEG 2 by default. I admit the wording confused me. That is my bad and I admit to it. However I never stated D-VHS is DV-25. I asked how does it compare to DV-25. Knowing it is MPEG 2 it may or my not be worse than DV-25 depending on the amount of compression. What I am going to say is that the MPEG 2 sample was no better than DV-25 for quality. You claimed it was far superior. MPEG 2 can look good or bad depending on the amount of compression. DV-25 is as it is.

As of now I think we can move on from this debate.

[medeamajic]

[QUOTE]

I simply stated D-VHS maybe on par with DV-25 for quality which is not the same thing as DV-50 from the Digital-S.

Well, then it's a stupid statement.

There really is no "D-VHS format", it's just MPEG-2 TS, and with 4:2:0 (4:2:2? I forget), using 14mbps max SD, or HD. It's much better than DV, or even DVD, on par with Blu-ray SD specs. The problem with D-VHS was it's still tape, VHS-type at that, and lots of functions and features didn't quite work correctly. It wasn't a mature product, and failed before maturity. It had promise. Some folks have found narrow uses for the machine, mostly as S-VHS replacements (often with issues playing EP/SLP, even more than normal JVC), but that's really it.

How is it a stupid statement? DV-50 will be less prone to compression artifacts when compared to MPEG 2 at 14 mbps. I would agree MPEG 2 at 14 mbps would probably be slightly better than DV-25 and DVD. Those kind of specs are what I was asking for.

Your quote is useless because many people learn better visually.

I'm referring to you, not others learning. You can't explain anything concisely, and when you do, it's inaccurate or false. You try to lose people in blah-blah and puffery. That may work in politics, especially when talking to the uneducated, but not a niche site full of deep concepts and jargon. You can't BS your way through this topic, when you're surrounded by pros and serious hobbyists. We'll call bullsh!t when we see it.

You are pathetic! I don't loose people in blah blah puffery. I simply say DV converters are easy to use and give a good result but not the best. Everyone else has to go into their blah blah puffery but not me. Pros and serous hobbyist. Spare me. I highly doubt anyone here is working on feature films and I am willing to bet I have made more money edit on an Avid Media Composer than you have. Am I correct?

I'm usually extremely nice, but you're really being a pain the @ss now, taking a dump on topics, straying far off-topic, with your little rants and ramblings, and Youtube links, and apparent erections for the DV format. Yeah, you like DV, want to marry it. Great, we get it. STFU now. Some of us are trying to help people, not pontificate.

You were a jerk to me my very first day here but I could care less about your opinion as do others. I think DV device are easy to use and Christina thanked me for the links I posted so suck it up : )

[dellsam34]

Unbelievable !! Thant's all what I can say.

[lordsmurf]

Whew! Hopefully that’s settled now.

Apparently it is now, the admin/mods have seen to that. Let us resume helping you now.

I just went back through the posts and someone suggested AmaRecTv too which I think is a codec, not a program, right?
I’ve also heard good things about scenalyzer.

AmaRec and Scenalyzer are best reserved for when VirtualDub and WinDV refuse to cooperate, respectively.

Speaking of codecs, you mentioned Perian. With the past few versions of OS X and Quicktime, Perian no longer works. So it's only an option if you have a legacy version of OS X. The better cross-platform codecs are MagicYUV and UtVideo, but I'm not sure how well those work for capture. Huffyuv works well because it has low CPU overhead, at the expensive of larger files.

For my own knowledge and testing purposes, I want to try capturing lossless with my windows 7 laptop via USB.
I know someone said the startech device I linked somewhere in here was ok for that.

There are worse cards. It's a quasi-clone of the ATI 600. But the most interesting aspect of that card is that it works with both Mac and Windows. I have no idea how the Mac aspect will work, but with Windows 7 use VirtualDub. And this Huffyuv install guide will help you get it installed on Win7.

But again ... you need to pay attention to the VCR and TBC. Maybe not for testing, but for the serious capture work.

[Eric-jan]

* I think Eric-jan above mentioned he uses MacX Video Converter Pro as a editor/transcoder on his Mac? I love Handbrake, I use it on my PC and Linux machines, and it's great. BUT, I have had various issues with it, from time to time -- and audio sync is most definitely one of them. Of course audio sync issues are enormously common in any kind of video conversion (dumb question maybe but did you make sure to set the video framerate in Handbrake to 29.97 and constant? I think it often defaults to 25fps and variable framerate). I do know a few people with Macs who use MacX Video Converter Pro, I think it costs around twenty-five bucks, and you can probably download a trial copy to see if doing an edit/conversion in that software to see how it behaves, see if you still have audio issues.

Yes, i use MacX Video Converter Pro, because it outputs a good video/audio format, i used Handbrake too in the past, but it doesn't always outputs in an good output format, and sometimes will not play on a hardware player.
It can also extract audio from a video clip like youtube, in an easy way, i know other apps can do this too, but with MacX Video Converter Pro it's easy to do so.

[Christina]

Hey everyone. Just wanted to give you a quick update and ask a quick question.

For my own experimenting and testing, I have my Windows 7 Pro Dell laptop set up with a USB capture device, VirtualDub, and HuffYUV. I am new to VirtualDub so the settings are a bit overwhelming. I set the compression to HuffYUV and left audio at PCM. It seems to capture just fine, so long as I don't tell it to playback the audio while I'm capturing. If I select that, the video is choppy/choking/skipping (unwatchable while capturing). It works fine if I disable audio playback but sometimes I like to watch what I am capturing. Does anyone know why this is happening and is it as simple as a setting being changed, or is my laptop just not up to the task? Thanks!

[jagabo]

VirtualDubso long as I don't tell it to playback the audio while I'm capturing

That's a longstanding problem with VirtualDub. Also don't try to compress the audio while capturing. AmarecTV works better for a lot of people with USB capture devices.

[lordsmurf]

There are workarounds.
- using card that works with Preview
- splitting VCR/camera audio to 2nd computer input
- distro amp or 2nd VCR/camera output to 2nd computer input or dedicated speakers

[TimA-C]

Do your test captures and tweak the brightness & contrast etc. and then just let Vdub capture minus the audio - don't worry, by the time you've finished tweaking and filtering and re-encoding you'll probably be sick of the video and the audio anyway . . . !

[lordsmurf]

by the time you've finished tweaking and filtering and re-encoding you'll probably be sick of the video and the audio anyway . . . !

This is so true. After a hobby project is done, I often won't watch it for a year. I just can't enjoy it yet. I'm still in "detect flaws" mode, and not entertainment mode.

[Christina]

I get that - although my main purpose here is archiving home movies, so I'm not really sitting and working on a big project that requires a lot of editing, and so I typically like to sit there and watch the video, since I haven't seen it in a very long time (or ever), and enjoy it while it's capturing. I could live without it if had to...

Anyway wanted to give everyone a little update again on my recent testing. Before anyone crucifies me, just know this is for TESTING purposes, so I am not using a S-VHS, or an external TBC. Just a regular JVC VCR, a VHS tape, and composite connections.

I captured with VirtualDub using HuffYUV and PCM Audio on my Windows 7 laptop with a USB Composite capture device. I have to say, the AVI file (at least on my laptop screen) did look initially a lot better than my DV capture on my Mac. More on this in a sec.

I converted using Handbrake (I had CF at 19), framerate same as source, h264, mp4 container, aac audio etc.. with the default filters (decomb I believe?) Whatever the settings were, it was the same settings I had used to convert my DV capture file.

I transferred the mp4 and the avi to my mac to compare there on the big screen. At first I was absolutely horrified at the comparison (meaning the AVI was sooooo much better) although I felt the audio was just ever so slightly in and out of sync - moving lips were not matched up 100% and I personally am very sensitive to that.

The big thing I learned here though is that Quicktime, which on my Mac is the default program for DV when you just double click on the file, does something terrible during playback. I don't know what it does but it made my DV file look like total garbage next to the AVI playing in VLC.

Once I played the DV file in VLC, the results were much closer, although I definitely think the AVI file had an edge on it. The colors had a little more pop, and possibly the highlights slightly less blown out (although they're blown out in the original tape too) - overall, just retained a little more detail in people's facial features, it appeared.

So I took the 2 converted mp4 (h264) files and put them on an external drive, hooked up to my tv to play there (which is a 65" samsung QLED), and while I think the avi -> mp4 came out a little better, the end result after converting, in my (I'm sure flawed in several ways) test examples were not THAT different. Me, staring at them, going back and forth, trying to notice the differences, I noticed some - but the average person watching the video would not be displeased with either copy or be paying attention to the details I was. I'm sure there are ways to increase the quality of BOTH files. And just to circle back to the original purpose of this thread, the DV capture was done via passthrough with Sony Digital8 camcorder in Vidi, NOT ProRes with Quicktime as in some of my other test captures.

One thing I noticed that I'm sure there is loads of info on that I've yet to look into, is that my mp4 file from the DV capture was wider on the tv screen (720x480) while the mp4 from AVI was 640x480. I don't know what bearing this has on quality but that's my next step to look into. Are all DV captures at 720 or was that a setting I glazed over at some point in capturing or converting? I also was wondering, does that "stretch" the video to make it to 720 (i.e. does it spread the video out making people and subjects in the video look wider)?

I'm working on possibly acquiring a S-VHS VCR before I continue with more testing, and for my own knowledge, I'll also be trying another DV capture via a DAC200 just to see how it compares to all of this in the grand scheme of things.

Again I appreciate everyone's input but I need to see for myself to believe

[ozymango]

Anyway wanted to give everyone a little update again on my recent testing.

Hey, Christina;

Thanks for the update, and glad to hear that things are, if not strongly progressing, at least moving in a forward direction. You had a nicely detailed update on your test and your results, but I think you left out one thing: The audio. Did either of your conversions/methods help at all with your earlier sync issue?

[ozymango]

One thing I noticed that I'm sure there is loads of info on that I've yet to look into, is that my mp4 file from the DV capture was wider on the tv screen (720x480) while the mp4 from AVI was 640x480. I don't know what bearing this has on quality but that's my next step to look into. Are all DV captures at 720 or was that a setting I glazed over at some point in capturing or converting? I also was wondering, does that "stretch" the video to make it to 720 (i.e. does it spread the video out making people and subjects in the video look wider)?

Oh boy, the rabbit hole of pixel aspect ratio and digitized analog video data ...

Well, kids, this is where I check out of this thread, it's been fun but I feel a headache coming on.

Have fun, everybody!