Current status of ld-decode / vhs-decode (true "backup" of RF signals)

[dellsam34]

General question to European VCR owners who are experimenting with vhs-decode. Have you guys tried capturing a native NTSC tape? Technically it should work since most European and Asian VCRs are two speed VCRs (525/625), If the speed is correct the VCR should pickup a pure NTSC 3.58 at the RF level.

[Brad]

General question to European VCR owners who are experimenting with vhs-decode. Have you guys tried capturing a native NTSC tape? Technically it should work since most European and Asian VCRs are two speed VCRs (525/625), If the speed is correct the VCR should pickup a pure NTSC 3.58 at the RF level.

Yes, it does work as expected. oln has noted though that these VCRs may not optimally read NTSC Hi-Fi, especially in EP mode.

Here is one of Harry's examples. The "reference" capture is PAL60 from the VCR, poorly interpreted by a DMR-ES10. Those Panasonic DVD recorders don't properly support PAL60 input.
https://archive.org/details/dream-times-minayo-chan-1987-vhs-ntsc-j-fm-rf-archive

---


Hopefully I'll have some worthwhile AG-1980 samples ready to post this week. Maybe tonight if I'm really lucky. The rewolf amp does resolve the amplitude drop + crosshatch issues.

[dellsam34]

The HiFi issue can be mitigated by physically tweaking the stator angle on VCRs with the stator on top, I've had success doing so on some problematic tapes.

[pasteur10]

about capturing cx card.
I have found 3 versions of them.
which ones do correctly?


[Attachment 86245 - Click to enlarge]
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005008463187953.html


[Attachment 86246 - Click to enlarge]
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005008509975212.html


[Attachment 86247 - Click to enlarge]
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005008188029346.html


also i have hackrf. it can capture rf signals.
has anyone tried it before or is it possible at least?

[i4004]

this is not a valid test: dvb-s (mpeg2) encoder might of had totally different setup when you were (re)recording it from satellite. ie lower bitrate.
dvb-s .ts rip will always look better than vhs recording of it, or s-vhs recording, or sp beta recording, doesn't matter which analog format u use. it's just that better formats will yield less deterioration.

What is not valid is your understanding.

Let me explain once more the test in that link.

On one side there is the rip of a DVB-S broadcast at 480x576 resolution, MPEG-2 encoded at good bitrate 5/6mbps average bitrate. And from source master in good shape. In principle, from a technical point a view, slightly better than the max quality of the S-VHS standard, which allows rafely 400 point of horizontal resolution inside a line and 576 interlaced lines. Definetely a nice video when whatched.
(BTW, the rip is in .pva format, not in .ts; at that time there was no hardware able to rip the full stream)

On the other side there is exactly the same broadcasted program, transmitted few years earlier, when I did not have the hardware to rip the digital stream. So the flow to produce the digital file was DVB-S set-top box Y/C output to high-end S-VHS VCR recording on high quality Sony VXSE tapes, then an analog capture of the tape via its Y/C output to a capture card.

When comparing the two files there is almost no difference in term of quality, meaning that the whole process of capturing, but also of recording, is not introducing significant deviations from the original. Impressive!

As a side note, we all know that on Astra and Hotbird in Europe there were / there are channels with crap quality, at low resolution, too low bitrate and not optimized encoders and low preformances studio equipements (cameras and broadcast hardware). It was not the case for Canal Jimmy (my source for the test I linked) inside D+ bouquet in late 90s/early 2000s.

dvb-s .ts rip will always look better than vhs recording of it, or s-vhs recording, or sp beta recording, doesn't matter which analog format u use. it's just that better formats will yield less deterioration.

Yes in principle, not in practice in the test I showed, given the specifications I gave.

In order to see a difference the reference must be a D1 720x576 at 8/9mbps bitrate from a perfect master. Then, of course, the (limited in comparison) S-VHS specifications will not be able to match the original quality of the source.

i wholeheartedly disagree with LS there: you don't need TBC. at all.

Concerning the need of an external TBC, I am one of the few disagreeing with lordsmurf that is always needed, because I do not see a need for tapes in pristine shape like mines. But is not so common, so what you wrote in term of TBC "you don't need TBC. at all" is a non sense.

edit: and while comparing, as you can understand, I can also move frame by frame, field by field the reference and the analog capture at the same time and verify that not only the quality of the second is in pair, but also that there are not dropped or inserted frames or whatever, both with AviSynth scripts and by visual inspection. As you probably know these potential issues are of great concerns when capturing analog.

dvb-s mpeg2 bitrate inside transponder was dynamically allocated, ie some channels were prioritised. for example "less important" channels got more bitrate only if "more important" channels had static video that required less bitrate.
you're literally not comparing the same thing, it's apples to oranges.
on the other hand, i'm not contesting s-vhs has decent quality. but on the third(!) hand s-vhs has same crappy chroma bandwidth as usual vhs, AND dvb-s has crappy 4:2:0 color encoding! this is where recording dvb on vhs becomes rather questionable. it seems to me vhs actually needs some noise, to "excite" it, and dvb has none. dvb recordings on vhs for me were unbareably soft. good thing that didn't last long! ie we started ripping it over capturing it from vhs.
offcourse, these (s)vhs color issues become more apparent once you start copying, ie master is ok, copy is instantly recognizable as copy.
just like recompressing digital video. but digital video has big advantage, you just copy the digital file, and then it's 1:1 to "original". infact it is original. offcourse that advantage gets lost when vhs-decode boys upload raw files...hehe.....250gb.....

tbc, still you:

And the A/D D/A is not the only aspect; any additional element introduces (neglettable or important) degradation. Better do not risk if not necessary

so do we need tbc or not?

Off topic:

BTW, if we could have access to the digitized data at the output of the TBC circuits inside the VCRs it would be a wonder: no capture card needed, just a packing data/format conversion/what else.

this is peculiar thought! why do you think adcs in those 90s machines were better than digitizers on (cheap) capture cards some 10 years later? for example bt8x8 and saa713x.

esteemed lordsmurf (btw. no tongue in cheek there):

The A<>D process is not harmful any more than colorspace conversions are harmful.

have you tried 5x colorspace conversion vs. 5x a-d+d-a process? heh...

Consider this:
- If TBCs only cost $10, almost nobody would state TBC isn't needed.
- If TBCs were embedded in all capture cards (and all cards cost, say, $300 minimum), almost nobody would complain.

point1: no, i just don't buy stuff i need not.
point2: tbcs essentially ARE INCLUDED, by design: cheap cards have adc front end, just like TBC.
it's just a matter of which adc you used. to illustrate:
https://youtu.be/S1ndneq38xY?t=136
(excellent, moving camera is enough to confuse elgato! incredible stuff!)

You could even think of TBCs as insurance. With frame TBC, you know you're getting the best "quality" (actually capture integrity, signal quality, not visual). Without TBC, it's really just guessing, or overly relying on drop/insert counters (which can be deeply flawed with some cards/software), unless a deep-dive verification is performed post-capture. The net effect is that TBC removes project time needed.

how? what makes you unsure when you lack tbc? we need to go back, to the beginnings:

That makes zero sense. "In the beginning" (of modern ingest/capture, meaning the late 90s, early 00s), the items were sold new in stores. Nothing was scarce. I remember, because I was there.

but were they any good? what was your first capture card? and what was wrong with it?
mine? vpx3225 chip on riva tnt2 graphics card.
good image quality, dropped frames for no reason, couldn't do 25fps, not even near.
(yeap. i remember part number, vpx was made by "micronas")

i mean, i think i see the issue:
https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/marketplace/8253-sale-ati-600-a.html
you love ati!

Wrong assumption. Released retail material has never been my focus.

so what was? what do you have such a big troubles with that you need tbc every time?
1st generation copy? that doesn't have tbc issues even on consumer grade vhs hardware.

This is not a true statement. And it seems you make the blanket statement based on your own narrow (and unverified) experiences. If TBC was not needed, why do you think I, and others, buy them? Do you really think we're just stupid?

this is not an argument if you can't explain why do you need them. it's like saying "i drink beer, others drink it too, it's excellent, it's healthy!"

and my experience is not narrow or unverified: let's just quickly verify it:
here is cheap card capturing white noise, ie no sync signals at all:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/oDWUVkI6sek
here is...well, see for yourself:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8R0IWcxA_mw

here's cap of ffwd:
https://youtu.be/z-EkBTh0pNg?t=117
(you'll notice change in voice pitch when audio resampler tries to keep pace with video, you'll also notice sync is not lost as soon as normal playback continues)
here's hd version, if you wanna inspect how good is yt at sd vs hd compression, and how good or bad does it resample pal source to ntsc's 480 lines:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSJIKgPzNps
notice how crappy and mangled that video signal is: now, come again, why do we need tbc?
i mean you have portions of that clip that were capping just one field of signal, because one head was dirty! lol! for example flicker at 2:08

were there dropped frames there?
sure!
how many?
a lot! on crappy video portions.
but...so what?
are we capturing white noise or cueing video or one-field vhs?

from your reply to lollo:

It's not so much that it's "always" needed, but rather "almost always". There are exceptions. However, everybody always wants to think themselves the exception. So the general rule is that TBC is needed, with exceptions. But the exceptions do not overrule the rule.

no, you can't prove this.

TBCs allow us to babysit captures less. We can let the capture hardware do its thing (VCR>TBC>card captures out video), with monitoring, but with no real invention needed.

You could even think of TBCs as insurance. With frame TBC, you know you're getting the best "quality" (actually capture integrity, signal quality, not visual). Without TBC, it's really just guessing, or overly relying on drop/insert counters (which can be deeply flawed with some cards/software), unless a deep-dive verification is performed post-capture. The net effect is that TBC removes project time needed.

insurance is quite an english/american concept, and it's a good one! esp. when it comes to health insurance!
another good saying of yours is "if it ain't broken, don't fix it!"
i would say in this case try with decent capture card....sync issues?
sure, get tbc.
but not before you try without it.

This line of argument is extremely recent, last few years, started by newbies

i'm rather more interested who started the "everybody needs tbc!" mantra, and i think ti was probably you.
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/111648-ATI-AIW-drops-frames-but-only-on-one-computer and i hope yor standard process was not capping straight to mpeg2!

to that extent:

You just need a standard workflow: VCR > TBC > capture card.

If you have XP PCs, then ATI AIW are outstanding, some of the best cards ever made. When you say "9800 PRO", be sure it's "All In Wonder". but not just am ATI graphics card. It has to be AIW to have the video. Remember, AIW is just video, audio is slaved to a quality audio card, such as Turtle Beach Santa Cruz.

i think i alread wrote this somewhere, maybe on digitalfaq: i once tried ati-aiw on pal, and it was biggest pos ever.
incredibly blurry images. composite input. they were not even trying. has to be something along these lines:

GV has PAL fans, but not really NTSC -- which isn't unusual, lots of cards do favor one format, then "also do" the other (but compromised in some way, either video quality or usage/UX quality).

(my bold)

as for ld-decode and tbc, to neatly bring us back to subject: would you concede that aligning lines in software is cheaper and probably can be done better than doing same thing in hardware from 90s?
i mean i didn't do deep or any dive on this (i didn't dload those rf files that are 250gb in size to inspect are lines shimmering left/right, hell no! hehe), but what would your guess be? who would be able to do it better, today's cpus and xx gbs of ram and (relatively) simple algos, or 90s tbcs?

So at what point is it really about "better" quality? -- which is actively being debunked by others, with true 1:1 S-VHS vs. vhs-decode samples,

it was dubunked? somebody has done both vhs-decode and analog cap with the same machine and tape?
and vhs-decode looks worse?

dellsam34
Re: Current status of ld-decode / vhs-decode (true "backup" of RF signals)

General question to European VCR owners who are experimenting with vhs-decode. Have you guys tried capturing a native NTSC tape? Technically it should work since most European and Asian VCRs are two speed VCRs (525/625), If the speed is correct the VCR should pickup a pure NTSC 3.58 at the RF level.

i'm not experimenting with vhs-decode, but one can capture pal60 (pure ntsc tape) without problems in europe, again with a cheap capture card.
feature on vcr is called "ntsc playback on pal tv".

Not sure how hard to reverse engineer those chips. Maybe it's impossible, maybe it's because no one has tried it yet, Who knows. But if extracted, it seems that it's much easier to deal with digital pockets of scan lines than an entire process of RF capture and conversion.

again, as i said to lollo, why would you do that?
were those adcs inside vcrs even sampling video at 27mhz?

MrCreosote

I'm such a noob here. I have a lot of gear, SVHS VCR's, DVD HDD recorders, XP PCs, but not much in capture cards.

I'm working with SVHS and wondering, compared to VHS, is it worth the extra effort for RF-capture?

I looked for the ATI AIW 9800XT and Radeon 7500 cards and found not much on eBay. Is the 9800 PRO as good? I just don't know. A list of OK cards would be nice. Then read (pardon garbage memory) Brookstone? BF878 Conexant card someone wrote RF-capture firmware for? or? (don't quote me)

I remember somewhere, in some catalog, maybe Heathkit, ??? Lafayette Radio ??? where they had hi-fi systems (turntable, amp/receiver/tuner, speakers for various budgets. Would LOVE that for the Food Chain of capturing SVHS.

I definitely NOT a $$$ pro TBC maniac and honestly, RF-capture would require more time than I have left on this earth although the improvement over VHS is rather amazing BUT is it as dramatic on SVHS? I know REDs suck. (I recall somewhere about 60 lines for reds?, for VHS?)

Best "bang for buck" VHS capture? (I have read the Retro Game captures are NOT good for VCR. RetroTINK even expensive, not ideal.)

you mention brooktree bt848 and 878.
no nobody will rewrite drivers for those, but i just checked sampling frequency of vhs-decode projects:
https://github.com/oyvindln/vhs-decode/wiki/Signal-Sampling
they're actualy using LOWER sampling freq. than bt8x8!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooktree

vhs-decode uses something else, some cheap surveillance card with newer conexant chip (conexant bought brooktree) (which seems to be not so cheap now?) and a re now making alltogether different hardware.

i used cheap bt878 card a lot, in pal land, no issues with quality or reliability.

yes, color on vhs is crap, yes, especially visible on reds. it's even less than 60 lines. vhs can't stack 60 vertical lines of different colors on screen. and neither can s-vhs. and it quickly falls apart if you copy it on another (s)vhs machine.

frankly i doubt anybody can demonstrate big difference between good hardware setups (be it vhs or s-vhs....you'll still be capturing vhs recordings ie not s-vhs recordings....s-vhs has the edge by separating luma and chroma, but only if the recording had is separate too, ie if vhs tape was made via composite copying what exactly are you gaining on s-vhs machine? to that extent i'm just watching some of the stuff from ITV archive on yt: i'm finding composite video with composite video issues
https://www.youtube.com/@ITNArchive early 90s european production) and vhs-decode.
but many can demonstrate difference between crappy vcrs and crappy capture cards vs. vhs-decode!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ-u979_6Cw vhs-decode is clear winner there, sharpness and stability.
this was captured from Panasonic NV-SD220. i had that vcr. i have machine producing sharper images now.
even when capturing tapes recorded on sd220, it's sharper.

pasteur10, that's rf, but radio rf!
can't be used for video.
software defined radio is ment to decode radio rf modulations.

abour cards:
https://github.com/oyvindln/vhs-decode/wiki/CX-Cards
notice the "capture hardware" links on the right....below "software installation" links.

[dellsam34]

i'm not experimenting with vhs-decode, but one can capture pal60 (pure ntsc tape) without problems in europe, again with a cheap capture card.
feature on vcr is called "ntsc playback on pal tv".

My question was specifically about the RF pickup not about using the VCR normally.

[MrCreosote]

YES to crappy VHS/SVHS chroma - such a disappointment - reds somewhere I read like 60 lines of resolution - don't know if VHS or S.

Having done countless convergences of Advent Video Beam TV's, it's Blue we can't see.
Red and Green are sharp.
Couldn't they have compromised Blue instead when designing the VHS system? why red?

[lollo]

dvb-s mpeg2 bitrate inside transponder was dynamically allocated, ie some channels were prioritised. for example "less important" channels got more bitrate only if "more important" channels had static video that required less bitrate.

While true there there was / there is a dynamic allocation of the bandwidth in term of bitrate for single channels, I can assure you that for what concerns my tests, there is 0 (zero) impact.
I ripped from satellite hundreds, I repeat hundreds of programs, and never measured major modification to average bitrate for channels in D+/Sky Italy bouquets.

you're literally not comparing the same thing, it's apples to oranges.

The apples and the oranges are in your understanding, the test are pertinents and appropriate. Their outcomes are valid, and outstandings.

on the other hand, i'm not contesting s-vhs has decent quality. but on the third(!) hand s-vhs has same crappy chroma bandwidth as usual vhs, AND dvb-s has crappy 4:2:0 color encoding! this is where recording dvb on vhs becomes rather questionable. it seems to me vhs actually needs some noise, to "excite" it, and dvb has none. dvb recordings on vhs for me were unbareably soft. good thing that didn't last long! ie we started ripping it over capturing it from vhs.

Again, you did not understand the contest. The source is always the 4:2:0 MPEG2 broadcasted by satellite through a DVB-S transport stream. Ripped from digital, or recorded to S-VHS. So any "defect" because color space is in the source (the reference), and then also in the analog captured and "compared" video.

offcourse, these (s)vhs color issues become more apparent once you start copying, ie master is ok, copy is instantly recognizable as copy.
just like recompressing digital video. but digital video has big advantage, you just copy the digital file, and then it's 1:1 to "original". infact it is original. offcourse that advantage gets lost when vhs-decode boys upload raw files...hehe.....250gb.....

Side comments, not relevants.

so do we need tbc or not?

It depends on the source.

this is peculiar thought! why do you think adcs in those 90s machines were better than digitizers on (cheap) capture cards some 10 years later? for example bt8x8 and saa713x.

Beause I am an analog designer and know the chips inside the old cards, the new cards and eventually the VCR. Not assessing anything in general, but different hardware provides different performances. And in the VCR you are closer to the signal, rather than intercepting it outside after some inevitable loss. But it was just an idea, nothing engineered.

[dellsam34]

We don't know at what chroma sub those late 90's ADCs sample at but at the time chip technology was advanced enough to store a lossless digital scan line, Perhaps a specially designed chroma pattern recorded into a VCR and played back can decypher the chroma subsampling of a line TBC if one knows how to design the graphic patterns.

[dellsam34]

If anybody is interested, I have two tapes of the 1985 Live Aid Concert recorded in EP mode. I'd be willing to ship them out if need be so they can be used for testing purposes. Already digitized them myself so I have no need for them.

I took a short capture only from the tape, I will not be doing a full capture, Not only it's EP mono linear but the average luma level is too low and the video is too noisy, Was it an over the air broadcast?

[The 14th Doctor]

If anybody is interested, I have two tapes of the 1985 Live Aid Concert recorded in EP mode. I'd be willing to ship them out if need be so they can be used for testing purposes. Already digitized them myself so I have no need for them.

I took a short capture only from the tape, I will not be doing a full capture, Not only it's EP mono linear but the average luma level is too low and the video is too noisy, Was it an over the air broadcast?

Ah, thanks for the sample. I'm not sure if it was an over the air broadcast as I wasn't the original owner of the tape, sorry.

Here is my sample, tried to match up the timing to match your clip, might be off a few milliseconds though. Used a JVC SR-MV45U, Cypress CDM 640 and Pinnacle 510 (brightness was adjusted by 10, contrast by -18 to avoid crushed blacks and clips whites during capture) The Cypress' proc amp values were left at default besides saturation, was decreased by three stages because by default the Cypress oversaturates the image.

I forget if the VCR was set to NORM or EDIT during this portion of the capture, I think it was set to NORM for a good chunk of the beginning before I switched to using EDIT

[dellsam34]

I see excessive blanking space on the left and right of the frame compared to my capture, Was it the Cypress or the Pinnacle 510 adding that?

[lordsmurf]

.s-vhs has the edge by separating luma and chroma, [B]but only if the recording had is separate too,

That question makes no sense, because VHS is inherently separate chroma and luma. There is no such thing as a "composite recording" when it comes to VHS (or S-VHS). Low-end VCRs are what composite (smush together), not tape data.

Even if we play "devil's advocate" here, and you're suggesting an "nth gen" (copy of copy) type tape, made with two cheap VCRs daisy chained to make copies, then it still does not matter. Why? Because you will (almost always, 99%+) still incur loss by ingesting composite, rather than playing as s-video (separated video, Y/C). That's just how the technology works, even vhs-decode. However, given your ITN example, I don't believe you are/were referring to nth gen situations.

I'm unable to reply further, too busy.

[dellsam34]

The only difference between VHS and S-VHS video signals is the luma bandwidth which is slightly higher in S-VHS, hence the S-VHS tape formulation is finer and better video heads, The recording and playback scheme is exactly the same. JVC later used the same dual azimut heads for both VHS and S-VHS machines. Maybe he means that S-VHS machines being inheritly equiped with S-Video socket therefore better playback than regular VHS machines which lack it.

[Sharc]

And there are differences between VHS composite equipment in how they do the "composition"
a) Cheap gear just heterodynes the chroma-under to shift it above the luma
b) Better gear use proper frequency interleaving where the chroma subcarrier is tightly locked to the line frequency for spectral "combing".
Only for case b) a (3D) comb filter can really exploit its benefit for best Y/C separation upon composite playback.

[The 14th Doctor]

I see excessive blanking space on the left and right of the frame compared to my capture, Was it the Cypress or the Pinnacle 510 adding that?

Don't have another capture card to test, but it's the Cypress that at least causes more blanking space on the right, can really only compared clips that use it and don't use it in the chain.

Edit - Just added a with and without comparison, granted the camera used to record this footage includes extra blanking space on the right and top.

[Attachment 86521 - Click to enlarge]

[Attachment 86520 - Click to enlarge]

[Spektre]

A while back, somebody asked me what I think of you.
My response = "I don't."
I have real-world responsibilities/concerns. Things that actually matter. Family, health, etc. My time is valuable,

From an outsider's perspective...

For someone who does not think about him, from the sheer volume of posts and lines within those posts, it sure seems you think about him a LOT.

[dellsam34]

The use of S-VHS machines to playback VHS tapes has nothing to do with the S-VHS format itself, it has to do with the fact that S-VHS machines have S-Video out, Also unrelated to the point benefits is they are equipped with better mechanisms and better image processing such as TBC, DNR ...etc. In fact S-VHS format did nothing to improve chroma even if it is separated during recording and playback, it only improved the bandwidth of luma or horizontal definition if you will, that improvement can be seen even via composite, if in doubt, look at Super Beta, most of S-Beta machines don't have S-Video IN/OUT.

So what S-Video output does is just avoids an extra stage of signal degradation which is composite, The elimination or the bypass of this composite stage is equally beneficial to both formats, S-VHS and VHS despite their original quality differences, It doesn't make them of equal quality but improves upon their different original qualities. So for someone to ignore this fact and say the improvement applies only to S-VHS recordings is clearly has no clue or pretends to have no clue.

[lordsmurf]

A while back, somebody asked me what I think of you.
My response = "I don't."
I have real-world responsibilities/concerns. Things that actually matter. Family, health, etc. My time is valuable,

From an outsider's perspective...

For someone who does not think about him, from the sheer volume of posts and lines within those posts, it sure seems you think about him a LOT.

I often get PMs asking for my input on threads. And then sometimes I give thorough replies. That's all that is.

[The 14th Doctor]

A while back, somebody asked me what I think of you.
My response = "I don't."
I have real-world responsibilities/concerns. Things that actually matter. Family, health, etc. My time is valuable,

From an outsider's perspective...

For someone who does not think about him, from the sheer volume of posts and lines within those posts, it sure seems you think about him a LOT.

In my opinion it's the opposite, especially if you jump into the discord server. Did a quick browse myself and it wasn't pretty. Though even as early as 2022 when that Hackaday article was posted about decode Harry always assumed every critic was LS in disguise, even when another user said one comment from the article could have not been from him due to their speaking (or rather, typing) styles being totally different.

What is this, smurf-cusations?

Also since S-VHS & S-Video was mentioned, in my opinion most of the Decode vs "Conventional" comparisons you find on YouTube are more like Decode vs Composite, completely disregarding proper equipment from the picture ie S-VHS VCR with Line TBC.

Not everyone of us is able to do electronic work and script coding.. and here I thought Avisynth was a pain to figure out even with Hybrid, Decode makes that seem likes like baby's first text document. I myself see this as being kept behind it's niece group of people, but never, or having a very low chance, breaking out to the masses.

If you wanna stick with it, be my guest, you do you. I just get angry when it's being call "the one and only method" it's like cavemen vs robots, old vs new.. where the reality is that this isn't so cut and dry, the new method has drawbacks that the old method does not. And for us who have used 'the old method', this new method doesn't offer any big improvements for us to jump ship to then and there.

Seeing how Harry's main goal is to basically replace us and be the new mayor in charge of the town, that tells me everything I need to know about the guy and how he comes across. Feels like his reality is way different from our reality, from real reality..

[Spektre]

A while back, somebody asked me what I think of you.
My response = "I don't."
I have real-world responsibilities/concerns. Things that actually matter. Family, health, etc. My time is valuable,

From an outsider's perspective...

For someone who does not think about him, from the sheer volume of posts and lines within those posts, it sure seems you think about him a LOT.

In my opinion it's the opposite, especially if you jump into the discord server. Did a quick browse myself and it wasn't pretty. Though even as early as 2022 when that Hackaday article was posted about decode Harry always assumed every critic was LS in disguise, even when another user said one comment from the article could have not been from him due to their speaking (or rather, typing) styles being totally different.

What is this, smurf-cusations?

Also since S-VHS & S-Video was mentioned, in my opinion most of the Decode vs "Conventional" comparisons you find on YouTube are more like Decode vs Composite, completely disregarding proper equipment from the picture ie S-VHS VCR with Line TBC.

Not everyone of us is able to do electronic work and script coding.. and here I thought Avisynth was a pain to figure out even with Hybrid, Decode makes that seem likes like baby's first text document. I myself see this as being kept behind it's niece group of people, but never, or having a very low chance, breaking out to the masses.

If you wanna stick with it, be my guest, you do you. I just get angry when it's being call "the one and only method" it's like cavemen vs robots, old vs new.. where the reality is that this isn't so cut and dry, the new method has drawbacks that the old method does not. And for us who have used 'the old method', this new method doesn't offer any big improvements for us to jump ship to then and there.

Seeing how Harry's main goal is to basically replace us and be the new mayor in charge of the town, that tells me everything I need to know about the guy and how he comes across. Feels like his reality is way different from our reality, from real reality..

I'm just stating HE wasn't making the claim that he didn't think about Lord Smurf at all. Heck, LS is all over the front page of at least one of his sub-reddits. Seems like they both live rent-free in each other's heads.

As for vhs-decode claiming it is the "one and only method"...have you read a Lord Smurf post LOL?

A fear of losing being the "mayor of town" is what I see a lot of here. Coming from a digital signal processing background, I'm quite hopeful of vhs-decode. Had it had a bigger footprint, I may have seen and tried it for this current batch of transfers I'm doing. That being said, I have the tried and true method of a top VCR/TBC/USB600, but it is something I luckily got over a decade ago. If it were in today's $$ I don't think I'd be shelling out the kind of money necessary to go that route. "Not everyone of us is able to" shell out that kind of money.

And that's probably all you want to hear from an outsider.

[The 14th Doctor]

To me anyway it seems like Harry lives rent-free in LS's head, not the other way around.

And yes I have, but there is a difference between using and sticking to an old method that works great when proper gear is sourced, vs gambling with a new method that may be slightly better, the same, or way worse. Even then both methods require a lot out of a person, money for the former (though compromises can be made) and time/electronic knowledge for the latter.

If one wants to use the new method for fun, then go do so, that ain't a problem, the issue is claiming it's the best in the world, and we are all losers for sticking with the method we've been using for years already.

[Spektre]

To me anyway it seems like Harry lives rent-free in LS's head, not the other way around.

And yes I have, but there is a difference between using and sticking to an old method that works great when proper gear is sourced, vs gambling with a new method that may be slightly better, the same, or way worse. Even then both methods require a lot out of a person, money for the former (though compromises can be made) and time/electronic knowledge for the latter.

If one wants to use the new method for fun, then go do so, that ain't a problem, the issue is claiming it's the best in the world, and we are all losers for sticking with the method we've been using for years already.

As opposed to claiming a method is the best in the world and they are losers for just doing it "for fun"?

[Spektre]

Eh, I really don't have a stake in the game and don't enjoy PC vs Mac debates. Mods feel free to delete this and my last post.

[The 14th Doctor]

This feels like a one sided debate that should not exist, let decode be a modern option for now, not a modern solution, a solution that has potential, but as it stands is not feasible for everybody.

Imagine a new person, they are presented two options, conventional and decode, to them the conventional option makes them worried because they can't afford it, and might need to make compromises, of course there are better compromises than others. While the decode option might scare them if they are not at all use to, or comfortable with needing to, take apart of piece of electronic equipment, as well as learn scripting, and what to do the with raw data.

It is not idiot proof, nether is conventional but thanks to knowledge from people on this forum and DigitalFAQ I got a conventional workflow, I know how to capture a tape, I know how to do some avisynth restoration. The only thing I don't know and don't want to deal with is when my equipment needs maintenance, I'd trust that to somebody else.

Apologies if I've made you upset, all this talk about decode from the promoter makes me angry, I don't want people to get the wrong impression of me

[aramkolt]

Just a comment on this above:

"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ-u979_6Cw vhs-decode is clear winner there, sharpness and stability. this was captured from Panasonic NV-SD220"

I think the issue with that one in particular is that the differences weren't that much visually different than the EH58 and it's not super clear how the video came off of the EH58 - like was it a recording to DVD or HDD in MPEG2 format, or was it internally upscaled via HDMI output, or was it composite or S-Video output to a different capture card? I would expect differences to that degree to be more due to S-Video vs composite when it comes down to the finer patterns like grass or the repeating in the shingles of the roof. Decode trades complexity for cost, though that might not be quite the savings depending on whether you already have a relatively powerful computer to pair it with that is often needed for a good experience.

I don' t expect VHS_Decode to be beaten on a vanilla no TBC/composite output only machine, but a better comparison would be S-Video output and a machine with a line TBC at a minimum. Youtube compression also messes with the details, so a better comparison would be something like an 4x magnification on a single area of the screen to look at details.

Where Decode should excel is dropouts, but I haven't seen a lot of comparisons for that.

Another area I'd expect Decode to excel in would be formats that don't have many internal line-TBC or S-Video output options such as most U-Matic or betamax players. I do plan to do some testing on U-Matic and I'll post results once I have them. Older U-Matic tapes do tend to have a lot of dropouts as well.

[lordsmurf]

In my opinion it's the opposite, especially if you jump into the discord server. Did a quick browse myself and it wasn't pretty.
What is this, smurf-cusations?

I've always figured as much. I'm sure it's just a childish cesspool, a 4chan of video capture.

I just get angry when it's being call "the one and only method"

Let's channel that video passion into something more productive.

Seeing how Harry's main goal is to basically replace us and be the new mayor in charge of the town, that tells me everything I need to know

Harry also made a lot of politically charged comments in 2024, using right-wing terms like "sleepy Joe". That told me all I needed to know about him.

As for vhs-decode claiming it is the "one and only method"...have you read a Lord Smurf post LOL?

That's never happened. I've never made such a claim. Video capture is "shades of gray".

A fear of losing being the "mayor of town" is what I see a lot of here.

I don't think you read that correctly. There's no "fear", nor of "losing" anything. Most of us that run these communities, like Baldrick and myself, often consider ourselves the janitors, merely keeping things clean for others. We're not on some power trip, as Harry seems to be.

but it is something I luckily got over a decade ago. If it were in today's $$

This is often stated, but often false economics.

Video gear largely MSRP'd for current 2020-2025 prices. Note that prices really have not changed much in the past 5 years now. Post-GFC (the '08-09 recession), pricing for many items was artificially low. Combine that with temporary "digital transition" and used gear oversupply. There was also a general uncaring of '10s tape transfer, between the '00s transfer heyday, and the current late-memo '20s fear of tape degradation/loss.

We were in a ZIRP environment, sub 2% inflation, for the entirety of the 2010s. That gave a false impression of prices -- especially to younger generations that don't understand those times were NOT normal.

"Today's money" is worth about 2x-3x what it was 10-30 years ago. So the MSRP-matching number now is often half of what it was then. So you are paying about 50% for this gear used, which is average (50-75%) for quality used AV/photo gear. This is normal. AG-1980P was about $2k in 1999 (in 1999 dollars), and is about $1k now/2025 + ~$750 refurb costs (so ~$1750 in 2025 dollars). Many TBCs were about $1k in 2000, and are about $1600-2000 now/2025 + ~$500 refurb costs.

The math all lines up.

You cannot look at the artificially low prices in the 5 years post-GFC, as those all reverted to mean once the oversupply cleared out (largely due to gear failures, poor/no maintenance that ruined extant gear).

For about 20 years, I'd tell people what to get, where to buy it. Heck, I'd often give out eBay links, because it wasn't a reseller/recycler shithole back then. (I had one affiliate link for B&H for the green AVT-8710, but that was it. One of the best TBCs, at one of the best stores.) It wasn't until the late '10s, when I saw all the gear falling into disrepair, that I began to refurb for others. The '20 demand really increased costs, but it also saw a lot more gear failures, so prices spiraled up back to the longer-term mean.

Like any other inflation, prices will not reverse once set.

Even the vhs-decode parts/pieces have started to run up towards $1k in total costs. So much for "cheaper". That ignores the excess data storage also needed, so lots of $$$ for HDD/SSD as well (beyond what is needed for normal workflows). And often "gamer'/higher-spec computers to chug through all the data, unlike normal capture systems (where almost anything from the 2010s can work)

Even then both methods require a lot out of a person, money for the former (though compromises can be made)

Don't give in to the propaganda. It's just not true that either method is cheap. Both can have costs significantly reduced, but at a reduction in quality and/or user experience. It's not a 1:1 comparison. I can easily make a modest normal capture system, that is easy to use, costs less than vhs-decode, and is quite similar in quality (ie, not best, not worst).

If one wants to use the new method for fun, then go do so, that ain't a problem, the issue is claiming it's the best in the world, and we are all losers for sticking with the method we've been using for years already.

^ This!

Eh, I really don't have a stake in the game and don't enjoy PC vs Mac debates.

So you made accusations, and now choose to back away when confronted?

Decode trades complexity for cost, though that might not be quite the savings depending on whether you already have a relatively powerful computer to pair it with that is often needed for a good experience.

Don't forget all the bits and pieces that need to be soldered in to various equipment. Those all have costs, as much as $500 for some pieces.

Another area I'd expect Decode to excel in would be formats that don't have many internal line-TBC or S-Video output options such as most U-Matic or betamax players. I do plan to do some testing on U-Matic and I'll post results once I have them. Older U-Matic tapes do tend to have a lot of dropouts as well.

This is where RF/FM could really shine, but instead they focus on reinventing the VHS wheel (and arguably worse than what we already have). Had the project focuses on non-VHS formats, and without all the immaturity, I'm sure it would have some of the highest accolades. But no, that's not what we got, and may never be.

[harrypm]

I do find it quite funny that I live rent-free in Kevin's head, It's a tax haven after all I wish my local taxman didn't bother me.

(Hippity hoppity r/DigitalFAQ Is my property)

He obviously keeps on trying to put hard work and effort into strawmaning me, and years of my work and the community members work (People who he can't even name, because he sure can't read a commit log on GitHub) but I have to give an old dog credit for trying.

What I don't find funny is the endless misinformation posting, lapping as intelligible with half intellectual sounding responses which just is outright brainrot.

Like the post above which is outright cost of workflow misinformation about FM RF archival hardware costs, and capability scope of decode which supports every major consumer format, most professional formats that gained mass adoption, and anyone that can read the first page of the readme gets that information update for free.

(Your average 5min fresh reader would be more informed then Kevin here, who loves to just expressly take part in a community he not only knows nothing about, yet expressly and arbitrarily criticise things that were addressed years ago, wholesale uninformed people can't have legitimate opinions or any ground to stand on)

Just loves to skip over the fact that if you recommend the same deck for 20 years it has a SEO score indexing effect that perpetually increases, inflation by association, I don't have to spew out massive amounts of correlative math on that really everyone knows the advertising dystopia we live in.

(Being called right wing +5 bating points, excellent character assassination move okay now let me go find my armband, oh wait it's got a hammer and sickle on it, this is kind of awkward)

Just because I use language which is culturally shit post appropriate to someone's native region, and age bracket, doesn't help when they live upto the stereotype and act demented in terms of memorising basic facts about his opposition, It's like calling someone a Nazi It's all fun and games until you realise, well I actually can use chemical weapons and you still don't know difference between a P3 filter and an ABEK2P3 filter so you don't breathe in mould spores and damage your lungs... then again you don't even clean clients tapes despite charging them over a thousand bucks... so I guess there's that factor to take to account.

Anyways I've been enjoying providing the glorious salvation that is FM RF Archival to every museum, transfer house and individuals that can do this bizarre ancient thing called reading.... Why yesterday I got an email from some guy in Canada who reached out to Kevin for advice and realised he nearly got himself scammed into using legacy outdated workflows which wouldn't have preserved key stuff like the VITC timecode.

[The 14th Doctor]

Yeah, you made r/DigitalFAQ because you have such a high level of hatred for a certain blue smurf, I believe making a hate subreddit tells me everything, actually a lot of what you do tells me everything about you.

Go ahead and say that you've been presenting this new option to "every" transfer place on the planet. Last time I checked my local transfer service that has had an online presence since 1996 (though have been in the business since 1977), and have done tape transfers since the early 2000s don't use it.

I'm seriously gonna ask the owner (or the guy operating the tape transfer section) if they have even heard about decode. I wouldn't be surprise if their answers are either "No we haven't" or "While we have heard of it, we don't think it offers any major benefit over the methods we've been using" And they use S-VHS VCRs with Line TBCs, so compared to the likes of LegacyBox and Got Memories, they know their stuff.

You sound like a know-it-all that just dismisses even the people who are older than you, and have had experience in this field, that's what I believe anyway. You're wanting to take over the video capture world over here.

As I've said, you are digging your own grave and just refueling the fact that while you are knowledgeable, you come across as a bit of an ass who just automatically believes we are all as smart and knowledgable as you, not a cranky old guy kind of ass but a young hotshot who thinks he is changing the world. Let decode be a second option, a last resort sort of deal. You do it your way, we do it our way. To think this young chap is crapping on users who are older than him, it ain't fair..

This should not be a fight over who wins or loses, but you make it out to be that way. Decode hasn't won years ago, if it has then we would've all jumped on it in a heartbeat, but we haven't, some of us might take the leap for experimenting reasons, which I'm all for. But don't forget the old method.

We are dealing with outdated tech anyway, what's next, we gonna get a decode method for film strips? Keep it to stuff like U-Matic and Betamax that'll need the helping hand..

You might think Decode is for the average joe, but it ain't. I'm not touching it because I don't wanna deal with the internals of a VCR, or any electronic for that matter because I fear I'd mess up and make it even worse. Leave the non misleading comparisons to be done by users here who wanna take the plunge like Lollo for example.

Maybe it will be the replacement in the next decade, but right now it isn't. It's a neat interesting option that might be better, the same, or worse. That's how I view it, No different than using DV, an option. Might not be the best option, but it is an option, not the be all end all solution.

I'll stop yapping, every time Harry speaks I myself get angry because he comes across like a brat that is crapping on us, it's not healthy.. probably also because I'm in the same age range as him, so his words and how he comes across effects me, but would probably not even leave a dent in somebody who has dealt with these kind of people before.

No wonder some redditors have taken notice on how much he craps on LS, calling it a bad move and a huge messy stain on the decode community as a whole...

[Spektre]

In my opinion it's the opposite, especially if you jump into the discord server. Did a quick browse myself and it wasn't pretty.
What is this, smurf-cusations?

I've always figured as much. I'm sure it's just a childish cesspool, a 4chan of video capture.

Of course, certainly not the eruditeness of the post I am responding to. (chuckle)

Seeing how Harry's main goal is to basically replace us and be the new mayor in charge of the town, that tells me everything I need to know

Harry also made a lot of politically charged comments in 2024, using right-wing terms like "sleepy Joe". That told me all I needed to know about him.

So you equate his archiving claims with his political leanings....interesting.

As for vhs-decode claiming it is the "one and only method"...have you read a Lord Smurf post LOL?

That's never happened. I've never made such a claim. Video capture is "shades of gray".

I've read the boards. You've often stated there is the "right way" and then there is crap. It sounds like there is not much dynamic range in the shades of gray.

A fear of losing being the "mayor of town" is what I see a lot of here.

I don't think you read that correctly. There's no "fear", nor of "losing" anything. Most of us that run these communities, like Baldrick and myself, often consider ourselves the janitors, merely keeping things clean for others. We're not on some power trip, as Harry seems to be.

Yet here you comment on him again. It sure SEEMS like a case of physician heal thyself. As mentioned before, it certainly doesn't SEEM like you don't think of him at all as previously stated.

but it is something I luckily got over a decade ago. If it were in today's $$

This is often stated, but often false economics.

There is nothing "false" about it at all. It is fact. The gear I obtained around 13-15 years ago, even converted to today's money, was all significantly cheaper. If putting together the same gear today it would be much higher in price (inflation adjusted).

"Today's money" is worth about 2x-3x what it was 10-30 years ago.

I purchased the first of the gear in 2012 (A 1980P off ebay for $199). Inflation today has made prices generally 40% higher than in 2012. The lowest priced OPERATIONAL 1980P on ebay as of this writing however is $750. My AVT-8710 was also $199. Today the one and only operating 8710 I see on ebay in the USA is $2250 and it is being sold "as-is". These effects far outstrip inflation and thus exclude more people from finding this an affordable option.

There are real prices.

You cannot look at the artificially low prices in the 5 years post-GFC, as those all reverted to mean once the oversupply cleared out (largely due to gear failures, poor/no maintenance that ruined extant gear).

Why couldn't you? The prices you see now are what they are now. If one cannot afford to get into this workflow now as they could then it is completely a valid concern.

For about 20 years, I'd tell people what to get, where to buy it. Heck, I'd often give out eBay links, because it wasn't a reseller/recycler shithole back then. (I had one affiliate link for B&H for the green AVT-8710, but that was it. One of the best TBCs, at one of the best stores.) It wasn't until the late '10s, when I saw all the gear falling into disrepair, that I began to refurb for others. The '20 demand really increased costs, but it also saw a lot more gear failures, so prices spiraled up back to the longer-term mean.

Like any other inflation, prices will not reverse once set.

This almost makes the point for me. Prices are where they are and are not expected to decrease (again). Therefore, if you are unable to put that kind of investment into this, other options need to be explored.

Even the vhs-decode parts/pieces have started to run up towards $1k in total costs. So much for "cheaper". That ignores the excess data storage also needed, so lots of $$$ for HDD/SSD as well (beyond what is needed for normal workflows). And often "gamer'/higher-spec computers to chug through all the data, unlike normal capture systems (where almost anything from the 2010s can work)

I'd wager you can find a very cheap, new, current or last gen PC system for less than you could source old used parts to build up a system on an unsupported OS like XP. You can buy an awful lot of 20TB hard drives for what you can buy a used TBC for today.

Even then both methods require a lot out of a person, money for the former (though compromises can be made)

Don't give in to the propaganda. It's just not true that either method is cheap. Both can have costs significantly reduced, but at a reduction in quality and/or user experience. It's not a 1:1 comparison. I can easily make a modest normal capture system, that is easy to use, costs less than vhs-decode, and is quite similar in quality (ie, not best, not worst).

So, one can make a vhs-decode system for a similar cost to a VCR/TBC/capture card system that produces similar quality?

If one wants to use the new method for fun, then go do so, that ain't a problem, the issue is claiming it's the best in the world, and we are all losers for sticking with the method we've been using for years already.

^ This!

The "workflow" method you advocate has nothing to prove. It has already proven itself for decades.

Eh, I really don't have a stake in the game and don't enjoy PC vs Mac debates.

So you made accusations, and now choose to back away when confronted?

My "accusation" was that for someone you claim not to think about, you sure seem to think about him a lot. The feud seem to be raging on the other side as well, but for people of our age, we can usually let it roll off our backs.