VideoHelp Forum

Try DVDFab and download streaming video, copy, convert or make Blu-rays,DVDs! Download free trial !
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2
FirstFirst 1 2
Results 31 to 54 of 54
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    Neither powerdirector, nor vdub are screencap softwares. And even if they now have that feature, I wouldn't recommend using them. Go with OBS.

    But, are you really trying to capture your computer screen? Or are you trying to capture the Camcorder's (D8/DV) stream? Not even close to the same thing.

    Scott
    I sure didn't think I was capturing the screen. I don't think The Cyberlink Power Director Software8 that I have on the XP laptop has that feature. PD17 comes with it as a separate program but I haven't tried it. I just go in PD8 under capture, set the parameters and file names and hit capture. The Easycap connects to s-video and RCA plugs for audio to the USB port.
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Yeah, that's NOT screen capture (which captures from your video card's buffer or from your OS's overlay renderer(s)). That's (data) stream capture, usually just called "capture". Takes it from the incoming data stream (either from a pre-compressed Firewire/DV stream, or from an uncompressed YUV stream from an A/D converter card/device). So, you could call it capture, just not screen-capture.

    PD ought to work ok for you...IF you had the settings right AND you were using a good A/D converter/capture card/device. Easycap is NOT what anyone here would call good. And unsurprisingly, there are even worse knock-offs of that.

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by hpcampr View Post
    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    Elgato - relax.
    If it works for him, great. Problem solved for this small project.

    If it doesn't, I'll assume he got it from Amazon, which means free returns - No money wasted. Otherwise, can always sell it used and ink sure someone will find it useful.

    ...

    Old equipment - unfortunately, not covered by Amazon's nice return program for new items, so it's a risk.
    I believe it is returnable. Actually, I hope I'm on the way to a potentially better solution. I won an auction for a PAL Digital 8 Camcorder. On the negative side the guy just said it powered up but didn't say it had been tested. He said it worked before putting it in storage for a long time. I'll get it in a week and keep my fingers crossed until then. Thanks
    I just was reading this post
    https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/396085-TRV120-D8-cam-won-t-play-most-old-8mm-tapes...rs#post2574633
    where you say:
    "Yes look for a camcorder with S-Video out and line TBC feature, Analog tapes are best captured from S-Video not the DV port."
    This statement that DV capture of analog tapes is worse than S-Video (line TBC) caught my eye. How about a comparison of DV vs S-Video (no TBC). I guess that's what I've got with my TRV2200E. I actually won an auction for a Digital8 PAL Sony TRV285E for $54. That's where the fun stopped however. When I received it, it was a TRV280 NTSC. Not sure if they guy sent me that because I lucked out on the bidding or what. I suspect that. He'll take it back but now I wonder if most agree with you when you say DV capture is worse than S-Video or is that comparison based only on having TBC? Thanks
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member dellsam34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Paris Ca, 92345 Mexico
    Search PM
    You are quoting the wrong guy, I wrote that and yes DV AVI doesn't even come close to a lossless AVI 4:2:2 captured from S-Video, If you need samples just look for them they are everywhere, you can even make your own tests if you have the equipment, The bottom line is DV is compressed not lossless and it processes the chroma at 4:1:1 for NTSC vs 4:2:2 in lossless, if that's not enough for you then sure go ahead and search for the comparison samples.
    Quote Quote  
  5. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chroma_subsampling

    The chroma sampling type used by different recording systems cause artifacts to be introduced into any recording.

    4:1:1 for 60hz ntsc dv systems
    4:2:0 for 50hz pal dv systems
    4:2:0 for the device you use to record to mpeg-2.

    Bit rate limits also introduce encoding artifacts, whether mpeg-2 7000~ kbps by your device or the 25mbps of dv.

    Thus, a recording in 4:2:0 at 7000 kbps mpeg-2 may or may not be better than a 4:1:1 recording at 25mbps dv due to both chroma and bitrate limitations.

    You need to test to see.

    ....

    Naturally, if you can record lossless to 4:2:2 or better like 4:4:4, then you'll get better quality than the above.

    ...

    For pal dv, because it's 4:2:0 (pretty much the common standard for consumer level recordings anywhere), then it's similar to the 4:2:0 mpeg-2 recording from your device at 7000~ kbps, but better because the bitrate is 25mbps. (All assuming you can get a good video signal as input from the original tapes.)

    ....

    Yes, you can always do better, but you'll need to decide between convenience, quality, time, money.

    DV isn't hard. Put tape into camcorder with dv output, plug into pc, start capture.

    S-video into tbc into a better capture card (maybe necessary) into lossless codec needs some more setup, testing, tweaking, time.

    But in the end, nobody can argue 4:4:4 lossless is bad - rather, it gets you the best "perfect" recording of whatever you've got as an input source with no encoding losses like mpeg, no chroma artifacts like 4:2:2, 4:2:0, etc.

    (Yes, even 4:2:2 isn't as good as pure 4:4:4.
    http://i.rtings.com/images/chroma-subsampling/subsampling.png
    https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/chroma-subsampling)
    Last edited by babygdav; 23rd Feb 2020 at 22:03.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member dellsam34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Paris Ca, 92345 Mexico
    Search PM
    Beyond 4:2:2 is pretty much just extra large files, Going from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 some chroma artifacts can be noticeable but the difference between 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 is hardly if ever noticeable for low resolution sources, The reason why 4:2:2 is used because most of analog lossless capture software and hardware are optimized for 4:2:2. HD and UHD lossless is better done in 4:4:4 because the huge pixel count add to that the newer HDR and color gamut standards where every bit counts.

    I agree that DV PAL is better than MPEG-2 PAL, MPEG-4 in the highest setting is better than DV 25.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by hpcampr View Post
    Originally Posted by dellsam34 View Post
    The device you have is as bad as the elgato, You should have listened to the senior members here, you could have spent half of that money getting a capture device from the early 2000's that actually works. And don't use screen capture software, use Vdub or similar.
    Is Cyberlink Powerdirector screen capture software? I've tried Vdub several times now and it just crashes. That was when I was trying to capture to Avi. As mentioned in other post I tried that HuffYUV 2.1.1 but it also failed in capturing.
    Figure out why it crashes, don't just jump ship to known-worse software because "it works" (phrase used loosely).

    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    4:1:0 for 60hz ntsc dv systems
    Thus, a recording in 4:2:0 at 7000 kbps mpeg-2 may or may not be better than a 4:1:0 recording at 25mbps dv due to both chroma and bitrate limitations.
    There is no 4:1:0.
    That'd be alternating quartered chroma, and look closed to badly colorized B&W than color video.

    Naturally, if you can record lossless to 4:2:2 or better like 4:4:4,
    You cannot record "lossless" to 4:4:4. Why? Because the source is just under/at 4:2:2. Technically, yes, 4:4:4 would retain the source losslessly. But (sadly) far more often, newbie (or stupid aka stubborn) users would think their video is magically 4:4:4 color. The 4:4:4 is just wasting space, pissing away bits for no reason. At no time do you actually have 4:4:4. You cannot recover 4:4:4 from a 4:2:2 source. End of discussion.

    For pal dv, because it's 4:2:0 (pretty much the common standard for consumer level recordings anywhere), then it's like the 4:2:0 mpeg-2 recording from your device at 7000~ kbps, but better because the bitrate is 25mbps. (All assuming you can get a good video signal as input from the original tapes.)
    Wait, no, incorrect statement as such. Yes, 4:2:0 is the home viewing DVD/BD standard. And DV PAL 4:2:0 is sort-of like DVD/broadcasted/H.264 4:2:0 -- not the same, sort of. You can still screw it up with bad colorspace conversion, being that it's not the same. There's really no direct correlation between DV PAL 25mbps and MPEG 4:2:0 25mbps, as the allocation of bits differs some. You also confuse the MPEG spec with DVD (ie 7mbps). I could just as easily encode to 15mbps 4:2:2 MPEG, and likely beat the quality of DV PAL. Why? The math of the modern MPEG encoder (especially VBR, even more so 2-pass) tends to surpass the 1990s DV codecs, and would retain better color as well.

    Yes, you can always do better, but you'll need to decide between convenience, quality, time, money.
    Yes, but ironically some of the worst methods cost more, have extra steps (thus more time). So you need to do research into video, not believe marketing, not monkey-see-monkey-do a Youtube goober, don't just be a lemming.

    DV isn't hard.
    Most 1990s tech wasn't.

    S-video into tbc into a better capture card (maybe necessary) into lossless codec needs some more setup, testing, tweaking, time.
    Any tweaking needed will be needed with any workflow.

    But in the end, nobody can argue 4:4:4 lossless is bad
    Yes! When the source is 4:2:2 (at best), and the output will be 4:2:2 or 4:2:0, it is bad! Those extra bits will be a bottleneck for both space and processing time.
    Last edited by lordsmurf; 23rd Feb 2020 at 18:03.
    Quote Quote  
  8. "There is no 4:1:0."
    Typo fixed

    "You also confuse the MPEG spec with DVD (ie 7mbps)"
    Mpeg-2 is the encoding standard for dvd video.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD-Video

    My bad.
    DV uses intraframe compression unique to the DV/miniDV/DVCPro format.
    HDV, which I always used, uses the MPEG-2 format.

    Nonetheless, if you have mpeg-2 at 7000kbps and dv at 25mbps, the 3x higher bitrate allows for less compression artifacts in the dv recording (chroma artifacts aside, assuming pal vs pal 4:2:0).
    Last edited by babygdav; 23rd Feb 2020 at 22:05.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    "You also confuse the MPEG spec with DVD (ie 7mbps)"
    Mpeg-2 is the encoding standard for dvd video.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD-Video
    DVD-Video is the spec. DVD-Video uses MPEG, with strict constraints. But MPEG is not DVD-Video, and the spec is quite large, including 4:2:2, HD, etc.

    My bad.
    DV uses intraframe compression unique to the DV/miniDV/DVCPro format.
    HDV, which I always used, uses the MPEG-2 format.
    DV doesn't use GOP, which is another reason that MPEG, even with less bitrate, can far exceed DV in overall visual quality. The only difference is that MPEG isn't as easily edited, though it's not as bad in 2020 as it was in 2000, as the CPU overhead was ugly.

    Nonetheless, if you have mpeg-2 at 7000kbps and dv at 25mbps, the 3x higher bitrate allows for less compression artifacts in the dv recording (chroma artifacts aside, assuming pal vs pal 4:2:0).
    Not really. Because of GOP, the artifacts from 7mbps MPEG could match 25mbps DV. DVD uses 12-18 IPB GOP. In this exact example, 7mbps is a bit thin, unlikely to overcome DV, yet not impossible. But if the MPEG was half of DV, 12.5mbps to 25mbps, you'd actually be harder pressed to make that argument. Up it to 15-20, and the argument is ridiculous, as the extra bitrate is all wasted interframe (on lots of duped pixels), while MPEG can do intraframe. The concept is easy to see by comparing CBR I-only MPEG to VBR IPB MPEG, at the same bitrate. DV is essentially CBR I-frame 25mbps.

    Again, DV is the best video available in the Pentium III era, late 1990s to early 00s.
    Minimum DV spec was usually a Pentium II 350mhz, but III strongly suggested.
    And since you like to link to stuff, I'll add this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_III
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    While I appreciate the effort in the last 7 posts here , as a beginner in video capture, I find it hard to grasp much of it. On the other post on this forum the guy asks about capturing s-vhs to a laptop. Many of the devices mentioned in that post seem not to be for laptops. The very first reply from apparently one of the the most senior contributors here goes right into speaking about what I think is a capture card for a desktop PC. I was criticized for taking bad advice on buying the Elgato. How am I supposed to know who's giving bad advice? He had quite a few posts and sure seemed to know more about this than me. I only have 2 laptops and no desktop PC. One laptop is pretty powerful, with win10 and another XP but with a firewire port. I know a lot more than I did when I started here but came away from that post on s-vhs capture more confused than before. One mentioned The I-o DATA GV-USB2 and Hauppauge USB-Live 2 610. To my untrained eye they look like the videocap devices that I was told were bad. Is it because the I-o DATA GV-USB2 comes from Japan and not China? The Elgato thing looks like them too. It cost $90 so $70 more than the Easycap thing I started with. When that one guy recommended it I assumed it was something much better but people here say it's just as bad as the $20 Easycap. So as I understand it now, some Pinnacle/Dazzle devices were OK but no one can tell what's exactly inside them. By the way, Lordsmurf, I finally got Virtualdub to work using the Huffy compression after fiddling with the settings after I got much help on that from a youtube video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sn_TDa9zY1c/watch?v=sn_TDa9zY1c
    I guess he's going to get criticized for using an Easycap device but he went step by step in a way that helped me finally get Virtualdub to capture. I would just appreciate the experts here to say exactly what device I should consider buying to replace the Elgato. Like a top 3 or something. I'd just like to be able to compare it to what I have already captured. By the way, although Virtualdub now captures there's an error somewhere that causes the bottom 10% of the video to be missing. Attached is the comparison of the video from Cyberlink which captures the whole thing and Virtualdub which cuts a bit off. So far I can't see a difference between the Vdub and Cyberlink captures in terms of video quality. Thanks!
    Image Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	vdub vs cyb sm.jpg
Views:	10
Size:	91.7 KB
ID:	52203  

    Last edited by hpcampr; 1st Mar 2020 at 23:48.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by hpcampr View Post
    as a beginner in video capture, I find it hard to grasp much of it.
    Yes, video can be harder to comprehend. There are many aspects to consider and understand. You must also learn to identify (1) who is a clueless person spouting nonsense, and (2) which companies advertise/market items with broken promises and low quality. This is why it requires patient and reading. And why it requires asking questions, and digesting those responses. You cannot be a rush.

    Many of the devices mentioned in that post seem not to be for laptops.
    No. No capture card is designed "for desktops" or "for laptops".

    What computers have are communication ports: USB, Firewire, AGP, PCI, PCIe, Thunderbolt, etc. Some of those are only on desktops. But even when the comm port exists, the OS and overall system quality still matters. So when asking for capture cards, lots more details are needed on the system for which a card is being requested.

    Building/using a dedicated capture system (or buying/reusing laptop) is usually suggested, because your existing computer probably has too much crap on it (other software running in background, phoning home, with Windows Update being a major offender), which can interrupt the capture process. Offline computers work best for capture, not noisy online system used for everything else.

    but no one can tell what's exactly inside them.
    You'll only know after getting it, and cracking it open. But then you also have to know what to look for.

    I guess he's going to get criticized for using an Easycap device
    Yes.

    Also:
    - For starters, you do not capture to 60p.
    - NTSC is not 30fps, it is 29.97fps. No, you cannot just round up!
    - Do not capture audio from video as 44.1kHz
    - 17 frames is an unforgiveable loss, more than 0.5s (half second) from 30s. This is what happens due to lack of TBC.
    - Doubled framerate Yadif deinterlace? Why? That was entirely pointless.

    but he went step by step in a way that helped me finally get Virtualdub to capture.
    Or you could have used this: Capturing with VirtualDub [Settings Guide]
    And ask questions if needed.

    I would just appreciate the experts here to say exactly what device I should consider buying to replace the Elgato. Like a top 3 or something.
    I thought you were already given the answer? For laptop, for USB, get ATI 600 USB or clones.
    What OS do you have? That matters.

    Attached is the comparison
    Nothing useful is attached. All I see is an inaccurate chart.
    Last edited by lordsmurf; 2nd Mar 2020 at 00:38.
    Quote Quote  
  12. 1. Keep in mind, the hardware capture device is only 1 part of the capture process.
    Simply playing a tape in one machine vs another, even if identical brand and model can give you different results due to the variations in old analog equipment and how they go out of spec.
    Cables, AC interference, head cleanliness, etc.

    In other words, having top capture hardware may still produce subpar results.

    2. Few actual do A/B tests and post results across a range of capture devices.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dehmSV2CxDc
    This one of the rare examples of capture device testing across a range of parameters, including aspect ratio, overscan crop, etc.

    3. Fewer even use an accurate test tape with known recorded values and a vectorscope/waveform monitor to see what's going out of the player.
    People might have the best equipment, but if the player is off, they might think "oh, that capture card is crap because the reds are off" - they have no way to confirm whether the player even outputs pure red correctly or not without a scope.

    ....

    https://www.ospreyvideo.com/index.php/products/usb-capture
    Naturally, what's better?
    One could say broadcast equipment is better built designed, but you'll have ones here who have never bought a video deck with sdi/hdmi output with scope verified signal captured by a sdi input capture device saying oh, they're no good/not as good as choice B.

    Simply getting very good without going through all the testing and such, one expects broadcast equipment to do at least that. Why would a $$$ broadcast device be designed to do poorly?
    Again, you'll have people here having little confidence in such.

    ...

    Now, if you're going to Ensure the best, I'd think:
    Vhs broadcast deck with sdi output to scopes for verification of proper signal output using a test tape. Video8 deck with s-video and tbc like the Sony EV-S3000.
    Anything connected after the player before the capture card gets verified by scope for proper signal transmission.

    Anything out of spec gets fixed first.

    ...

    Capture software - highest quality non-lossy capture for audio and video as you've been shown.

    That's realistically the "best" any home user can do.

    Not a ton of analog usb video devices out there.
    Cheap usb dongles.
    Elgato
    Hdmi capture devices + svideo to hdmi
    Quote Quote  
  13. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    2. Few actual do A/B tests and post results across a range of capture devices.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dehmSV2CxDc
    Useless example for this conversation/thread.

    3. Fewer even use an accurate test tape with known recorded values and a vectorscope/waveform monitor to see what's going out of the player.
    Now, if you're going to Ensure the best, I'd think:
    Vhs broadcast deck with sdi output to scopes for verification of proper signal output using a test tape.
    Anything connected after the player before the capture card gets verified by scope for proper signal transmission.
    Overkill. Even I don't do that.

    Not a ton of analog usb video devices out there.
    There are enough to meet demand. (The best VCRs and TBCs, not so much, getting harder to find.)
    Quote Quote  
  14. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2VYgpE3I1A
    Anyways, if you ever go the digital8 deck to dv route, this provides some info as to one way to clean up the capture.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member dellsam34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Paris Ca, 92345 Mexico
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by babygdav View Post
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2VYgpE3I1A
    Anyways, if you ever go the digital8 deck to dv route, this provides some info as to one way to clean up the capture.
    Your posts are not helping, they add more confusion than they help. Everything done in that linked video is wrong, from capturing to DV to cropping to upscaling... alll unnecessary steps.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    Originally Posted by hpcampr View Post
    as a beginner in video capture, I find it hard to grasp much of it.
    Yes, video can be harder to comprehend. There are many aspects to consider and understand. You must also learn to identify (1) who is a clueless person spouting nonsense, and (2) which companies advertise/market items with broken promises and low quality. This is why it requires patient and reading. And why it requires asking questions, and digesting those responses. You cannot be a rush.

    Many of the devices mentioned in that post seem not to be for laptops.
    No. No capture card is designed "for desktops" or "for laptops".

    What computers have are communication ports: USB, Firewire, AGP, PCI, PCIe, Thunderbolt, etc. Some of those are only on desktops. But even when the comm port exists, the OS and overall system quality still matters. So when asking for capture cards, lots more details are needed on the system for which a card is being requested.

    Building/using a dedicated capture system (or buying/reusing laptop) is usually suggested, because your existing computer probably has too much crap on it (other software running in background, phoning home, with Windows Update being a major offender), which can interrupt the capture process. Offline computers work best for capture, not noisy online system used for everything else.
    I can't afford the $ or time to set up a dedicated system and because I have several hundred tapes can't afford to send them to someone else to do so I'm just trying to do the very best job I can on my own. I know what you mean by the problems Windows Update causes. Somehow, after trying many times to turn it off (or maybe Microsoft did something) updating has been off for 9 months which has been great for me. Just the Anti-Virus has been updating.


    but no one can tell what's exactly inside them.
    You'll only know after getting it, and cracking it open. But then you also have to know what to look for.

    I guess he's going to get criticized for using an Easycap device
    Yes.

    Also:
    - For starters, you do not capture to 60p.
    - NTSC is not 30fps, it is 29.97fps. No, you cannot just round up!
    - Do not capture audio from video as 44.1kHz
    - 17 frames is an unforgiveable loss, more than 0.5s (half second) from 30s. This is what happens due to lack of TBC.
    - Doubled framerate Yadif deinterlace? Why? That was entirely pointless.

    but he went step by step in a way that helped me finally get Virtualdub to capture.
    Or you could have used this: Capturing with VirtualDub [Settings Guide]
    And ask questions if needed.
    There may be much disagreement with his settings but putting it in a video like that was very helpful to me. I went to your explanation of vdub. I'm not good at being able to digest manuals. I'm far better able to make progress in unknown fields with a step by step video. Seeing Vdub steps on video and the programs sub menus helped me get it capturing to AVI for the 1st time. In terms of getting the explanation out to the the general public there aren't as many roadblocks that can break the concentration on Youtube videos. For example,in your explanation I clicked to open a picture but only got the message that I had to register on that other site to even see the picture. I don't mind registering but it stopped me when I was struggling to digest even the 1st 1/4. Personally, I think both would be good. A video and written explanation. Anyway, thanks for laying it out in any case.
    I would just appreciate the experts here to say exactly what device I should consider buying to replace the Elgato. Like a top 3 or something.
    I thought you were already given the answer? For laptop, for USB, get ATI 600 USB or clones.
    I went to Amazon and Ebay searching for ATI 600 USB. I couldn't figure out much from those search results. All kinds of varied things were shown. Could you provide a link just as an example of the specific device or more details?
    What OS do you have? That matters.
    Windows 10 on my main laptop and XP on the older laptop that I just been using for video transfer because of it's firewire port and that it accepted the Easycap. Since I got the Elgato I haven't been using (that) Easycap or XP because Elgato at least had drivers for Win10.
    Attached is the comparison
    Nothing useful is attached. All I see is an inaccurate chart.
    Sorry, what is it that I need to attach to figure out why 1)it's cutting off the bottom 10% of the video 2) why the avi video doesn't look any better than the mpeg2 video? Maybe the response to the video quality will be because of the Elgato but if not I'd appreciate knowing if maybe I have some settings wrong.


    I'm glad to have whatever information I can get to do this as good as possible. It's frustrating to realize I've already spent a lot of my limited time capturing 2/3 of the many Hi8/Video 8 tapes I have but now wonder if I have mediocre captures. Once I got something (the Elgato) that would work on Win 10 I doubled my capturing since I could use the XP /Firewire laptop for the DV's and the Win10 Laptop for 8mm.If I have to do it again, I will. Post processing can be done later on maybe 15% that are special. I had hoped to not rely on these tapes anymore because they're only going to deteriorate more and take up too much space in a very limited area. Thanks for the comments!
    Last edited by hpcampr; 4th Mar 2020 at 15:30.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Mountains of gear vaporeon800's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Search PM
    Your VDub capture is 720x480 at 25fps. It should be 720x576 for your PAL tapes.

    This page shows the "ATI 600 USB"; if you buy one you need to ensure it comes with the analog input adapter cable. https://linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/ATI/AMD_TV_Wonder_HD_600_USB
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    [QUOTE=vaporeon800;2575732]Your VDub capture is 720x480 at 25fps. It should be 720x576 for your PAL tapes.

    This page shows the "ATI 600 USB"; if you buy one you need to ensure it comes with the analog input adapter cable. https://linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/ATI/AMD_TV_Wonder_HD_600_USB[/QUOTE
    Appreciate the information. There must be another setting somewhere in Vdub I'm missing. I found 2 different settings and both said it was already set to 720x576 but the video captured today was again 480 and cut off the bottom bit. Also huge as 52 minutes were 25gb. It helps to see your info on the ATI 600 USB. I see one that has the RCA females and s-video plug with it. I'm assuming that's the analog input adapter cable you speak of? Thanks.
    Image Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Vdub vs Cyberlink captures cyber 576 vdub480.jpg
Views:	7
Size:	89.8 KB
ID:	52220  

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Vdub capture settings video size 720c576.jpg
Views:	5
Size:	38.9 KB
ID:	52221  

    Image Attached Images  
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member dellsam34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Paris Ca, 92345 Mexico
    Search PM
    Vdub should detect your video source resolution automatically, Something is wrong, I never had to set the resolution on my capture cards. Also you should capture in YUY2.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by dellsam34 View Post
    Vdub should detect your video source resolution automatically, Something is wrong, I never had to set the resolution on my capture cards. Also you should capture in YUY2.
    Yes those settings were done automatically when it detected PAL. Those captures are useless with the bottom cut off so I hope I figure out where the mistake is.Thanks for the tip on YUY2.
    Last edited by hpcampr; 5th Mar 2020 at 11:23.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Get yourself a tbc or one of the recommanded dvd recorder (with TBC-like feature) otherwise you will have surprises such as lost frames and audio/video desync.
    good usage:
    1-Use Xp (better for capturing) / Good softwares to try: Vdub, VirtualVCR, Dscaler
    2- Use a dedicated HDD to store the video( DO NOT store on C drive !)
    3-Capture "Flat" preferably (don't tweak the colors, levels too much or noise reduction)
    4- Best video codec to use (lossless): Huffyuv, lagarith (takes less space), UTvideo (lesser space than lagarith) or H265 (way less in lossless mode and best signal/noise codec to date: require a horsepower computer)

    Good luck to you
    Last edited by themaster1; 5th Mar 2020 at 14:01.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by vaporeon800 View Post
    Your VDub capture is 720x480 at 25fps. It should be 720x576 for your PAL tapes.

    This page shows the "ATI 600 USB"; if you buy one you need to ensure it comes with the analog input adapter cable. https://linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/ATI/AMD_TV_Wonder_HD_600_USB
    Is the ATI TV Wonder HD 650 USB Combo Tuner not as good as the 600? Not finding those 600's. Thanks
    Quote Quote  
  23. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Q: Is the ATI TV Wonder HD 650 USB not as good as the 600?
    A: Not even close. Completely different.

    650 is bad. Avoid.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads