I plan to transfer my old Video8 videos from camcorder to PC. The camcorder has only 2 cinch for output(A/V). The video is composition. For better result i could read, it is better to use comb filter to separate luma and color. My capture card is Dazzle dv.now AV basic. https://www.cnet.com/products/dazzle-dv-now-av-video-capture-adapter-firewire/ I do not have any TV. I plan to watch my videos only on PC. When I search a comb filter on google, there are only results about comb filters in TV. Nothing about a "box" which i could put between camcorder output and capture card in pc.
As well, i would like to buy a TBC box for some "waves" in some videos.
I plan transfer only my own videos. A have aprox.50hours. So it is not cost-effective to give the videos to specialist company.
Please, could you recommend to me some solution?
Thank you very much.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 26 of 26
It's probably a lot cheaper to get a Hi8 camcorder with line TBC and S-Video out so you can avoid having a comb filter box, that's all what you need for this format, Sometimes you need an external frame TBC but I never had with my Sony TRV66.
You have Hi8 camcorder, where signal is recorded separately(Luma and chroma). As well, there is built-in TBC and it is recorded on tape.
I have Video8 TR617E. There is no TBC nor S-Video. So i thought it is possible to get some more from special "box".
I am not sure about heads in old Hi8 camcorders.
As I said good quality comb filters are expensive, more expensive than a Hi8 camcorder. You can always get a cheap one that doesn't work as it suppose too or put a DVD recorder inline and capture from its s-video out like Panasonic ES10 or ES15 but those can be expensive depends on where you live. You also need a Y splitter to convert mono audio to stereo RCA.
Thank you. I can buy camcorder TR918E(used) for aprox.100USD, or Panasonic ES15 for 50USD(used). What is better choice(if I would not watch the price)?
TBC- I looked into menu in my camcorder TR617E(Player mode). There is possible switch ON/OFF the TBC. Do you think, does this TBC same proper work like canopus ADVC-300/110? In the menu, there is switch mode DNR too.
TR918E is a better choice, It gets the signal from the tape as Y/C and sends it to the capture card that way, no conversion to composite and back to Y/C again.
Does it go differently?
I thought that the signal from Video8 goes out as composite from yellow cinch to the composite input(Scart) on the Panasonic. There is conversion to the Y/C. And this Y/C goes to the my capture card(On the card there is S-Video connectors IN/OUT).
Does it go differently?
All analog tape formats (8mm/Hi8/VHS/S-VHS/VHS-C/Beta/SuperBeta and many more) record the signal on tape in a Y/C form. Your low end camcorder taking the Y/C signal combing it into one composite signal called CVBS and outputting it via the yellow RCA plug, If you use a Hi8/D8 camcorder with S-Video out there is no composite signal involved, plus the mono audio is output into 2 red and white RCA connectors so no splitter is needed.
ok, thank you very much for your explanation and for your help. I did not know, the signal is recorded on Video8 in Y/C form too. Thank you again
Yes, the luminance signal and the chrominance signal are separated at certain sections of the recording & playback chain and each have their own carrier frequency.
BUT, both signals are recorded at the same time, using the same record head. And UNLIKE true component recording processes, all the formats you mentioned utilze a "Color Under" form, where the carrier frequency of the chrominance is folded down into the range of the luminance signal. Thus, they OVERLAP.
Once they overlap, there is NO way to completely keep them isolated, and no way to avoid interference issues. Some ways are better than others: 3D comb filtering is one of the best. But in many respects, they are now intermixed, and you just can't "un-mix" the signals, without some loss or artifacts.
Too bad the idea of deep layer azimuth-change recording (the kind used in VHS Hi-Fi) wasn't available when the format was introduced, as they could have maintained the segregation of the Y/C channels completely, without expanding the bandwidth, had they used that method.
I don't want newbies to get the wrong idea about the capabilities of these legacy consumer formats.
Do you think the OP needs that details? I just put it in layman words so he can understand what I'm talking about, The purpose is not to show off the knowledge, just to help him understand the differences between hardware so he can make a wise choice. Despite the limited capabilities of the format using a player with a Y/C output is lot better than combining the signal and capturing it from composite.
Last edited by dellsam34; 1st Feb 2021 at 12:21.
I think it is better to explain to the layman that UNLESS their deck has a clear design to maintain such separation (incl. 3D comb filtering), it is very likely that there would be NO difference between composite and S-Video, or possibly even a degradation when using S-video (because of additional intervening electronics).
Cornucopia is no newbie.
And I think you're both arguing the same thing from different approaches.
Y/C depends heavily on the internal components of the camera/deck/whatever. The Y/C is recorded separate, but not necessarily read separately (ie, "composited" together into a single signal). That's certainly the case on a cheap crappy camera.
I use VCRs, now fix them, more than study how they work (and thus often forget some thing).
What matters is this:
- good gear (actual good, not the uneducated laymen idea of "good" that's based on nothing)
- s-video is usually better than composite, except when it's not (and that happens); component and HDMI is not proper
In my repair journey I've looked at countless service manuals never seen once a manufacturer who designed a tape player circuit that processes the head RF signal, converts it to composite and then converts again to S-Video, So I don't know where this idea is coming from but I'm sure is not coming from an engineer designer who worked for JVC, Sony or Panasonic. But since I like to learn I want to hear from the VHSdecode team (OLN and Zcooger) about what hardware design they are working on and how it works.
One more question. Is big different, if I will use camcorder Hi8 or Digital8 for capturing analog video? Does the Digital8 take the Y/C signal from tape and send it directly to capture card as it does the Hi8?
First of all, don't get so hung up on the comb filter. As Cornucopia (who know his stuff better than anyone) says, it helps, but is not going to completely unmix the chroma. Also, while the artifacts resulting from the mixing of the red end of the chroma with the luma signal (which is what the comb filter attempts to fix) are quite real, they are pretty minor compared to all the other artifacts you get with the 8mm format.
I strongly recommend using the Digital8 for your capture. While others may disagree, I would simply use the 1394 output from that digital camcorder. This completely avoids all the questions being asked here because there is nothing to capture because the Digital8 camcorder encodes the video for you and what you get via the 1394 connection is just a transfer of those already digitized bits.
This is how I've been doing all of my 8mm and Hi8 transfers for the past few years, and the result comes out great.
Yes, the DV format does have its own set of issues, but once again, the artifacts from that are minor compared to the underlying issues with consumer video. Also, the model quoted by the OP is European, so if the tapes are PAL, the limited colorspace of NTSC video is not an issue and, as a result, DV is actually a pretty decent format.
If the OP has any questions, I advise him to capture the same video using the 1394 ouptut and compare that to what he gets with a capture card.
Last edited by johnmeyer; 3rd Feb 2021 at 16:49. Reason: typo
I have transferred 8mm, Hi8, and Digital8 and have been 100% satisfied with this unit.
I did test. Subjectively, what picture is for you better?
The title of the image is the format in which the video is made. These looks same, but there are some differences visible.
Frame still does not show the video quality, you need to post some video samples. PNG is not a good format for pictures and resolution of the frame is way off.
That said, for standard VHS and 8mm, the overlap between the luma bandwidth of those formats and upconverted chroma signal is quite small, so there may not be a huge difference between S-Video and composite either if using something with quality Y/C separation. You can see an example schematic of a JVC SVHS here.
I should note that for DVD-recorder/VHS combo decks, dvd-recorder/digital side typically just uses the composite output from the VHS part, so on those of them that has S-VIdeo out you do not get raw Y/C output from VHS. (It also often goes through the internal digitizer before going to the output which can be good or bad). Same with the VHS side of the Sony VHS/Hi8 combo decks I've seen schematics for (tho in that case it's just an analog comb filter since it doesn't have digital stuff).
In addition to demodulating the luma signal, there is usually an internal comb filter on the chroma signal that mixes in a bit of the same input signal delayed by 1 line (inverted) to reduce crosstalk. The luma signal goes through Y noise reduction, which also uses mixing with part of a 1 line-delayed signal in some way to reduce noise but I don't know the exact process. Higher end vcrs may have additional noise filtering afterwards. 8mm may have some more stuff going on but I haven't looked into the decoding process for that much.
Something I have noted with SVHS decks, is that they seem to all feature extra chroma noise reduction which normal VHS decks often does not have, it's possible that for composite from a norma vhs deck the intention is to rely a bit on the Y/C separation on the receiving end to help reduce crosstalk.
Something to note about Y/C filtering of composite is that video ICs may fall back to simple filtering if the input is unstable, something you can see noted in datasheets for video ICs. It's especially noticeable with many capture cards. Even with devices that have 3D comb filtering like many DVD-recorders you often get chroma dots in areas with strong colors, which you don't get on S-Video output from the same VCR, tho a lot less than with a capture card alone.
"But but .. it has s-video!" < No it doesn't!
Internal processing matters.
Even with devices that have 3D comb filtering like many DVD-recorders you often get chroma dots in areas with strong colors, which you don't get on S-Video output from the same VCR, tho a lot less than with a capture card alone.
Play the tape. Dots.
Play it again. No dots.
Welcome to consumer video. Having fun yet?
Even if this project ultimately fails (which I think will be the case), the info being learned/shared from it will have value in other areas.
1- RF interference + composite interference
2- RF interference followed by a better Y-C separation
I suggested option number 2 to the OP and was told I'm wrong.