Vhs capture advice.

[Alwyn]

Except for the elevated blacks and the clipped whites.

Yes yes yes OK, I didn't make any attempt to "get the exposure right" during capture. I was only after the wheel shape at that point in the discussion. Had I known every aspect of it was going to be forensically dissected I would have made more of an effort!

[Sharc]

Here you go, Sharc. Different wheel, same thing. Lying on driveway for camera at wheel centre not good for my elbows!

Thanks. Same conclusion. The SAR is 16:15. Apparently the HV20 simply scales the 1440x1080 HD straight to 720x576 SD, ignoring Rec.601 as referenced in the DVCAM specs.

Torture enough. Take care of your elbows


Added:
@Leanoric: So there is a good chance that your former miniDV 720x576 which you encoded using SAR 16:15 are in fact correct
(This will not apply for your 720x576 VHS captures though)

[8mmthebest]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNPvHdwyoWI

this dude seems to have no probs with obs

[lollo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNPvHdwyoWI

this dude seems to have no probs with obs

He must be a "friend" of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpzJhujEs-8 , and many others on YouTube.

Here few (appropriate) comments: https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/news/13312-how-capture-video.html

[8mmthebest]

the point is it worked for him.
or did it not?

[lollo]

You can also eat dog food (lordsmurf dixit), or ruin the quality of the VHS video. Your choice

edit: a recommendation was already given to you: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/408796-Transferring-from-8mm-cam-to-pc#post2682731

[8mmthebest]

im not trying to argue with u,but in his video,did it not work 100 percent?
the quality looked the same as it was on his tape.

[lollo]

the quality looked the same as it was on his tape.

And you assert that based on what?

[Leanoric]

im not trying to argue with u,but in his video,did it not work 100 percent?
the quality looked the same as it was on his tape.

You’ll waste time and money doing it this way. The guys here know what they're talking about and no one is going to advise you to use obs and a cheap hdmi dongle to capture vhs. I took their advice and am getting much better results than I did with obs.

[8mmthebest]

the quality looked the same as it was on his tape.

And you assert that based on what?

watching his video.

[lollo]

watching his video

I hope you’re just trolling and not beeing serious

[8mmthebest]

I don't know what I'm missing.the guy recorded a piece from an old VHS onto his pc,saved as a file,played it back on his pc and it looked fine to me.

[Sharc]

I don't know what I'm missing.

Own experience and knowledge.

[Alwyn]

Horses for courses, Lollo. Not everybody is a perfectionist. If you don't want to help him, don't post. If you have some constructive criticism, then fire away but don't call them a troll just because they can't see your point of view.

[lollo]

I do not accept any lesson from you, stop talking to me that way. I gave to the OP the right indications already.

[dellsam34]

im not trying to argue with u,but in his video,did it not work 100 percent?
the quality looked the same as it was on his tape.

Capturing analog video is not a straight forward task as to what those youtube videos leads you to believe, It depends on a lot of factors, condition of the tapes, condition and the quality of the VCR, the method or workflow used, the quality of the capture hardware, What works for John may not always work for Peter. I get PMs from people asking for help after pruchasing several cheap gadgets and still couldn't get the damn thing to work, This is the reason we warn people through YT comments, There are known to work devices for most people/cases, stick to those to mimize your losses.

[Bwaak]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNPvHdwyoWI

this dude seems to have no probs with obs

Is this the dude you referred to in the thread you've started? Have you missed the part where he is using HDMI-to-USB converter?

I think a $12 no-name Chinese composite-to-USB converter with bundled software will do as good or better job than his double-adapter-to-OBS approach.

[8mmthebest]

the part where he is using HDMI-to-USB converter? what am i missing in that part?

[Bwaak]

the part where he is using HDMI-to-USB converter? what am i missing in that part?

You did not have it and wanted to feed HDMI directly to your computer.

[Sharc]

Sorry, this thread has totally derailed. The same issue about HDMI, UBS, OBS, wiring etc. is discussed in 2 threads now and can be continued in the other thread.

Please stop this discussion here.

[Leanoric]

This clips from an advert, recorded in 1986. It doesnt look interlaced or have the same interlace lines that are on other parts of the tape. Deinterlacing doesnt seem to make much difference. Is this clip actually interlaced? I thought that all video from back then was? Ive seen this on a few adverts now and on a commercial tape.

[jagabo]

All analog SD TV was broadcast interlaced and displayed interlaced (ie, one field at a time) on analog TVs. But that doesn't mean the content was interlaced. That ad was shot on film at 25 fps (or 24 fps and sped up to 25 fps), broadcast interlaced, then captured with same field order as the source. The result is no interlacing (very common for PAL video) in the captured frames (both fields come from the same film frame).

[Leanoric]

Ah ok, its seems to be mainly adverts for some reason that ive seen it on.

[lollo]

It doesnt look interlaced or have the same interlace lines that are on other parts of the tape.

To understand the nature of your video by yourself, you can do the following (from old http://neuron2.net/faq.html):

Make a simple AviSynth script to step through the fields:

AviSource("Advert.avi")
AssumeTFF() # or AssumeBFF()
SeparateFields()

Now serve the script into VirtualDub and step through the fields in a high motion section. We will label a new picture with a new letter below. If you see a repeating field sequence like this:
... a a b b c c ...
then it is progressive video.

If you see this:
... a b c d e f ...
then it is pure interlaced video.

If you see this:
... a a a b b c c c d d ...
Then it is 3:2 pulled-down progressive video.

Make sure that you always apply this test in a scene with continuous movement, e.g., an object moving steadily across the screen. There is no more reliable way. It also allows you to spot field blending very easily. If you see any blended pictures, then you have field blending.

[Leanoric]

Thanks Lollo, I'll give that a try when (if) I manage to understand how to use Avisynth.

[Sharc]

Thanks Lollo, I'll give that a try when (if) I manage to understand how to use Avisynth.

You can basically do the same tests using any of the deinterlacers or bobbers included in VDub2:

[Leanoric]

Yes I tried yadif tff and then bff, and thought that it was strange that they didnt really make a difference. I didn't realise that there was video from back then without interlacing.

Ive noticed it now on a few different adverts, the edges where you would normally see interlace lines, seem to be quite blurry instead.

[jagabo]

SeparateFields()... If you see a repeating field sequence like this:
... a a b b c c ...
then it is progressive video.

Progressive video captured with a different field order than the analog source will give that same repeat pattern. But all frames with motion will look interlaced (comb artifacts). You can restore the original progressive frames via field matching. See the attached sample.

There's another type of telecine pattern you sometimes see in PAL video: 2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 pulldown. This can be used to convert 24p film to 50 fields per second PAL video without changing the running time. You will see the frames alternate between progressive for 12 frames, then interlaced for 13 frames, repeat...

[Bwaak]

For 2:3 pulldown VDub has IVTC filter.

[lollo]

You can basically do the same tests using any of the deinterlacers or bobbers included in VDub2

I prefer the AviSynth approach because you examine the true fields without applying any deinterlacing and then conclusion on processed material. I found (rarely) in the past that it can lead to misinterpretations.

Progressive video captured with a different field order than the analog source will give that same repeat pattern. But all frames with motion will look interlaced (comb artifacts). You can restore the original progressive frames via field matching. See the attached sample.

A constant phase-shift video is easily recognizable and can be fixed with a simple:

DoubleWeave()
SelectOdd()

More complex phase shift requires a field matching solution and are well analyzed in famous Scharif's document: