ATI AIW 7500 AGP Radeon Capture Big Problem

[theseeker2]

I recently replaced my old ATI TV Wonder USB 600 with an ATI AIW 7500 AGP Radeon for VHS capture and I discovered something that shocked the **** out of me. The AIW 7500, which is widely considered the "better" of the two cards, is doing something bizarre on capture in VirtualDub where the frames are all stretched out and cropped on the left and right, even with cropping turned all the way off (0 all the way around). Settings are identical with both cards, 720x480 HuffyYUV 4:2:2 interleaved AVI, S-Video capture on both (basically the "sanlyn" settings from digitalfaq).

Here's the ATI TV Wonder USB 600 capture:


[Attachment 71031 - Click to enlarge]

And here's the ATI AIW 7500 AGP Radeon capture:


[Attachment 71032 - Click to enlarge]

I know it takes a careful eye, but on the left you can definitely see the edge of the logo on the guitar amp on the USB capture, but it is basically gone on the AGP capture. There are a few pixels on the right missing as well.

What in the blue blazes is going on here? Is this a flaw with the AGP ATI AIW Radeon cards? Are the ATI TV Wonder USB's actually better? I can't believe I'm the first person in the world to notice this, so I'm really hoping I just have something set wrong on my Radeon AGP card, but I can't for the life of me figure it out.

[dellsam34]

I think this is one of the cards that crops to 704x480 and resizes back to 720x480, Do you have access to some other advanced settings? Otherwise just get rid of it and go back to your old card.

[theseeker2]

Wow! News to me. Thanks for tipping me off to that.

Here's a thread that may have an answer: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/248901-ATI-AIW-MMC-9-15-stuck-on-960-resolution. I will try fiddling with some of those settings in the registry and see what happens.

[dellsam34]

While 704 is the standard sampling rate for both NTSC and PAL, chopping of 8 pixels on each side equally is not the right way to do it, Most analog video formats don't have the active video area in the center, there is more blanking area on one side than the other, This is why you want to capture the entire 720 window and crop accordingly later to make sure nothing is cut off.

[Skiller]

What in the blue blazes is going on here?

Nothing unusual at all for capture hardware of that era.

You need to set the capture width in VD to 704.
If needed, you can pad (not resize) to 720. Problem solved.

This is why you want to capture the entire 720 window and crop accordingly later to make sure nothing is cut off.

That would be ideal but it's not possible with this capture hardware. The driver will always return what was 52 µs in the analog video signal and blindly resize that to whatever is requested (thus 704 is the only correct choice here).

[theseeker2]

I'll try capturing at 704x480, but I have a feeling when exporting to mp4 and uploading to YouTube that it's going to stretch the picture.

I really like the picture quality of the captures with the AIW 7500 Radeon AGP vs the ATI TV Wonder USB 600, but this may be a deal breaker

[Skiller]

but I have a feeling when exporting to mp4 and uploading to YouTube that it's going to stretch the picture.

If it does, it is not related to having to capture at 704x480. SAR signaling works the same universally for any video dimension. Just make sure you set the SAR to 10:11 and I'm pretty sure it will be fine on YouTube. Better yet, you get much better quality on YouTube by upscaling to 720p and above.

I really like the picture quality of the captures with the AIW 7500 Radeon AGP vs the ATI TV Wonder USB 600

Really? While I only have those two screenshots to judge, I think the USB 600 is better. At a first glance the 7500 Radeon has less noise, but that's only because it has a much stricter analog low-pass filter which smears edges – and the noise. Even with this blurry VHS source, there is slightly more definition in the USB 600 capture. The noise can be filtered much better in software, such as AviSynth, if so desired.

[theseeker2]

I'd like to see what this card can do at 704x480, but that isn't even an option in the Capture Pin->Output Size in VirtualDub. If I go to Video->Set Custom Format in VirtualDub and choose 704x480 YUY2, then the Capture Pin->Output Size gets automatically set to 320x240 which it says is default (huh?).

And I agree with you that the USB cap is better based on the screenshots I provided. Sad after all the work I put into getting this old XP box working with AGP video.

[theseeker2]

When I try capturing at 352x480, which honestly is good enough for plain ole VHS, I'm still getting very weird behavior in VirtualDub, which sets my output size to 352x288 and does not allow me to choose 352x480.

[theseeker2]

I tried a new capture in MMC 8.9 at 704x480, and it did not cut off anything that I can tell. Skiller, I'd be curious to know what you think of this screenshot vs. the ATI AIW 600 USB screenshot I posted earlier.


[Attachment 71068 - Click to enlarge]

[dellsam34]

That would be ideal but it's not possible with this capture hardware. The driver will always return what was 52 µs in the analog video signal and blindly resize that to whatever is requested (thus 704 is the only correct choice here).

Yes, that's why I suggested to go back to his old card, two or three posts above.

[theseeker2]

One more bit of info to add: when I capture 704x480 in VirtualDub with the ATI AIW Radeon 7500 AGP, it still cuts off the 8 pixels on the left and right, just like the 720x480 capture. When I capture 704x480 in MMC, it doesn't cut off.

I'd be happy to use MMC to do my captures, but I can never seem to get the audio in sync

I also tried AmarecTV with the ATI AIW Radeon 7500 AGP, but it always gave some weird intermediate filter error every time I tried to capture.

[lollo]

Just use your ATI 600 USB as others have suggested, with AmarecTV. You'll have a better picture and synch audio/video.

https://imgsli.com/MTc5MTA1 (look the face of the singer, the drums and so on)

[Alwyn]

I also tried AmarecTV with the ATI AIW Radeon 7500 AGP, but it always gave some weird intermediate filter error every time I tried to capture

I get a similar error if I don't have the correct TV system set (eg PAL_B or NTSC_M). Config>Graph 1>Device Setting> Video Decoder >Video standard.

[theseeker2]

In case it helps anyone else, I figured out the problem with my ATI AIW 7500 AGP Radeon. The cut off pixels on the left and right seems to have been video driver related. I reformatted my system 5 times before I finally hit on the right driver combination for my Windows XP SP2 box.

What worked for me (your mileage may vary) was to install the drivers and MMC 8.8 from the install CD (180_V01084_100) archived here: https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/392-ati-wonder-hacks-2.html. Before I ran the install CD, I installed DirectX 9c and mmc-8-1-0-0-dao-mdac.exe as prerequisites.

Once I did all that, I was able to capture directly at 720x480 in VirtualDub with no cut off pixels. See below for the final result. I'm also now able to capture at 704x480 in VirtualDub with no problem. I'm not sure whether I should capture at 720x480 or 704x480, but I would guess that capturing at 720x480 is upscaling a tiny bit (maybe stretching a little horizontally?). If anyone has any input on that I'd appreciate it!


[Attachment 71088 - Click to enlarge]

[lollo]

If anyone has any input on that I'd appreciate it!

IMO the AIW picture is streched and has wrong proportions (or, unlikely, the opposite):

https://imgsli.com/MTc5MzYz

[Sharc]

Once I did all that, I was able to capture directly at 720x480 in VirtualDub with no cut off pixels. See below for the final result. I'm also now able to capture at 704x480 in VirtualDub with no problem. I'm not sure whether I should capture at 720x480 or 704x480, but I would guess that capturing at 720x480 is upscaling a tiny bit (maybe stretching a little horizontally?). If anyone has any input on that I'd appreciate it!

IMO you should always capture at 720x480 (NTSC) or 720x576 (PAL). The active picture should come out as approx. 704x480 (704x576 for PAL) with narrow black borders left and right (depends on the driver) which you may crop off for final encoding. Encode with SAR 10/11 (for NTSC 4:3).
I think your 720x480 capture is slighltly stretched horizontally (~2% too wide which usually does'n hurt much and shouldn't cause sleepless nights). To be sure one would have to do a "circle test". Probably not worth the pain though.

[theseeker2]

lollo, I see what you mean about the stretching on the AIW.

I took one last capture with the AIW at 704x480 and have attached again the ATI 600 USB for comparison at 720x480 (with the 8 black pixels on either side that was part of the original capture). On this last capture, I also made sure the levels were set at default, as I had adjusted the contrast up a bit on the previous captures to get more of the signal in range on the VirtualDub histogram.

Do you see any stretching here? And what do you think in regards to picture quality on this AIW 704x480 capture vs. the ATI 600 USB 720x480 capture? The picture on the AIW seems to have a little more "life" for lack of a better term, maybe the colors are more vibrant. But it does seem that the ATI 600 is a little sharper and loses less detail, but would love to hear what you all think as I am just starting out with this.

ATI AIW 7500 AGP Radeon at 704x480:

[Attachment 71106 - Click to enlarge]

ATI 600 USB at 720x480

[Attachment 71107 - Click to enlarge]

[lollo]

The new AIW 7500 has a sort of "repeated pattern" on the left and the right. The stretch is much reduced and it should be ok now. But because the repeated pattern I still prefer the 600USB.

https://imgsli.com/MTc5NTUz

It may be related to the AIW drivers, it has been long time since I used a AIW, so I cannot help further.

However, as Sharc said, we are talking about marginal differences.

Concerning the better image, I still think that 600USB is somehow better, but that's me. After a proper deinterlacing, denoise and sharpening in post-processing, the 2 restored captures will be almost impossible to differentiate.

And finally, if you are really worried about best capture, do it with both cards for the material you consider important. I often do that when I cannot choose between edit=on and edit=off mode of my VCR

[lordsmurf]

AIW drivers plays a role here.

600 USB sharpness is false, artificial pumping in default card settings.

Also don't assume the ATI 600 USB was correct here. That's bad science. Look at the circle on the drum. Resize to 4x3, export a screen grab to Photoshop, and then use a tool to draw a perfect circle. Which is perfect? Either, neither?

I'd not at all be shocked if it was neither. People too often forget about camera lens distortion at shooting time. (There's a reason pro lens cost $$$$, and camcorders are plastic toys.)

[Moody_Blues]

This thread is like a time travel 20 years back. The biggest nightmare concerning drivers for ATI AIW. And drivers for AMD Athlon. It drove me always nuts and since then I avoid AMD / ATI. I had another card - it escapes me - but this worked perfectly. In general: I can't stand anymore the lousy video quality of all these solutions if not tied to personal recordings like video of my kids.

[Brad]

Your results with the new driver sound similar to my experience with the X1950's VIVO function.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/360704-2013-my-video-capture-device-comparison-scr...ts#post2429158

Both use the Rage Theater chip. My test captures required a resize to 711x480 to match standard captures.

[Sharc]

Look at the circle on the drum. Resize to 4x3, export a screen grab to Photoshop, and then use a tool to draw a perfect circle. Which is perfect? Either, neither? ..... I'd not at all be shocked if it was neither. )

The circle on the drum does not prove much because the picture is not taken straight perpendicular. The viewing agle distorts the circle.
Anyway, capturing of analog video should follow Rec.601 (13.5MHz luma sampling rate), means the active picture should have a width of of 702 pixels (or 704 in practice for mod16 compliance). Viewing the (702....704)x480 as 4:3 will then give an undistorted picture.

[theseeker2]

I'm not exactly young anymore, and honestly know a lot more about computers of a 90s vintage than I do a brand new PC, so it was a fun challenge rehabbing a friend's old MSI K7N2 motherboard-based tower and getting the AGP AIW Radeon 7500 up-and-running. I got the 7500 NIB on eBay, and then picked up a Turtle Beach Santa Cruz, so I thought I was pretty hot stuff! That is until I started trying to capture VHS...

I thought the Rage Theater chip with a Santa Cruz card for audio was supposed to be the Cadillac configuration, but it's turning out to be more of a Chevy Nova (no go, lol).

Anyway, I'm not sure how much further down this rabbit hole I can go without cutting my losses and going back to the ATI USB 600 as many who are much more experienced than me on here have suggested! But against my better judgment I fired up Photoshop and did the perfect circle test. I honestly can't tell hardly any difference between the two, but maybe you all can.

The two things I don't like about the ATI USB 600 are that for whatever reason I can't get the histogram working in VirtualDub on mine without some weird banding whenever I adjust the levels, and also the audio levels can't be adjusted without resorting to registry hacks and I really don't like that since I'm mainly an audio guy in the first place.

Anyway, here's hopefully the thrilling conclusion to this trip back in time:

ATI USB 600 circle test:

[Attachment 71117 - Click to enlarge]

AIW Radeon 7500 circle test:

[Attachment 71118 - Click to enlarge]

[lollo]

Your results with the new driver sound similar to my experience with the X1950's VIVO function.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/360704-2013-my-video-capture-device-comparison-scr...ts#post2429158

Both use the Rage Theater chip. My test captures required a resize to 711x480 to match standard captures.

Thanks Brad, always "scientific" facts

I thought the Rage Theater chip with a Santa Cruz card for audio

Excellent combination, but having separate audio and video cards may lead to asynch for long captures, because the clocks of the 2 boards cannot be exactely the same (that's why VirtualDub has several options to resynch the audio, not to be used for cards with integrated audio/video).
In addition, as you have experimented, the AIW captured video is not better than other recommended cards.

If you prefere a capture less sharpen with the 600 USB, put its slider for sharpness to 0 (a setting always recommended)

The two things I don't like about the ATI USB 600 are that for whatever reason I can't get the histogram working in VirtualDub on mine without some weird banding whenever I adjust the levels

Not clear to me. Do you have problem in having the Histogram working, or once you adjust the levels there is banding in the captured video?

The USB 600 captures in 16-252, so you should tune the input levels with the procamp to stay inside that range. In alternative to VirtualDub you can use GraphEdit and AviSynth histogram (in real time or on a captured sample) to check the levels.

Any operation on card procamp is at "digital" level, introducing spikes or gaps in the histograms (-> banding). Unavoidable, but somehow fixable in post-processing.

Jagabo's example: hist.avi

[Sharc]

The USB 600 captures in 16-252, so you should tune the input levels with the procamp to stay inside that range.

I would stay safely within the range 16....235, or bring it back to this range in post processing. Y>235 bears the risk of clipping and crushed brights when converted to RGB, unless your TV supports super whites.

[lollo]

I would stay safely within the range 16....235, or bring it back to this range in post processing. Y>235 bears the risk of clipping and crushed brights when converted to RGB, unless your TV supports super whites.

Once more, thare is no need to shink 235-252 levels with procamp in rudimental way at capturing stage. Better to handle the levels adjustement, if needed, in post-processing or at encoding stage.

However, capturing 16...235 is safe for sure!

[theseeker2]

Your results with the new driver sound similar to my experience with the X1950's VIVO function.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/360704-2013-my-video-capture-device-comparison-scr...ts#post2429158

Both use the Rage Theater chip. My test captures required a resize to 711x480 to match standard captures.

Thanks for linking to that thread and putting in the work to analyze all of that data for all of those cards!

If I correctly understand your findings, capturing at 708x480 on my ATI AIW Radeon 7500 AGP will actually very slightly shrink the picture since 711x480 would be the "correct" dimensions. I guess I could capture in VirtualDub at 711x480, but after reading all the gymnastics you had to go through to get the picture back to a standard workable size I don't think I'm up for that

[Sharc]

It looks to me like the manufacturer was just smart enough to escape the 704 vs 720 4:3 discussion so he went halfway to 711

[theseeker2]

I thought the Rage Theater chip with a Santa Cruz card for audio

Excellent combination, but having separate audio and video cards may lead to asynch for long captures, because the clocks of the 2 boards cannot be exactely the same (that's why VirtualDub has several options to resynch the audio, not to be used for cards with integrated audio/video).
In addition, as you have experimented, the AIW captured video is not better than other recommended cards.

If you prefere a capture less sharpen with the 600 USB, put its slider for sharpness to 0 (a setting always recommended)

I do like that sharpness 0 setting, thanks for the reminder on that.

The two things I don't like about the ATI USB 600 are that for whatever reason I can't get the histogram working in VirtualDub on mine without some weird banding whenever I adjust the levels

Not clear to me. Do you have problem in having the Histogram working, or once you adjust the levels there is banding in the captured video?

The USB 600 captures in 16-252, so you should tune the input levels with the procamp to stay inside that range. In alternative to VirtualDub you can use GraphEdit and AviSynth histogram (in real time or on a captured sample) to check the levels.

Any operation on card procamp is at "digital" level, introducing spikes or gaps in the histograms (-> banding). Unavoidable, but somehow fixable in post-processing.

Jagabo's example:
[Attachment 71132 - Click to enlarge]

The histogram works, but there are spikes and gaps whenever I make even a tiny adjustment.

From what I've read, the Diamond VC500 USB captures the full range of 0-255, so I'm thinking of picking up one of those and calling it a day. It was a fun and somewhat expensive adventure with the AIW Radeon 7500, but I think it's time to let it go.