VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 29 of 29
Thread
  1. What is currently the best option for capturing NTSC images using a PAL VCR?
    If I understand correctly, the output format would be PAL60?

    Or is it better to use a multisystem VCR like Panasonic AG-W1 or Samsung 5000W?

    possible equipment to be used:
    JVC 9700 or DVS1 , Panasonic W1
    9200 Vivo, 9200 AIW
    ADVC - 50
    Panasonic es10
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member DB83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    The ADVC will not work since that only recognises true PAL or true NTSC. PAL60 is neither.

    One option is to use a usb capture device that does indeed support PAL60 such as the Hauppauge usb-live2.


    Of course, a true multi-system vcr is a another option. You will still need a capture device. But I guess that the ones you mention do indeed support true NTSC
    Quote Quote  
  3. Originally Posted by DB83 View Post
    The ADVC will not work since that only recognises true PAL or true NTSC. PAL60 is neither.

    One option is to use a usb capture device that does indeed support PAL60 such as the Hauppauge usb-live2.


    Of course, a true multi-system vcr is a another option. You will still need a capture device. But I guess that the ones you mention do indeed support true NTSC
    yes I didn't mention it, but I also own a Hauppauge usb-live2
    I wonder if there is a big difference in the quality of video captured by PAL VCR > NTSC to the quality of video captured via NTSC VCR like AG-1980 or NTSC JVC VCR
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member DB83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    I have only ever done PAL60 and since the colour sampling is PAL one might indeed argue that PAL is better than NTSC however it is captured.

    Except, that is, for pure DV where NTSC is far inferior to PAL
    Quote Quote  
  5. Capturing Memories dellsam34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Member Since 2005, Re-joined in 2016
    Search PM
    It's debatable to why PAL looks better in DV than NTSC, I personally believe that PAL has a better chroma encoding than NTSC in the analog domain to begin with, In DV, compared to luma, horizontally; NTSC has 1/4 the chroma resolution and PAL has 1/2 the chroma resolution. Vertically however; NTSC has full chroma resolution and PAL has 1/2 the chroma resolution temporally, in other words both fields have the exact same chroma info. After de-interlacing NTSC will have better chroma details where it is needed the most, Vertically. I bet if PAL was ever made in 4:1:1 it would look even much better, but DV bandwidth does not allow it since 4:1:1 encoding make more data.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Captures & Restoration lollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Italy
    Search Comp PM
    What you say is (almost) correct, but the vertical chroma PAL resolution reduced in not an issue, you have already been answered here: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/356262-Canopus-ADVC-100-vs-ADVC-110-vs-ADVC-300?p=...=1#post2625520

    Back to the original question, the capture of a NTSC tape played on a NTSC VCR and using NTSC-capable capture card is better than the capture of a NTSC tape played on a MultiStandard VCR producing a PAL60 output and using a PAL60-capable capture card. Unfortunately I do not have (anymore) samples to show, but I experimented it in the past. The reason is that you are introcusing a lossy and generally not accurate conversion on the fly and that the PAL60-capable capture card are not high-end for this purpose.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member DB83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    Ok. But surely a multi-standard VCR does not output PAL60 but pure NTSC.

    Of course most basic PAL VCRs allow for NTSC playback and this is where PAL60 kicks in.


    Maybe I am not so critical (and not having seen a pure NTSC recording) and have always been content with my PAL60 captures.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Capturing Memories dellsam34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Member Since 2005, Re-joined in 2016
    Search PM
    Again, it becomes an issue after de-interlacing, In the analog domain where fields are blended in our brain "looks" fine, The answer you're referring to is based on wrong facts, The choice of 4:1:1 and 4:2:0 is not based on what the guy claimed, it has to do with keeping the bandwidth of DV below a certain level so the same DV tape can be used for both PAL and NTSC. PAL was always superior to NTSC not just luma resolution but chroma encoding is robust too.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Captures & Restoration lollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Italy
    Search Comp PM
    It was just an extrapolation, not subscribing the whole contest.

    PAL was always superior to NTSC not just luma resolution but chroma encoding is robust too.
    We all agree on that
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2022
    Location
    Bavaria
    Search PM
    Maybe this:

    https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/396108-capturing-ntsc-tapes-from-pal-60-vcr

    You should search for postings from "oln" here on videohelp or "hodgey" on digitalfaq if this is a option
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by lollo View Post
    It was just an extrapolation, not subscribing the whole contest.

    PAL was always superior to NTSC not just luma resolution but chroma encoding is robust too.
    We all agree on that
    No, we don't.
    Coming from 30/60 Hz and then seeing 25/50 Hz, I find the drop in framerate to be noticeably, objectionably bothersome.

    Just depends on what you're used (and sensitized) to.


    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  12. Captures & Restoration lollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Italy
    Search Comp PM
    dellsam34 refers to luma and chroma, not frame rate
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Fair enough.


    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  14. Capturing Memories dellsam34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Member Since 2005, Re-joined in 2016
    Search PM
    It's kind of a personal opinion, I don't get 24 fps either, but it is the most widely used framerate in digital cinema, sure it was a film based framerate and made sense then to cut down on film cost but I don't get why it is preferred in the modern world, Honestly I don't see 25 fps is a limitation in PAL, If I have to choose between more resolution or more frames, I choose more resolution.
    This is a VHS PAL.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Captures & Restoration lollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Italy
    Search Comp PM
    If I have to choose between more resolution or more frames, I choose more resolution.
    Me too, in general, but where there is fast motion second is better.

    I apologize with the OP, we are going off topic discussing the basic of video characteristics

    The suggestion/option from Bogilein, to use an additional device in your chain, is also (as always) appropriate!
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    I certainly concede the rez issue, that's pretty clear. And chroma is usually better too (though a little more hassle when setting up an live editing system, since you need to fully sync 4 fields instead of 2). Lots of that improvement comes from: 1) PAL being a later tech that was able to learn from the mistakes/inefficiencies of NTSC, and 2) PAL not having to maintain full backwards compatibility with monochrome imaging while NTSC decided they did have to.

    Rez certainly is important, probably more important to most people. Since most users are less sensitive to chroma rez, I feel the 4:1:1 vs 4:2:0 is really a non-issue (as long as there isn't a straight cross-conversion, which there often is)

    Don't get me wrong, I do notice 24Hz but because in the theatre it is triple-flashed (to 72Hz), that alleviates some of the issues, and 2:3 pulldown is something I know we in NTSC-lands have been desensitized to.

    BTW,
    I noticed the "stiltedness" of that PAL clip, and that's just a talking head. It would probably bother me even more if it was an action/sports clip. Granted, that was seen on a monitor that wasn't optimized for 50Hz stuff.


    Sorry to sidetrack from the main topic of the thread...


    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  17. Thank you gentlemen for the extensive discussion, there is always something new to learn, in the meantime I have read the post

    https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/396108-capturing-ntsc-tapes-from-pal-60-vcr

    and decided to buy a Pionnier 440H or 545HX, because I have these options locally.
    However, I am still wondering what will be the additional benefits if the final format is NTSC in comparison to PAL60

    NTSC > JVC PAL VCR > PAL60
    NTSC > JVC PAL VCR > PAL60 > PIONEER > NTSC
    Last edited by ghost2k8; 11th Jan 2024 at 03:01.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member DB83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    ^^ I notice a familiar name in that thread

    I stand by my remarks there. Unless you can get the Pioneer cheap (and since S/H equipment is always a lottery) I still wonder if you gain that much.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Originally Posted by DB83 View Post
    ^^ I notice a familiar name in that thread

    I stand by my remarks there. Unless you can get the Pioneer cheap (and since S/H equipment is always a lottery) I still wonder if you gain that much.
    locally I can get it for 20 (440H) so i will try
    Quote Quote  
  20. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    I feel the 4:1:1 vs 4:2:0 is really a non-issue (as long as there isn't a straight cross-conversion, which there often is)
    This has always been the case. The "on paper" math works out, but the "in practice" devices were all crap, especially mass-produced Canopus ADVC boxes. There is very visible loss in detail and color, outputs dull mushy videos (with added DV blocking). The NTSC add tint shifts, almost like bad analog era PAL<>NTSC conversion.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Originally Posted by ghost2k8 View Post
    However, I am still wondering what will be the additional benefits if the final format is NTSC in comparison to PAL60
    NTSC 4.43 Mhz (Pal60 hertz) = 60 fields/s Versus NTSC 3.58 Mhz = 59.94 fields/s
    Result: video/audio desynchro (slight but still there) (unless it's a really high end vcr that could compensate for the drift on the audio side of things)
    Last edited by themaster1; 13th Jan 2024 at 04:09.
    *** DIGITIZING VHS / ANALOG VIDEOS SINCE 2001**** GEAR: JVC HR-S7700MS, TOSHIBA V733EF AND MORE
    Quote Quote  
  22. Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    I feel the 4:1:1 vs 4:2:0 is really a non-issue (as long as there isn't a straight cross-conversion, which there often is)
    This has always been the case. The "on paper" math works out, but the "in practice" devices were all crap, especially mass-produced Canopus ADVC boxes. There is very visible loss in detail and color, outputs dull mushy videos (with added DV blocking). The NTSC add tint shifts, almost like bad analog era PAL<>NTSC conversion.
    I have yet to do my full testing, but is there a certain type of video or pattern that brings out the flaws with the ADVC-110 that I can try so it can be part of my eventual grand capture card comparison video? I have a variety of test pattern generators to choose from, or could make tapes of patterns or other HD content downscaled to SD for the purposes of such a test.
    Quote Quote  
  23. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2022
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    Coming from 30/60 Hz and then seeing 25/50 Hz, I find the drop in framerate to be noticeably, objectionably bothersome.
    Unlike the US, Europe started to move to widescreen progscan in the late 1980s with satellite and PALPlus. 100 Hz progscan widescreen TV sets were quite common in the 1990s Europe.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Yes, and..?


    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  25. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2022
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    Yes, and..?
    Not bothersome at 100 Hz.

    In fact, I've never been bothered with 50 Hz interlace either, and I hate 2:3 judder on 60 Hz TVs. But as you said, it is personal preference.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    That's like the film triple flashing (except there in PAL it is double/quadruple), it helps alleviate some of the issues, but the base framerate of the contents is still the same (25/50 fps), and still is to this day, and as I said, is noticeable to me and many other NTSC raised folk. Unless you are saying those do motion interpolation, but even now that technology hasn't been perfected.


    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  27. Member DB83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    I guess I have been reading these 'arguements' for years now.

    Those on the left side of 'the pond' (Atlantic) notice the difference between NTSC and PAL timings whereas those on the right are not so bothered.


    And given that the OP is of the latter should that be of any impact ?
    Quote Quote  
  28. Originally Posted by themaster1 View Post
    Originally Posted by ghost2k8 View Post
    However, I am still wondering what will be the additional benefits if the final format is NTSC in comparison to PAL60
    NTSC 4.43 Mhz (Pal60 hertz) = 60 fields/s Versus NTSC 3.58 Mhz = 59.94 fields/s
    Result: video/audio desynchro (slight but still there) (unless it's a really high end vcr that could compensate for the drift on the audio side of things)
    No, NTSC 4.43 and PAL60 (Aka "NTSC on PAL TV") is going to be playing at the standard NTSC field rate just like standard NTSC, it's only the chroma encoding that's different.

    How it works is that the VCR upconverts the color signal to the PAL frequency instead of the NTSC one (which if outputs without further alteration it's own gives NTSC 4.43). Then to get the "PAL60/NTSC on PAL TV" format there is some does some further conversion to make it decodable on a PAL decoder so it shows in color on a newer PAL CRT that can lock to a 59.94 fields/s signal. This did at least in early implementations m to dropping chroma on every other line to simplify things, though it's possible this is different on later implementations and stuff with digital encoders like dvd players or the TBC chips on the JVC SVHS vcrs but it's hard to know. (Hence why if you have the option between NTSC 4.43 and PAL60 use NTSC 4.43 as it's really just standard ntsc but with the color at a different frequency so it doesn't involve any further quality loss.)

    The use of the pioneer/sony dvd-recorder is more to avoid frame drops or as a TBC/stabilizer if you aren't using a VCR with that built in though (say if you want NTSC 4.43 output or a multi-system one, not sure if there are any SVHS with the former and there is like only like one or two multi-system extremely rare SVHS JVCs with TBC). (Not all the PAL VCRs with TBC have it active in NTSC mode either, the earlier Panasonics do not, not sure about late model ones.)
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!