Tape to Digital services

[_robert]

Hello Guys,

I'm starting this topic for anyone looking to transfer their videos without having to invest an excessive amount of money to do it themselves.

Since I am familiar with all bits and bobs pertaining to old video technologies and analogue signals, etc., it is obvious to me that appropriate hardware is required, which means costly equipment. Spending such amount of money to transfer a few tapes alone, however, is not logical. In this instance, using a professional or semi-professional service makes sense. Unfortunately, it can be difficult to distinguish between the quality services and the many random ones that are advertised on the Internet. By saying quality services, I meant, knowledgeable, furnished with appropriate equipment (ideally stduio grade), and at a reasonable cost.

Regarding the UK mainland, any recommendations? That same question may apply to the U.S. or perhaps worldwide.

[themaster1]

Look for Video99uk he's got a youtube channel, does repair + digitisation with pro equipment (tbc, decks etc..). I've never tried his services but i watch his channel.

[_robert]

Look for Video99uk he's got a youtube channel, does repair + digitisation with pro equipment (tbc, decks etc..). I've never tried his services but i watch his channel.

I really like this chap's channel, so thanks for bringing it out. I also went to his webpage to check out the T2D services he provides. It sounds promising. Cheers for the suggestion, themaster1

Another service worth checking out is videotodvdscotland.co.uk. It appears that they make use of some really cool gear, such Panasonic AG-7330, JVC HR-DVS3, and HR-S7700. In addition, Canopus ADVC-3000 is included in the flow that they employ, which may be interesting. Though I'm not sure how it will turn out in the end, they appear to be competent. I discovered that they also do Betacam SP or SX. The support for DNx or Pro-Res formats in their offer is something I like. Very straightforward to use while using NLE.

[lollo]

Video99uk is a reliable source, some friends of mine had a good experience.

He uses a DV approach.

A short description of his workflow in a recent youtube thread https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NuquTDhjGY&t=3s:

@video99couk
I run a video transfer business in the UK. I never use any of these simple USB converter devices, they all produce small video files of limited quality. For most domestic formats I use DV capture equipment, the DV codec looks much better than these compressed files and is much better suited to editing. For miniDV and Digital8, the DV-AVI file format is not only a lossless bit for bit copy of the tape contents, it also retains the original time/date metadata which some software can display. Then for Video8/Hi8, most Digital8 players will output the same video file format from analogue tapes. For other domestic formats, a DVCAM deck or a Canopus AD-VC55 is used to generate it. Typically I additionally generate smaller de-interlaced MPEG4 files as well. For professional formats such as Digital Betacam, SDI video capture equipment can generate huge files for broadcast use.
I appreciate that your DVD recorder gave better results than the USB capture device, but there are issues with that route too. MPEG2 files are not very well suited to editing, and to get the highest bitrate you are limited to about an hour on a single layer DVD.
Another key component, and the reason you saw that wobble, is requiring a Digital Timebase Corrector (TBC as you have in the Hi8 player). Some high end SVHS players have this built in, and I also use external standalone TBCs on all of my video capture systems.

[Alwyn]

His uneducated sledging of USB digitisers shows he's living in the past. If used his DV workflow for a professional service, I'd be howled down as being a cheapskate backyarder con-artist. I'm not against DV-AVI per se, but let's have some consistency here.

[dellsam34]

Not sure why he thinks a USB capture device produces smaller files, Only if used with the proprietary software, Sure you may have to install the proprietary software to get the driver but you don't have to use the software itself.

[lollo]

His uneducated sledging of USB digitisers shows he's living in the past. If used his DV workflow for a professional service, I'd be howled down as being a cheapskate backyarder con-artist. I'm not against DV-AVI per se, but let's have some consistency here.

• A DIY workflow with recommended hardware and software, 4:2:2 interlaced lossless and an appropriate AviSynth restoration provides the best quality, no need to repeat this every time

• In the thread I linked he was replying to a on-the-fly h264 compression with elgato device and software (this should also answer dellsam34 question)

• Concerning your judgment, consider that this is a solution asked by the OP about "transfer their videos without having to invest an excessive amount of money to do it themselves.", and the DV solution is an appropriate solution, so there is consistency

• Nothing personal, but finally, just watch and learn his videos and his level of expertize (compared to yours) before talking of "cheapskate backyarder con-artist"

[dellsam34]

There is no doubt he is one of the most qualified people on the internet when it comes to archiving media, and he has an arsenal of equipment of all sorts that cover almost any media ever created, and he is one of the few who lasted doing it, Back then DV and DVD were the main two formats one could capture to, DV was obviously the better and people liked DV, But in his own words he is capable of producing lossless if that's what the customer wants, DV is just what most people prefer according to him.

[_robert]

I appreciate you sharing your thoughts, Chaps. Concerns over a particular flow are always present, based on the equipment being used and any possible problems with the source recording. Colin seems to maintain a good balance in his services because there is always a trade-off between the effort put in and the end result's quality. In practical terms, the pricing is excellent when you consider his experience. His track record is unquestionable.

https://www.freeindex.co.uk/profile%28video99%29_192111.htm

[aramkolt]

He has a lot of great repair videos and I would assume that he's tried a variety of capture methods before arriving at DV. Since he does PAL work primarily being in the UK, There's more vertical resolution and the end result probably looks much similar to what a professionally encoded DVD might look like (which also uses 4:2:0).

I think I've seen him talk about using SDI capture occasionally, but I could be wrong.

My guess is that he found diminishing returns going beyond DV and DV looks better than most people remember their VHS tapes, especially if the DV is viewed on a CRT (probably not too often) or on a small phone screen (probably the majority of viewing). I will say DV is nice in that there's never audio sync issues.

I haven't seen Video99 post any samples of his captures, but that's not too dissimilar to how we don't see too many capture samples from some prominent users on the forums. Some post a lot or have full channels with their captures, others seem to have almost no posting of their own results. PAL also tends to just look better anyway compared to NTSC due to having more vertical resolution, so his captures probably would look pretty good to those who have been exclusively working with NTSC content.

I have often wondered why there isn't a test DVD that has been put out there with various patterns and short video clips that can be burned and played back on any DVD player and then have capture directly from the DVD player versus recording it to a VHS tape first and then capturing it from the tape. Doing it in this way would give a wide variety of chains to compare and other things like time, cost, and availability of hardware could be factored in to what sort of result someone who is just starting should be expecting to get from their chain if they copied one of the chains that was tested in this way.

[dellsam34]

Test patterns on any compressed format are not ideal for testing cards that are used for lossless capture, MPEG-2 especially, has compression problems of its own therefore it cannot be trusted for testing lossless workflows.

[Alwyn]

I would assume that he's tried a variety of capture methods before arriving at DV.

Of course; it's the easiest. What's simpler than popping an 8mm tape into a D8 camcorder and recording the output? Low disk space compared to lossless, no USB digitiser worries and most of his clients couldn't tell the difference/couldn't care less. I'm not criticising him, just bemused by the warmth that he is held here by people who would have an apoplexy if someone like me suggested such a process for a commercial operation.

Nothing personal, but finally, just watch and learn his videos and his level of expertize (compared to yours) before talking of "cheapskate backyarder con-artist"

I'm not a mechanic, I don't fix things, I capture and process video. If you find a video of his on processing video, point it to me, I can't find one. And that "cheapskate" comment was for me.

[lollo]

I'm not a mechanic, I don't fix things, I capture and process video. If you find a video of his on processing video, point it to me

No need; read again first sentence in post #4, although no “processing” was involved

[_robert]

I digitised a tape using Colin's (Video99uk) service.

Service
The degree of professionalism and customer care was outstanding in my opinion. Colin is a really good communicator and offers a wealth of information covering all aspects. It's really great that he provides cloud storage for handling digitised content - much better than posting flash drives and other such devices.

Quality
Colin has digitised a VHS (TDK EHG tape) preview copy of a master tape that was originally S-VHS but was lost. In addition to being extremely difficult to consume, the preview copy is of extremely low quality. I was pleasantly surprised by the digitised content since VCR decks, when combined with CRT monitors, have a fairly wide tolerance for analogue issues and can manage low res at a level that makes the visual experience acceptable.

In my opinion, the digital version contains all of the image information needed to enable further NLE processing with minimal pre-work. Put otherwise, the details I see on my studio 32" monitors are accurate. I didn't anticipate such good results. Once more, the source quality is quite bad - it flickers, blurs, etc.

I could right away apply the material to the colour grading process for deflickering, mapping, noise cleaning, and other uses, which saved a lot of time.

In conclusion, Video99uk service is excellent, quick, and very attainable. Highly recommended.

[Alwyn]

What video format did he give you?

[lollo]

I could right away apply the material to the colour grading process for deflickering, mapping, noise cleaning, and other uses, which saved a lot of time.

Do not over-process the material, if starting point is not that high quality you can introduce ugly artifacts and produce a bad final result.

In conclusion, Video99uk service is excellent, quick, and very attainable. Highly recommended.

[_robert]

What video format did he give you?

Format : AVI
Format/Info : Audio Video Interleave
Commercial name : DVCAM
Format profile : OpenDML
Format settings : BitmapInfoHeader / WaveFormatEx
File size : 22.4 GiB
Duration : 1 h 45 min
Overall bit rate mode : Constant
Overall bit rate : 30.3 Mb/s
Frame rate : 25.000 FPS

Video
ID : 0
Format : DV
Commercial name : DVCAM
Codec ID : dvsd
Codec ID/Hint : Sony
Duration : 1 h 45 min
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 24.4 Mb/s
Width : 720 pixels
Height : 576 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 4:3
Frame rate mode : Constant
Frame rate : 25.000 FPS
Standard : PAL
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Interlaced
Scan order : Bottom Field First
Compression mode : Lossy
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 2.357
Stream size : 21.2 GiB (95%)

Audio
ID : 1
Format : PCM
Format settings : Little / Signed
Codec ID : 1
Duration : 1 h 45 min
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 1 536 kb/s
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Sampling rate : 48.0 kHz
Bit depth : 16 bits
Stream size : 1.13 GiB (5%)
Alignment : Aligned on interleaves
Interleave, duration : 480 ms (12.00 video frames)

[_robert]

I could right away apply the material to the colour grading process for deflickering, mapping, noise cleaning, and other uses, which saved a lot of time.

Do not over-process the material, if starting point is not that high quality you can introduce ugly artifacts and produce a bad final result.

Yeah, I did make an extremely subtle correction to meet the contemporary display's dense pixel count.