Info: IOData GV-USB2 capturable range

[lollo]

Because my new capture PC hardware, as per the Hauppauge USB-Live 2 (https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/418254-Info-Hauppauge-USB-Live-2-capturable-range) I did an update of the drivers for my IOData GV-USB2 to latest available (thanks a lot to Alwin for providing me the 115 drivers; for some unknown reason I was unable to download the latest IOData drivers myself on their site with my seial number).

The card is now able to capture in the range 1-254 as well!





The new drivers at default procamp values are unbalanced, and the whites are clipped, so the contrast need to be reduced, something that I do not like because I want to reduce the procamp manipulations at minimum (I think Sharc already mentioned that in another thread). I do not remember if it was the same with the old drivers, having lost my data.

default procamp values:


customized procamp values:


For people curios about comparisons, here a frame match for USB-Live 2 and GV-USB2. GV-USB2 is unfortunately cutting 2 pixels on the left side compared to the Live-2 (I wonder why producers are not able to capture all available good data across different cards and different drivers, is not nice for us simple users!).
I did not equalize the pictures for overall look, but the capture quality is very similar (I still have a small preference for the USB-Live 2)
https://imgsli.com/NDEwMjg4

Last note, about the AGC behavior that Sharc found in the USB-Live thread with test signals, I see the same with the GV-USB2 with real recorded material:


Unfortunately, in my experience there are no cards free of (small or large) automatic level correction (see the behavior of an old AIW here https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/7775-ati-aiw-7500-a.html analyzed by master msgohan/brad). A balanced set-up in term of input levels should mitigate AGC effect, but it really depends on recorded material (and then input signals) a lot.

[Alwyn]

The new drivers at default procamp values are unbalanced, and the whites are clipped, so the contrast need to be reduced, something that I do not like because I want to reduce the procamp manipulations at minimum (I think Sharc already mentioned that in another thread)

Sharc says -5 (older drivers). What would be reasonable a reduction for these drivers?