Dazzle Hollywood or DVC2, plz help me choose

[DarkAngelAlpha]

My lack of experience with the DV format is making this decision difficult. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but Dazzle Hollywood only captures in the DV format, and ONLY at 740x480, right? DVC2 is more like an external capture card with options you get from internal capture cards, correct? If so, which do you think would be the best choice for me.

They are both about the same price, but of course Dazzle Hollywood requires a 1394 firewire card so it ends up slightly more expensive. As I understand it, DV is better quality than Mpeg2 and is easier to edit, meaning that it's perfect for recording TV shows and cutting out commercials. Also with Dazzle Hollywood I can hook up my Sony Digital 8 camcorder via 1394 port, but I don't use it that much. Every review I read of this device was good, actually they are highly praising it for it's capture quality. One review compared it to a $10,000 analog capture device, now that is something .

The DVC2 captures directly to Mpeg2, so it's nice not having to convert it. Still, converting from DV to Mpeg2 with my P4 2.4Ghz shouldn't be long...right? Well as long as it can do it overnight, I'm happy . Anyway there don't seem to be many reviews on it, but half of the ones I read mentioned a lot of frame dropping, anyone here with a DVC2 experience this problem?

I'm plan to record a lot of stuff from satellite TV and burn onto SVCD's, later on DVDR's when I'll get one of those burners. Now knowing that DV is better than Mpeg 2, I should get better results with the Dazzle Hollywood but DVC2 captures directly to Mpeg2 so it saves time. Actually wait, don't I have to re-convert either way? With the DV, I have to cut out commercials, frameserve from Vdub to TMPGenc and then use a SVCD template. With the DVC2 Mpeg2 file, I will still have to cut out the commercials and convert it to SVCD format with TMPGenc, right? So either way I will have to convert, or am I mistaken?

So if you guys had to choose either one of these Dazzle products for the purpose I mentioned above, which would you choose? So far I'm leaning more towards Dazzle Hollywood because of the great reviews mentioning stunning quality, and the simplicity. DVC2 sounds like a regular capture card, having to worry about drivers and compatibility. Anyway, what do you guys think?

Thank you for all the help.
Dark Angel Alpha

[DVWannaB]

My choice is Hollywood. What can I say, I am a quality first kinda guy

[chjan]

If you mean Hollywood DV-Bridge, you need to consider about encoding time. Yes, the DV format is lossless quality, but it is not make any sense to convert the bad quality video to DV format. I think the idea of convert everything to DV is just convenient to edit, add tittle or effect. After that you need to encoder to mpeg1/2. Well you know it. Therefore, when you capture 1 hour movies, you need time to encode 2-3 hours. I think you could only 1-2 movies a day.

Real-time capture is the way to go. Capture then edit/cut and burn that's it....

[DVWannaB]

Respectfully disagree chjan. Becuase even if you have bad or not so good quality vhs. You now have the ability to capture AVI and apply some filters and improve the visual quality. Capture real-time MPEG2 (SVCD or DVD) only if you have really clean source. Capturing real-time VCD is a quick, useless and futile endeavor. Good VCD requires patience patience patience. ie. Re-encoding hi-bitrate cap to VCD specs.

[chjan]

Yes, you're @ your side.
However, he wants to capture from satellite TV which gives a good signal video. I don't think he need to do anything about filtering or add tittle/efficet. What he needs is just cutting out the commercials and the join them together. So the real-time Mpeg encoder is fit his require, he doesn't have to spend alot of time for the offline encoder which will limit him the # of movies to capture.

Well, he is the one to design it. We just give the ideas to him.

[dgsmith]

Satellite caps - I do it all the time. The reason I got into this was to cap satellite. If you want dv quality from a dv source get a dv bridge. Since satellite is nowhere near dv, a good mpeg2 hardware encoder is what I finally ended up with to do the job.

Get the DVCII. The quality for me is 95% of the original satellite broadcast even with the 30' svideo cable I use to get the signal to my PC. I burn to dvd-r (2hrs per disc).

I used to use a digital8 camcorder (same use as Hollywood bridge) to go from svideo from Hughes receiver to camcorder to 1394 to computer. Captured raw .avi and converted using tmpgenc.

1. .avi takes alot more space (12 gig per hour), plus it takes forever to edit then forever again to convert.
2. yes, you do get to apply filters etc during .avi conversion process, but the dvcII looks REALLY good for realtime caps. DvcII has some basic stuff like color corection. Also, you can specify bitrates for audio and video.
3. If you had a really crappy source, you would need more filtering, but satellite is pretty clean.

encode to mpeg2, edit, author and burn with Ulead.

Plus, if you get it at someplace like Best Buy, you can return it for up to 30 days. If you get it online, good luck.

ds

[dgsmith]

Ok, I read the post too fast. Yes, you would have to convert the MPEG2 to SVCD in tmpgenc to get it onto cd. However, the DVCII also allows MPEG1 and SVCD realtime captures. So, problem solved.

Also, dvcII is not a capture card. It is an MPEG encoder.

Once you get a dvd burner (and you will because you get all the movies), you will REALLY appreciate the quickness of getting them onto DVD.

Gotta got, The Heist is on, gotta cap and burn! :P

ds

[pacoreguenga]

I think there is not really a point of comparison between the hardware you are mentioning. If you need to convert analog video to dv and back, go for the hollywood dv bridge, but I'd suggest the canopus for better quality and locked audio support.
If you want to encode in realtime, there are plenty of options available, including the cheap averTV studio.
Now, You can have both methods, as they just are for different tasks.
However, if you already have a miniDV or Digital8 or DVCAM device that converts analog video onto dv which you can feed right into your computer, you don't have to buy a DV Bridge. But you could always use a realtime mpeg encoding solution, be it DV or analog based. Try MediocampegRT for dv to mpg2 realtime conversion.

[spiderman2k1]

DV will take for ever on a High end P4 2 gig AVI file's are big and you should only use Windows 2000 or XP i would use 2000 Also there is a timer so when your not home the DC2 will record a TV show for you. you can download it here http://stop.at/TWNH also this is the best message board for DC2 http://stop.at/dazzle2 Also I would say edit out commercail's is better on the DVC2 I use MPEG2VCR and a one hour show only take 4 minutes to edit and put it back together. Also DV is not always great you need real good plugim to convert CCE 2.50 if the best one and it goes for 4000 dollar's this is the only plugin I would use all the other are not worth it and the DVC2 will look better then and DV capture with cheep plugin. Also CCE has bad sound you will have to make two file's and recode the sound with TMPG. Trust me if you want TV show's you want a timer so when your not home

[chjan]

Hi spiderman2k1

That's what I'm doing, :P , Capture with HWVC II & SW:TWNH (Just set timer and let it goes), Cut/Merge with MPEG2VCR and then burn it.
The way to go, man....

[ajrecs]

However, if you already have a miniDV or Digital8 or DVCAM device that converts analog video onto dv which you can feed right into your computer, you don't have to buy a DV Bridge.

I have been trying to do just that, but lack the correct software. I have the Studio 7 capture software, and DV input, and a Sony mini-DV that will do the analog to digital conversion, but if I try to use the Studio software to capture the DV, hitting Capture starts the tape in the camera, rather than using the analog feed. I presume I need a different piece of software to to the capture. I even tried using (don't laugh too loud) the Windows Video applet that comes with WinME. It could capture the video, albeit into MPG not DV format, but still started the camera when Capture hit. Help~

[DarkAngelAlpha]

Wow that's some great help. Special thanks goes to spiderman2k1 for those links. The site with the forum has great mpeg2 clips in pal SVCD format, the quality is amazing. I'm leaning more towards the DVC2 now.

I just have one last question. Is the DVC2 a plug and play device or does it have drivers to install? I heard the dazzle dv-bridge was plug and play, as long as you had the software you were fine. I just hate paying so much money for hardware that may not work in the next operating system just because there is no driver. Thanks for the help again.

[Dragonsf]

As the HW Bridge is an external FireWire device, it's not plug and play in the pure sense.If your FW card is PNP, then your done.
I'm usíng the HW for the same purpose: capturing form Sat or S_VHS, cutting comercials and converting them to SVCD.This is easy, cutting is fast and preview too.Converting takes 6 hours for 90 min footage.
But when I tried to edit a mped-2 encode video. editing (and previewing) take so much longer /about 10 times).With every cut frame(s), the video is going to be reencoded.That is, you press play, it takes about 1 min per frame to recompress, and then you could see something.Any way to avoid this? (I'm using ULEAD Medistudio 6.0)

[Dance4Me]

Sorry I cannot help you but I have a similar dilema. I cannot decide if to get a DV-bridge or a real-time Mpeg2 capture device.

I plan on making SVCD's or SXVCD's but one thing is bothering me. VBR gives better quality when compared to a CBR video of the same file size. You guys say getting a real-time mpeg2 device is a time saver, but not if you would want better quality video with VBR. Whether you choose a DV-bridge or real-time mpeg2 device, you still have to convert the video. Difference of course being that the DV will give better quality. So in the end wouldn't the DV device make a better choice?

Which caputre device I go with depends purly on how much video quality differs between CBR and VBR. All the SVCD's I found on the net so far used VBR. I don't have any high quality video to test the difference between VBR and CBR so what are your opinions?

EDIT:
User opinions over at Cnet and Epinions are totally bashing the DVCII as a lousy product. Seems to have a lot of compatibility problems. I hear good things about the Dv bridge hollywood. If you ask me, I would prefer waiting 3 hours for a video to convert to mpeg2 rather than using that time to fix my video capture device. If your favorite show starts in 5 minutes, the last thing you want is your capture device to die on you .

[SodGawd]

@Dance4Me

Which caputre device I go with depends purly on how much video quality differs between CBR and VBR. All the SVCD's I found on the net so far used VBR. I don't have any high quality video to test the difference between VBR and CBR so what are your opinions?

VBR is definately the way to go for quality. Takes twice as long, but looks better in the long run and you can possibly fit more minutes onto a CD-R. This is all relative. Some vids look great with CBR or VBR. The DVC2 caps with either CBR or VBR. You can choose which method and the bitrate specs. Of course, you're gonna wanna max 'em out anywhoo especially if you're gonna resize to SVCD. The saying here on this site is "garbage in, garbage out." That is sooo true.

Between these 2 products, I would most likely get the DVC2. Since I don't have the HD space for such a massive file. Depending on what capture proggy you use to cap DV and what DV codec you use, your filesize is gonna be HUGE!! Get a 100GB HD and you should be fine. Remember, whatever your DV filesize is, you'll need that much more to edit it and then encode it. I have been looking at the Dazzle DVD Creation Station 200. It it like the DVC1 except that it will record MPEG-2 streams all via the USB ports (which WOULD be PNP). I have my doubts that USB can sustain the bitrate needed for MPEG-2. Guess I am gonna just have to do some testing, eh?

Hope this helps...

Sod out

[DVWannaB]

SodGawd,

I have seen captures done by a product called USB Instant DVD and I was really impressed. Being a quality freak, this was very important for my judgement. Incidentally, bitrate topped out at 5MB for MPEG2, but quality was great nonetheless. SO USB does work. Again it all depends on what your needs are and what level of quality is acceptable and how much time you want to spend to get there.

DV

[TheInformer]

SodGawd:

I'll have to make a comment about a few statements of yours.

VBR is definately the way to go for quality. Takes twice as long, but looks better in the long run and you can possibly fit more minutes onto a CD-R...

Takes twice as long? Yes. Looks better? For lower bitrates I'd agree, but for higher bitrates the 'quality' is the same.

Between these 2 products, I would most likely get the DVC2. Since I don't have the HD space for such a massive file. Depending on what capture proggy you use to cap DV and what DV codec you use, your filesize is gonna be HUGE!! Get a 100GB HD and you should be fine.

The capture proggy is irrelevant in terms of the resulting file size. DV is a fixed format - 3.6 megs a second, 216 megs a minute, and so on. One hour of DV take ~13 gigs of hard drive space. I have a 20 gig boot drive and a 60 gig capture drive and have yet to fill the capture drive up, ever. A 60 gig drive will hold a little over 4 hours of DV.

Remember, whatever your DV filesize is, you'll need that much more to edit it and then encode it.

I disagree here. If you frameserve the DV file via VirtualDub or AVISynth to your encoding program, then no appreciable extra hard drive space is needed. The only real extra space needed is for the encoded file. Since most folks use CD/RW drives then that means ~700 megs more for the file.

Just my two cents.

[SodGawd]

@TheInformer

yes the 'quality' is the same but the filesizes are bigger and therefor possibly (stress point here..) more difficult to achieve your desired filesize. If going for a 3 disc SVCD, then it matters not what method you use and so forth...

DV takes some fast hardware. Not everyone has the dough to plop down for the latest and greatest crud that hits the market. I for one can't, not if I want to eat the next night... Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah blah blah. I have heard your arguements countless times and we could banter back and forth on the highes and lowes of this. Anywhoo, it matters not. We agree to disagree.

@DVWannabe

I can't agree more. That was the point of my response, but I digress.

Sod out...

[TheInformer]

yes the 'quality' is the same but the filesizes are bigger and therefor possibly (stress point here..) more difficult to achieve your desired filesize. If going for a 3 disc SVCD, then it matters not what method you use and so forth...

We actually aren't disagreeing about the point you're trying to make, namely that 2 pass VBR produces a better quality video at a given bitrate. I was just commenting that after a certain bitrate is achieved, you really can't tell the difference.

Compare a 2 pass VBR file with an average bitrate of 1000 and a CBR file with a bitrate of 1000 and the 2 pass VBR file will win out a majority of the time for quality.

Do the same again, but this time use 5000 as the bitrates, and you'll be much harder pressed to tell the difference visually.

5000 average bitrate VBR files and 5000 bitrate CBR files would give approximately the same file size, yes?

2 pass VBR's strength is that it can give a comparable quality file with a lower average bitrate than a CBR file, because it can allocate the bits to the scenes that need them and cut down on the bits in scenes that do not need as many.

The negative? Unless you have a ninja machine (and even if you do) it takes time for the encoding process. Some folks would rather trade disk space for time. Me? Quality (2 pass VBR) for archival, speed (CBR or CQ) for just viewing.

BTW, DV is not a Godsend, but it does simplify the capturing process

[Anonymous65]

To simplify the confusing options, I would use this description:

DV video, high quality video, even broadcast standard video. You need a powerful PC with lots of hard drive space. Also, you basically need Windows 2K or XP with a NTFS partition. DV is good for high quality editing, like making a commercial, and then saving the editited video back to video tape (DV). Converting to VCD, SVCD or DVD is possible, but is a slow process.

Real-time mpeg captures, best for use in making VCD, SVCD and DVD's. It saves a lot of encoding time, and you no longer have to give up video quality with the latest hardware. However, mpeg video is not very editable. Simple cutting (not even frame accurate) is possible, but forget about special effects and titles which will require reencoding, giving a noticable loss of quality.

So, what are you going to do with the video? Make a commerical for a TV station, or save a copy of Star Trek on a VCD? Answer that question, and the choice should be simple.

[SodGawd]

thank you skittleson for that post..

That was exactly what I was trying to point out. Oh well.. onward I say..onward..


Sod out

[Dragonsf]

....
So, what are you going to do with the video? Make a commerical for a TV station, or save a copy of Star Trek on a VCD? Answer that question, and the choice should be simple.

I want to do the obvious:I want to save a recorded movie from Sat or VCR.AND edit the comercials out.
Harddisk space is a one time money issue (not too much today), but time is essential: I can record,edit and convert a movie of 90 min length onto 2 SVCDs in about 2+6 hours.
Using mppeg-2 as source it's going to go at 6 hours recording/editing and 3 hours converting.Not only gives me DV 1 hour advantage, but I need only 30 Min for editing against 4 hours with mpeg (cutting, reconverting/control and so on).