Quantcast I'm done with AIW/XP/VirtualDub capture? Maybe? - Page 2 - digitalFAQ Forum
Go Back    Forum > Digital Video > Video Project Help > Capture, Record, Transfer

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21  
10-14-2019, 02:38 PM
latreche34 latreche34 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 2,198
Thanked 377 Times in 346 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei316 View Post
I am currently using a BM Analog to SDI converter. Converts both audio and video. I still utilize the recommended analog VTR's, TBC's, etc in my workflow. The results are the same. I use software based waveforms / histograms on both setups on pre and post side and there is no difference. Visually, no difference. Unles I am missing something.

The problem with AIW/XP route is what I have mentioned earlier. I spend more time messing with the AIW/XP setup somedays when I should be capturing.

I am just frustrated. Spent a lot time and money acquring gear for the AIW/XP workflow.
Welcome to the club, We are in the same boat, I switched over to SDI for two reasons, One it's a lot easier and no settings to monkey with other than choosing the bit count, everything else is source matched unless you choose otherwise, Two, I do capture Betacam so SDI to USB 3.0 link has already been established all what's needed is S-Video/Component to SDI capture device for analog sources such as VHS or Betamax, for that I use BrightEye 75, It's a pretty "stable genius" if you will.

By the way I recently acquired 2 BE75 capture boxes if anyone wants to convert to our religion, I will be listing them shortly, you do need a SDI to USB dongle to complete the workflow. BE75 has a full frame TBC so one digitization process only but I don't know how it compares to a stand alone full frame TBC, One thing I can say is I never had problems with any tape that required me getting one.

Last edited by latreche34; 10-14-2019 at 02:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
The following users thank latreche34 for this useful post: archivarious (01-20-2021), ofesad (10-14-2019)
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Ads / Sponsors
 
Join Date: ∞
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #22  
10-14-2019, 04:11 PM
Sergei316 Sergei316 is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 103
Thanked 23 Times in 18 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogilein View Post
Watch the sdi capture way from Goldwingfahrer, who was a professional from Switzerland. He has own and tested more equipment for capturing video as we all on this board together. In Europe he was one of the best which has written and share his experiences in various videoforums.

VHS home movie capture setup critique?

Watch the picture in posting 2
Thanks!! That is very close to my SDI workflow.

Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
Welcome to the club, We are in the same boat, I switched over to SDI for two reasons, One it's a lot easier and no settings to monkey with other than choosing the bit count
Thanks!! Happy to join!! Only 2 members in this club?! SDI does seem to make the workflow easier. I haven't given up on the AIW/XP workflow, just very frustratrated with it. LS, did make some good points in his previous post about the AGP boards and some other possible solutions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
all what's needed is S-Video/Component to SDI capture device for analog sources such as VHS or Betamax
I pass the the converted analog SDI signal into a AJA LHi (waveform/histogram) then out to AJA 3g for uncompressed 8/10bit capture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
BE75 has a full frame TBC so one digitization process only but I don't know how it compares to a stand alone full frame TBC, One thing I can say is I never had problems with any tape that required me getting one.
I have a few AVT-8710's that I use for full frame TBCin all my workflows. However, I might be interested in incorporating the BE75 in my workflows. I like options.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
10-14-2019, 06:33 PM
latreche34 latreche34 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 2,198
Thanked 377 Times in 346 Posts
I don't know what do you mean by analog SDI, but SDI has always been digital "Serial digital interface". For analog video capture SDI 3/4 SD lossless (compressed or uncompressed) is the preferred option.

I don't have a desktop so instead of AJA 3g I use BM UltraStudio SDI/USB 3.0.







Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_3451.jpg (103.3 KB, 105 downloads)
File Type: jpg IMG_3454.jpg (52.3 KB, 103 downloads)
File Type: jpg IMG_3453.jpg (41.6 KB, 103 downloads)

Last edited by latreche34; 10-14-2019 at 06:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
The following users thank latreche34 for this useful post: VideoTechMan (10-23-2019)
  #24  
10-14-2019, 09:50 PM
Sergei316 Sergei316 is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 103
Thanked 23 Times in 18 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
I don't know what do you mean by analog SDI, but SDI has always been digital "Serial digital interface". For analog video capture SDI 3/4 SD lossless (compressed or uncompressed) is the preferred option.
My apologies, I meant analog signal converted to SDI.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
10-23-2019, 08:43 PM
VideoTechMan VideoTechMan is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 186
Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts
I wanted to offer some insight in this thread.

In Sergei's defense, the transition to doing captures via SDI is what I feel imo a great idea, when looking towards a more modern workflow. Alot of the pro based hardware say even 10-15 years ago were out of reach for the common person, even advanced hobbyists.

Of couse, SDI is a digital signal which can carry up to 16 channels of embedded audio (similar to HDMI) minus the HDCP crap that plagues HDMI. SDI also carries a full, uncompressed, unrestricted signal and can carry for long distances, which is why you will never see SDI based equipment nor connections in consumer gear.

While you can capture uncompressed, for SDI work there are other codecs that are not hard drive space-heavy which can be used and is an editable format, and that would be Avid's DNxHD and Apple's ProRes. They are compressed, but very high quality formats and are a great intermediate format designed for editing (depending on what NLE you use). Signals from SD to HD, and even UHD (via 6G-SDI and dual-link) can pass through SDI cables.

The main issue with with Blackmagic products that I have read about on the forums over the years is that they are pro-level devices, and for these to work correctly like they should they require a clean, stable sync signal (both line and frame based TBC) in order for those devices to be really useful, even AJA products. Yes in this day and age alot of the pro level stuff aren't focused on consumers so is why consumers are left with the more crappy junk that's out there that guarantee poor results. The XP era of video hardware was the best and king for video captures in its time. I still have an XP machine myself which still captures great. But you have to ask yourself, how much longer is the XP era gear going to be around? The recommended TBC's on the forums here along with the SVHS VCR's are getting very hard to find now and many folks that have them aren't letting them go. Same with specific XP based computer hardware as they are overpriced on ebay and probably in poor condition. And of course, if your XP system dies, then what?

So I think the idea of this thread is to eventually consider some other ideas in capturing the old analog videos, which is just more than VHS. The XP method here on the forums will always be an excellent and advisable method to capturing the sucko VHS format. Heck I still have VHS tapes back when VCR's made their debut in 1976-77 (and yes they still play) with the top loader Sylvania 2-head unit we had. But SDI is also a great option, if one has the time, research and the funds to upgrade to such a setup and to learn its own ecosystem for captures. There's always a preferred and advisable method, but there's no right or wrong way to capture video since the end result based on the end user's requirements.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
10-24-2019, 12:35 AM
latreche34 latreche34 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 2,198
Thanked 377 Times in 346 Posts
When I decided to switch to SDI workflow I studied the compatibility issue with modern computers pretty carefully backed with my experience of owning capture gear over the years and the different issues that I had over 3 or 4 generations of MS windows.

Going from an analog tape which is an old technology that never going to change to a capture software that keeps evolving I've divided the capture workflow into two sections, One that doesn't need to evolve and requires a device of a high quality from the analog tape era that is made specifically for that purpose. Two, the part that needs to evolve which requires a device that is compatible with modern computers and can be replaced whenever it is outdated and yet it can still connects and communicates with the device in the first section of the workflow via a link despite they are from different generations. After a lot of research and experimentation that link is determined to be the "SDI connector". SDI has been evolving for decades in several generations and they are all backward compatible.

So for a device in the first section any composite/S-video/component capture device to SDI will be adequate for the job and those are going to be pro devices since SDI is not a consumer connector,some are built in full frame TBC, it can be as old as the ice age and it still wouldn't matter because it is not going to communicate directly with the computer.

The device in the second section of the workflow is the one that translates between the old capture device and a modern capture software, it is basically just an SDI to USB X.0 adapter (or SDI expansion card for desktops), it can evolve with the computer software/hardware, SDI/USB2, SDI/USB3, PCI, PCI-e, PCIx ....etc

With this approach you can still have/keep your old decent tape capture device that can be used with any modern computer without having to switch to a crappy modern capture device (USB, HDMI ...) or use a legacy capture device and stay with Windows XP for the rest of your life.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ATI AIW cannot capture with VirtualDub anymore? lordsmurf Capture, Record, Transfer 7 04-12-2017 06:28 PM
VirtualDub error upon capture / test capture? dinkleberg Capture, Record, Transfer 5 09-05-2016 04:07 AM
VirtualDub - Can't Capture Video rckowal Capture, Record, Transfer 7 01-19-2010 06:49 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:06 PM