digitalFAQ.com Forum - Best choice when capturing Hi8 tapes?

digitalFAQ.com Forum (https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/)

- Capture, Record, Transfer (https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/)

- - Best choice when capturing Hi8 tapes? (https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/12704-best-choice-capturing.html)

Best choice when capturing Hi8 tapes?

hello!

Which is the best choice when capturing Hi8 tapes?

1. What is the difference between Amarec tv and Virtualdub?

2. What is the difference between HUFFYUV and Lagarith?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsj2251 (Post 84097)

Which is the best choice when capturing Hi8 tapes?

For the software, whichever works best for your capture device and provides captures with no frame drops, with audio in sync, etc.

Quote:

1. What is the difference between Amarec tv and Virtualdub?

AmarecTV's interface is godawful, in my opinion. I like VirtualDub's interface, but I can't see it with fresh eyes since I've been using it for 20 years. Under the hood, they both use DirectShow/Windows APIs to grab video and audio from capture devices and place them into files on a storage medium. But there are a lot of little intricacies when it comes to exact device support/usage.

Quote:

2. What is the difference between HUFFYUV and Lagarith?

Lagarith is newer, provides a higher compression ratio, and I believe tends to decode faster with multi-core processors than the classic Huffyuv. Huffyuv has much lower system requirements and is much less likely to be the cause of a dropped frame.

Personally, I prefer Ut Video Codec and MagicYUV in modern times. Huffyuv and myself had a loving decade-long relationship starting in 2002, but times have changed. :P

Vote for Lagarith here, but also I'm not one for fussing over such matters too much, both Huffyuv and Lagarith look rather great to my eyes. I've used both, but Lagarith is a better fit for us.

Amarec is certainly an acquired taste to be as polite as possible about it. VirtualDub is a bit bland, but it's an impossibly well understood and documented quantity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobustReviews (Post 84101)

I'm not one for fussing over such matters too much, both Huffyuv and Lagarith look rather great to my eyes.

They produce mathematically identical output (hence "lossless") so they'd better! :eek:

Quote:

Originally Posted by msgohan (Post 84103)

They produce mathematically identical output (hence "lossless") so they'd better! :eek:

Touché! :smack:

Definitely Virtual Dub, because of the simple, realtime-adjustable histogram. Depends on the capture device though (the IO Data GV-USB2 works well with VDub).

Quote:

Originally Posted by msgohan (Post 84098)

For the software, whichever works best for your capture device and provides captures with no frame drops, with audio in sync, etc.

AmarecTV's interface is godawful, in my opinion. I like VirtualDub's interface, but I can't see it with fresh eyes since I've been using it for 20 years. Under the hood, they both use DirectShow/Windows APIs to grab video and audio from capture devices and place them into files on a storage medium. But there are a lot of little intricacies when it comes to exact device support/usage.

Lagarith is newer, provides a higher compression ratio, and I believe tends to decode faster with multi-core processors than the classic Huffyuv. Huffyuv has much lower system requirements and is much less likely to be the cause of a dropped frame.

Personally, I prefer Ut Video Codec and MagicYUV in modern times. Huffyuv and myself had a loving decade-long relationship starting in 2002, but times have changed. :P

thanks!

Do you happen to know what is the most suitable lossless codec for editing on Adobe Premiere Pro?
:)

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:01 PM