DV or Huffyuv for archiving videos?

metaleonid · #1 06-14-2013, 06:51 PM

Continuing DV vs Huffyuv discussion. I digitized all of my 8mm tapes via S-Video in using Huffyuv. I am all set with that.

Now I started to get my hands on VHS cassettes that I either once recorded off of RF cable or 2nd or 3rd generation copy. I just want to save them on hard drive and throw them away because no space in the apartment. I don't think I will even want to enhance them or process them. I already digitized one using Huffyuv, but it turned out that the VHS wasn't even recorded in SP mode. It was LP mode. So for such low quality VHS recordings wouldn't Canopus ADVC-300 be sufficient enough? I sure can do Huffyuv but it would be much more time consuming and not sure that I will gain anything in quality. So what do experts think?

lordsmurf · #2 07-18-2013, 02:09 AM

The flaw of DV is in the colorspace handling, and no amount of VHS resolution (up or down) would affect that. So no, even as LP mode VHS, the Huffyuv is better. Whatever the color is on the tape now -- dreadful I'd imagine, on the 2nd+ generation VHS tapes -- DV would make it worse. But if you'd like to save space, that's the tradeoff.

~15MB/hour, color issues
~35MB.hour, and excellent color

That's the choice.

metaleonid · #3 07-19-2013, 02:32 PM

Hi Lordsmurf,

It's more about time consuming rather than space, although space also plays role.

Do you happen to point me to visual example where Huffyuv would be superior to that of DV and really what artifacts I should look for. I did try a few test captures using ADVC-300 (DV) vs LifeView 3000 (Huffyuv) vs ATI 650 (Huffyuv) from VHS, Hi8 and LaserDiscs. While I did notice very subtle difference between all 3 which could be attributed to hardware, I didn't notice the quality degradation in DV. I also took Huffyuv AVI file and converted it to DV codec using VirtualDub to see the difference. I didn't notice difference at all. Perhaps I wasn't sure what to look for?

Thanks.

lordsmurf · #4 07-23-2013, 05:59 AM

My stuff is currently in disarray. So I don't have any samples, and probably won't locate that for several months. Remember, I'm just now getting back online, in a new state, after almost 8 months.

The colors are simply blurred more as DV. The end. It's not bad, no, but you can never really do anything with it again -- created DVD (yet again convert colorspace!), restoration, etc. It's fine to view on a monitor or TV (media player, like the WDTV or Samsung Blu-ray players). After it turns to DV, it gets worse the more you touch it. That's why Huffyuv and other lossless exist. It's why Apple ProRes exists. People want (pro especially!) formats that don't degrade at every turn.

As you've seen, hardware plays a role in DV, too, since it was never agreed upon by TPTB. Each company is different. Again, unlike lossless.

The decode and encode codecs also vary highly.

And it really depends on the source -- how good is it, what was it's editing history, etc. You need to view such video at about 4x -- the size of a small TV -- to see the differences. It's not noticeable at a computer 720x480, which is tiny. (Few inches by few inches.)

Note: I've split this thread from here: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...dvc300-vs.html