Go Back    Forum > Digital Video > Video Project Help > Capture, Record, Transfer

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1  
04-06-2016, 08:08 PM
rf99 rf99 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 31
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hello,

I've been reading the forums and guides here for the last week, and have learned a lot on how I might improve my capture process. However, I haven't had much success incorporating VirtualDub and using the Huffyub codec.

My equipment: SR-V101US deck, Sony DCR-TV17 camcorder for analog to digital passthrough, PC running Windows 10

Up until this week, I had been using Premiere Element's to capture... which I now understand to be capturing in DV-AVI. I am about to embark on capturing about 50 hours of home videos, and wanted to improve my capture method.

(I have read how the DV-AVI format can cause issues with color space, so that's what I'm currently concentrating on improving by switching to Huffyuv encoding.)

STEPS I took:
First Step: The forums here were immensely helpful in getting improved settings on the JVC deck. I now have it set to:
Digital TBC/NR: On
Video Calibration: Off
Picture Control: Norm
Digital R3: Off
Video Stabilizer: Off

This seems to work well (albeit with a seemingly softer picture... though, I now also understand that the Digital R3 was doing edge enhancement for me... and I'll do that later, with a better method, if necessary).

Second Step (and where I am having a problem):
Now I am trying to capture into a Huffyub AVI.

I decided on Huffyub, because after reading everything here, I think I can afford the hard disk space... and this seems to be the best tradeoff to be as lossless as possible without being uncompressed.

I followed the guides, and am using VirtualDub 1.10.4 (also tried 1.9.11) 32bit and Huffyub 32bit.

I installed both on my Windows 10 machine. (And had to use the rundll32.exe method to install the codec.)

In VirtualDub, I select Microsoft DV Camera and VCR (DirectShow), since that seems to be the only way I can actually see my Video Overlay. (It seems to be the only device choice that shows the video I'm trying to capture.)

If I go to Video->Compression, I have to check to "Show all codecs, even if they may not work"... and then, and only then, do I see Huffyuv v2.1.1.

However, if I try and capture video, I get a "Video compressor error: The source image format is not acceptable. (error code -2)"

If instead I choose "(No recompression: dvsd)", then VirtualDub will capture video. But, I can't seem to get it to work using Huffyuv.

Also, one other thing I noticed is that I can't configure PCM audio to be 48k like the guide suggests. I can select "<No compresion (PCM)>" in Audio->Compression, but that only seems to be capturing at 32k.

I apologize in advance for these newbie questions. It seems like most people in the forums are using capture cards instead... and don't have this issue.

I would certainly be willing to buy a capture card if it would make a big difference over using the DCR-TRV17's audio/digital passthrough for capture.

Thanks in advance!
Reply With Quote
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Ads / Sponsors
 
Join Date: ∞
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #2  
04-06-2016, 10:15 PM
sanlyn sanlyn is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N. Carolina and NY, USA
Posts: 3,648
Thanked 1,307 Times in 982 Posts
Welcome to digitalfaq.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
I haven't had much success incorporating VirtualDub and using the Huffyub codec.
The codec name is huffyuv, not huffyub. There is no "huffyub" codec. Huffyuv is a shorter name for the Huffman lossless codec which works with YUV and RGB color. Huffyuv cannot be used to compress the color format used by lossy DV.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
(I have read how the DV-AVI format can cause issues with color space, so that's what I'm currently concentrating on improving by switching to Huffyuv encoding.)
If you want lossless capture from Analog tape, why are you using a camera that transmits only lossy DV? Once your analog signal is converted to DV in the camera, the output isn't lossless. It's lossy DV format with DV color and typical DV compression losses. Lossy means lost -- You can't get back what has been lost or altered in the first lossy encode.

You're using the wrong tools for what you want to do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
First Step: The forums here were immensely helpful in getting improved settings on the JVC deck. I now have it set to:
.....
.....
Picture Control: Norm

This seems to work well (albeit with a seemingly softer picture
It isn't "seemingly softer", it is softer with "Norm" picture control. Use EDIT picture mode for playback from the JVC to other recording/capturing devices.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
Second Step (and where I am having a problem):
Now I am trying to capture into a Huffyub AVI.
DV can't be compressed using huffyuv. DV and huffyuv are different codecs for different video formats. DV input isn't "captured" anyway, it's copied from a DV device-- which is why you see the default "dvsd" no-recompress message.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
I followed the guides, and am using VirtualDub 1.10.4 (also tried 1.9.11) 32bit and Huffyub 32bit.

I installed both on my Windows 10 machine. (And had to use the rundll32.exe method to install the codec.)
Good job. many people don't get that far with Windows 10.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
I would certainly be willing to buy a capture card if it would make a big difference over using the DCR-TRV17's audio/digital passthrough for capture.
You can't capture to lossless AVI with the setup you're using. Either use the camera's DV conversion for digital passthrough and copy as lossy DV-AVI with VirtualDub 1.10x, or get set up for lossless work.

For lossless you can't use DV passthrough. Remnove the camera and connect the VCR to a capture device designed for analog-to-lossless capture. Windows 10 is a video-unfriendly operating system, so your are pretty much limited to the Hauppauge USB Live-2. By the way, huffyuv isn't the only lossless compressor used around here: Huffyuv, Lagarith, and UT Video Codec are three lossless codecs that are fast enough for real-time capture. I use huffyuv for capture, Lagarith for restoration intermediate work files.
Reply With Quote
The following users thank sanlyn for this useful post: lordsmurf (04-06-2016), rf99 (04-06-2016)
  #3  
04-06-2016, 11:16 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,503
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
It isn't "seemingly softer", it is softer with "Norm" picture control. Use EDIT picture mode for playback from the JVC to other recording/capturing devices.
No. It's more complex.

JVC S-VHS VCRs are suggested due to their filtering abilities. So buying the fancy VCR, only to always turn off the filters, is somewhat pointless. In general, it should be NORM. It reduces grain, and it has an effect on chroma noise as well. EDIT turns it off.

The issue comes when certain tapes react poorly to the denoise. A VCR, unlike software controls, has on/off NR, not sliders to vary the degree on NR. So, sadly, off sometimes looks better than on. Now, you could argue that off is better, and software is king, but that's also wrong. Certain noises sometimes can't be cleaned up as well in software as can be done in hardware processing.

As always, video isn't "one size fits all".

And yes, sometimes it only "seems" softer, sharper, or the same. Your eyes play tricks on you, mostly because noise is confused as detail. Even software graphs/meters can be fooled. My pet peeve is reading that "Panasonic is sharper that JVC", which is false. Panasonic oversharpens at default, and everything has ringing halos. (Another big problem is that HDTV is warping our ideas of VHS. The longer we go into the HD era, the more "it's soft!" complaints that I see. The number of "can I convert VHS/8mm to 1080p/4k?" questions I see online is getting downright stupid lately.)

Quote:
Don't overkill the corrections.

When you simply list the proper name, it auto-links. For now, it goes to the download page. But soon, very soon, it'll go to glossary entries! I'm working on that right now. I'm hoping to give you editor/mod access to that, along with some others here, so we can really enrich this site.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
The following users thank lordsmurf for this useful post: rf99 (04-06-2016)
  #4  
04-06-2016, 11:42 PM
rf99 rf99 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 31
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
The codec name is huffyuv, not huffyub. There is no "huffyub" codec. Huffyuv is a shorter name for the Huffman lossless codec which works with YUV and RGB color.
Apologies for that. Information overload in the brain. Huffyuv.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
Huffyuv cannot be used to compress the color format used by lossy DV.

If you want lossless capture from Analog tape, why are you using a camera that transmits only lossy DV? Once your analog signal is converted to DV in the camera, the output isn't lossless. It's lossy DV format with DV color and typical DV compression losses. Lossy means lost -- You can't get back what has been lost or altered in the first lossy encode.

You're using the wrong tools for what you want to do.
Thank you for clearing this up for me! Obviously, I had it completely wrong what was going on here. It didn't occur to me that the camera was the one converting it to DV-AVI. This leads me to an entirely new issue/question, which I will post in a separate thread.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
Use EDIT picture mode for playback from the JVC to other recording/capturing devices.
My understanding was a little different on this, as I'd still like to make use of some of the quality filters that are disabled in EDIT mode. I think lordsmurf summed it up well in his reply.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
DV can't be compressed using huffyuv. DV and huffyuv are different codecs for different video formats. DV input isn't "captured" anyway, it's copied from a DV device-- which is why you see the default "dvsd" no-recompress message.
Followup question on this... I thought DV is only copied if the source to the camcorder is DV. But, since my source is analog from the VHS deck, and I'm operating it in an on-the-fly analogy to digital conversion mode, I thought it was just outputting an AVI stream that still needed to be "captured". But, you're saying that the computer (virtualdub/Premiere Elements) is seeing it as a file that is just copied? (Just want to make sure I understand.)

Thanks again for your (and lordsmurf's) quick and complete replies! I appreciate it!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
04-07-2016, 03:10 AM
sanlyn sanlyn is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N. Carolina and NY, USA
Posts: 3,648
Thanked 1,307 Times in 982 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
It didn't occur to me that the camera was the one converting it to DV-AVI. This leads me to an entirely new issue/question, which I will post in a separate thread.
It won't be easy to keep up with two threads from the same person about the same subject and the same problem.

EDIT mode:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
My understanding was a little different on this, as I'd still like to make use of some of the quality filters that are disabled in EDIT mode. I think lordsmurf summed it up well in his reply.
He did. It depends on the original tape and how you like to work. Like lordsmurf, some prefer noise reduction over detail, others take the detail with some noise and work on the noise later. And as lordsmurf noted further, cheaper players that oversharpen and artificially juice up their output look impressive at first but can get annoying over time when you realize how phony and unreal it looks. Legacy analog tape formats have softer images than digital video to begin with, because those analog formats didn't have the higher resolution of today's digital video. Then again, analog video doesn't have digital artifacts like macroblocks, mosquito noise, or aliasing. Those glitches are digital compression effects that become more obvious when capturing noisy analog to lossy compression formats.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
I thought DV is only copied if the source to the camcorder is DV. But, since my source is analog from the VHS deck, and I'm operating it in an on-the-fly analogy to digital conversion mode, I thought it was just outputting an AVI stream that still needed to be "captured". But, you're saying that the computer (virtualdub/Premiere Elements) is seeing it as a file that is just copied? (Just want to make sure I understand.)
The camera doesn't output an "AVI file" or an "AVI stream". The camera outputs a stream of 0's and 1's arranged as DV-encoded data.

When the capture device receives this digital stream it recognizes it as DV format and places the data in a container that is saved as a file on your PC so that it can be stored and played back. The name of the format is DV. The name of the container file is AVI. AVI can accommodate digital video using any of several codecs, including Xvid, lossless huffyuv or Lagarith, or DV Types 1 and 2, uncompressed, and others.

Last edited by sanlyn; 04-07-2016 at 03:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
04-07-2016, 04:50 AM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,503
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
It won't be easy to keep up with two threads from the same person about the same subject and the same problem.
Agreed. That thread (http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...hrough-vs.html) is now locked.

Quote:
cheaper players that oversharpen
The Panasonic AG-1980P does it, and it's not cheap.It's just different. In the case of fake sharpening, different in a bad way. The default has ringing/halos, and must be tweak down a bit (2-3 marks worth).

Quote:
Those glitches are digital compression effects that become more obvious when capturing noisy analog to lossy compression formats.
Yep, worst of both worlds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
Hello
Hello and welcome.

You have two threads, and I had to lock the other. While we like different threads per topic, this one was too close, and none of us want to repeat ourselves in two places. So I'll answer some of that here as well, where it differed.

The underlying issue I see is this: What are you trying to do? < answered in other thread

DV is probably wrong method, but even Huffyuv lossless may be the wrong method for your needs. So again, what are you trying to do? I only use lossless when the video needs further processing (restoration) and editing. When it's just an archive of an already-good tape, assuming good hardware in use (VCR, TBC, etc) then a 15mbps MPEG-2 capture works well.

Premiere Elements = decent basic editor, terrible at capturing.

Realize that DV AVI rapes chroma, squishing it to 4:1:1 NTSC, and is more likely the cause of blurry-looking video. The JVC EDIT/NORM debates is moot in light of this. When you only have half (or less) of the color signal, it's softer.

As stated, Huffyuv is the term. It's Huffman-compressed YUV data. And it can only be used by certain capture cards. A DV box or DV camera 'hardware compresses' to DV, and unringing that bell if not possible. An incoming DV signal can't be losslessly compressed.

Streaming formats are different yet again. You'll need to archive master copies as interlaced, and make a copy as deinterlaced for the streaming (progressive, non-interlaced) use. QTGMC is suggested, but you can get away with Yadif on some content. While H.264 (best MP4-wrapper streaming format) supports interlaced, devices rarely use it. DVDs/Blu-ray will stay interlaced.

Again, DV throws away 50%+ of the color quality, and is a reason it looks softer. DV was fine for shot video, but DV was never intended for conversion. The loss appears much greater on converted video.

You made no mention on external TBC. It;s needed as well. Internal just clean image, not cleans signal.
See also: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...time-base.html

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
  #7  
04-07-2016, 07:29 AM
sanlyn sanlyn is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N. Carolina and NY, USA
Posts: 3,648
Thanked 1,307 Times in 982 Posts
Adding to latreche34's comment in your other thread, and to what lordsmurf has posted, I quote from your other thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
I don't think I'm likely to be doing any advanced editing at this time, but it's possible some day in the future I might try something (possibly some sharpening... and who knows what else).
I think I know what you mean by "advanced editing", but work such as noise reduction and cleanup are referred to as repair and restoration. Anyway, it's just as well -- NLE's from the most basic to the very expensive are OK editing tools but poor restoration tools.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
(I know that in theory the color space is trampled when converted to RGB for DV-AVI. But is it actually noticeable in either of the two playback scenarios I mentioned?)
It's not theory. It's fact. But I think you have something confused. Consumer DV-AVI is not encoded or transmitted as RGB. Most DV is YUV 4:2:0 (aka "YV12") or 4:1:1. It has half the color information of YPbPr color used on NTSC analog tape (similar to YUY2), and even less color information than RGB. One added problem you are having with trying to re-compress DV input with huffyuv is that huffyuv works only with YUY2 and RGB. Huffyuv doesn't work in YV12. By RGB conversion you might refer to most NLE's that work in RGB only, and most of which don't make that conversion from YUV very well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
My immediate goal is to get as lossless digital recordings as possible to save for the future
. "Lossless as possible" means lossless. Either it's lossless or it isn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
1. Is it worth it? I know that I will need to re-encode for final playback, but is there likely to be a truly noticeable quality difference in either of the two playback scenarios for files that were originally encoded in Huffyuv vs. DV-AVI?
........
I know there is some loss when encoding in DV-AVI. And, then again, when re-encoding for playback... but is this double loss really more noticeable in my playback scenarios vs. the single loss on the re-encoding the Huffyuv files for playback?

2. If the difference would be noticeable in either playback scenario, then is there a best suggestion on what capture device to use?

I am currently using Windows 10, but I'd be willing to use an older operating system on a different computer if it opened the door to a significantly better capture device. (Though the preference would still be to use this Windows 10 machine, if possible. I do already have VirtualDub and the Huffyuv codec installed and working.)

I'd also be happier spending hundreds rather than thousands of dollars for a good capture device. (Again, assuming that you think there would be an actual, practical, noticeable difference over my current DV-AVI setup.) I get that quality is in the eye of the beholder, so this may be hard to answer.
Ultimately you have to answer those quality questions for yourself. You get different opinions from different users. There isn't space here for repeating the last 25 years of debate on this issue. The technical facts are that DV wasn't designed as a conversion format, nor designed for restoration work, and wasn't even designed for re-encoding to other formats. It was designed as a shoot-and-watch format for PC or camera-to-tv playback. Using it for converting other formats was an imaginative idea for selling a format that was obsolete almost as soon as it appeared and was not even considered for the advent of DVD. There are higher quality professional DV formats that are not like "consumer DV". The codecs, software, and hardware for pro DV gear require training and lots of money.

People often ask, as you do, if anyone can see a difference. The differences are apparent to many. But it's common that the average viewer will watch just about anything. I don't mean to infer a personal like or dislike for the religions, occupations, education, politics, ethnicity, or aesthetic taste of the "average viewer". But it's known that 1 in 10 men and 1 in 200 women on this planet are color blind, and most people have poor visual discrimination overall. It's a simple, widely recognized fact of the a/v marketplace.

My own take on analog to DV is that the results look denuded, noisy, and have an etched, plastic look. Some don't see those effects, some do. The magic that makes analog video look "great" as digital video depends on capture, post processing, and encoding, which are elements for which DV is poorly optimized. DV is especially difficult for restoration work. Those are the conclusions of many who have worked with both DV and lossless for decades.

Windows 10 is unfriendly for analog capture. The few workable capture devices that work with it for lossless capture are USB devices from Diamond Multimedia and Hauppauge. They cost less than $50. If you want better you can get ATI devices for XP thru Win7. If you want the affordable best, use XP with ATI All In Wonder cards that are specifically designed for analog-to-digital.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
04-07-2016, 04:32 PM
rf99 rf99 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 31
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thank you, thank you, thank you for all of the help! Everything is starting to make a lot more sense, and you guys have been fantastic!

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
Agreed. That thread (http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...hrough-vs.html) is now locked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
It won't be easy to keep up with two threads from the same person about the same subject and the same problem.
Understood. Sorry about the newbie mistakes!

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
The camera doesn't output an "AVI file" or an "AVI stream". The camera outputs a stream of 0's and 1's arranged as DV-encoded data.

When the capture device receives this digital stream it recognizes it as DV format and places the data in a container that is saved as a file on your PC so that it can be stored and played back. The name of the format is DV. The name of the container file is AVI. AVI can accommodate digital video using any of several codecs, including Xvid, lossless huffyuv or Lagarith, or DV Types 1 and 2, uncompressed, and others.
Got it. I think I was confusing the camera's analog/digital conversion stream that we have been talking about with how the camcorder handles its own MiniDV recordings (and does a literal file copy with them).

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
DV is probably wrong method, but even Huffyuv lossless may be the wrong method for your needs. So again, what are you trying to do? I only use lossless when the video needs further processing (restoration) and editing. When it's just an archive of an already-good tape, assuming good hardware in use (VCR, TBC, etc) then a 15mbps MPEG-2 capture works well.
I definitely considered capturing in MPEG-2 instead. And it's true, that I'm really just trying to make an archive of an already-good tape. But, since I'm okay with the additional storage cost when capturing a huffyuv AVI, I feel more comfortable doing that instead... "just in case" it makes a difference (or makes a difference if I eventually do some advanced editing sometime in the future).

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
Realize that DV AVI rapes chroma, squishing it to 4:1:1 NTSC, and is more likely the cause of blurry-looking video. The JVC EDIT/NORM debates is moot in light of this. When you only have half (or less) of the color signal, it's softer.
...
A DV box or DV camera 'hardware compresses' to DV, and unringing that bell if not possible. An incoming DV signal can't be losslessly compressed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
It's not theory. It's fact. But I think you have something confused. Consumer DV-AVI is not encoded or transmitted as RGB. Most DV is YUV 4:2:0 (aka "YV12") or 4:1:1. It has half the color information of YPbPr color used on NTSC analog tape (similar to YUY2), and even less color information than RGB. One added problem you are having with trying to re-compress DV input with huffyuv is that huffyuv works only with YUY2 and RGB. Huffyuv doesn't work in YV12. By RGB conversion you might refer to most NLE's that work in RGB only, and most of which don't make that conversion from YUV very well.
...
My own take on analog to DV is that the results look denuded, noisy, and have an etched, plastic look. Some don't see those effects, some do. The magic that makes analog video look "great" as digital video depends on capture, post processing, and encoding, which are elements for which DV is poorly optimized. DV is especially difficult for restoration work. Those are the conclusions of many who have worked with both DV and lossless for decades.
Okay, this helped immensely. I am pretty picky, and it sounds like these are things I will notice.

It's clear to me that I don't want to capture in DV AVI.

So, that means I need a new capture device.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
Windows 10 is unfriendly for analog capture. The few workable capture devices that work with it for lossless capture are USB devices from Diamond Multimedia and Hauppauge. They cost less than $50. If you want better you can get ATI devices for XP thru Win7. If you want the affordable best, use XP with ATI All In Wonder cards that are specifically designed for analog-to-digital.
I would think that anything that works on Windows 7 would also be able to work on Windows 10, since it's the same driver architecture. Even if it doesn't for some reason, I definitely have a separate Windows 7 machine I can use.

You mentioned ATI devices available for Windows 7. What would be your best recommended capture device for Windows 7?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
Streaming formats are different yet again. You'll need to archive master copies as interlaced, and make a copy as deinterlaced for the streaming (progressive, non-interlaced) use. QTGMC is suggested, but you can get away with Yadif on some content. While H.264 (best MP4-wrapper streaming format) supports interlaced, devices rarely use it. DVDs/Blu-ray will stay interlaced.
Besides the DVDs, I am going to playback on an Oppo BDP-103D. This blu-ray player supports streaming MP4 H.264... so it sounds like that may be the best way to encode the playback copies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
You made no mention on external TBC. It;s needed as well. Internal just clean image, not cleans signal.
See also: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...time-base.html
At first I didn't think I really needed a full frame TBC. But, after reading your article, I think it would be very helpful (I have seen some mild vertical jitter in some of the recordings).

The TBC-100 (or TBC-1000) sound ideal, but I can't seem to find either one anywhere. Are there any other suggestions on where to find either one?

Otherwise, it sounds like the AVT-8710 is the way to go. These days do new units seem to be spared from the issues the chipsets were having a few years ago? (Sounds like the jvc menu was a good indicator if the unit was bad? Does that mean the best way is to buy one, and test for that to know if the unit is defective?)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
04-07-2016, 05:58 PM
sanlyn sanlyn is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N. Carolina and NY, USA
Posts: 3,648
Thanked 1,307 Times in 982 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
I would think that anything that works on Windows 7 would also be able to work on Windows 10, since it's the same driver architecture. Even if it doesn't for some reason, I definitely have a separate Windows 7 machine I can use.
A lot of people who took the free Win10 upgrade or got a new W10 PC have been very disappointed with some of their old software and hardware. XP is still on top for the tons of free and paid video goodies that wouldn't work in later Windows. But Win7 still holds a pretty solid 2nd place. Don't wait for all of the old-line video software designers to come up with Win8 or Win10 revisions. They've about had it with Microsoft's ruthless driver changes lately.

You should use 32-bit apps for capture drivers, VirtualDub, Avisynth, compressors, etc., and 32-bit filters. Reason: see how many 64-bit filters you can find for VDub and Avisynth. Not many. But there are literally hundreds of 32-bit filters still working.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
You mentioned ATI devices available for Windows 7. What would be your best recommended capture device for Windows 7?
My recommendations would come from lordsmurf's listing for lossles capture:

Hauppauge 610 USB2 capture stick ~$50

ATI TV Wonder HD 600 USB2 capture stick ~$50-100

ATI TV Wonder HD 600 PCI capture card (aka Diamond ATI TV Wonder HD 600 PCI capture card) ~$50-100

ATI TV Wonder HD 650 PCI capture card (aka Diamond ATI TV Wonder HD 650 PCI capture card )~$50-100 (NOTE: Not the USB versions!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by rf99 View Post
Besides the DVDs, I am going to playback on an Oppo BDP-103D. This blu-ray player supports streaming MP4 H.264... so it sounds like that may be the best way to encode the playback copies.
Oppo plays DVD also, often better than many DVD-only players. Because your sources are interlaced, you should maintain interlace for your final encodes to keep temporal resolution for smooth motion, especially during camera pans, rolling credits, etc. DVD is interlaced. So is standard definition BluRay/AVCHD.

You can deinterlace for progressive mp4 stream, but I strongly suggest: (a) Don't use Premiere Elements to do it. Use Avisynth and the QTGMC deinterlacer. (b) When 29.97 video is deinterlaced it has twice the number of original frames and plays at 59.94 fps. Don't use any deinterlacer that tries to stay at 29.97 by discarding interlaced fields or blending them. Discarding fields causes choppy motion and stutter. Field blending ruins your output. Neither can be repaired without your original files. The deinterlacers in Avisynth do a very clean job, but there's always something lost when interlaced video is deinterlaced.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
04-08-2016, 01:36 PM
rf99 rf99 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 31
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks sanlyn!

lordsmurf, I was wondering if you might be able to chime in on my last reply above... in particular about the the TBC. Short of finding a TBC-100 or TBC-1000, it sounds like the green chassis AVT-8710 is the best way to go? (Though I've seen warnings about buying them on eBay, too.) Or, do the newest ones from B&H no longer suffer from the defects?

Also, are the ATI TV Wonder HD 600 USB2/ATI TV Wonder HD 600 PCI devices considered the best post-Windows XP capture devices? (I saw lordsmurf's and others success in getting the USB version to work with Windows 7, but I didn't see much on the PCI version.) If so, and the USB version seems to have had the most luck (with no loss in quality vs. the PCI version), then will likely pick that up and try and get it working in Windows 10.

Finally, this whole conversation has me pursuing a parallel path. I am working on resurrecting an old system with an Asus P4SD-LA motherboard, which has a 8x/4x AGP slot, and a decent Pentium 4 processor. The power supply is dead, and I see a couple of leaking capacitors... so working on getting this back into working order. If I'm successful, then this can be a dedicated XP capture box... and then I will pursue one of the AIW cards. (Probably a 9800 Pro, as it seems to be a fairly recommended card that also has a DVI output that I'll use for the monitor... or do you suggest using a second graphics card for primary video to try and reduce the risk of dropped frames?)

Thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
04-25-2016, 12:40 AM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,503
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
For those reading, I PM'd rf99 about some TBCs that I have available.

Also consider archiving important video to 15mbps MPEG-2 (Blu-ray spec, broadcast), not mere lossy DVD. It's what I do. H.264 doesn't handle interlace well, due to players and software being too narrow in scope. That happens with DVD as well. For example, not many people realize that DVD support MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 @ 352x240. It was terrible, yes, but not even possible to play/use easily.

4x/8x means all ATI AGP cards will work.

PCI isn't the USB. USB is Empia, and I forget what the PCI was. It's not Empia that I recall.

Don't mess with leaking caps. I started a fire once that way. Toss it. Get a new board/PSU/whatever that is.

Yes, DVI much better than VGA. However, my main capture system uses a VGA, and is as clean as DVI. That's not typical, but can happen. If using a KVM, forget VGA, DVI only. Spend the $300.

You can't use non-ATI graphic card on ATI AIW system.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Analog capture to digital has bad results! vbendezu Capture, Record, Transfer 10 10-11-2015 09:16 AM
Vertical jitter from VHS analog capture? darktree General Discussion 13 08-26-2015 09:06 PM
Trying to capture analog video tapes to digital with Canopus ADVC AVNorm Capture, Record, Transfer 3 02-25-2014 03:17 AM
What are some non correctable analog capture issues? premiumcapture Capture, Record, Transfer 1 02-19-2014 04:07 PM
Digitizing analog 8mm tapes: Best capture software ? mguitonxlt Capture, Record, Transfer 8 03-17-2008 08:16 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:03 PM