Quantcast Lossless HuffYUV with ATI MMC - digitalFAQ Forum
  #1  
07-23-2017, 05:35 AM
Tony_Shaul Tony_Shaul is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 4
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
And I'll have an OJ with that

I've been lurking on here for a while now.

I have an All in Wonder Pro and have been using Virtualdub to capture Lossless HuffYUV from my old Videos.

But I really dislike the program interface and would rather use the software that came with the card (Multimedia Centre).

I have already used this to capture mpeg and find the interface MUCH more enjoyable

I think one of your own, Lord Smurf, wrote the following guide to capture lossless huffyuv in MMC:

http://www.digitalfaq.com/guides/vid...re-ati-avi.htm

Would capturing this way provide a higher quality video than capturing mpeg using the same card?


Once captured I would filter and edit before encoding to mpeg to put onto DVD.


Thanks for any advice.

Tony.
Reply With Quote
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Ads / Sponsors
 
Join Date: ∞
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #2  
07-23-2017, 05:50 AM
sanlyn sanlyn is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N. Carolina and NY, USA
Posts: 3,561
Thanked 1,130 Times in 922 Posts
Of course if you intend to filter or do other restorative work on a capture, you wouldn't want to capture to lossy MPEG in the first place.

Using MMC to capture YUY2 huffyuv AVI, you'll get exactly the same results you'd get using Virtualdub to capture the same way -- however, with MMC's interface you lose the ability to monitor for valid video levels. I assume that you understand the importance of capturing at legal luma levels. http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...st45238http:// . I'd also assume that you've been monitoring and adjusting signal levels all along.

The above link is one part of a more recent VDub capture guide that begins here, if you haven't seen it: Capturing with VirtualDub [Settings Guide]

Use whatever you want, but be aware of certain elements that affect your capture and all subsequent work.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
07-23-2017, 06:07 AM
Tony_Shaul Tony_Shaul is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 4
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
Of course if you intend to filter or do other restorative work on a capture, you wouldn't want to capture to lossy MPEG in the first place.

Using MMC to capture YUY2 huffyuv AVI, you'll get exactly the same results you'd get using Virtualdub to capture the same way -- however, with MMC's interface you lose the ability to monitor for valid video levels. I assume that you understand the importance of capturing at legal luma levels. http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...st45238http:// . I'd also assume that you've been monitoring and adjusting signal levels all along.

The above link is one part of a more recent VDub capture guide that begins here, if you haven't seen it: Capturing with VirtualDub [Settings Guide]

Use whatever you want, but be aware of certain elements that affect your capture and all subsequent work.

Really just minor editing (trimming the ends off tapes that have tv programs at the end of them and also rarely padding if there is excessive noise) so nothing elaborate. 'Filtering' was probably the wrong terminology to use. I've used Womble in the past.

But I read somewhere that capturing in hufyuv avi and then encoding to mpeg slowly afterwards results in a better quality mpeg file and hence a better quality DVD.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
07-23-2017, 08:40 AM
sanlyn sanlyn is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N. Carolina and NY, USA
Posts: 3,561
Thanked 1,130 Times in 922 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony_Shaul View Post
Really just minor editing (trimming the ends off tapes that have tv programs at the end of them and also rarely padding if there is excessive noise) so nothing elaborate. 'Filtering' was probably the wrong terminology to use. I've used Womble in the past.

But I read somewhere that capturing in hufyuv avi and then encoding to mpeg slowly afterwards results in a better quality mpeg file and hence a better quality DVD.
The idea behi8nd lossless capture is to allow image modification and edits without encoding. Lossless codecs would be huffyuv, Lagarith, or UT Video codec. If you're performing no cleanup (denoising, color correction, removing bottom-border head switching noise, evening up or cleani8ng messy borders, removing tape noise, chroma noise, spots, ripples and other dropouts, and other common analog tape defects, you're pretty much wasting time with lossless media. Since simple cut and join is all you're doing in Womble, that's done with a minimum of re-encoding. You might just as well capture to MPEG, because without cleanup you'll have a copy of the tape and all of its defects but with a few frames cut out. However if you make any image corrections using lossy media such as MPEG2 (includi9ng transitions, title overlays, that6 sort of thing), you'll incur quality loss through lossy re-encoding.

Whether you get quality improvement by capturing to lossless and then encoding separately is a matter of how you're encoding. If you're encoding lossless to MPEG using the same or similar settings you use if you captured to MPEG in the first place, you'll see very little improvement without cleanup.

For archival purposes, another advantage of lossless capture is that you can separately encode an archive copy at very high bitrates, much higher than you could use for DVD or web posting.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
07-23-2017, 09:53 PM
Tony_Shaul Tony_Shaul is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 4
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
The idea behi8nd lossless capture is to allow image modification and edits without encoding. Lossless codecs would be huffyuv, Lagarith, or UT Video codec. If you're performing no cleanup (denoising, color correction, removing bottom-border head switching noise, evening up or cleani8ng messy borders, removing tape noise, chroma noise, spots, ripples and other dropouts, and other common analog tape defects, you're pretty much wasting time with lossless media. Since simple cut and join is all you're doing in Womble, that's done with a minimum of re-encoding. You might just as well capture to MPEG, because without cleanup you'll have a copy of the tape and all of its defects but with a few frames cut out. However if you make any image corrections using lossy media such as MPEG2 (includi9ng transitions, title overlays, that6 sort of thing), you'll incur quality loss through lossy re-encoding.

Whether you get quality improvement by capturing to lossless and then encoding separately is a matter of how you're encoding. If you're encoding lossless to MPEG using the same or similar settings you use if you captured to MPEG in the first place, you'll see very little improvement without cleanup.

For archival purposes, another advantage of lossless capture is that you can separately encode an archive copy at very high bitrates, much higher than you could use for DVD or web posting.

Yeah I know Virtualdub can do all that but I can never tell if anything needs doing or not.

In other words my eye for visual detail is limited.

All I know is that the family is very happy with what I've done so far and that is good enough for me

Will let them know about your last sentence though as that is certainly a very good option if they want to filter the files themselves now or in the future.

Thanks Sanlyn. Appreciate the way you help lots of people
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Making lossless Blu-ray iso files... merchantord Copy DVDs, Duplicate, Replicate 3 06-03-2017 07:34 AM
Capture VHS to lossless, ATI AIW 8500 with laptop? Bruxo Project Planning, Workflows 3 09-23-2016 06:29 AM
Hauppauge video capture is lossless? dinkleberg Capture, Record, Transfer 5 08-26-2016 12:19 AM
Is H.264 lossless really lossless? premiumcapture Encode, Convert for streaming 4 08-31-2014 03:44 PM
DV vs. lossless - huge quality difference? premiumcapture Capture, Record, Transfer 4 02-21-2014 02:16 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:48 PM