Archiving VHS as AVCHD
 

Its been a while since I've done analog transfer and in that time, the wonderful MPEG4 h264 spec has come out. I figured something like 6000-7000 3 pass VBR x264 would look as good or better than 2 pass 9000-11000 MPEG2 for DVD. I also figured that storing as AVCHD (on DL DVDs) would mean better future compatability (btw material would be stored at 720x480) and easy xfer to blu rays for later archiving once discs come down in price (already have the burner)... processing power is really not a factor for me, as I have an i7 which does a very acceptable 48 fps on slow settings (or 5 fps on very slow). This seems like kind of new terirtory... don't know anyone who's archiving this way yet... especially since I already archive all my digital stuff this way, both SD and HD... and the loss is unnoticable to the eye at about 3/4 compression of DVD and about 1/2 compression of DV.... the only downside of course is that I need to uncompress if I'm going to do future editing.

So just wondering what people's opinions are... or if there's even a better codec to use (even if its not DVD, AVCHD)... btw my stress test for encoders is pure noise... if it can replicate that without blockiness, than it can do anything IMO.

I actually rely on MainConcept Reference for this, but x264 can do well if tweaked and setup just right. I'm currently testing some x264 GUI frontends, to do some re-comparison tests in the next month or two.

As far as H.264 from VHS, for Blu-ray archiving -- we're thinking alike. That's something I want to look into further in early summer, after acquiring necessary hardware. Already have the software.

It's value will mostly come in on noisy VHS tapes, especially that shaky hand-held stuff, or any kind of SLP mode TV recordings. For anything else, DVD and H.264 would likely be transparent to one another, assuming each was clean and encoded with good settings in good software (or hardware).

I've been gathering info for months now, following software and hardware developments/advancments/updates, pricing, and other viability factors.

I don't know that noise is a good test. Something realistic like fog, rain, smoke, or fire -- those tend to work well for encoding tests. Fast multi-camera sporting event audiences shots are good too -- wrestling is nice. Go one further and test with a old SLP VHS recording of a wrestling event! I already wore out an old tape of this, used it many times for tests in past years.

I used reference back about 5 years ago for MPEG2.... wonderful piece of software. Is the Adobe plugin just as good as the pro/broadcast version of the standalone plugin?

MainConcept Reference is the "full" version of the software from MainConcept directly. Reference is pretty new software, the evolved version of the much older MainConcept MPEG Encoder.

Adobe, Sony, Corel/Ulead, etc -- they often have customized versions of the encoding, using the MainConcept SDK (software developer kit). Although CS3/CS4 are very good, no, the versions are not necessarily 100% identical to the Reference implementation. Adobe, Sony, Corel/Ulead, etc -- of course -- will say their special tweak is the best. Personally, I'll take Reference any day, but there's nothing wrong with the Adobe/etc versions.

If nothing else, MainConcept Reference is far more tweakable, unlike the relatively few slider bars and tick boxes found in Adobe/Sony/etc. I guess Adobe/Sony/etc figures we're too stupid to have access to all the advanced options. As much as I hate to agree, they're probably 100% correct for most users. I'm never surprised anymore, when a brilliant shooter/editor has no idea what a GOP is, or what "intermediary codec" means.