Signvideo PA-100 vs. software color correction?
 

I have recently got back into the game of doing analog video captures after a few years off. Unfortunately (for me) my workflow has changed drastically. My previous workflow was as follows:

Mitsubishi VCR (with S-Video) -> Panasonic DMR-ES10 -> AVT-8710 -> Signvideo PA-100 -> USB-Live2

Long story short, I ended up selling the SignVideo PA-100 unit about two weeks ago. The unit was a huge part of my workflow as I used it to correct all of the colors for anything I captured. I also decided to give up on the Panasonic DMR-ES10 as it is the most unreliable piece of equipment I have ever worked with.

My question is this. What is the best way to replicate the color correction from the SignVideo PA-100 machine? I have googled extensively and I see numerous references to using the ColorMill filter in VirtualDub? Is this what I should be doing? I also see people saying that AviSynth is the way to go for color correction. I'm no stranger to AviSynth as my entire noise reduction stage has always been done in AviSynth. I just wanted to know what is the preferred way to color correct (I'm far from a genius at this.)

Thanks in advance and sorry to bore you guys with all of this.

Color correction is 2-fold.

1. Pre-process as analog before capture, meaning proc amp, as needed. And the PA-100 is a nice proc amp. There is a Sima that I also sometimes like to use (forget model offhand, would have to dig it out later), but it differs from the PA-100. I've been known to chain both.

2. Post-capture process in software. VirtualDub Colormill sort of works, it can be hit-or-miss, not always the easiest for color correction. NLEs tend to be best, and I've used Adobe Premiere quite a bit in the past, as it really does mimic Photoshop to a degree. Avisynth is a terrible general color-correction tool (horrible UI, not friendly at all, even with AvsPmod), but it can be exceptional for tricky corrections. DaVinci is becoming a favorite for some folks, but it has limitations on files (ie compressed files, not uncompressed, a deal breaker for many of us).

Color correction isn't a hard skill, but is mostly (A) how well the source cooperates to make the desired changes, and (B) having the right software and/or hardware.

Also required = calibrated monitor, so you're not "correcting" the values to a bad monitor.

And lots of patience. This task is tedious.

You need to color correct both in analog and digital stage. I do all the color correction with FCP using Apple ProRes. You need to use scopes, this is mandatory. A calibrated monitor won't prevent your eyes from tricking you....

Sorry for the delay. You guys have been unbelievably helpful. As of right now I'm leaning towards putting in the effort to learn color correction using Davinci Resolve. I know that software actually runs on Linux (and is actually probably the best video editing package for Linux as well outside of putting in SERIOUS effort to learn Blender's video editing mode.) Anyway, thanks again for all of your help.

I agree that color correction at both analog and digital is appropriate.

Correct with a good, low noise, proc amp while analog to get it close. That maximizes the available dynamic range of the digitizer and thus will reduce the potential truncation/round-off errors associated with digital processing, especially if using 8-bit depth captures.

Fine tune in digital.