Quantcast What gear to capture, stream from video mixer s-video output? - Page 2 - digitalFAQ Forum
Go Back    Forum > Digital Video > Video Project Help > Project Planning, Workflows

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21  
09-02-2021, 08:04 AM
dpalomaki dpalomaki is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: VA
Posts: 1,223
Thanked 267 Times in 231 Posts
It boils down to knowing the internals and capability potential of your gear. I've seen TV sets where-in the composite input display looked better than s-video from a known good source. Evidence that some inputs were added as an afterthought for marketing purposes.

S-video and component inputs/outputs are disappearing from new equipment, composite is often retained as an accommodation for legacy gear, at least for a while. HDMI is taking over.
Reply With Quote
The following users thank dpalomaki for this useful post: lordsmurf (09-02-2021)
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Ads / Sponsors
 
Join Date: ∞
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #22  
09-02-2021, 08:55 AM
RobustReviews RobustReviews is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: London - UK
Posts: 168
Thanked 30 Times in 26 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpalomaki View Post
Component is the standard industry term for the 3 wire system. You also see terms such as YUV and YPrPb used - the three components needed to form the color image. Keep in mind that traditionally computers worked in RBG colors while video with YUV and the two color spaces to not translate perfectly. Also computers were generally progressive while video was interlaced. Commonly used scan rates and screen sized (in pixels/scan lines) differed so moving between them, especially for SD video, is not seamless.
I'm well aware of this, but thanks for retelling. Most of our transfers are done from YPrPb (or latterly HD-SDI) so I'm keenly aware of the signal architectures.

My point (which I did make clumsily) is "should chroma-under" be considered a composite, component or 'third' signal system?"

It was a genuine question, I'm not convinced domestic analogue videotape is any more component than it is composite? It doesn't change anything in reality - as I said, it was a genuine question.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
09-02-2021, 10:16 AM
latreche34 latreche34 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,790
Thanked 300 Times in 279 Posts
No, Y-C is not composite, two separate components don't mix until they hit the composite circuit, Just because they are multiplexed in the same RF envelope recorded on tape doesn't make them composite. The degradation of chroma when recorded on tape is due to converting it to a lower frequency and restoring it back to its original frequency.

It gets degraded further in the composite circuit, You will never ever get a better picture from composite vs S-Video from the same player period. Once the chroma is smeared in the composite stage It don't matter what comb filter you use it will still be inferior to the original Y-C that started from. All the talk about composite could be better is in different scenarios with different hardware which is not what I was referring too.
Reply With Quote
The following users thank latreche34 for this useful post: lollo2 (09-03-2021), lordsmurf (09-02-2021)
  #24  
09-02-2021, 10:36 AM
hodgey hodgey is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,207
Thanked 311 Times in 265 Posts
The commonly used term for VHS and similar is "color under" as noted due to the chroma being separated and stored at a lower frequency band.

Another variation was found in Betacam, which does store the Y, Cb, and Cr components separately through a complicated process, which gave the format much better color resolution than the color under formats.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
09-02-2021, 05:13 PM
dpalomaki dpalomaki is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: VA
Posts: 1,223
Thanked 267 Times in 231 Posts
Also, we should keep in mind that the common use of the terms composite, s-video, and component refer to the method (protocol?) of passing the signal (connecting) from one piece of gear to another. We have been ignoring the RF (channel 3/4) connection method.

It does not equate to the method of storing the information on tape or other media. However, the storage methods may make signal transfer over one connection method easier or lower cost than another
Reply With Quote
  #26  
09-02-2021, 06:47 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 11,131
Thanked 1,979 Times in 1,706 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
Once the chroma is smeared in the composite stage
Composite doesn't have to smear, and there is some composite gear that you'd have a hard time seeing an immediate difference between it and s-video. It'd take some A/B testing to see the difference. However, sadly, almost everything is smeared and full of ugly dot crawl. It didn't have to be this way. It's obviously due to mass usage of cheap chips, probably Philips/NXP.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- Find television shows, cartoons, DVDs and Blu-ray releases at the TVPast forums.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
09-02-2021, 07:00 PM
RobustReviews RobustReviews is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: London - UK
Posts: 168
Thanked 30 Times in 26 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
. It'd take some A/B testing to see the difference. However, sadly, almost everything is smeared and full of ugly dot crawl. It didn't have to be this way.
It's called PAL.

(Runs for cover).....
Reply With Quote
  #28  
09-02-2021, 09:30 PM
latreche34 latreche34 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,790
Thanked 300 Times in 279 Posts
When it comes to chroma artifacts over composite, PAL is the best, followed by NTSC and then SECAM, SECAM chroma smear is horrible especially from consumer camcorders over composite. I've had some family tapes in VHS-C SECAM shot with a low end camcorder and they are unwatchable.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
09-03-2021, 10:03 PM
AntonN0 AntonN0 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 6
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hello again. Thank you, everybody for participating.

I did some recordings and want to share with you. I am ready to do better recordings later with your recommendations.

Files:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...97?usp=sharing

Gear
EasyCap capture device: I believe it's original version, and I am ready to open up it to check chip serial if it helps.
Laptop: budget Lenovo 5y+ old, Windows 10
Camera: JVC GZ-MG 47. Maximum bitrate, Svideo output
Mixer: Panasonic WJ-MX50. I think it wasn't necessary to use it, but I decided to keep it in chain.

Software
OBS, canvas 720x576. I did custom settings for easycap to make it 720x576 also. Everything else is default for recording.

Scenario:
1. Make recording with camera
2. Connect it via s-video to mixer
3. Connect mixer via s-video to EasyCap
4. Connect EasyCap to laptop
5. Open software with minimal settings
6. Start playback on camera
7. Do recording in software

File names meaning:
"original file.MOD" is file copied from camera memory
"obs mixer svideo capture" obs capture via mixer's svideo output

Also I have virtual dub 2, 64 bit version running on the same laptop. I did raw capture of the same file and setup with default setting and no special filters. File name is "virtual dub capture.avi" 740MB. But I personally cannot see any difference comparing to OBS. Maybe you can help with setting to virtual dub? Or point out diffs.

I did capture for mixer's RCA output also, to check if it's true about poor s-video on EasyCap. File name is "obs mixer av capture" For my opinion s-video is better, not sure why I decided that RCA output is better on this device, I will check again in different situation usually it has poor colors.

Again I am ready to make more apropriate recordings. and thank you for your help. What do you think about this degradation from original file? Can I get better quality with another gear or software?
Reply With Quote
  #30  
09-03-2021, 10:18 PM
AntonN0 AntonN0 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 6
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
As I promised before I am going to do the same on Matrox RT.X100 on WinXP and virtualdub famous pack VirtualDub 1.9.11 + Filters
if you help with basic filter and setting recomendations for that vitual dub.

But first of all I want to make it work on my laptop with any software or any other hardware at least for recording without streaming. But not old PC.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Output file corrupted? (analog video capture) danielscreed Capture, Record, Transfer 2 12-06-2020 11:54 PM
Manuals for JVC video gear, used for restoring video [DOWNLOADS] robjv1 Video Hardware Repair 1 02-11-2011 04:19 PM
Manuals for Sign Video/Studio 1 video gear, used for restoring video [DOWNLOADS] robjv1 Video Hardware Repair 1 08-20-2010 01:19 PM
How to capture and download a video stream from site? admin Encode, Convert for streaming 1 03-23-2010 12:50 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:29 AM