Help choosing the proper VHS capturing workflow?

[mparade]

Nice. Thank you very much.

[mparade]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sanlyn

I've been unable to reply to your request for more Virtualdub details (post #58). I've been traveling and using my laptop since yesterday, but I'll be able to reply later today or tomorrow.

Meanwhile my laptop does have copies of the original ReplaceFramesMC and ReplacefFramesMC2, both of which originally appeared at Videohelp and Doom9. Which one is better? The consensus seems to say that MC2 seems to work better when more motion is involved, while the original MC is faster. But most users say you just have to experiment. Both are attached.

Hello sanlyn,

Could you please send RemoveSpotsMC2X and RemoveDirtMC plugins as well?
My plugin collection does not include these, either. In the internet there are a lot of versions (e.g. "special editions" of RemoveDirtMC) and I am not sure which to download. Regarding RemoveSpotsMC2X I did not even find the plugin itself ().

Thanks again.

[sanlyn]

I'll link to both when I get back to my main PC. I'd advise bot to download the versions of RemoveDirt/RemoveSpots you find on the 'net, they've all been re-engineered. I'll send debugged versions of both. It didn't occur to me that you'd be far into Avisynth so soon. Good work.

[sanlyn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mparade

Could you please send RemoveSpotsMC2X and RemoveDirtMC plugins as well?
My plugin collection does not include these, either. In the internet there are a lot of versions (e.g. "special editions" of RemoveDirtMC) and I am not sure which to download. Regarding RemoveSpotsMC2X I did not even find the plugin itself.

Indeed, there are so many versions of RemoveDirt and RemoveSpots that it defies description. RemoveDirtMC2X itself has multiple versions, and in multliple plugins! All of them require yet another set of plugins from a package called RemoveGrain. The avsi versions most people use are attached. But they require some explanation.

There are two versions of RemoveSpots mentioned: RemoveSpotsMC2 and RemoveSpotsMC2X. "MC2X" is the more effective and newer version, but the older "MC2" can be used if artifacts result from MC2X. I have stayed with MC2X, which is faster. Both versions require the original, which is RemoveSpots(). Confused? Most people are, but after a lot of reading and the experience of others the versions I'm attaching are the debugged versions.

RemoveSpotsMC4.avsi. This avsi plugin autoloads when executed from a script. It contains five versions of RemoveSpots functions:
- The original RemoveSpots()
- The original RemoveSpotsMC()
- RemoveSpotsMC2()
- RemoveSpotsMC3() - very slow
- RemoveSpotsMC4() - so slow that people rarely use it, and no better than MC3.
Note that you can call any one of those functions. Each increment number in the function names is more powerful and slower than the other. MC4 is so slow it looks as if the script has hung, and I think I tried it only once with no clear results better than MC3, which is slow enough. The most useful is MC2.

RemoveSpotsMC.avsi. This avsi plugin autoloads when executed from a script. It contains three versions of RemoveSpots functions:
- The original RemoveSpots()
- The original RemoveSpotsMC()
- RemoveSpotsMC2X()
MC2X is preferred over the "MC2" version in the other .avsi file, but sometimes it can interact with other plugins being used in a script. No one has figured out why. In that case, use the "MC2" version in RemoveSpotsMC4.avsi.

RemoveDirtMC.avs. This is included as an ".avs" file because there are so many versions of RemoveDirt and RemoveGrain, on which it is based. This .avs file contains two functions, either of which can be called on their own:
- the original RemoveDirt()
- the original RemoveDirtMC()
Both functions require that you set two parameters, a limit value and a greyscale value. Limit is a strength factor. Usually a limit of 20 is sufficient. You can use 30 or 40, but increasing limit can often result in smearing or other artifacts. The greyscale parameter is used to distinguish between video in color and video in greyscale. "False" means that the video is not greyscale. So the way this function is usually called in a script is:

RemoveDirtMC(20,false)

The RemoveDirt plugin's .avs file doesn't autoload, so you have to import it with Avisynth's Import() command. I've tried using it as an .avsi file but it refused to work properly, likely because so many other Avisynth filters call the old RemoveDirt() function on their own and have varying copies of it in their code. The RemoveDirtMC.avs plugin must be loaded with Import(), as shown:

Import("drive:\path\to\Avisynth\plugins\RemoveDirtMC.avs"

Change the path statement to point to the location of AVisynth plugins in your system.

RemoveSpots and RemoveDirt versions are based on two versions of older plugin dll's, some of which were for Avisynth 2.5, some of which were for Avsisynth 2.6. You can have both versions of those dll's in your plugins folder. RgTools is the 2.6 version. I've included all of them in the attached dll_plugins.zip. Copy all of the dll's into your AVisynth's plugins folder:
- RemoveDirtSSE2.dll
- RemoveGrainSSE2.dll
- RepairSSE2.dll
- SSE2Tools.dll
- RgTools.dll

Let us know if there are problems with these.

[sanlyn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mparade

In one of your previous letters you mentioned pixel samplers and ColorFinesse. You mentioned as well that often a color correction is required later in processing in RGB colorspace (final work in RGB).

Could you please detail these flows to include them in my post-processing workflow, if possible?

ColorFinesse is an expensive color adjustment app that is sold as either a standalone product or as a plugin for advanced NLE's (my copy of ColorFinesse came supplied as a plugin with AfterEffects Pro). Plugins are available for other NLE's and cost plenty.

Most of the work in the last few posts deal with damage repair. The best tool for repair is Avisynth. VirtualDub does have many noise filters that are handy for cleanup of glitches like chroma noise and color blotches (e.g., Camcorder Color Denoise) which work in RGB color. Virtualdub also has plugins that mimic the behavior of many advanced NLE color filters, among them VDub's ColorMill, the Gradation Curves plugin, and Levels. These work in RGB color, although Curves can be configured to work in other colorspaces like YUV.

Many color problems such as illegal luma and chroma levels or over saturation should be resolved first in the original YUV matrix, notably because conversion to RGB makes many of those problems look worse. So I usually correct some of those problems before using RGB controls. The advantage of RGB is that you can target very specific colors and color ranges without affecting other colors or color segments. For example, what if your bright sky is too red and black shadows or blackish objects are too green? Correction would call for adding cyan only to the bright spectrum and adding magenta only to the darks. That would be difficult in YUV where working with secondary colors and isolated color ranges is not something YUV systems readily allow except in complex NLE's and apps such as Premniere Pro, ColorFinesse, or DaVinci. But much of what those fancy systems allow is available in Virtualdub and RGB.

Almost every advanced NLE has a pixel sampler control, which allows you to move the cursor around an image and measure the RGB values of pixels under the cursor. Why VDub doesn't have one built-in is a mystery to me. Why would you want this? If you say that white shirts and other white objects in your image are off color (not really white), what kind of color cast exists and what colors would be needed for a correction? A device that reads RGB pixel values gives the amount of each of the 3 colors in those image areas. If the pixel reader reveals that your white shirt has too much Red+Green (yellow), you know you can either reduce those two colors or add Blue. Similarly, the black frame of a bicycle might look too blue, or flesh tones will look "off" because of some kind of overall color cast. Pixel readers and histograms reveal graphically the amount and extent of each color channel in various parts of the image.

When you run an Avisynth script in VirtualDub you can apply Virtualdub filters to the script's output while the script runs. Making precise analysis and settings in RGB can be a hassle if you're running slow AVisynth filters that interfere with scrolling thru the video. In that case I usually comment-out a few scripted lines that run those slow filters, then restore those lines after I've set up VDub filters. Or you can always save the output of a very slow script as an intermediate lossless file, then load the resulting file directly into VirtualDub for correction.

Fortunately undamaged video doesn't require those slow industrial-strength repair methods. Many don't require additional color correction or added VDub denoisers, while many good captures can be filtered entirely with less powerful VDub filters.

pixel readers: one handy tool is CSamp.exe, a simple Windows desktop add-on that requires no installer. It's a bit clunky to operate, but it does the job. The download is at http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/atta...-time-csampzip. If you click Csamp's desktop icon, its small desktop panel will appear along with a smaller icon in the lower right-hand taskbar. Left-click either the panel or the icon, hold down the left mouse button, and move the cursor over the area you want to measure. The clunky part occurs when you let go of the left mouse button, which disables csamp. So I'm forever left-clicking that little taskbar icon and holding down the left mouse button.

A less clunky version is the free ColorPic desktop plugin. Turning it on displays a larger but resizable set of narrow readout panels that stay on all the time until you close it. It takes up more room, so I usually leave it the lower right-hand corner of the desktop. The download page is here: https://www.iconico.com/colorpic/.

Some previous posts illustrate the use of Csamp.exe as well as two other VDub plugins (gradation curves and the ColorTools histograms). The article has an attachment of plugins discussed. The post is here: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...html#post38384. The Virtualdub plugin attachment link is in the post that follow it, but here is the download link for the plugins: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/atta...dub_filterszip.

Another previous post that shows the use of VirtualDub controls such as ColorMill and Levels: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...html#post42315.

The histograms in the ColorTools plugin have been mentioned many times here and in links in this post. The plugin was designed for Windows XP but won't work in Win7 or Win10. An updated 32-bit 2015 version for Win 7 & 8 is attached. The .zip also contains a link to the original 2015 download page. If you bare using XP, the download for the original ColorTools 1.4 is at Trevlac's website: http://trevlac.us/colorCorrection/colorTools.html.

[sanlyn]

Meanwhile I was experimenting with "the hill.avi" (again) and came up wuith something slightly different. Who knows what the original mcolors were? One could play with various filoters forever here, but in this case I used ColorMill to twaek the results of the script.

The new scripts I wrote for "the hill.avi":

Step 1
------

AviSource("Drive:\path=to=video\The Hill.avi")
Crop(0,0,-20,-8).AddBorders(10,4,10,4)
ColorYUV(off_u=-15,gain_v=30)
ConvertToYV12(interlaced=true)
MergeChroma(MCTemporalDenoise(interlaced=true,settings="Very High"))
return last
# ####################################################
# save output as step1 (I named it "The Hill 01.avi")
# using Lagarith YV12 and "fast recompress" mode.
#
# ####################################################

Step 2:
-------

LoadCPlugin("Drive:\path\to\Avisynth\plugins\yadif.dll")

AviSource("Drive:\path\to\video\The Hill 01.avi")
AssumeTFF()
QTGMC(preset="Ultra Fast",EdiMode="RepYadif",EZDenoise=4,Denoiser="dfttest",\
  NoiseProcess=1,ChromaNoise=true,DenoiseMC=true,border=true)
SeparateFields()
a=last
e=a.SelectEven().RemoveSpotsMC2X()
o=a.SelectOdd().RemoveSpotsMC2X()
Interleave(e,o)
Weave()
RemoveDirtMC(20,false)
LimitedSharpenFaster(edgemode=2)
# --------- re-interlace --------------
SeparateFields().SelectEvery(4,0,3).Weave()
ConvertToRGB32(matrix="Rec601",interlaced=true)
return last

The ColorMill settings I used for the attached mp4 reworked version are set up in a Virtualdub .vcf file. A .vcf is a plain text file that VirtualDub can interpret. It contains the filters used and their individual settings. To load a .vcf you must have the named filters in your VirtualDub plugins folder. With a video loaded in Virtualdub, click "File.." -> "Load processing settings..." and navigate to the location of the .vcf file, then click "OK" (or "open", whichever applies). The filters will load with the same settings and sequence I used. One caution is that loading a .vcf file will overwrite any otehr filters you've previously loaded. A .vcf is a text file that you can read in Notepad. You can also change it, but you'd better know what you're doing.

The attached "VirtualDub_vcf_A_C_H.zip" contains 3 .vcf's for the following video samples:

A_the hill.mp4 (mp4 also attached) used ColorMill.

C_riding a bike used ColorMill and another VirtualDub plugin, Sergey Stolyarevskiy's "Frequency Suppressor of the Noise", or NDF.vdf. I have attached NDF_plugin.zip with the ndf.vdf plugin and its source code. The filter is associated with a website, but unfortunately it offers little information and is in Russian. The filter is used for severe crosshatching and herringbone. It can severely soften a video if used to remove as much herringbone as possible, usually chained in mutliple copies (which will inevitably blur a video out of sight if you're not careful). It was used here to slightly reduce herringbone noise on the light blue automobile in the video. You could get rid of almost all of it with a powerful Avisynth filter called TemporalDegrain, but it left serious artifacts elsewhere.

H_dishwashing: ColorMill was used to tweak color and levels.

There are a few dozen more Virtualdub plugins here: http://www.infognition.com/VirtualDubFilters/

[mparade]

I am much obliged again. I have just finished capturing all my tapes (), so I can start to elaborate in post-processing ().

Thank you very much for your efforts again.

[mparade]

Hello sanlyn,

I have attached 3 pcs of my Video-8 captures from 2003. They seem to have definite edge problems, such I haven't met so far, that is why I would need your expertise again (I think these problems result from the unknown automatic settings of my older Canon UC800 camera which was used to capture the tapes).

So, some info:

- captures were recorded on tape using a Canon UC800 Camera (maybe by using "simply" the automatic settings, I do not remember, unfortunately);
- for capturing I used my Sony DCR-TRV355E with TBC switched on, DNR and filters switched off, using it's s-video output, and Datavideo TBC-5000 as a frame-level TBC. I controlled only the highlights and shadows through the levels filter in Vdub using my X800GT AIW card;

If you have some time for my capture problems again, please help to correctly filter the samples.

Thank you again.

Your help is greatly appreciated.

Regards,

mparade

[sanlyn]

I think that the "edge problem" you refer to is aliasing. To some extent it's present on most consumer VHS cameras and isn't easy to clean up. Excessive aliasing is usually caused by tracking/recording factors using one camera and different tracking/playback factors using a different camera. Its also due to different shutter factors. There are various means of dealing with it, most of them rather destructive when it comes to the type and severity of aliasing. I'll take a longer look tomorrow and see what can be done.

[sanlyn]

Sorry for the delay, very busy around here. Will report later today.

[sanlyn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mparade

I have attached 3 pcs of my Video-8 captures from 2003. They seem to have definite edge problems, such I haven't met so far, that is why I would need your expertise again (I think these problems result from the unknown automatic settings of my older Canon UC800 camera which was used to capture the tapes).

Aliasing and line twiitter effects are often do to the way tape tracks and plays in two different cameras, as noted earlier. Aliasing on many edges during camera movement is common, but usually milder than seen here. The problems occur with digital and HD cameras as well, not just with older analog units.

Color translation problems are another story. The image below is a frame from grill party1.avi. Note how red turns green in a stripe down the right border (it doesn't happen on the other borders). This problem with red along the border doesn't always occur on all frames. Whether it's due to the differences in cameras is impossible to say. There's no easy fix for this. Note that the green tint occurs only with certain red hues, has little or no effect with other colors, and is not a stain that is uniform along the entire border -- all of which make it impossible to clean using normal filters usually applied to what is often called "border stains". Masking and motion tracking with something like AfterEffects would be one way to handle this.
border problem.png

The aliasing/twitter problems are from playback differences, and they forced a decision into the project: to deinterlace and discard odd-numbered frames to reduce the effects, or to use aggressive and destructive anti-aliasing/resizing/low-pass filters and thus destroy all fine and small detail. I chose to keep even frames only, which does affect motion resolution (smoothness). But in this case the camera is jittery and jerky anyway. It comes down to what you're willing to live with. The result is progressive video, but if you want DVD or standard definition BluRay the only choice is to encode progressive as if it were interlaced (many players will play it as interlaced anyway).

The only color problems: a washed out look because of relative high gamma from the camera's AGC, over saturated bright red, and a slight but visible blue color cast. Gamma levels were fixed in Avisynth, color with ColorMill in Virtualdub.

Attached:
- An mpg of all three .avi samples joined and encoded together as interlaced PAL for DVD.
- A copy of the original version of the Santiag plugin (santiag.avs).
- A .vcf file for the ColorMill, CamcorderColorDenoise, and Curves filters I used in VirtualDub.

I used the same Avisynth script on all 3 samples before joining them together. The QTGMC command statement includes the code to Select Even frames only.The script below also includes commented-out lines that were used to help analyze and setup the Avisynth levels controls:

Import("Drive:\path\to\Avisynth\plugins\santiag.avs")
AviSource("Drive:\path\to\video\Grill party1.avi") #<- same script for Party 2 & 3

# ###--- temporary crop for histogram----
#Crop(0,0,-20,-16)
# ###--- end temporary crop ----

ColorYUV(off_y=-5)
Tweak(cont=1.02,coring=false,dither=true)
Levels(12,0.85,255,16,235,dither=true,coring=false)
ConvertToYV12(interlaced=true)

# ###--- temporary histogram ----
#Histogram("Levels")
#return last
# ###--- end temporary histogram ----

AssumeTFF()
QTGMC(preset="very fast",EZDenoise=10,denoiser="dfttest",ChromaMotion=true,\
   border=true,ChromaNoise=true,DenoiseMC=true,GrainRestore=0.3).SelectEven()
FixChromaBleeding()
ChromaShift(C=4,L=-2)
Santiag(4,4)
MergeChroma(awarpsharp2(depth=30))
ConvertToRGB32(interlaced=false,matrix="Rec601")
Crop(0,0,-22,-12).AddBorders(10,6,12,6)
return last

[mparade]

Hello sanlyn,

Thank you very much. You helped me a lot again.

Regarding the color translation problem, I need to find a solution because after checking the Video-8 captures I realized that all of them has the same "non-uniform green tint border" effect. Other solution would be to crop that stripe, I assume...but I do not want that to happen if it is not a must. It made me a bit said when you wrote an NLE like AE was required to correct such an effect. As far as I remember, I bought such an NLE software long ago, but I have to check first of all (whether it was AE or Premiere Pro, I don't remember).

In the worst case I will buy the license of the preferred (recommended by you for such a correction) software for the minimum of a year or so until I correct all my captures dealt with.

Could you please help me with this "non-uniform green tint border" effect to solve? It would be great also, if even a tutorial existed for such a workflow.

Regards,

mparade

[sanlyn]

The Adobe "Pro" versions are no longer sold, but are rented (Adobe greed wins again). In any case what would be involved is working manually frame-by-frame, in most cases a partial frame and long stretches with no red-loss effects at all. Consider that you're not replacing a single color, but a range of color shades from medium-shadow red to bright red and all shades in between. Also, take a look at the shape and other properties of the disturbance:

Below is a reduced frame 60 from grill party1.avi showing the green strip at the right-hand side that results from the loss of red along portions of the right border (the reduced image is resized for 4:3 display proportions):



The discoloring is apparently from the other camera, or else it's the way the newer camera is reading and tracking an older video recorded elsewhere. The green is at the lower right and also the upper right, where yet another shade of red in the roof is affected. This same roof appears elsewhere but without the green effect. Note also that the original black right border is 22 pixels, while the green effect itself is 16 pixels, which would correspond to the usual SMPTE border area from another camera shooting 4:3 video in a 720-wide frame. The current camera's 22-pixel right border is thicker than usually found with 720x576 PAL and 4:3 DAR.

Below, look at problems from another perspective. The panel has three separated RGB layers converted to grayscale. The brightest shades of colors are bright gray or white in the photo, while darker shades shjow up as dark gray and the absence of a color is black or nearly so. The panels each show 240 pixels of the right=hand side of the frame #60 image.


In the "red" panel note how red is nearly black at the right-hand border, while Green in the "Green" panel is a very light gray indicating green dominance. In the "Blue" panel notice two things: (A) there is a mild deficit of blue along the same discolored areas, which is no surprise, and (B) the blue channel has a lot of noise in the form of thin horizontal bands similar to Hanover bars -- so the discolored border isn't the only problem that plagued one or the other of the cameras. Also, note that the discolored areas aren't a solid-edged band but are feathered along one edge, which complicates any possible masking techniques.

The alternative is cropping (or masking), which isn't as bad as it seems. As it is, 22 pixels of black border are already being cropped or masked, and that doesn't include any actual image content. The offending right-hand band is 16 pixels, and there are 2 pixels of noise on the left that will change shade with any amount of color or levels corrections and become visible against a black background.

In the original filtered mpg and other reworked samples posted earlier, cropping and adding new borders was pretty much the same for all the videos:

Crop(0,0,-22,-12).AddBorders(10,6,12,6)

I'd suggest cropping and mild resizing to fill more of the frame. This resizing takes some care in order to preserve the original pixel aspect ratio and image proportions when the anamorphic frame is displayed as 4:3. With normal cropping of the right black border and bottom head-switching noise, plus additional cropping to include the greenish band and left-hand noise, the resulting image would be 680x564. That image has an aspect ratio of 1.2222:1. So if the image is resized for 576 pixels of height, a proportionate horizontal resize would be 576 * 1.2222, or about 702 pixels. That 702 is an inferior number that isn't mod8 or mod16. The horizontal measure would resize with higher quality if 696 or 704. I tried 704x576 (which happens to be valid for 4:3 anamorphic formats DVD) , but it looked a little "stretched" to me. 696x576 seemed more natural (yuour mileage might differ), and you'd have to add side pixels to get 720x576:

Crop(2,0,-38,-12)
Spline36Resize(696,576).AddBorders(12,0,12,0)

4:3 display result of the earlier crop and added borders:


4:3 display result of added crop + resize + borders:


Technically, I'd say this would be more correct, going strictly by the numbers:

Crop(2,0,-38,-12)
Spline36Resize(704,576).AddBorders(8,0,8,0)

[mparade]

Hello sanlyn,

Being a bit away from the topic:

I have read in an other thread here at DigitalFAQ that one should consider during capturing such equipment like external Proc amps (e.g. SignVideo PA-100) and Detailers (e.g. SignVideo DR-1000) as well. Since I do not know them at all a question to you would be: Do you have some experience with those during capturing?

I really hope I haven't been behind with something in my capturing workflow. My current capturing workflow includes equipment like: JVC S-VHS VCR, TBC-5000, monster cables, and an AIW card. I just would like to know if those external units above could have improved the quality of the captures compared to a "professional" post-processing workflow including the usage of filters in Avisynth and Vdub.

Thank you again as always.

P. S. Thank you very much all your efforts you have done about my problems reported.

mparade

[sanlyn]

The gear you have now is high quality, as good as you'll get without spending 4 figures several times over for pro shop gear, which requires years of training and experience as well as unheard of hardware accessories anyway.

Detailers aren't recommended. They're primitive by today's standards and were designed for the CRT era. If you think noise and other common defects are tricky to remove now, think how capture-time sharpening and "enhancements" would make them much tougher later to clean if not impossible. Also, remember that you can't create or add detail from nothing; all that any component can do is meddle with what's already there. They don't remove noise or defects.

The Sign Video PA-100 doesn't enhance captures; it does the same thing the ATI/VirtualDub proc amp controls do. I own one, purchased new and use it now and then, its main advantage being a builtin LED luminance meter instead of a histogram. With it you would still be obliged to check levels in a capture histogram anyway -- things happen, as they say, between the external proc amp and other components and the capture card. I don't use it for bad tapes because every extra connection and piece of wire degrades the capture to some extent, even if a little. The only PA-100's available now are used. Most require maintenance these days, and there are configuration tricks to using it (for example, this post and the problems discussed elsewhere in the same thread: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...html#post44422).

[lordsmurf]

Detailers are not primitive/useless, and work better than software sharpening. However, they are special needs gear, for specific situations -- not general use gear always in a workflow. Not all tapes need sharpening, and sharpening (hardware or software) always has side effects that must be weighed (benefits analysis).

sanlyn also refers to an archival situation, where you may need an untouched version -- though it can be argued to capture twice, once sharpened and once not.

Same for proc amps. Analog proc amps, in many conditions, can change colors far better than software (including capture-time software proc amp controls). But it's not an always-on sort of device, and is used for specific needs. For example, the AG-1980P contrast/brightness values differece from a more-accurate JVC, and I do a TBC-3000 (TBC + proc amp) in my workflow. But not on all tapes, or even the same tape on a different day (ie, Panasonic caps futzing with things again).

You MUST have a calibrated workflow for color correction (proc amps or whatnot).

A good proc amp is going to cost about $400+ -- SignVideo, Elite Video, DataVideo.

And good luck finding the detailer. About 15 years ago, you could pick one up for under $100 used, but now it's going to run $300 or more if you can locate one.

Of the two, proc amps are more useful. But, again, only if your source needs it. Or if your workflow needs it (aka my 1980 issue).

[msgohan]

mparade's last activity was March 7, but perhaps he is subscribed to this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sanlyn

Below is frame 75 from the original "The hill.avi" with a YUV histogram attached. Blue dominates the image. The histogram shows no yellow or red in the image.

IMO there is a chance that playback VCR is at fault here. You (mparade) said you had 4 JVCs and 1 Panasonic. I'd be interested to see a capture of this from the opposite brand.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mparade

I have attached 3 pcs of my Video-8 captures from 2003. They seem to have definite edge problems
...
- captures were recorded on tape using a Canon UC800 Camera (maybe by using "simply" the automatic settings, I do not remember, unfortunately);
- for capturing I used my Sony DCR-TRV355E with TBC switched on, DNR and filters switched off, using it's s-video output, and Datavideo TBC-5000 as a frame-level TBC. I controlled only the highlights and shadows through the levels filter in Vdub using my X800GT AIW card

If you really care, you could replace the Digital8 with a Hi8 player to avoid the "edge color issue".

http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...y-dcr-trv.html