Go Back    Forum > Featured > General Discussion

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #81  
07-13-2022, 03:18 PM
latreche34 latreche34 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 3,257
Thanked 537 Times in 497 Posts
I'm interested but just wanted to make sure you are blowing smoke, So where were we? Oh post #67.

https://www.youtube.com/@Capturing-Memories/videos
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Ads / Sponsors
 
Join Date: ∞
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #82  
07-19-2022, 12:47 PM
harrypm harrypm is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 6
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Well, decoding is vapourware that beats a 500USD conventional setup, attached is internal TBC vs Decode TBC the results are clear as day on a fully serviced NV-HS950B.

The reality of today is anyone can hook up some test probes to a test point and run through a 1-page install doc for hardware, 1-3k USD TBC units are dead in the water for all but expensive previewing use as the up-to-date budget and archival community have evolved.

The only key variable that matters is signal tracking but that's a hard given for anything tape format-wise.

This methodology of copying RF, and decoding later is actually not new at all, if you followed the 2010-2011 NASA landing tape mess they had to decode signals in software off tapes due to a lack of any supporting systems being around.


Attached Images
File Type: jpg Wedding-VHS-ADV-BlackMagic-NV-HS-950B-PAL.jpg (246.9 KB, 26 downloads)
File Type: jpg Wedding-VHS-DdD-Decode-NV-HS-950B-PAL.jpg (62.5 KB, 25 downloads)
The following users thank harrypm for this useful post: RobustReviews (07-19-2022)
  #83  
07-19-2022, 01:36 PM
RobustReviews RobustReviews is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: London - UK
Posts: 568
Thanked 88 Times in 76 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrypm View Post
Well, decoding is vapourware that beats a 500USD conventional setup, attached is internal TBC vs Decode TBC the results are clear as day on a fully serviced NV-HS950B.

The reality of today is anyone can hook up some test probes to a test point and run through a 1-page install doc for hardware, 1-3k USD TBC units are dead in the water for all but expensive previewing use as the up-to-date budget and archival community have evolved.

The only key variable that matters is signal tracking but that's a hard given for anything tape format-wise.

This methodology of copying RF, and decoding later is actually not new at all, if you followed the 2010-2011 NASA landing tape mess they had to decode signals in software off tapes due to a lack of any supporting systems being around.
I'm very much in agreement.

We're a long way beyond the 'fork in the road' on this now, and it's starting to get a touch amusing at some of the views of decode based either on posts from years ago or half-baked misunderstandings.

I've got decode running with a good degree of success (albeit, not perfect) for, by constraint as an experiment, under £100 worth of equipment. It's a bit of a curve to set up, but nothing beyond the keen user willing to invest a bit of time, doubly so when the savings over high-quality conventional capture run, in all reality, into thousands of dollars.

The buy-it-sell-it notion of good quality conventional capture is starting to look less and less appealing in my opinion. It probably was very feasible a few years ago, today it's much more of a gamble, with the inevitable game of 'hot potato' with some of the most sought-after equipment. It's all cheerful until it fails on you and your investment is the final one.

Again, for clarity, I am categorically not accusing anybody of malfeasance. It's simply entropy in action.

Some people will be happy to make investments in conventional capture, and so they should if they feel like it's the way for them. I can't help thinking sometimes discussion of vhs-decode becomes conflated with 'you're denigrating approved methods' which is demonstrably untrue.

Also with decode, if you build a basic little set-up and it's not for you, you've not made a tremendous investment etiher, you can use a scrap VCR from Craigslist/Gumtree for nix and a £25 card plus a £3 lead to get going, then either consider upgrading the VCR or just sell the card again.

Multihead capture is becoming established, as well as FM audio decode. If you're technically minded the sky really is the limit, if you're not, follow basic guides and get some great captures at modest prices.

If you're not at all technical, there are still all of the conventional avenues open.

Documentation is becoming vast and detailed, a thankless task curated by @harrypm as well as others.

Self-appointed gatekeepers don't have to 'like' it, nobody is criticising established methods, but the time has now come for a paradigm shift.

  #84  
07-19-2022, 04:29 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is online now
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,510
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
I think the issue is more politized than it should be.
I'm afraid that the "social media affect" (aka bitching for sport) has taken hold here. As you said, like politics.

The people griping are almost always from these camps
(a) already have and use the gear being discussed, and are simply dissuading other users from getting it too
(b) are griping only about price, and would have griped about price no matter the dollar amount
(c) never had any intention of getting any gear, regardless of price

Quote:
It's pretty simple, hardcore hobbyists and archivists will always find/have the appropriate gear to make good captures, They are not waiting for the holly grail to show up,
yes expensive and exotic but it works almost as good as the VHS-decode,
That's it. These are just tools for tasks we want or need to partake in. Video hobby, video/photo pro, or the family historian. It was never going to be a cheap task. But it's also not expensive compared to historical norms.

Quote:
Such gear is circulating online, I've sold it and it sells.
Yep. It just needs to be good gear, in good condition. Not random junk, or junked out condition.

Quote:
The average Joe looking for a $5 Chinese device just want a convenient way of getting the video signal into storable state regardless of its quality, those are the masses and those are not going to invest in the VHS-decode if it ever happens, they simply don't have the skills to buy one and rig up a VCR or buy a complete system for God who knows how much but it won't be cheap. I think we should stop fantasizing about it, because such devices do exist already, not cheap but they work pretty well.
Exactly it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
$200 for what? The hardware?
200 is just another random number pulled from the buttocks. You may as well act like the immature Elon Musk, at make it 69 or 420.

Quote:
Buy it sell it may sound like snake oil but it is actually the truth, Analog video tapes are not being made or massively recorded anymore so every person has a limited collection of tapes, If done with his project, what is he going to do with the hardware? Sell it of course.
You can sometimes see the "duh factor", the lightbulb flickering on, in a person's head. Too many people do think you buy it, use it, and then put it in a drawer or closet (or even the trash, yikes!). It's so obvious, and yet some overlook it. So this is why I so often repeat it. People do overlook it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by harrypm View Post
Well, decoding is vapourware that beats a 500USD conventional setup, attached is internal TBC vs Decode TBC the results are clear as day on a fully serviced NV-HS950B.
The sample isn't valid because it's using a known-bad Blackmagic card, probably with lack of frame TBC. I'd want to see the comparison between a vetted proper ATI AIW setup, and the vhs-decode. I'd also need to see clips, not stills. I don't doubt the decode is sharper, but it's the other things that are concerning, often failing.

Worth mentioning: the project is better with PAL than NTSC, not really a surprise since most of the project devs are in PAL lands.

Quote:
The reality of today is anyone can hook up some test probes to a test point and run through a 1-page install doc for hardware,
The reality is almost nobody does that, due to lack of tools and knowledge. That's like suggesting most people know how to work on their cars. But the reality is that many struggle with basic operations like turning it on, or finding the gas tank release. Don't make the mistake of thinking your basic niche knowledge is basic common knowledge.

Quote:
1-3k USD TBC units are dead in the water for all but expensive previewing use as
No.

Quote:
the up-to-date budget and archival community have evolved.
The budget consumer is the same as always: cheapest, regardless of quality

The archival community is using tried-and-true gear. Only more adventurous archives are seeking different methods, for a later conversion. They already used the basic kit to convert, often long ago. So far, nothing is really exceeding the basic kit, ROI (or ROT, time) isn't there.

Quote:
The only key variable that matters is signal tracking but that's a hard given for anything tape format-wise.
Not really. Even bad alignment can be compensated with guide repositioning. It just tasks practice, even a bit of luck.

Quote:
This methodology of copying RF, and decoding later is actually not new at all, if you followed the 2010-2011 NASA landing tape mess they had to decode signals in software off tapes due to a lack of any supporting systems being around.
Apples to oranges. Why? You said it: "due to a lack of" hardware. We have hardware for standard conversion of VHS. Anything beyond the standard setup is going to be harder to use, more niche, and won't necessarily be an upgrade. We'd already pushed what's possible, very far, back in the 2000s. vhs-decode mostly squeezes out a % of sharpness, but at the moment there are tradeoffs in image quality. The way to overcome it is dedicated hardware kits to that project. The idea that it can all be done in software, with a random VCR, is dreaming. The key dev himself (right?), oln/hodgey, has already stated he's run into limitations of the capture cards available.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobustReviews View Post
The buy-it-sell-it notion of good quality conventional capture is starting to look less and less appealing in my opinion. It probably was very feasible a few years ago, today it's much more of a gamble, with the inevitable game of 'hot potato' with some of the most sought-after equipment. It's all cheerful until it fails on you and your investment is the final one.
You're confusing quality gear with bitcoins.

Quote:
I can't help thinking sometimes discussion of vhs-decode becomes conflated with 'you're denigrating approved methods' which is demonstrably untrue.
Sometimes it is. Sometimes I'm accused of the opposite, which is also untrue. I just take a realist approach, I'm not a cheerleader.
- Do I want it to succeed? Yes.
- Will it replace extant transfer method? Probably never.

Quote:
Also with decode, if you build a basic little set-up and it's not for you, you've not made a tremendous investment etiher,
This is flawed. You wasted time, and most don't have the time to waste. You may have also ruined your videos, by running it through a cheap POS VCR. The entire notion of "just buy a thrift store VCR" is fatally flawed, bad advice.

Quote:
If you're technically minded the sky really is the limit,
The hardware is the limit. The entire reason you have to scrap together junk for the project is because that's lacking. Better gear conflicts with the purpose of the project, so you can't use that either. So you're stuffed, you're screwed. I don't know what the solution is here, but I know what isn't working. When you use those craptastic consumer VCRs, you're ending up with problems you don't get on the suggested better gear. It's a tradeoff, not a total upgrade in experience of quality. That's the problem. I wish it were different. It is not. I'm not the only one you sees this.

Quote:
Documentation is becoming vast and detailed, a thankless task curated by @harrypm as well as others.
That's great. Keep going. But you have to realize it's not done, not yet viable as a replacement to existing methods. So again ... keep going. Someday, I look forward to recapturing some tapes with an FM method. But that's won't be anytime soon. And I'm not waiting for it, I'm using what exists now, to get the best that exists now.

Quote:
Self-appointed gatekeepers
If you're referencing me, I think you'll find it's not self appointed. That's how my career got started. I was minding my own business, sharing my notes online, sharing my work, and the right people noticed. An accidental career was born. The best experts in fields are recognized, not self appointed. And we tend to shirk the label "expert", it feels wrong. And yet, it's not, we eventually come to terms with it (see also: imposter syndrome). I still avoid that label. I just know lots of stuff, have decades of experience. If that makes me an expert, so be it.

... and none of this has anything to do with the false notion of Kickstarter for TBCs.
Getting off-topic.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
  #85  
07-19-2022, 06:30 PM
harrypm harrypm is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 6
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
The sample isn't valid because it's using a known-bad Blackmagic card, probably with lack of frame TBC. I'd want to see the comparison between a vetted proper ATI AIW setup, and the vhs-decode. I'd also need to see clips, not stills. I don't doubt the decode is sharper, but it's the other things that are concerning, often failing.
The example is using the internal TBC of the NV-HS950B, looks like it does in the still on the PVM.

The Blackmagic ADV7842-based hardware output is all the same, the only factor is how much ram and how lazy the developers are, Magewell does it better and BrightEyes make bank off it, at the end of the day its the same chip same quality potential, hard-limited by the baseband output of the source device these are meant for live signals when stipped down but could be on part with broadcast TBC units when fully used to spec.

(Being next to an FPGA in a closed metal box with no heat sync and no fans hur dur take the lid off and put a fan on it)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
Apples to oranges. Why? You said it: "due to a lack of" hardware. We have hardware for standard conversion of VHS. Anything beyond the standard setup is going to be harder to use, more niche, and won't necessarily be an upgrade. We'd already pushed what's possible, very far, back in the 2000s. vhs-decode mostly squeezes out a % of sharpness, but at the moment there are tradeoffs in image quality. The way to overcome it is dedicated hardware kits to that project. The idea that it can all be done in software, with a random VCR, is dreaming. The key dev himself (right?), oln/hodgey, has already stated he's run into limitations of the capture cards available.

The initial goal was to preserve the medium's signal content as a 1:1 backup of tapes, i.e the modulated signal not the ‘’Visual Media’ content this is not baseband S-Video/Composite capture, so there are no ''capture card limitations'' in any practical sense of the word as its not video capture.

It's like a positive or slide photo its the original, captures using the baseband outputs are cheep prints in this case just an imitation of the original source material, decode skips that and projects the original image directly, all things such as chroma noise reduction, sharpness and the like are merely arbitrary parameters adjustable as it is on a physical box.

This cuts out physically moving and wearing the tape more and more, you have unlimited ability to process in-post due to having all the information in a non ''baked video'' format.

Kits would cost more when it's sub 40-100GBP of total hardware that can be sourced locally cheaper it's an international project, not just westerners bear that in mind the CX Cards are china direct the rest can be sourced locally for free/next to nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
That's great. Keep going. But you have to realize it's not done, not yet viable as a replacement to existing methods. So again ... keep going. Someday, I look forward to recapturing some tapes with an FM method. But that's won't be anytime soon. And I'm not waiting for it, I'm using what exists now, to get the best that exists now.
It works off 8-bit or 16-bit RF samples so any off-shelf ADC that does 4fsc (14.3Mhz NTSC & 17.9Mhz PAL) or higher works perfectly fine the CX Cards can do this perfectly at stock, and the DomesDayduplicator just does 40mhz over USB 3.0 it's a plug and play option its been here in hardware for over 20 years just the software was not, today it's here not as speed efficient as real-time hardware, but far more effective from a restorative or production house perspective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
The hardware is the limit. The entire reason you have to scrap together junk for the project is because that's lacking. Better gear conflicts with the purpose of the project, so you can't use that either. So you're stuffed, you're screwed. I don't know what the solution is here, but I know what isn't working. When you use those craptastic consumer VCRs, you're ending up with problems you don't get on the suggested better gear. It's a tradeoff, not a total upgrade in experience of quality. That's the problem. I wish it were different. It is not. I'm not the only one you sees this.
Head-Drum - Pre-Amps - Tracking IC is the hardware limits, but as you said tape guides can be adjusted, but here are the things that matter to the current state of things, decks across the board are fairly equal aside from JVC they have weaker RF output this is a tested fact, funny enough there is not much difference between a Samsung/Orion deck and a K-Mech based deck like the AG1980 or NV-HS950B you could not tell with a blind test on a modern calibrated Proart display or PVM CRT.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
‘’Worth mentioning: the project is better with PAL than NTSC, not really a surprise since most of the project devs are in PAL lands.’’
NTSC/PAL are both equal in terms of decoding due to exact technical standards data being available, no clue what you are on about with this there is no quality bias only hard format limitations and you're forgetting PAL-M/SECAM/MUSECAM/NTSC-J etc which are also supported.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
The archival community is using tried-and-true gear. Only more adventurous archives are seeking different methods, for a later conversion. They already used the basic kit to convert, often long ago. So far, nothing is really exceeding the basic kit, ROI (or ROT, time) isn't there.
Archival is the preservation of information as original as possible, you can not preserve VBI data with standard equipment as such conventional methods are inferior to this basic idea unless you can provide me with a device that produces perfectly post tweakable full 4fsc data?

(That's the full 1135x625 PAL & 910x525 NTSC area for reference that's what VHS-Decode outputs to the aptly named .TBC format)
  #86  
07-19-2022, 07:34 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is online now
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,510
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrypm View Post
The example is using the internal TBC of the NV-HS950B
That still looks like typical Panasonic caps issue, making it a bad field TBC. Field TBC isn't frame sync TBC, there are differences (to the layman, line/field fixes image, frame fixes signal, you need both). BM fully chokes without frame. Then again, it still often chokes even with TBCs. It's just an overall awful card for SD analog use.

Quote:
The Blackmagic ADV7842-based hardware output is all the same, the only factor is how much ram and how lazy the developers are,
Too many people focus on that chip. And BM developers were apparently way lazy.

Quote:
at the end of the day its the same chip same quality potential, hard-limited by the baseband output of the source device these are meant for live signals when stipped down but could be on part with broadcast TBC units when fully used to spec.
I'm not sure it has too much potential. Some cards added it, then disabled it for ... no reason? Right. This chip itself may be fine, but that chip alone doesn't seem to be able to handle everything (line based) as needed.

Quote:
(Being next to an FPGA in a closed metal box with no heat sync and no fans hur dur take the lid off and put a fan on it)
Yep.

Quote:
The initial goal was to preserve the medium's signal content as a 1:1 backup of tapes, i.e the modulated signal not the ‘’Visual Media’ content this is not baseband S-Video/Composite capture, so there are no ''capture card limitations'' in any practical sense of the word as its not video capture.
But it does require capture, and available cards are apparently limiting to the project. It may not be the same use, but it is being used.

Quote:
It's like a positive or slide photo its the original, captures using the baseband outputs are cheep prints
No, I disagree with that entirely. "cheap prints" is when you use cheap hardware. Quality hardware, quality prints. As a photographer, I think you're also overestimating positives/slide quality. But that makes my point: it's not better, just different. vhs-decode is indeed trying to grab a "more true" signal, and it's definitely sharper (true sharpness, actual resolve) as a result. But at what cost? There are downsides, it's not all sunshine and rainbows.

Quote:
This cuts out physically moving and wearing the tape more
Tape wear happens outside VCRs, and in fact mostly outsides VCRs. So what you suggest doesn't matter, aside from re-capturing.

Quote:
Kits would cost more
- Serious users will not care about costs, within reason.
- Casual users will not be major adopters, regardless of a cheap price.

This is a typical issue of engineers/devs not seeing the bigger non-technical picture. vhs-decode has already created a race to the bottom, which is completely opposed to the goal of better quality. You cannot have both.

Quote:
the CX Cards are china direct the rest can be sourced locally for free/next to nothing.
aka, the capture cards.

Quote:
NTSC/PAL are both equal in terms of decoding
I don't know why the qualifier "in terms of decoding". I've been following the VH thread for years now, and NTSC has more issues than PAL. But I also think it's due to dev preference (not really "preference" as much as happenstance) to be in a PAL land.

Most samples are also from higher-quality retail tapes, not the bog standard crap we all made at home with VCRs and camcorders. The retail tape was contact reproduced, not recorded. That does make a difference. This has been discussed on other sites, and various devs have acknowledged as much.
For example, here https://www.reddit.com/r/VHS/comment...eb2x&context=3

Quote:
Archival is the preservation of information as original as possible, you can not preserve VBI data
Why does VBI need to be preserved? In some situations, sure. But all? No.

Again, I support this project. But I'm going to be very realistic about what it is, does, can do, may do. It's ironic that I sometimes get criticized for insisting a standard workflow needs a line TBC (so the video doesn't look like crap), yet others get a pass when describing absolute overkill. The VBI signal is archaic and meaningless to the final digital capture. For example, documentaries won't get better because VBi was left attached. Those just need quality captured footage, and the filmmakers work magic with the available sources.

Quote:
with standard equipment as such conventional methods are inferior
In theory, I don't doubt that. But the practical application is the weak point. It takes fiddling not need with traditional capture methods. It's not a case of acquiring good gear, inserting tapes, and capturing. No, this has time needed to tweak and massage each tape, and the ROI for time spent will not pass muster for most. The output of quality standard methods is not just "good enough", but excellent. I'm sure the quality of vhs-decode can be excellent, in theory, but it's just not proving to be reliable right now. Maybe later?

I don't BS easily, so keep it real. I can see the potential of vhs-decode, but it's not ready. And you have to acknowledge that it may never be ready, or take many years. It's definitely not a currently viable solution for any sort of mass use. Keep at it, at least keep trying.

Quote:
(That's the full 1135x625 PAL & 910x525 NTSC area for reference that's what VHS-Decode outputs to the aptly named .TBC format)
Was something supposed to be attached?

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
  #87  
07-20-2022, 05:53 AM
hodgey hodgey is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,680
Thanked 447 Times in 384 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
I don't know why the qualifier "in terms of decoding". I've been following the VH thread for years now, and NTSC has more issues than PAL. But I also think it's due to dev preference (not really "preference" as much as happenstance) to be in a PAL land.
The PAL chroma decoder is more sofisticated than the NTSC one as of now as it uses the PAL Transform decoder, while for NTSC it's a more run of the mill 2d/3d comb filter. That's in part due to technical limitations as the transform approach relies on some pal-specific properties (though there is a variant for NTSC in development too). That difference mainly impacts laserdisc though, as that is composite while vhs has separate Y/C on tape. Chroma is one area where vhs-decode seems to be able to give less noisy output regardless of system than any conventional vcr I've seen without any extra noise reduction. Maybe it's a result of tbc being done before upconversion which was rarely done in vcrs other than a handful of JVC decks like the WVHS decks (not the later TBC/3DDNR models) but not sure.

NTSC sometimes have a bit of tint/phase offset on the chroma, which remains to be sorted properly, though that can be adjusted easily if needed.

There shouldn't be any other specific differences between PAL and NTSC on it's own otherwise, the luma part works the same way other than line count/frame rate and what exact frequency band it's modulated on to.

vhs-decode still has a fair bit to go to be a practical alternative of course, sand not a replacement for a good digitizing setup as of now, so don't see it as a competitor. It's slowly chugging along and being worked on though.

Ideally we would have an easy software decoded composite capture alternative which would be very easy to set up, but we lack a solid way of capturing raw composite as of now (cx card does weird stuff when detecting composite that we haven't been able to work around and DDD and SDR otpions end up filtering out the lowest frequencies.)

My Video gear overview/test/repair/stuff yt channel http://youtu.be/cEyfegqQ9TU
  #88  
07-24-2022, 12:00 AM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is online now
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,510
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by hodgey View Post
The PAL chroma decoder is more sofisticated than the NTSC one as of now as it uses the PAL Transform decoder, while for NTSC it's a more run of the mill 2d/3d comb filter. That's in part due to technical limitations as the transform approach relies on some pal-specific properties (though there is a variant for NTSC in development too).
This is (I think, mostly) what I refer to. It's not 1:1, limits, flaws.

Quote:
Chroma is one area where vhs-decode seems to be able to give less noisy output regardless of system than any conventional vcr I've seen without any extra noise reduction. Maybe it's a result of tbc being done before upconversion which was rarely done in vcrs other than a handful of JVC decks like the WVHS decks (not the later TBC/3DDNR models) but not sure.
Chroma noise suppression?
The vhs-decode TBC?
If so, I don't know. I don't think TBC has much to do with chroma handling, specifically referring to inherent VHS weakness of chroma noise.

Quote:
NTSC sometimes have a bit of tint/phase offset on the chroma, which remains to be sorted properly, though that can be adjusted easily if needed.
See, I disagree here. At least, I think I do. DV cooks colors/chroma, massive flaw of NTSC. (Before you say "this has nothing to do with DV", follow along...) The problem with conversions that give false colors is that original intent coloring is lost. With a generic camcorder-shot home movie, the coloring sucks anyway. Even proc amp often can't fix it. But anything not homemade is harmed. It's bad enough the VHS inherently screwed with colors/contrast/etc, but to go a step futher (like DV; see, it was relevant!) is a big problem, big no-no.

Quote:
There shouldn't be any other specific differences between PAL and NTSC on it's own otherwise, the luma part works the same way other than line count/frame rate and what exact frequency band it's modulated on to.
But beyond luma/chroma, there's still issues like dropout compensation.

Quote:
vhs-decode still has a fair bit to go to be a practical alternative of course, sand not a replacement for a good digitizing setup as of now, so don't see it as a competitor. It's slowly chugging along and being worked on though.
Ideally we would have an easy software decoded composite capture alternative which would be very easy to set up, but we lack a solid way of capturing raw composite as of now (cx card does weird stuff when detecting composite that we haven't been able to work around and DDD and SDR otpions end up filtering out the lowest frequencies.)
Realism, hooray!

You, and (I think) zcooger, have always been somewhat grounded in reality.
Whereas some of the others devs, cheerleaders, and fanboys have utopian dreams about magical FM video conversion.

It reminds me the Tesla fanboys/fangirls, that seem to think all cars will be flying AI driverless Teslas, and by end of the decade. It's just beyond stupid. No realism, no understanding of the technical hurdles and headwinds.

And remember, VHS conversion is a legacy task with an expiration date (like developing film). As the clock on this vhs-decode project runs up (just shy of a decade old now, right?), the clock on people who need/want it winds down. New drapes for a phone booth?

The current practical method is the typical VCR>TBC>ingest method. And not just any random gear (VCRs, TBCs, cards, recorders, etc), but the items known to perform this task well. That gear is rightfully in demand, and will remain so probably into the 2030s. The entire reason I started to acquire and refurb gear (and resell in the marketplace here) is because I foresaw a day when gear would be harder to find in good condition. I didn't want to just say "sucks to be you", and then give worthless advice for hardware that didn't exist.

At this exact moment, vhs-decode is somewhat like the almost-but-not devices of years past. The capture cards with a TBC/"TBC" that was weak to useless, the excellent VCR with flaws, etc. Pros and cons, with cons that overrode pros.

I know that vhs-decode isn't "done" yet, but the possibility still exists that it could be practical vaporware. Not true vaporware, just the practicality. Sort of like Schrödinger's cat of video capture, the project is observed to both fail and succeed. But we won't know definitively until vhs-decode actually done. But it's not done, won't be anytime soon, and therefore it's currently not viable. If it's never done, it'll never be viable.

Tape degradation is also real, and waiting on this project is not prudent. In the 2000s, this was BS, but now it's 20 years later, and that 35-65 year tape longevity is at 45+ years for the oldest 70s VHS tapes, 35+ for early 80s tapes. Run the project now with best gear, assume vhs-decode never happens. But hold back tapes to re-run if/when vhs-decode is practical. So I want to see this project succeed, and re-run some of my own special "deserves the best" tapes. But it won't be now, or even soon (years). I don't know why others are so obstinate to this obvious fact. I see this, you see this, latreche, etc.

... and thread drifting off-topic again.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
  #89  
07-24-2022, 04:49 PM
latreche34 latreche34 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 3,257
Thanked 537 Times in 497 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
Whereas some of the others devs, cheerleaders, and fanboys have utopian dreams about magical FM video conversion.

It reminds me the Tesla fanboys/fangirls, that seem to think all cars will be flying AI driverless Teslas, and by end of the decade. It's just beyond stupid. No realism, no understanding of the technical hurdles and headwinds.
Those Fanboys/fangirls have weird ideas too, take a look at this, it is within the lengthy VHS-decode thread itself, I tried responding to him and gave up since it's hard to reason with folks like that.
  #90  
07-24-2022, 05:59 PM
RobustReviews RobustReviews is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: London - UK
Posts: 568
Thanked 88 Times in 76 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
Those Fanboys/fangirls have weird ideas too, take a look at this, it is within the lengthy VHS-decode thread itself, I tried responding to him and gave up since it's hard to reason with folks like that.
Yes, the post is nonsense, I couldn't make 'head nor tail' of the blasted thing myself.

But you've still got all your work ahead of you, a sample of 1 isn't that useful. I can find plenty of examples of absolute nonsense posted on here (LordSmurf often entirely breaks universal mathematical Laws when there's input on electrical subjects) but it would be unfair to tarnish a whole community with that, and it doesn't detract from knowledge elsewhere. There are odd posts that pop up in any community, no matter the subject.

You're right insomuch as that post is nonsense, but it doesn't really advance any counterargument. If every group was reduced to one poster, one member, one topic pointing fingers would become a wholly futile act.

Happy to provide resources on here to established members getting some fundamental topics entirely 'arse backwards' such as to cause mirth elsewhere. Do we then discount everything else?
  #91  
07-24-2022, 09:21 PM
latreche34 latreche34 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 3,257
Thanked 537 Times in 497 Posts
Not me buddy, when I say VHS-decode is not ready for prime time "yet", it was never because individuals like the one I linked to, I know it has potential and merits, I know it can be done, It is just as of right know not a viable option for a lot of folks like myself. When it becomes a product I will certainly buy it, If you go back to some of my old posts over at VH, I even offered financial help for the project to a few members there if they ever needed to build or acquire hardware, no one responded though. Then later it became clear that the project wasn't dragging because finances but because the complexity of the hardware and software and the issues that it faces.

https://www.youtube.com/@Capturing-Memories/videos
  #92  
07-24-2022, 10:07 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is online now
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,510
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
I tried responding to him and gave up since it's hard to reason with folks like that.
Reddit and Youtube often get lemming cheerleaders for the project, but only in a vague sense. Then they disappear. I can only assume they see what is required and involved (not even the quality issues, but because "work is hard, wah"), and then make no mention of it ever again. Never underestimate lazy.

So not only does vhs-decode have to compete with quality gear, but lazy users. The demographic is being eroded from both ends.

Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
Not me buddy, when I say VHS-decode is not ready ... I know it can be done,
I'm less sure than that. Why? Technological headwinds. For example, in the world of science, there are many advances that are seemingly possible on paper, and yet don't show fruition. As you accomplish more and more of the goals needed, the curve steepens. The low hanging fruit is never the issues, it's the problems at the top of the curve. Right now, it's only viable in a hobby/tinker sense (with issues), not any sort of production sense (smooth operation, providing a path of least resistance). That's the hurdle here. It's very likely that a ground-up chip design will need to be fabbed, as all available chips seem to have weakness and oddities.

This goofy "bailing wire and duct tape" style of video gear is not the norm, be it (somewhat foolishly) trying to use a DVD recorder as a TBC (it's not), trying HD/HDMI garbage converters (including overpriced Blackmagic/Magewell) on SD (which butchers the output quality worse than the tape source), and cobbling together random crap as proclaiming "good enough" (aka, an excuse for low quality methods). vhs-decode has to break from that mentality as well, if anything is to work in a production capacity. Not random junk VCRs, etc.

That brings us full circle to the initial topic of this thread. But it quickly turned into discussing building a TBC from random junk, and selling cheap on Kickstarter (or free "open-source" instructions). It's just nonsensical. This is the sort of runaway topic/discussion that happens online when the participants don't know what they don't know. (See also, why we have so many political loons these days, created crazy crap in their heads, and putting it online for other gullible lemmings to believe and follow.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobustReviews View Post
(LordSmurf often entirely breaks universal mathematical Laws when there's input on electrical subjects)
Off-topic...

Just can't help yourself, can you? More passive aggressive BS.

There's an episode of The Big Bang Theory that guest stars Brian Greene. (Do you know who that is? He tries to explain complex science in laymen terms.) He's giving a book tour, and Sheldon makes snarky condescending statements denigrating his good work. It's one of the few times I found Sheldon uncouth and completely out of line, the joke really wasn't funny (especially now in retrospect, given the anti-science slant these days). You're being Sheldon.

I explain things so others can understand. I don't give a damned about the technical accuracy or jargon at that time. I can only guess you've never had to teach students. You cannot bury and drown them, subjects must be eased into, even at the collegiate level.

Furthermore, assuming you refer to AC adapters here, you have theory vs. practice issues. Science isn't as clean cut as you suggest. And to be blunt, I have no interest in getting electronics electrical advice from somebody that a mere lineman decades ago. That knowledge does not necessarily translate, for multiple reasons.

So enough of your BS, the passive aggressive comments.

Enough!

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
  #93  
07-25-2022, 06:45 AM
RobustReviews RobustReviews is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: London - UK
Posts: 568
Thanked 88 Times in 76 Posts
------------

Last edited by lordsmurf; 07-25-2022 at 07:14 AM. Reason: No, no more. Enough. -LS
  #94  
07-25-2022, 07:43 AM
harrypm harrypm is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 6
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
First off this thread is becoming a meme replacing processing hardware with software is the future due to pure flexibility.

However both lordsmurf & latreche34 are 10-13 months out of the loop the VideoHelp Thread is a legacy userbase mostly from the LaserDisc side and is not using current documentation or methods.

Hell, not even a single mention about CVBS decode which does what a traditional TBC setup does use that baseband signal out the back to a digital file no need for the original source signal no need for control over the demodulation process just run whatever you get though the TBC code and that's that, wait ain't this like apples to oranges huh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post

Why does VBI need to be preserved? In some situations, sure. But all? No.

(Context 4fsc readout at the bottom) Was something supposed to be attached?
SVHS has VITC SMPTE timecode on every SVHS tape-recorded on a camcorder from 1993+ as well as a lot of other media, this is not just limited to (S)VHS.

Now, 1135x625 PAL & 910x525 NTSC the 4fsc standard is what's hard decoded from the RF capture, if there is frame jump or shifting etc not only is that saved into the .TBC but is extractable and editable instead of hard cut but this also tells you about tape condition and other errors you would not see in the pre-cropped SD-SDI signal or Desktop PCIE card capture inside the 720x576/720x480 area.

Also, not everyone can afford a PVM/BVM to do H/V delay checks or wants to tinker with their VCR or CRT's to see if there is data with decode a simple test capture and decode takes a mear few minutes, with there is no worry or need for supporting equipment to convert that into LTC for standard editing it's just an FFMPEG filter and copy paste into any standard NLE.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post

No, I disagree with that entirely. "cheap prints" is when you use cheap hardware. Quality hardware, quality prints. As a photographer, I think you're also overestimating positives/slide quality. But that makes my point: it's not better, just different. vhs-decode is indeed trying to grab a "more true" signal, and it's definitely sharper (true sharpness, actual resolve) as a result. But at what cost? There are downsides, it's not all sunshine and rainbows.

Tape wear happens outside VCRs, and in fact mostly outsides VCRs. So what you suggest doesn't matter, aside from re-capturing.
If it's not the full 4fsc sampled signal output without extra scaling and processing it's no where near to the original of the medium in terms of resolving power but the resolving power is 200-400 ish lines on colour under tape so lol.

Tape Ware: I mean shedding mostly here as you cant get that magnetic signal value back when it's physically gone forever.

As a photographer If you cant resolve past 1:1 grain resolution you cant print an original quality anything, why I like digital so much its less fuss then having to drum scan everything but we do have 1:1 that's the RF copy, decode is the print in this analogy too I'm just saying its a better print without buying the 1895 printing press.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post

Tape degradation is also real, and waiting on this project is not prudent. In the 2000s, this was BS, but now it's 20 years later, and that 35-65 year tape longevity is at 45+ years for the oldest 70s VHS tapes, 35+ for early 80s tapes. Run the project now with best gear, assuming the vhs-decode never happens. But hold back tapes to re-run if/when vhs-decode is practical. So I want to see this project succeed, and re-run some of my own special "deserves the best" tapes. But it won't be now, or even soon (years). I don't know why others are so obstinate to this obvious fact. I see this, you see this, latreche, etc.
You forgot to discriminate the fact that the RF capture process is finished today, working and is based on universal hardware.

Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
When it becomes a product I will certainly buy it
Anyone can pick up CX Cards and install CXADC on any cheap desktop and capture this data off any colour under tape format VCR with test points.

That is the 1:1 copy, saved today to be decoded today or tomorrow.

Tape decoding is after the RF of the medium is captured and saved, not during the decoding process.

That's a hard reality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post

Again, I support this project.
Then categorically prove it with one simple act RF capture your "deserves the best" tapes today, decode them on this week's release, then re-decode them in 1-5 years or more or sit on them and let them demagnetise in the background of solar flairs increasing seeing is believing so go see for yourself how far its come

Then tell me what you think or better yet post an uncompressed video on the internet archive

Currently, with full chroma phase correction and the full-field TBC already working perfectly fine on VHS/SVHS/Umatic it will still beat out anyone with a Panasonic internal TBC or DMR-ES10 the most common affordable methods.

There is dropout detection and correction, and of interesting note, Macrovision is also being slowly removed from ''the picture'' literally with the demodulation side being able to detect it and ignore its effect.

So as long as you can get that RF data with a copy of the project of today on a 100GB M-Disk or two and read it in 30-40 years then decode has done what it was meant to do replace the VCR and its functions with software and archive the original untouched mediums information in a universal format RF samples.

Decode wins today with conventional alongside for hardware reference, It's allowing one-and-done archival today, to the consumer it's the affordable option to the equipment scalping community its death, to the restorative and archival communities it's the first analogue toolset foundation with a value equivalent of FFMPEG in the digital realm.
The following users thank harrypm for this useful post: RobustReviews (07-25-2022)
  #95  
07-25-2022, 08:11 AM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is online now
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,510
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrypm View Post
the VideoHelp Thread is a legacy userbase mostly from the LaserDisc side and is not using current documentation or methods.
That's never been my impression or understanding.

Quote:
Hell, not even a single mention about CVBS decode
No, it's there.

Quote:
which does what a traditional TBC setup does
No.

Quote:
Then tell me what you think
I have nothing more to add. My position is already quite clear.

Quote:
Currently, with full chroma phase correction and the full-field TBC already working perfectly fine on VHS/SVHS/Umatic it will still beat out anyone with a Panasonic internal TBC or DMR-ES10 the most common affordable methods.
All this statement shows me is that you don't understand the difference between TBCs. Frame, frame sync, field, line, etc.

Quote:
being slowly
So as long as you can get that RF data
That's the crux of the comments. It's not ready for primetime yet.

Quote:
with a copy of the project of today on a 100GB M-Disk or two and read it in 30-40 years
More not understanding media, namely video and optical. The M-Disk stuff is BS marketing, and the concern in 30-40 will be having hardware that reads the discs. Why? Because lasers have finite lifespans, far shorter than even a decade. So in multiple decades, good luck with that.

Quote:
Decode wins today with conventional alongside for hardware reference,
Well, that's your opinion, and I think it's extremely wrong. Again, for reason outlined already. I see no reason to keep repeating myself.

Quote:
the affordable option to the equipment scalping community its death,
That's really what this is about to some folks. Trying to be cheap. Quality be damned, issues are ignored. Save some dollars, bestest ever! Sorry, but no. You won't get the high end, nor the low end, with this mindset. See my comment above about "duct tape and bailing wire" mentality. Until that attitude is stripped out, vhs-decode will flounder. It needs far more QoS and auditing to be taken seriously.

Quote:
to the restorative and archival communities it's the first analogue toolset
No.

Quote:
with a value equivalent of FFMPEG in the digital realm.
I think you vastly overestimate the value of reverse engineer software to the archive/preservation/restoration community. I refer to the actual community, not people at home trying to restore videos from Youtube, bootlegs, or VHS tapes of junior playing T-ball. We buy software if needed.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
  #96  
07-25-2022, 10:51 AM
RobustReviews RobustReviews is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: London - UK
Posts: 568
Thanked 88 Times in 76 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
It needs far more QoS and auditing to be taken seriously.
To be taken seriously by whom?
  #97  
07-25-2022, 10:56 AM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is online now
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,510
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobustReviews View Post
To be taken seriously by whom?
Anybody that cares about quality, ROI, etc. At the moment, it's a toy for tinkerers, it's not a production tool. This was already discussed. You should be able to connect the dots here.

Not only has this thread gone off-topic, but now the off-topic is circular.

So that's enough of that. /done.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Closed Thread




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A Kickstarter campaign for modern VCRs? ddw_119 General Discussion 4 11-20-2021 11:33 AM
AIW build specs? DEAGS1978 Project Planning, Workflows 2 11-15-2019 03:33 AM
PC build with ATI All-In-Wonder X800/9200? misieeq Capture, Record, Transfer 17 06-19-2018 01:35 AM
VHS to digital PC build with ATI AIW? gable74 Capture, Record, Transfer 5 02-04-2018 12:41 AM
DV repair software on Kickstarter - is it any good? robertsharp Restore, Filter, Improve Quality 2 06-19-2013 07:12 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:10 AM