Identifying source of motion artifact?

[amw2320]

Hi all,

I'm trying to do my first backup of old home videos. Right off the bat, I am hitting some sort of motion artifact, and I'm trying to figure out what could be the source. My system is a JVC-HRS7800U attached to a windows 10 box. Capture card is a Hauppauge WinTV 1600 capturing in VirtualDub via s-video.

There seems to be some sort of ghosting whenever the camera moves which is not present when the VCR is hooked straight up to my TV.

Thanks!

Link to video: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Xy...BXybJ6FB25LgdC

[sanlyn]

Thanks for the sample, but please don't post off site. When your video disappears this thread will be useless. For security reasons many readers will not respond to offsite video links.

Your sample has been converted to RGB32. If you captured to RGB32, it's not recommended. The sample is more than twice the size it would be if you had captured to YUY2 and saved it that way. Take a look at how to make lossless samples and http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/news...ly-upload.html.

Motion smearing is common with many JVC players. I don't use them. Some JVC users should be able to advise.

[traal]

The video was probably taken in really low light, so we should be seeing a lot of sensor noise. The fact that we don't points to some aggressive filtering. Is it possible that it was done in-camera?

[amw2320]

Thanks for the tips, that led me to the issue. Traal, you were correct. I had noise reduction selected in VirtualDub when capturing. Unchecking that solved the problem.

I guess the VCRs built-in DNR + the VirtualDub option was overdoing the noise correction.

Sanyln, thanks for the links, I'll upload directly in the future; I thought I was being kind by not uploading such a huge file. The Hauppauge cannot capture in YUY2, or at least VirtualDub tells me it can't.

[sanlyn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by amw2320

Thanks for the tips, that led me to the issue. Traal, you were correct. I had noise reduction selected in VirtualDub when capturing. Unchecking that solved the problem.

Never use denoising filters during capture. The operative word here is "Never".

Quote:

Originally Posted by amw2320

I guess the VCRs built-in DNR + the VirtualDub option was overdoing the noise correction.

JVC's built-in DNR will soften the image, too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by amw2320

Sanyln, thanks for the links, I'll upload directly in the future; I thought I was being kind by not uploading such a huge file. The Hauppauge cannot capture in YUY2, or at least VirtualDub tells me it can't.

That Hauppauge device is not recommended. I've used 5 recommended capture cards to capture YUY2 since Windows 95, and have read up on dozens of others and seen the output. There are many reasons why RGB isn't recommended, too detailed to go into here. It's been covered many times. Also, the denoisers in VirtualDub capture convert to RGB whether you want it or not.

Whatever . . .Everyone starts somewhere. We all learn as we go.

[themaster1]

i can see that, perhaps vdub don't like your card, try with the provided software to pinpoint the error

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sanlyn

Thanks for the sample, but please don't post off site. When your video disappears this thread will be useless. For security reasons many readers will not respond to offsite video links.

Thank you. Yes, Site Staff policy is to not download from external sites -- though exceptions are made for a few services that we use ourselves (Dropbox, GoogleDrive, Microsoft One). But still best to attach, as users of those services may delete their files, and these threads become worthless for later readers. I truly detest when I go to a site, and the hotlinked sample/proof/file/etc is 404, I wasted time in the thread. We strive to not be like that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by amw2320

I thought I was being kind by not uploading such a huge file.

Correct, huge files are not needed or wanted. Site limits to 99mb attachments. Video clips can be short, and even using 4:2:2 MPEG with high bitrates, or 4:2:2 H.264 with "lossless" (less lossy) CQ modes of 17 or lower (16, 15, etc).

Quote:

There seems to be some sort of ghosting whenever the camera moves which is not present when the VCR is hooked straight up to my TV.

Some sort of NR issues, as already surmised here.

Quote:

The Hauppauge cannot capture in YUY2, or at least VirtualDub tells me it can't.

Which exact model card?
UYVY is fine, too, essentially same as YUY2.

[msgohan]

He did provide the model number in the OP. "Hauppauge WinTV 1600" which is a hardware MPEG-2 encoder. There may be a way to grab uncompressed YUV from it.

As sanlyn alluded to, maybe the problem with RGB-only was simply because amw2320 had VDub's filters enabled. It's not clear what steps he took after disabling that one filter and what others he may have turned on.

[amw2320]

That's correct, a Hauppauge WinTV 1600. I was able to pick up an ATI AIW 9200 before realizing that my PC only took PCI cards, not AGP.

At this point, I am curious as to how much new hardware it is worth throwing into this project. Is anyone who has pulled from these Hauppauge chips vs the AIW able to comment on how significantly different the quality is. If it is truly significant, I may consider buying a new computer (or I guess old computer in this case with AGP slots).

My current capture settings are no filters capturing UYVY and HuffyUV compression with conversion to YUY2.

[Feedbucket]

I did some comparisons between the 1600 and the ATI Theater chip (VE PCI): http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...ti-aiw-ve.html

Though I think some of the assumptions I made in the thread turned out to be incorrect - I think what the 1600 is actually doing is capturing in 4:2:0 (possibly through the MPEG2 encoder) and then upsampling to 4:2:2 incorrectly. This results in some chroma ghosting when you deinterlace. The 1600 looks nicer at first blush but the ATI will give you a more complete representation of the video signal.

The PCI-e AIW 2006 I use now for captures gives pretty much the same result as the VE and could probably still be used in a modern desktop - the VE seemed to have a lot of difficulty running Windows XP in 32-bit color.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feedbucket

I think what the 1600 is actually doing is capturing in 4:2:0 (possibly through the MPEG2 encoder) and then upsampling to 4:2:2 incorrectly. This results in some chroma ghosting when you deinterlace. The 1600 looks nicer at first blush but the ATI will give you a more complete representation of the video signal.

This would be my assumption as well. It makes perfect sense.

Quote:

The PCI-e AIW 2006 I use now for captures gives pretty much the same result as the VE and could probably still be used in a modern desktop - the VE seemed to have a lot of difficulty running Windows XP in 32-bit color.

I've never liked the PCIe because of drivers/MMC. The PCIe drivers often offset the image, and MMC no longer has the dropped frames counter. But it does function, and I'd built several nice PCIe systems for others. My own systems use 9200/9600 AGP, and 7500 PCI. All ATI setups have nuisances, as do all capture cards, and just video in general. Videeo is not a task for the impatient!

[ImminentTax]

Please pardon me for necroing, and hijacking this thread, but that chroma ghosting you guys mention, is that the one where the chroma is 1 frame ahead?