Capturing VHS with SCART to HDMI converter?
 

Can I use a scart to HDMI converter like this for capturing VHS from a VCR ?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Wentronic-6.../dp/B002Z7PFP6
Seems to be identical to Goobay Scart/HDMI konverter, Upscales to 720p HD

Or this
SVHS to HDMI 720p HD
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Wentronic-6.../dp/B002Z7XL9S

And then capture with a HDMI capture device.

Right now my workflow is
VCR > Panasonic ES15 > Hauppauge USB 2 Live > PC

But I would like a quicker workflow where I can capture directly in MP4, deinterlaced, HD and without the overscan borders.

It's really upsetting to continue to see endless streams of posts like this. But, then, that's my problem I guess, not yours. My own misgivings aside:

The answer is NO to HDMI. It looks inferior to s-video (y/c as it's sometimes called overseas) from VHS and using HDMI for VHS sources introduces additional and undesirable processing and announces your inexperience to the world. Besides, if you really want a VHS->HDMI converter worth its salt it will cost you well into 5 figures Euro, and that doesn't include a decimal point. Why set top players were allowed to hype HDMI for analog sources crudely exploits user misinformation and should have been outlawed from the start.

The answer is NO to upscaling to try to make SD VHS into fuzzy HD. It looks like crap and loudly announces you as a novice.

Deinterlacing is a destructive process. You don't do it with your professional DVD's and cable broadcasts before viewing them on your TV, do you? It's done only when necessary for specific processing requirements or for internet posting and streaming. The only method you should use for deinterlacing is QTGMC. If your players and display devices can't deinterlace or inverse telecine properly, no amount of work on your part will will make them look better on those devices. Players and display devices that are able to deinterlace and upscale properly can do it a whole lot better than you can on your PC.

I want upscaled deinterlaced MP4
1. Upscaled because i want square pixels. 720 x 576 will display too narrow as 5:4 on some players (you often see it on Youtube)
2. Deinterlaced because some software players does not deinterlace automatically. I use QTGMC and I think it does fine job.
3. MP4 because that is the format that can be played on most players and devices.


The capture with HDMI has some dedicated followers, so I think it cannot be all wrong.
https://gleitz.info/forum/index.php?...en-und-andere/
http://www.hifi-forum.de/viewthread-54-17166-2.html

The cropping, upscaling, deinterlacing and conversion to MP4 I use now (Megui, Avisynth) is quite timeconsuming. Maybe 2 hours for one hour video.
I am interested in an alternative quick workflow in acceptable quality. But of course not if the quality is visibly poorer.

Since you've already answered your own questions and made up your mind based on sources like those that most of us have been looking at for many years, then what exactly are you asking?

Post relevant video samples here if you have specific problems. Meanwhile let us know how the project works out.

The method talked about there is capturing interlaced at the original resolution still. It's not a bad way approach, it's essentially just grabbing the output signal from the DVD-Recorder digitally over HDMI instead of from one of the analog outputs (like you do on the ES15). I use that approach myself a bit, with either a Sony or Panasonic recorder. That won't give you are ready-to-use processed mp4 file.

You could in theory capture an upscaled deinterlaced signal from those recorders, though in my experience at least, they don't do a very good job at it. Not that upscalers do either really. Got an rca to hdmi dongle here, and it looks absolutely horrible, but it seems not all those that are sold are quite as bad, seems a bit hit and miss though.

If you desperately want a direct-to-mp4 solution, maybe something like this would work, at least you will have some idea of what you are getting.

In either case whatever you use, you can at least put the ES15 in the chain if the device you are using has trouble handle the VHS signal.

My misgivings about HDMI output from analog devices is that the conversions suck most of the time, and so does HDMI wire which is nothing more than cheap remounted 100-ohm ethernet cable that mangles digital sources far less than analog source. That aside, unless you have a first class and very expensive upscaler you're better off capping at 480x576 interlaced lossless, so you'll have an archive-ready facsimile of your original source that can take you into any number of final format conversions, including some that haven't even been invented yet. I think you'll also find that the head-switching border will be the least of your VHS defects, which will look pretty awful by the time YouTube gets finished with it.

It's no news to us that internet players can't handle interlace, can't handle telecine, don't resize well, and can't handle non-square formats. So for 4:3 originals, folks like YouTube with their pretty dumb online players require that you get your capture into progressive double-frame-rate mode with QTGMC, resize to 960x720 (Avisynth's spline64 algorithm and nnedi3-rpow2 do a neat job of upsizing), then add side pillars to make the 16:9 1280x720 frame they usually require. YouTube will resize and down-sample the bitrate for several choice sizes before mounting, so do a clean job (because they'll use the quickest and dirtiest methods they can and certainly won't make any improvements for you).

The problem with those workflow links you posted is that they use a crappy VCR with composite output only, then input it into the DVD recorder and convert it to S-Video and then convert it to digital, upscale it and de-interlace it, total butchery, If they believe in that workflow they should have used a S-VHS VCR that can extract the Y/C signal from tape without further damage. I get it that if you must use HDMI to get samples out of the tape for demonstration or making a video but that workflow is definitely not for archiving or restoration.

You won't be getting anything decent with those crappy scalers/deinterlacers. The good ones go for €800+...

:mad4: You should read the workflow links. This was a huge project over 3 years. They had tested many captures cards and close every dvd recorder which have been available on german market. The testfiles were made from the user Goldwingfahrer (which was similar to LordSmurf in the german speaking video community, a professional from switzerland) who have had more vcrs as we all togehter and if he was involved you can believe his testing was done in the right way. Testcaptures have been made for example with Panasonic AG-8600, Panasonic HS1000, Panasonic FS-88, JVC BR822, JVC BR522, JVC HR-9600, JVC HR-9850, Philips VR1100, Philips VR1500 and a few more. The user "Gubel" who have written the tutorial has used a SVHS Philips VR1100 vcr and an Medion VCR. This was his own player which one has recorded most of his vhs tapes.
If you use a dvd recorder in passthrough mode for the jitter correction and as tbc replacement (like many of us do:wink2:) there is a analog to digital conversation on the input signal and if you use the S-Video/Composite connectors for the outputs, there will be a digital to analog conversation. When you use a dvd-recorder with hdmi output you can save this digital to analog conversation. You can grab the digital file. The Blackmagic card was the only one who could capture this file in YUV2 uncompressd via the HDMI Input of the card. There is no upscaling or deinterlacing. You only grab the digital file in 720x576i resolution. Testing has only made with PAL equipment.

I can care less if the guy has PHD in VHS, Capturing via composite is adding an extra step to the work flow which is combining the Y and C signals into one inside the VCR with less bandwidth, Only LaserDisc needed to be captured via composite because that's how it is recorded on disc but VHS is a component signal made of Luminance Y and chrominance C and should be captured as such.

PHD????? (I don't understand)

Come on, you should read the tutorial not only watching pictures. They have used both VHS & SVHS-Recorders. The tutorial is written foolproof that everyone who have no experience with capturing videotapes can use it and not everyone from the beginners has a SVHS machine at home.

PHD is one of the highest achievement in education and I used it as sarcasm as there is no such degree in VHS. You wouldn't get better results when using composite VS S-Video unless wrong settings are used or different VCR's with different video processing circuits, or wrong workflows that unnecessarily convert the signal in the path such as going from composite to S-Video or vise-versa.

Not sure what you're getting at? No one is claiming that composite is better than S-Video.

I'm not getting anywhere, I was just responding to the post that has links with a VCR used with composite out yet the poster claims they are the experts of VHS capturing.

Does your capture card contain a better comb filter than the one in the LaserDisc player?

Come on, you talk about something you haven't read or couldn't read because it's in german language.
On the pictures he has used a Tevion VCR to show how you could connect a vcr to the dvd-recorder and then to the hdmi-splitter and the blackmagic card. But he although shows how you could connect with S-Video and antenna cable connectors.
If we want discuss serious about the link with the tutorial you should read it and not just make it bad. Open your mind and try to understand.

This is an interesting point which I don't think I've ever seen addressed here. Conventional knowledge is that the fewer conversion steps the better -- is the HDMI output usable for restoration purposes in the same way the analog would be?

Oh I made a mistake. I just watched the pictures again and on the pictures you see the SVHS-Recorder Philips VR967. It isn't the Tevion VCR he has used,too.

Again I don't know why latreche34 always say that a composite connection is used.

Many LD collectors, including myself, use another device for that purpose. Your typical comb filter within your LD player is most of the times pure garbage. I have my LD player hooked up to my AV receiver and use that one instead.

Fair enough, I miss quoted the links however I didn't see the need to read them as most of the knowledge in terms of hardware already acquired throughout the years of using them and repairing them including pro equipment, I've used different capture workflows with different hardware that some are not accessible to the average user, It will not change my mind about being a bad idea using HDMI port for capturing.