TBC still required for RF capture? (VHS-decode)

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobustReviews

Out of interest, what is your professional role in video?

- streaming
- restoration
- analog source ingest

Those last two require a special attention to hardware, such as TBCs.

The streaming was in the 2000s, back when it was far more challenging to balance size and quality. This wasn't something I overly enjoyed, as it was not an extension of hobby (analog source ingest, restoration).

There's lots more to it, but I just don't have the time to write that novel post.

[RobustReviews]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

- streaming
- restoration
- analog source ingest

Those last two require a special attention to hardware, such as TBCs.

The streaming was in the 2000s, back when it was far more challenging to balance size and quality. This wasn't something I overly enjoyed, as it was an extension of hobby (analog source ingest, restoration).

There's lots more to it, but I just don't have the time to write that novel post.

Which formats?

[Shakedown St.]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobustReviews

I can't get behind this, not in the technical argument anyway.

S-VHS players have the benefit of playing S-VHS tapes properly. There's nothing inherently magic about an S-VHS machine for playing back standard VHS tapes. S-VHS machines use the conventional S-Video connector which is very useful for capturing, but the machines don't really do much extra for 'vanilla' VHS.

Broadly, S-VHS machines are later in VHS' lifecycle and were, by virtue of being built for a more demanding market, better quality machines than many standard players, but they're no panacea.

Many S-VHS machines can restore (to a degree line-timing), they often restore sync-tips, colour bursts and neaten the non-visual portion of the line which is a worthy task, but they're often not the best at it. These machines are all ageing though, they command high values and many of them are (personal opinion) not worth the prices some try and command for them, I'm fortunate that I can purchase 2nd/3rd rate machines and repair them, but this isn't feasible for many.

vhs-decode is proven in principle, I don't think that's up for debate anymore - there are arguments for and against when it comes to the technicalities and overall result, but it is improving, whereas some of the knackered old TBCs that are commanding such huge values are ageing like fine-milk bluntly and most are getting to the stage where components need replacing; where shall we be in five years? The same with many cards and capture devices, how long do we pretend these items aren't ageing?

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

<sigh> It's only "magic" when people don't understand what's going on. As mentioned, a primary reason is non compositing the output. Another is that the decks are simply made better, which lends itself to things like less timing errors. It's very much a situation of "you get what you pay for", with the cheaper/worse option having more problems, less quality. Often many more problems, substantially less quality -- not a nuanced amount.

I have been away recovering from surgery over the past month and have not been able to reply to messages. I'm back.

First off, this is why I bought an SVHS deck, and was willing to pay for it. I prefer an external workflow as much as possible. The reason I like proc controls as well. The less I have to fiddle around in software the better. I don't need an incredibly fast computer. I can even capture to an external recorder like an Atomos Ninja.

I use SVHS not just for the line corrections (a working AG1980 still works a lot better than VHS decode), there are improvements to outputting s-vid over composite, and like others have said just better built more rugged tape components (when it comes to JVC at least).

When it comes to servicing, an SVHS deck is no more costly to refurbish than a "regular" deck. All of these machines are getting up their in age, and the way I see it... I might as well put my time and efforts into an SVHS deck.

Second point. No software to my knowledge and even to this date, has replaced external frame TBC (please correct if wrong). No software can replace dropped frames.

The justification of using software TBC is that it is less costly. The major cost involved with TBC hunting is frame correction. Most I have seen fooling around with TBC software, are running a DV converter into their computer setup. I recommend many hobbyists to this forum, and the overwhelming majority baulk when they see the cost of obtaining a TBC setup. I even had someone say to me "the pros are intentionally holding newbies back by recommending expensive equipment."

If I'm archiving VHS I would rather be playing my tapes in an SVHS deck, not a cheapo deck running into software. I did reach into the piggy bank for a proper TBC for frame correction, because I wanted both proc controls and 4:2:2 color.

I don't knock software options and find it exciting there is still such an interest in the VHS world. I don't mean to sound behind the times or grumpy, however I do believe there are elements of the analog world that can never be replicated with software hacks or cheats. Please keep in mind that once the signal is converted to digital, any flaws are baked in and software can only compensate for so much.

I've invested in building a transfer house business, and I am not confident at this time to rely on the software that is out there. I much prefer having an external workflow and it was worth the cost.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shakedown St.

I even had someone say to me "the pros are intentionally holding newbies back by recommending expensive equipment."

In years past, such a comment would have amused me.

But in more recent years, we seem to live in a "Q" society (referring to QAnon, aka incredibly crazy conspiracy). The video community is sadly no different. Some of the BS that I've read in the past 2-3 years is such a wild mess of misinformation that it literally contains zero good info. In the past year, I think a lot of the stupid stuff is actually coming from young TikTok generation, that barely knows the difference between a VCR and a toaster.

Most BS is due to being cheap. That's it. Everything should cost $1, apparently?

And when you're young, time isn't yet valuable. So why simply use a good tool for a task, when you can waste hours/days/weeks/months/years screwing around? (Business understand ROI, regardless of age.)

Far, far too many older hobbyists and pros have written me in private, essentially throwing up their hands at trying to refute the nonsense, wanting to quit various sites and other forums out of frustration. It was their "goodbye" of sorts, as we'd not see each other at that place anymore. I'd do my best to talk them out of it, and some did stay. Some just post less, and others did eventually leave. All were appreciative that I'm still out there trying to dole out reliable information, as they really did love their hobby or career, and hate to see the BS cesspool it has become (along with so many other areas of our society). I truly miss some of those folks, especially our chatroom days (late 90s, early 00s).

Quote:

I have been away recovering from surgery over the past month

I wish you speedy recovery, if not already there.

[latreche34]

A lot of those instant expert/google diploma folks don't have the good gear to compare it to, All what they have is a cheap VCR from the thrift store or the side curb and dongle they bought from Amazon for $5, They have no sense of how a proper capture would look like and they participate in threads by saying this is good enough for me, Well this is not about you, it's about the poster seeking recommendation.

In the following video segment I linked look at how stable the frame is when using proper equipment, line and frame TBC, proper capturing, In a blind test environment most people would think it's from LaserDisc. It is a S-VHS tape however but without the proper gear the graphics in that video would have never looked that stable, except for some tape dropouts.

[Shakedown St.]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

I truly miss some of those folks, especially our chatroom days (late 90s, early 00s).

I browsed these forums for many years before I made an account.

There are a lot of familiar faces I don't see anymore. Yes I know what you're talking about!

Thank you by the way. I'm already hooked on pain meds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

In the following video segment I linked look at how stable the frame is when using proper equipment, line and frame TBC, proper capturing, In a blind test environment most people would think it's from LaserDisc. It is a S-VHS tape however but without the proper gear the graphics in that video would have never looked that stable, except for some tape dropouts.

You see. This is how a proper setup can look! Why fix something that isn't broken??

[robmoss2k]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

In my opinion for this project to really have some fruits the team should think outside the box and start considering building their own RF preamp bypassing the VCR's own, as well as the motors servo control to completely have control over the signal, That way they don't have to worry about what model VCR is and what signal level of the RF is, Also having control of the capstan and head drum motors means with one VCR you can have more tape compatibility in terms of video standard (PAL, SECAM, NTSC), The recording speed (SP, LP, EP ..), shrunk or stretched tapes speed compensation, prediction and replacement of damaged control track sync pulses for better tracking...etc.

This sounds like a great idea. Is it feasible? I'd like to pay someone to build a proof of concept device for VHS and another for laserdisc. Do off the shelf components exist or are we looking at contracting a Chinese manufacturer to build something? Can we dig into the internals of line/frame/field TBCs, perhaps with input of a retired JVC or Panasonic engineer? What level of VC funding would we need to put something in front of the BBC to digitise the rest of their archive material at as close to perfect quality as possible with minimal training for those performing the task? I'm personally interested in some very poor-quality VHS tapes made for Bolton Wanderers season highlights in the 1980s and 90s, which I've managed with an S-VHS deck, a decent TBC and an ATI capture card, but the results are still quite bad. I've had success post-processing the videos with various software, but it's painful.

[latreche34]

We've discussed this before numerous times across several threads, While everything can be made, the problem is finding someone to risk a big chunk of money in case the project comes to a dead stop or completes but no buyers.
SingMai is making similar device using a barebone VCR mechanism bypassing most of its electronics, but it has been a while since they made the announcement and we haven't heard anything yet.
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/...re-alternative)

More about the project:
https://www.singmai.com/dvcp.htm

[robmoss2k]

Interesting - I'll reach out to him.

[Shakedown St.]

I am the original creator of this thread. I have updated information from an argument I've been having with a VHS Decode enthusiast.

Smurf originally replied...

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

You're not understanding what this is for. This isn't something to avoid the costs of an external frame TBC, nor line TBC. It's a post-capture line TBC, for restoration, when sources are gone. If you have the original tapes, recapture with a proper workflow. This will never supplant a proper hardware workflow, merely complementing it.

This fellow claims VHS Decode replaces the need for frame TBC. I tried explaining to him (unless I am wrong) that VHS Decode is used mainly for line corrections. Or perhaps this has changed recently?

He replied...

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRealHarrypm

It's not line correction, its whole signal correction. It's never been "line correction" as it's using the same code from ld-decode past the demodulation phase, the tbc format has an entirely time base corrected 4fsc frame. The only tool in the family that does not time base correct is HiFi-Decode currently. Don't believe the misinformation"

I tried explaining to him that once a source is captured in the digital realm in software, any mistakes or flaws are baked in and cannot be corrected once they leave analog. His response...

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRealHarrypm

FM RF capture of the test points is the final capture method, vhs-decode is just a tool the processing and correcting that raw archive of tape media it's not "baked" past the technological reading medium which no one is making new heads, time base correction, dropout correction, converting to a YUV signal all done in software post archival capture. What I am stating is the workflow removes the entire capture chain as its analog FM RF signals captured to file and processed to final video all post.

Test Point --> Analog To digital converter 20msps or higher --> FM RF File

FM RF File --> VHS-Decode --> Decoded Composite or Y/C Signal File (.tbc) with dropout information* --> Dropout Correction --> YUV/RGB Stream --> FFmpeg Created video file i.g FFV1 in .mkv

There is no need to go though any hardware past the initial acquisition, idk if you're just confused here. VHS-Decode is the way forward and the methods of outdated and old are dying. The TBC market bubble has popped and it's time for those guys to face reality.

So now I am confused... so VHS Decode compensates for dropped frames and does it well?

[lordsmurf]

Harrypm is one of the project devs that thinks VHS farts will smell likes roses when sniffed by vhs-decode. The fact that Harrypm doesn't understand the difference between line TBC, and frame TBC, is revealing. I've had run-ins with him before.

For consumer analog formats, timing correction is needed, period.

You would be shocked at how many anti-TBC people don't even know what the letters "TBC" stand for. Then again, sadly, maybe not surprised at all.

The half-baked idea often peddled is that a "yet to be created" software TBC (FYI, likely not possible) will be integrated into the post-RF file processing. Good luck with that. I've personally funded $K of R&D into software TBC, and it cannot happen without a dedicated appliance of some sort, and thus rivaling the cost of traditional TBCs. It's tricky, even with the "fuller" signal (beyond standard 720x486 palette).

Our own hodgey (aka oln at VH) is a far more grounded vhs-decode dev, and he never states the BS that some of the others do. That's because he has some decent knowledge of video (and I remember when it was far thinner, so kudos to him learning, I'm proud at how far some of our members have come over the years -- some even rival my own knowledge now, on certain subjects!)

RF data is raw ugly data, warts and all. It still involves capture cards, and thus you get all the negative affects of any other capture card (ie, baked in errors happen). There's no magic to vhs-decode, it's just different. It allows more native sharpness (keyword: native), but it has some pretty bad performance on issues that VCRs from the 90s do not (or even 80s).

One step forward, one step back.

It's an interesting project, perhaps some niche uses. Not ready for primetime, not now, maybe never.

The only way vhs-decode will succeed is to ditch the cheapskate mindset, integrate some standard quality hardware, and divest themselves of the hopium addicts like Harrypm.

FYI, I'm far from the only critic of this project, nor the only one pushing back against the BS. I've been amused several times now, where Harrypm has accused other commenters of being me. Nope!

[latreche34]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shakedown St.

This fellow claims VHS Decode replaces the need for frame TBC. I tried explaining to him (unless I am wrong) that VHS Decode is used mainly for line corrections. Or perhaps this has changed recently?

VHS decode is a two step process and yes it addresses line, frame, DOC, DNR and more in the second process, BUT: Capturing RF which is the 1st process, is not finalized as they claim it to be, I've read throughout their main forum and they did have problems with hardware and software, So to say capture the RF and throw away the tapes is misleading.

As to the second process which is the decode of the RF, that is for sure not finalized yet and I would not approach it with sticks, too messy and complicated and results are not consistent. It does seem like the entire project has been stalled though, not sure why but haven't seen any new posts in the VH forum.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

VHS decode is a two step process and yes it addresses line, frame, DOC, DNR and more in the second process, BUT: Capturing RF which is the 1st process, is not finalized as they claim it to be, I've read throughout their main forum and they did have problems with hardware and software, So to say capture the RF and throw away the tapes is misleading.

As to the second process which is the decode of the RF, that is for sure not finalized yet and I would not approach it with sticks, too messy and complicated and results are not consistent. It does seem like the entire project has been stalled though, not sure why but haven't seen any new posts in the VH forum.

So ... none of it is final.

Part 1 is the RF capture. Zero consistency.
Part 2 is the RF processing. Zero consistency, messy even.

vhs-decode has been stalled for most of the past decade now. It gets spurts of progress, and "progress" (not really), and then goes dormant for more months/years. That's what you get with open source niche projects. I've been there too many times over the years, both with video and non-video. We've had the conversation before: until it has ROI, it probably won't go anywhere for anybody. Even BBC no longer invests much into "dead media", not even Doctor Who now -- noting that only PAL was ever supported anyway for their projects.

It's catch-22. This needed to exist 20 years ago, but the processing for it did not yet exist (and arguably still does not).

Meanwhile, most of the rest of us (you, me, others) are actually capturing tapes, with standard VCR > TBC > card workflows, before our tapes all implode. (What was scaremongering in the 2000s is now factual in the 2020s, we're losing tapes now, measurably so.) Waiting for vhs-decode to be finalized is not an option.

[harrypm]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

So ... none of it is final.

Part 1 is the RF capture. Zero consistency.
Part 2 is the RF processing. Zero consistency, messy even.

vhs-decode has been stalled for most of the past decade now. It gets spurts of progress, and "progress" (not really), and then goes dormant for more years. That's what you get with open source niche projects. I've been there too many times over the years, both with video and non-video. We've had the conversation before: until it has ROI, it probably won't go anywhere for anybody. Even BBC no longer invests much into "dead media", not even Doctor Who now -- noting that only PAL was ever supported anyway for their projects.

It's catch-22. This needed to exist 20 years ago, but the processing for it did not yet exist (and arguably still does not).

Meanwhile, most of the rest of us (you, me, others) are actually capturing tapes, with standard VCR > TBC > card workflows, before our tapes all implode. (What was scaremongering in the 2000s is now factual in the 2020s, we're losing tapes now, measurably so.) Waiting for vhs-decode to be finalized is not an option.

When are you gonna come down the the real world?

You know I'll fly you in from Kentucky any day you want and show you the decode projects in full scope with a wide range of VCRs hell I'll tap your best VCR for free and give you a 40msps 10-bit CX White card for vlaue of 23USD just for comming, and you know what I'll throw in some archival M-Discs and I know your health is not the best but wish you all the best, if you want to take me up on my offer my email is on the wiki alongside the 79 pages of It I maintain grounding us all to this harsh reality.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harrypm

When are you gonna come down the the real world?
You know I'll fly you in from Kentucky any day you want and show you the decode projects in full scope with a wide range of VCRs hell I'll tap your best VCR for free and give you a 40msps 10-bit CX White card for vlaue of 23USD just for comming, and you know what I'll throw in some archival M-Discs and I know your health is not the best but wish you all the best, if you want to take me up on my offer my email is on the wiki alongside the 79 pages of It I maintain grounding us all to this harsh reality.

- I appreciate the best wishes on my health, thank you.
- I'm not in Kentucky, never was. I think you confuse me with somebody else.
- Much like vhs-decode probably should have existed 20 years ago, I probably would have taken you up on your offer 15 years ago. But it's simply not an option now. In fact, I'd have loaded up the car with gear and tapes for serious comparisons. [Nope, you're in UK, not so easy to transport it.]

Unfortunately for you, I do live in the real world, one where vhs-decode simply is not viable, for the multiple reasons already documented on multiple sites (including this one). Understand I say this with disappointment, not any sort of malice. It is what it is.

I can see you're proud of your input to the project, but maybe a bit too much at times, as you do tend to overstate its abilities, and understate the abilities of standard workflows (TBCs, etc).

In our previous encounters, you were aggressive and unfriendly. Here, you softened your tone, so I shall as well.

[latreche34]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harrypm

show you the decode projects in full scope with a wide range of VCRs.

I have no doubt that you have a quite nice setup, we are not denying that. All what we are saying is that not everyone who wants to capture video tapes has to go through the learning curve, acquiring the gear and tinkering with the parameters, Like LS said if this was available 20 years ago then I would have jumped, The capturing business was booming back then, not much today. I personally get a pretty good results for the type of tapes I do, If I was an archivist for a media company I would probably consider it by paying someone like you, but for just a hobby? not worth my time really.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

If I was an archivist for a media company I would probably consider it by paying someone like you

I need to interject here ...

That's not likely whatsoever. I had such a role (comparable), and still frequently deal with organizations and those in that role. This is a niche open-source project (and aggregated by random people lacking in professional resume/CV). In order to be adopted, it must have time/money ROI, and it must be an easily repeatable process. The content cannot leave premise.

At very best, but also unlikely, is an outside person gets an on-site temp/contract job. But it can also involved NDA, and other legal surrender.

Existing hardware has the ROI and repeatability, vhs-decode does not.

When I discuss vhs-decode, I'm actually not thinking of hobbyists much, because those folks are far less likely to want to hassle with any of it. It's hard enough to step them through usage of standard workflows, then on to Avisynth where the real work begins. DIY non-hobby is even less willing, fully needing turnkey solutions, and costs are often not as concerning as some seem to think -- you pay in time, or money (or both!), no way to escape, pick your poison.

vhs-decode has carved out a tiny weird niche of people who are adamant about not spending any money, instead preferring to waste a mountain of time. Most seemingly don't even care about the small native sharpness gains, what I consider the real benefit. For this reason, I somewhat view the project as an oddity, not much different than I do some wacky fringe politicians. A WTF, a head scratcher.

FM capture still has potential, the vhs-decode project itself probably does not until forked.

[harrypm]

I have been paid to do transfers, and modifyed sevreal CX Cards for production use it works...

FM RF capture would not be for a thing for archival if it was not for vhs-decode, if make it sound like its some arcane obscure thing that does not work its really gas lighting.

In reality the vhs-decode and by extention the ld-decode and tools suit has advanced together by the month not by the year, anyone can verify that by logs and pull older commits and test to see the milestones.

The ROI is saving terbytes of space for clients archives and having master sorce files and less LTO tapes, the ROI for personal use is simmler small inital cost, small long term storage cost of optical discs which is the only practical cold medium.

Heres the kicker Its on Windows (self contained binarys), MacOS, and works on most distrobutions of Linux.

Heres the thing that made me use it, find me a single VBI data reader for under 40USD that can save data to file properly I mean each value from VITC, Closed Captions, XDS data, Teletext etc you really can't.

If it did not work why would I even bother writing a wiki?, and making graphics detailing the workflows with pictures!

Now we are at the point of TB's of FM RF data are out in the wild and its only getting bigger as the decode team migrates bulk archives to public domain for demo use.

[lordsmurf]

- That's great, you made some extra bucks.
- You used Github to upload some files, made a Wiki on how to use, sure. Many other do that too, easy and free, though limiting.
- Mac and Linux too, okay, great. All software should be, and many are.
- CC/etc data was saved, alright. But in an era of AI transcript writing, new subs will probably be more accurate than old CC.
- Some amateur hobbyists uploaded copies of random unsorted old home recordings, fine, whatever. Very niche hobby there.

ROI isn't about space here, as destroying masters should not be an option -- and it won't be for almost all.

Still far too much emphasis on costs. That's really a driving factor of the project, cutting costs when it's not the most important factor. Sort of like a nurse putting stitches in a nasty cut on you finger, meanwhile ignoring the fact that your arm is broken. Attention in the wrong spot.

Again, the issue here is you're overly eager, overstating abilities, the need, the TAM / user base, etc. It's not "the future", at least not anytime soon, if ever. You're young. You've not yet reached the age where you realize stuff really doesn't change all that much over the decades of our lifetime. Stuff changes, but not at some fast pace, it's not overnight changes. And most things never end up the way we think earlier in the process.

Right now, we have a proven method that has worked for two decades. Then we have a new method that is not yet reliably working now. That's where we are, when you remove the noise.

I'm a realist, not an optimist/cheerleader. I need to know what exists now, reliably. Not what could at an unknown date, or what sorta does/doesn't now "but it'll get better at the next update" (because we all know where that goes).

In the offline world, you and I would probably get along great. But you are a bit wound.

[harrypm]

You just lost any hope of getting any respect from the community.

You just brushed off and trivialised a decade of work, what's sad more so is you go and update your message with a petty jab, I gained my experience like I gained my respect of my fellow FM RF archivists, hard costs, hard effort I put the work in and actually learned from the ground up and made every step of it public information for others to consume and advance the work.

What's sicking about you is not only do you, truly not understand what goes into building a project, but keeping it in order together with multiple nationality's, personality's and backgrounds hell even time zones, zero respect for the work you have done nothing but try and cast falsehoods on it angering everyone who has contributed to its development as a 12 year old could deploy it.

Insulting the project is like pissing on a bible anyone can do it, but if you don't read it you get the point but in doing so you also anger everyone who subscribes to it.

You have been nothing but disrespectful to the community and make up information that suits you on the fly, I know incompetence acting with an un-informed opinion and passing it onto others without first fact checking or self improving or amending your mistakes with humility this display is just pure arrogance the mentality that breeds incompetence in others instead of full-scope self education.

The official docs and information out there now and it cuts off any leg you want to stand on, you will never be welcomed by the community period, between your acts of fraud and misinformation campaign, I've had enough of it really, keeping digging a hole to burry yourself alongside your petty "TBC Market" the future wants nothing to do with you as you have only helped inflation, and propagate miss information when real people in the real world have fact checked and rightfully stomped out your invalid opinion's on too many occasions to count.

It was cathartic to get all that out, I'll archive this page and note it in the wiki for future reference, oh got to hate those pesky public archives.