Actual profesional capture cards? (AJA, Matrox)
 

Hello!

I have been reading and learning for years about the best capture cards and which ones are crapy for analog SD signals.

I have an AJA IO LE, Matrox mxo2 le max, 4 units of Pinnacle 510, Black Magic Intensity Pro, Black Magic Decklink SDI, etc...

Do you have any tests/opinions of latest AJA, Matrox and Black Magic pro capture devices in SD analog situations?

I would love to have a modern workflow and meanwhile computer is capturing, i could do other stuff.

Have the possibility to buy really cheap a AJA Kona 3G capture card, and would love to know if it is good enough like Matrox MXO2 or AJA IO.

Thanks!!!

Certainly no one has all those cards and have time to test with, Since you own them all and worth knowing to you, spend some time and do some capture tests for us.

Really depends on what you want to do, what results you are expecting, what hardware/software you'll use, what amount of SD capture options and functions you want; there are lots of variables. Even if you're just doing SDI input to a newer capture card, though the hardware doesn't matter for that, the software options may not be what you want. What are the details of your project?

My recent capture workstation was a 2019 Precision so that shouldn't be a problem for you

Personally I wouldn't do that. Fresh Win 7 x64 install, latest (or most recent known stable) drivers, minimal additional software other than what's needed for what you plan to do e.g. capturing, processing, encoding, etc. While it is capturing, just let it capture.

Grab it if it's a good card, i.e.: from original owner or other person who has taken care of it, not abused it when loose outside the computer, stored in anti-static bag, known good with zero issues, etc. That card has no value to almost anyone anymore, so its correct market value/price is very low; sounds like you're on the right track with that.

Hi!
First of all, thanks for your reply.

My main stuff are comercial SP Tapes with HiFi sound and some home recorded tv shows.
Also more than 300 Betacam SP and Digital to capture (I Use directly a Sony Betacam Digital + SP thru my Black Magic SDI Card)

My VHS VCRs are really great machines. JVC SR V10E, Philips Digital VHS VR 20D, Panasonic NV - HS930, a Panasonic DMR - ES10 (just TBC use), ...

My computer have Mac Os Catalina. Is a really powerful machine. 128 GB RAM, i9 18 Cores, Radeon VII 16 GB GDDR5, ....

I want a really confortable workflow as BlackMagic have with Black Magic Media Express, but with the powerful fidelity and quality of Matrox or old AJA devices.

Problem of those old Matrox and AJa's? That i need to stay in really older systems than Catalina.

So, my actual question is if for example, the AJA Kona 3G PCie will have good service for old SD videos.

I don't have space at this moment to have other computer capturing with my old gears (AJA IO LE, Matrox MXO2,etc...)
There is not a problem for me to capture Pro Res files, and if is necessary, do a final conversion to a final possible format.

BTW, Im preparing a complete comparison of all these known capture cards and as soon as i can i'll share them :)

You won't see differences in quality, In lossless all should sample at the same parameters defined by Rec.601, The differences you will be looking for are stability, OS compatibility, Capture software interface features, TBC performance, and additional features such as luma DNR, chroma DNR, and other advanced timing features, Usually stand alone boxes have more features than their PCIe counterpart cards.

Thanks for your replies .
Finally Aja Kona 3G is not an option because is not compatible with OS higher than High Sierra.
But I have seen an option with Aja Kona LHi.

If all them are apparently more or less the same , why Lordsmurf use old ATI’s and not “pro capture cards” with better Os system compatibility??
My black magic intensity pro is AMAZING in compatibility and stability , but comparing colors with Matrox , ATI and others , looks worse .
Because of that I’m looking for something equivalent with actual compatibility.
Thanks !

Once you have a stable video signal, have a good analog to SDI/HDMI converter, and go for a SDI/HDMI recorder, or a non consumer SDI/HDMI recording card/device for your PC/Mac,
you already know the brands i see.
If you're using Mac OS be careful with Big Sur or M1 and M2 chip sets, some cards will not work with that, BMD website has lists for that, not using any computer system to capture is the safest way, these days.
(btw colors should be one of the least problems, using Davinci Resolve 18.1 on Catalina with ProRes422(LT) codec should be no problem)

Well, you're asking why he favors older ATI AIW cards over newer stuff with current OS compatibility

And you said you can tell that the newer stuff with current OS compatibility "looks worse" than the older ATI AIW cards.

I think you are answering your own question there.

Are you referring to any specific hardware?

You're mushing some things together here.

For starters, the term "professional" is just a label. Actual professionals will adopt, or not adopt, gear based on quality, needed features, etc. We don't really care what it's called. That goes for almost anything in any field. As an example, some companies make "professional hammers", but you'll mostly see Lowe's and Home Depot specials in the field. Hobbyists are almost always the one to fall into that trap, sometimes newbies to the profession.

What exactly are you referring to with "all them are apparently more or less the same"?
- Quality items are rarely the same.
- Consumer stuff, most of it junk, does tend to perform the same (because it often is the same, aka rebadges).

Understand that "professional brands" can make junk (example = often Blackmagic), and "consumer brands" can make certain exceptional items (example = most of the ATI AIW with Theatre chips, though not all).

It's not more stable. This is the main reason it is infamous for SD and consumer sources.

You must be careful with this advice. This user is PAL, so some paths exist here. Some, not all. For NTSC, this is 99%+ a no-go, do not do this whatsoever.

I don't care about OS. Most professionals do not care about OS, in any industry. This is why you still find Windows XP in wide use (the best Windows OS to date), even Windows 95/98/ME. The OS just controls the system, and need only to not get in the way of the quality tool in use. We don't care about "updates", as 99% of these are offline systems.

OS are a problem, especially Windows and Mac, because those were made for consumers (yes, even the Server versions, as those are based on the consumer version). After OS updates, often a single update, we get OS locked, the quality tool doesn't function in the new OS. It doesn't make the tool "old", it makes the OS crappy. WinVista, Win8/10/11 ... all horrible. Fine for Facebook and games, but often terrible for doing actual work, like video capturing.

Yep. ATI AIW is extremely faithful quality to the source, referring specifically to the exposure values (and it also allows capture of illegal values). Most other cards, regardless of age (2003 to 2023) are degraded from it.

He needs to. That's damaging advice (costly mistakes) without details.

Eric-Jan gave you a picture of the converter in his post.

Yeah, the Blackmagic Design Mini Converter Analog to SDI, i don't understand the (ungrounded) hatred towards the BlackMagic Design products… yes, a raw VHS video signal is below the quality a BMD product is meant for, but other consumer products also need "clean-up" for good results, and the "good" ATi AiW products are very rare, and need OS degradation, which is not a "sound" advise for most people. what about the NTSC/PAL difference ? a multisystem vcr/dvd-recorder/combo (EU model) solves that problem, otherwise doo explane that for once, where lies the problem, i notice litle with an VHS NTSC tape for that matter, I think the OP is on the right track already, mindwise.
Yes, even on a new Mac OS it will be difficult to capture VHS, but also with the right old specs of hard and software,2nd hand hardware & cheap, it will be possible, just like on an old Windows setup, but today, once converted to SDI or HDMI there are good options from different brands to have a good HDMI pro recorder/recording.
…...In general i think a computer is not the best way to capture analog video….

If you mean by "capture analog video" the conversion from analog to digital then I agree, You still need the computer though to ingest the raw digital signal into hard drive and edit or make a final playable format, I don't like the idea of using external recorders because you don't/can't control the workflow, If something happens it will be baked in and a re-capture is a must. Besides, good quality external SDI recorders are in the range of few thousands of dollars and geared towards HD not SD, Unless you are talking about the likes of clearclick junk and HDMI recorders, I wouldn't touch those even with a stick.

Yes, just like i said, capture, yes, post processing you do on any computer, your setup has not to be locked onto the capture device for compatebility, HDMI/SDI recorders don't have to cost thousands, there are both lines of BMD (Video Assist) and Atomos that range from $400 to under $999 these are good quality monitor/recorders, (there are also cost effective good HDMI cards for normal recent OS's)
No, 1-click etc. comes not into my mind… It's also not hard to avoid old pro stock TBC's which do costs thousands, even then these are hard to come by, and questionable of there quality also, i do not say capture is a cheap hobby if you want at least some quality, …..one should keep an eye out for new stuff, and try that, and dive into the technology, to be able to judge for yourself, if it's worth the try, there's no ready made answer for any one who tries the capture "game" of analog video.
That's with any capture, only with well over thought pro-sumer options/settings in a good device for recording video, it's unlikely you make any mistake, capturing/transfering/recording this way, while with a computer you have to figure it out yourself, with the few (good) options, it's less complex

Still, HDMI recorders are not recommended, they operate in the rec.709 range not designed for SD materials, with the exception of some legacy DVD recorders that did output legal rec.609 out of the HDMI port in 480i mode but they record only into DVD discs in MPEG-2.

I've never hear people complaining about rec.709 standard, how does one see when something goes wrong in this area ? reflecting this on most old recordings stored on VHS seems a bit exaggerated, quality wasn't that good in those days, certainly for the NTSC system, that has a nickname for that.
Referring to such details, i see no value in that for VHS, and is the least one should worry about.
(I guess HDMI capture cards work also in the rec.709 "range"…correcting colors in the 709 range is even wider/better)

I realize you have good intentions here, but you're essentially a newbie trying to give advice. And sometimes that advice is odd, or just outright wrong. You don't know what you don't know. It's very obvious to several of us.

There's no "hatred" here (an adjacent feeling to love). There's no feelings at all here. Blackmagic is just a bad brand of devices for SD video, and it's been a well-known fact for years. Even BM acknowledges this. It's not about "liking" it, or being tribal in some way, but rather just acknowledging the reality of the situation. It is what it is.

This is a loaded statement, rife with inaccuracies.
- "old pro stock TBCs", referring to rack mount units, is correct, those should be avoided
- there's nothing "old" about TBCs designed for consumer formats, when viewed from the timeline of video, not human years (nor dog years, or whatever)
- yes, there are certain issues with certain models, and that must be watched for (DataVideo caps, black AVT-8710, wrong gens, etc)
- rarity depends on model; some are rare, some really are not at all

I never liked this logical fallacy. So I combat it with something humorous and crass: I don't have to stick my pecker into an electrical socket to "try it" so I can "just for myself". Sometimes the wisest move is to listen to experts, not dabble like a monkey with a stick. To truly "test" hardware (and software), you need some basis for comparison, some constants -- you know, science. Not just random wild ass guessing on what "seems fine" or whatever. Sure, you can "try it" (play around aimlessly), but it may only waste your time. Video isn't a toaster.

This is accurate, and often needs repeating. Video does not cost the price of a cheeseburger, be it McDonald's, Chili's, or somewhat gourmet place. However, compared to others hobbies (photo, car, action figures, knitting, etc), video is actually quite cheap. Best of all, quality gear holds value, so buy it, use it, resell it. It's junk that has zero resale, and is sunk costs.

^ This.

And those units had all sorts of issues, always resulting in massive quality loss due to internal bad processing (or lack of processing where there needed to be some).

Still i do not see a reason why the color space 709 should be a dis adtvantage, it's even a greater range, then 601 0r 609, so color wise more room to adjust.
Also you're going to watch it on digital equipment that uses the 709 color space.

That's not how it works, it is not the bigger the number the better. But it's not just about the color, it's an entire system of settings.

How does it work ? i still see no answer, or a negative "thing" if the "digital world" needs this.
the primary colors are the same, and the "darks" you can correct.

Everything can be corrected at the software level, But at a cost of quality. The only way to be able to see the difference is using a calibrated studio monitor and feed it with two files, one from a quality capture workflow that follows the standard. and another from a crappy chinese analog to HDMI adapter and a crappy chinese HDMI to USB and toggle between the two sources, then you will notice the difference.

The only part that you may not notice a huge difference and I know some have already disagreed with me is at the very end during upscaling from SD to HD and encoding when converting from 609 to 709, There is a slight color shift, But that assuming the video has been properly captured first in rec.609.

The only thing i could find about it that, when mixing different video footage, there could be a problem,
or the difference how a computer handles color, and converting to HDMI looses a "bit" and difference between YUV and RGB, but like you said most of the time one would not have the equipment to compare, and i see no real problem in such a Minute difference.

Not everything. If only if could be. But many.

Not "the only", but certainly the most stark and obvious. TVs/HDTVs still show many issues, even poorly calibrated ones. The real problem for "not seeing" errors is on computer monitors, especially anything small or shiny, and the tiny capture preview windows that's smaller than a cell phone. You can't see anything that way, and miss all the flaws.

That and others. Some cards just outright look like sh!t when capturing, and even grandmas notice. The real problem with "not noticing" is purchase bias ("I bought it, so it must be good!" or the lame excuse "Good enough!"). Willful ignorance is bliss?

I'm not one of them.
Encoding and restoration has loss in this way, and sometimes it cannot be avoided. So a goal is to capture properly, as bad captures are far worse, and rather than being "colorspace changes/shifts" are now instead obvious "molested colors". The key is drawing a line, without being a junk apologist.

Eric-Jan has too often been in the low-quality camp, but has moderated some, so that's a good shift in understanding. Education will hopefully eventually bring him around to a quality mindset. When he has questions, I try to answer. When info isn't quite right, I interject if needed.

well yes, i want to learn, but i only am satisfied when i see a good explenation, otherwise it's only hot air to me,
i see too many answers where a lot of info is missing, but that's both in questions and answers.
I guess it's also hard to have any good refference to measure quality on analog video, and in what "stage" an error occurs, this could be already in the analog recording. only with digital video, refference "points" can be found, but says nothing of the analog part except skin tones…

but… i guess there are two camps, one is: only the best is good enough, and the other is, this is good enough, there lies the difference, between many people, but i see just too many negative things pointed out, and only few positive ones, that's very discouraging when people need help, with what they have to do the job.

Better than directly connect analog outputs to analog inputs of your AJA Card?
What is the advantage of convert to SDI the signal?


Im referring about the final capture quality comparing some Matrox vs AJA vs ATi vs other recommended hardware.
Why if for example, an AJA card that second hand is aprox 50-100$ who works with modern OS Systems is "less chosen" than an old ATI .


Yes, sorry, I expressed myself badly hahaha.
As capturing SD have a lot of drop frames, problems showing some VHS Menus, colors,....

What i try to say , is about their good driver and easy integration. BlackMagic have been updating their stuff driver for years.
their Intensity Pro device is from 2009 and is compatible latest Windows and Mac OS. (like RME devices in Audio World).
In the other hand, AJA and Matrox have really bad support developing drivers for their old devices....


Thanks for all your info and time!


BTW. I have bought an AJA Kona LHi + Breakbox + Cables .

Let me upload a comparison . Same conditions AJA Kona LHi vs Black Magic Intensity Pro.
(compressed to h264 with same prefs. from Pro Res 422 hq)

(Black Magic have also higher input gain dbs and non 4k model like mine, don't have any control panel where you can adjust your inputgain to avoid saturation. is time to say bye to Black Magic haha)

I agree, Eric.

Aja card does not have TBC, So if a better device is used and is built in TBC, the Aja becomes a digital interface, kind of like a firewire card for DV AVI, but SDI is a lossless digital port for lossless AVI.

Ohh.
What im trying at this moment to get an stable signal (AJA seems to have problems with non profesional devices signals)
is to passhtru into my Panasonic ES10, bypassing Philips VR 20D TBC and using Panasonic ES10 Pal TBC instead of the ones from VCR.
Works perfectly , but seems to have an audio delay problem...
https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vcr...-dmr-es10.html

Did I missing something? BM Desktop Video Setup does allow adjustment of Y and C level on analog video input with the Intensity Pro as it does with the 4k version. But not with HDMI input. (One can also adjust the audio gain.)

An issue with any "broadcast professional" class gear is its ability to deal with the variations in consumer analog video sources that are not found in well-adjusted "broadcast professional" sources.

Video capture device debate brings to mind the old party saying from my youth; "go ugly early and you never go home alone." In video terms settling for a lesser result may get the job done sooner and allow you to move on to some other project that may be more to your liking. But it is probably unwise to settle for less if you have nothing higher priority waiting your attention.

What is Rec 609? As I understand it REC (BT) 601 is the standard for digital SD (525 an 625 line) while REC (BT) 709 is for HD (720p and above). Some people no doubt have perfect vision (like perfect pitch) and can see the difference without a side-by-side comparison.

Was that me that wrote 609? I think it was a brain fart.

Yes, im talking about Audio Dbs Gain, not video :)

Audio control panel only appears in the 4K model.

Using PAL in Spain ? IRE should be 0.0 in that case…. NTSC uses 7.5

Hi! What is IRE? in Desktop Video Setup appears like 7.5
I never have touched that haha

It's about black level, it's in your attached picture, but my guess now is, IRE only set in this case when NTSC is used, because there's a difference for Japan and the USA, and PAL will be set as 0.0 and the NTSC IRE setting will have no effect when in PAL mode.
So good on screen text reading is still needed :) :laugh:

I like my Blackmagic Intensity Pro so much I have two, each to their own but they work fine for me.

Be aware that unless BMDD has slipped a significant production variation in the later production IP4K, it does an extremely poor job capturing Component NTSC SD.

What is your source for this ? otherwise it's just BS…….. link or proof for this ! or does NTSC has this effect on every capture device ?

Nice talk! I suggest that you should be sure of your facts before you accuse others of organically fertilizing the forum.

The source is tests I personally performed about 5 years ago feeding SMPTE color bars to an Intensity Pro and an Intensity Pro 4K, viewing the capture results on a monitor and with a vector scope. I captured HDMI, composite, s-video, and component bars. I did both 1080i HD and NTSC SD.

The original Intensity Pro did OK. The Intensity pro 4K drew a vacuum on component inputs. Levels were way off, so far as to be unusable for most purposes.

BMD did acknowledge the problem but intimated (to another competent tech support/editor at the Grass Valley forums) that they had no plan to fix it. Apparently it was a hardware problem that could not be addressed with a firmware update, and given the small demand and high cost for a fix owners were stuck with it.

Try it yourself if you doubt.

What's SMPTE color bars and a vector scope and why would I need them? I have a colour bar generator somewhere is that the same as SMPTE colour bars?

- SMPTE is Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers, among other things they are a standards organization. One of their standards were set of color bars at specific level and hues. Google "SMPTE color bars" for examples. Google "SMPTE" for more on the organization if that interests you.

- Historically bars (and tone) were used to calibrate and check calibration/performance of analog video systems to ensure consistent, within specification, performance. They were especially useful for setting up monitors to ensure proper display of colors (the so called "PLUGE" pattern)..

- A vector scope is a special type of oscilloscope that enable examination of the video signal component levels and phase.

- Often bars and tone were recorded at the start of a tape as a reference. This helped ensure the information in the tape interpreted correctly by the viewing system; i.e., that it got the colors right. (This might include tweaking the signal brightness, contrast, hue, and saturation before broadcast or duplication.)

- Not all sources of color bars are the same as SMPTE bars. The levels and content may be different. You would have to check the specifications of your source and whether or not it is in calibration. A vector scope can be used for this purpose (if it is in calibration as well).

- Most people do not need a vector scope, but serious video editors, video engineers, and geeky enthusiasts will likely find one useful. A good one is not cheap. Many NLEs include a vector scope-like display.

This all seems totally out of my budget, I just transfer tapes to the best of my ability for people who can't afford a TV studio type transfer for videos that are not likely to be used in any film and even if they were wouldn't any small colour/tone discrepancies be picked up by some sort of post editing by whoever wanted to use the film? Or should I go out and get these things bearing in mind for me it's a hobby /social enterprise not a business?