Mac vs. PC controversy for video capturing?

[Sac John]

I'm a Mac guy, and want to capture Hi8 tapes. When I posted some questions last year, the advice overwhelmingly was to buy a PC. It's been 35 years of exclusively Mac use for me, so that decision won't come easy, and one estimate to create an "ideal" dedicated capture PC came in at well over a grand.

But cost aside, I'm trying hard to understand the Mac vs PC discussion, which is very hard for me because I understand almost nothing about PC terminology and only some of the Mac terminology. So some of the advice I got last year about PC specs that I needed to search for went right over my head. Still does.

LS says that the main issue that makes Macs the inferior capture choice is software. OBS, popular on Macs, records from the screen, not from the conversion card output. (I can understand that much. If true, booo OBS.) He also said that the Mac's iMovie software wrongly processes and/or induces too much overhead that results in dropped frames. So I guess that iMovie is simply coded poorly for our purposes - as in, not created with video capture as the priority.

It seems to me that makes OBS and iMovie poor choices. I still don't get what about Macs specifically makes them a poor choice for video capture.

LS recommended I buy a DataVideo TBC, which I did. He also recommended the Tevion capture card, which I bought. Since the Tevion only came with PC capture software, LS told me to use VideoGlide. I trust his judgement, so that's what I installed and have captured one or two tapes to my Mac using that system. I have the finished video files, but nothing to compare them to, so I don't know how close to "ideal" I've gotten with this system and whether or not a PC would make that huge of a difference.

So is VideoGlide in fact still another questionable program like OBS or iMovie in that it doesn't capture video at the highest possible quality - whereas some PC software would?

The VideoGlide webpage sites all these technical stats, a whole list of them, to make it sound like their captures are top-quality. They don't seem to me to be marketing themselves to dummies.

Is even VideoGlide in fact still not equal in finished captured image quality compared to whatever capture software you PC users use? And if so, what's the difference? And how remarkable would the difference be if we could see the two captures side by side on a TV screen?

What am I still missing that would demand I spend a grand or more for an older customized PC and capture software to maximize the capture quality of my tapes?

-JOHN

If anyone's interested, from the VideoGlide website:

Quote:

VideoGlide Highlights:

- supports a wide range of USB 2.0 video capture devices.
- 640 x 480, 29.97 frames per second NTSC video capture.
- 640 x 480, 25 frames per second PAL/SECAM video capture.
- supports composite and s-video formats.
- high contrast, high quality video -better than DV at the same size.
- excellent audio/video synchronization.
- uncompressed YUV format: 66.5 GB per hour for video and audio.
- compressed JPEG format: 3 GB per hour for video and audio.
- 640 x 480 single frame capture.
- audio support up to 48 KHz 16-bit stereo for devices that have audio input.
- multiple device support for webcam and surveillance applications.
- Auto-Detect Input And Format, to automatically adapt to the current video source.
- easy to use, AppleScript enabled capture software with fast full screen playback.
- software to export movies to any QuickTime supported format, including DV and H.264.
- compatible with a large number of third-party applications.

General:

VideoGlide devices have been sold by various manufacturers since 1998. Manufacturers include Pinnacle, KWorld, LinXcel, VideoHome and many others. Devices originally sold as PC-only are also supported. Compatibility can be checked using the VideoGlide For Mac OS X demo mode. Simply click the "Download" button on the right, and install and run the software.

VideoGlide devices allow the capture of video from almost any video source including VCRs, cam-corders, DVD players, personal video recorders, digital cameras, etc.

VideoGlide devices accept either s-video or composite video sources and will work with the broadcast standards NTSC, PAL and SECAM found throughout most of the world.

Video from VideoGlide devices can be used in a variety of ways. For example, you can record your favorite home-movies and clips to keep handy on your computer. It can be used with web-cam software to upload an image to the Internet periodically. It can be used with web-streaming software to create online broadcasts of live or prerecorded events. Live-video chat is possible with the appropriate software. Captured movies can be put on a CD or a website for viewing by anyone with a CD player or Internet access. It can be used for motion-detection applications, or by clay-mation hobbyists. For a summary of some of the supported third-party software and where to obtain it, check the "Applications" page.

The VideoGlide software is capable of capturing a maximum of 29.97 frames per second for NTSC or 25 frames per second for PAL. The maximum frame size is 640 x 480.

The captured video quality is extremely good, with brighter colors and better contrast than typical DV captures. Video and audio synchronization is excellent, even with extremely long captures. Captured movies require only 66.5 GB of disk storage per hour of uncompressed yuv video. Using the recommended JPEG compression requires only 3 GB of storage per hour.

In addition to video, the VideoGlide software is able to capture still images with a resolution of 640 x 480.

Some VideoGlide devices come with audio inputs. These audio inputs are occassionally rerouted to the Mac microphone port, in which case the audio sample rate is as good as the Mac can provide; typically 44.1 KHz 16-bit stereo. In other cases, audio is brought in over USB along with the video. These devices support up to 48 KHz 16-bit stereo.

The VideoGlide software supports multiple devices, i.e. more than one device can be plugged in and used at the same time. This is particularly useful with security applications like Ben Bird's SecuritySpy. It can also allow multiple simultaneous broadcasts from the same machine using webcam software like Econ Technologies' ImageCaster. Note that one serial number per device will be required, i.e. to enable 3 devices, 3 serial numbers must be purchased. Note that a stock machine with no additional USB 2.0 PCI cards can run only two devices simultaneously, and one of those must be at 320 x 240. Adding USB 2.0 expansion cards can increase the number of devices that can run simultaneously, and the frame sizes at which they can operate.

Auto-Detect Input And Format allows video sources to be swapped in an and out dynamically without the need to inform the application that a change occurred. The VideoGlide software will automatically select the input carrying the video, as well as its format, for example PAL or NTSC.

The included VideoGlide Capture software will allow you to capture video from a VideoGlide device. It also has an extremely fast full-screen preview mode. VideoGlide is Apple-scriptable.

The included VideoGlide Export software will allow the export of QuickTime movies to any other QuickTime format including DV Streams required by iMovie and H.264 or MPEG-4 movies required by iTunes and video-enabled Pods. QuickTime Pro is not required.

[lordsmurf]

There's no controversy.

I actually get irritated when I read "Mac vs. PC", because a Mac is a personal computer (PC). Computers can have many OS, including versions of Windows and Linux, among others.

Understand that computer are just tools. Hammers or toasters, but with semiconductors and PCBs. When you romanticize computers (ie, "AI!"), or become a "fan" of a certain brand ("Apple rules, Windows drools!"), you lose focus. Forget the nonsense/BS, always see it as a tool.

The hardware is a tool.
The OS is a tool.
The software is a tool.

Certain hardware can only run certain OS, and certain OS can only run certain software. So there is a "sweet spot" to do the task needed. Sometimes the stars align, and the same software is available on all the standard OS, such as Firefox and Chrome. But most software is far more specialized, especially for niche tasks. So, for example, FCP is a NLE only for Mac, while Vegas is an NLE only for Windows. But then, that example is just one of preference, as both editors do fine for the task of editing. The real pickle is when you have hardware or a genre of software that ONLY exists on a certain OS. And that's where SD analog video capture exists. It's a Windows world, others fail to perform or function.

Mac doesn't support SD video because Steve Jobs was stubborn, myopic even, when it came to video. He just didn't foresee digital video becoming what it is today. He often gets praise for iPhones and iPods, but he really screwed the pooch multiple times over the decades. So all we got for Mac SD was DV, the end. He waged war with Adobe/etc, and thought all we ever needed was iMovie and FCP and Quicktime. How arrogant, how ridiculous. He eventually righted this wrong, but it was already an HD world by then. SD still got nothing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sac John

It's been 35 years of exclusively Mac use for me,

That doesn't really matter, as you've not been doing video on computer for 35 years. You must approach this as needing a tool for a task, not from brand loyalty (and from a brand that is not loyal to you, nor the correct tool for the niche task).

Quote:

so that decision won't come easy, and one estimate to create an "ideal" dedicated capture PC came in at well over a grand.

You can certainly compress a budget down to under $1k, but you'll make sacrifice in resources, especially motherboard and space. Those heavily matter.

I never understand the pushback on the costs of a Windows system from an Apple user. The Windows system is a fraction of the cost, and more powerful.

Quote:

But cost aside, I'm trying hard to understand the Mac vs PC discussion, which is very hard for me because I understand almost nothing about PC terminology and only some of the Mac terminology. So some of the advice I got last year about PC specs that I needed to search for went right over my head. Still does.

That's why I setup/build capture systems for others. It's not just a computer, but a system setup/built for video, a very specific task with specific needs. If you attempt to use your daily computer for video, you'll be miserable. It does too much stuff, and induces errors and drops/desync.

Quote:

LS says that the main issue that makes Macs the inferior capture choice is software.

Yep.
OS X to 10.14 have a very tiny selection of decent cards (ie, ATI 600 USB clones), and some crap (Easycaps), that could be used with VideoGlide. But in that ended years ago, especially on the new M CPU systems.

Quote:

OBS, popular on Macs, records from the screen, not from the conversion card output. (I can understand that much. If true, booo OBS.)

You have to understand capturing. When analog capture software connects to a card via the drivers, it directly acquires the data, with a preview layer (via DirectX/etc, or CPU via software) so you can see what's going on. These layers are subject to errors and flaws. OBS records analog data from these layer, as it's actually a digital screen recording software. It does not direct access the card data, but data that is a generation removed, and possibly corrupted.

Furthermore, OBS compressed the hell out of video (H.264). It can now use Huffyuv, but it's apparently the ffmpeg/ffdshow version, which is NOT suited to capture (only post-capture encoding). More often than not the ffmpeg version corrupts.

And it uses the wrong rec colorspace. It's made for digital HD, not analog SD.

Quote:

He also said that the Mac's iMovie software wrongly processes and/or induces too much overhead that results in dropped frames. So I guess that iMovie is simply coded poorly for our purposes - as in, not created with video capture as the priority.

Editing software is infamous for not capture well, or properly, or at all. Too much resource overhead. iMovie is especially crappy at the task of capture video.

Quote:

I still don't get what about Macs specifically makes them a poor choice for video capture.

Lack of drivers and software.

Quote:

LS recommended I buy a DataVideo TBC, which I did. He also recommended the Tevion capture card, which I bought. Since the Tevion only came with PC capture software, LS told me to use VideoGlide. I trust his judgement, so that's what I installed and have captured one or two tapes to my Mac using that system. I have the finished video files,

Standard workflow =
VCR > TBC > capture card.
Not just any devices, but ones specific to quality for this task.

Ideally:
JVC S-VHS with line TBC
> recommended DataVideo/Cypress type frame TBC
> recommended certain ATI/Pinnacle type capture card, or certain LSI DVD recorders

That gives best experience, best quality.

Quote:

but nothing to compare them to, so I don't know how close to "ideal" I've gotten with this system and whether or not a PC would make that huge of a difference.

Post samples.

Quote:

So is VideoGlide in fact still another questionable program like OBS or iMovie in that it doesn't capture video at the highest possible quality - whereas some PC software would?

VideoGlide is fine within the confines of the OS where it works. It's not bad software, simply software with strict requirements, meaning you cannot use any new random Mac system and get results from it. I doubt it would even install now, due to the Quicktime requirements being deprecated for years now.

Quote:

The VideoGlide webpage sites all these technical stats, a whole list of them, to make it sound like their captures are top-quality. They don't seem to me to be marketing themselves to dummies.

It's decent.

But remember: everybody thinks their feces smells like roses. Nobody ever says "our company makes middling items for the masses". No, it's all "best ever" whatever.

Quote:

Is even VideoGlide in fact still not equal in finished captured image quality compared to whatever capture software you PC users use? And if so, what's the difference? And how remarkable would the difference be if we could see the two captures side by side on a TV screen?

No, not the same.

The biggest difference is the options, namely 720x480 max res, and compression. The VideoGlide choices for codec are narrow, and the res is capped at 640 (which is fine, but non-standard historically).

Quote:

What am I still missing that would demand I spend a grand or more for an older customized PC and capture software to maximize the capture quality of my tapes?

Nothing. You can muddle through with what you have.

The difference is simply your own sanity. When you cut corners, it's not free. The money aspect, yes. But the cost is in frustration, aggravation -- ie, sanity. I value mine, so I use gear that doesn't fight me, doesn't make my capture life miserable.

And, of course, gives quality.

[hodgey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

The biggest difference is the options, namely 720x480 max res, and compression. The VideoGlide choices for codec are narrow, and the res is capped at 640 (which is fine, but non-standard historically).

y.

That seemed to vary depending on capture card from what I remember when using it at least (though it's been a while since I messed with it so could misremember) - one diamond VC500 MAC i tried (SAA7113 video chip + empia bridge chip) did 720x576 (and 720x480) fine while the slightly newer one with a all in one empia chip only gave 640x480 in videoglide. Both are different again to the Tevion.

[Hushpower]

Quote:

And it [OBS] uses the wrong rec colorspace. It's made for digital HD, not analog SD.

Colour space is selectable.

[latreche34]

OBS use to be just a screen capture, maybe they've evolved and are actually listening to the capturing community but it is still unclear to which layer they actually take the video stream of off, Is it the card driver? is it the OS graphic interface? ... That's why I tend to stay away from it.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hodgey

That seemed to vary depending on capture card

Yep, I've seen this as well, for 720 vs. 640. But those VC500 are crappy cards, aggressive AGC. The best cards are locked at 640.

But the compression option issue remains. MagicYUV/Utvideo lossless isn't good for capturing (just intermediary), ProRes422 doesn't always show, and uncompressed is a lousy option due to size. But if you insist on Mac, those are your options. Not bad/unworkable, just not a great user experience as found on Windows.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hushpower

Colour space is selectable.

Well, that's something.

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

OBS use to be just a screen capture, maybe they've evolved and are actually listening to the capturing community but it is still unclear to which layer they actually take the video stream of off, Is it the card driver? is it the OS graphic interface? ... That's why I tend to stay away from it.

Given the fundamental design of the software, being a screen recording software, I just heavily doubt it can ever use anything other than the graphics abstraction layers. Not actual card data transfer. That was fine for broadcast (aka the B in OBS), as drops/glitches are expected in transport streams. But not for capture. I'm sure some people "don't care", but those will be the same people that use Easycaps and HDMI adapters, which negate the harm of OBS, given how dreadful the quality was molested by those devices.

[Sac John]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

Re: Macs

Lack of drivers and software.

So is the lack of drivers and software on Macs also the case with new Windows computers? I suspect it is, because when I posted the question last year, all or most of the answers referred to these older machines with earlier OS's.

I ask because, while I have a hard time justifying an entire second computer just for video capture, my wife is starting to ask for a computer of her own, a Windows, that can run this fabric cutting machine she owns. It's an expensive machine that she got for free, and she's making a fuss that she can't use it because she doesn't have the computer to run it. (All beside the point.)

So if I bought a spanking new Windows computer, would the most current OS allow for the best software and recommended A/D converter to create a top-tier video capture station?

Pessimistic and ignorant, but still asking.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sac John

So if I bought a spanking new Windows computer,

No.

Video capture was a 2000s task, not a 2020s task. You'll run into driver and software issues with anything too new as well. You can sometimes find workarounds, and sometimes not. You make it harder on yourself bu choosing the wrong OS.

WinXP and Win7 best.
WinVista works, but overall sucks, extra steps to everything.
Win8 can go either way, works fine or not at all ever.
Win10 can be iffy at times, often needs fiddly workarounds.
Win11, no idea, good luck.

You'd need to post computer spec needed by the sewing machines, to see if something can be used to do both tasks. But I sure would not want to, probably conflicts.

[sordidpast]

Lately, in the course of helping a friend save a file from camcorder to Mac, I came across a program called SwiftCapture by Ben Software, which is supposed to handle SD composite video from your interface. I was going to try it last night, on my one Apple desktop (Im a Windows guy mainly), a 2009 Mac Mini, but I'll need a more recent machine to run the required OS 10.13 and above. Anyway, it's free to try for 30 days, and costs £29 to buy. Might be worth a try.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sordidpast

Lately, in the course of helping a friend save a file from camcorder to Mac, I came across a program called SwiftCapture by Ben Software, which is supposed to handle SD composite video from your interface. I was going to try it last night, on my one Apple desktop (Im a Windows guy mainly), a 2009 Mac Mini, but I'll need a more recent machine to run the required OS 10.13 and above. Anyway, it's free to try for 30 days, and costs £29 to buy. Might be worth a try.

It doesn't address basics like interlace. It's probably an automatic no. Try it, but expect nothing.

Reading the docs, it expects progressive HD sources.

[Hushpower]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lordsmurf

Video capture was a 2000s task, not a 2020s task.

There are plenty of current digitisers that work well with Windows 10: GV-USB2, USB-Live2 and USB3HDCAP to name some. Based on what I have seen, there is absolutely no need to up a dinosaur PC (Win 7, XP) just for capturing, although I do like that HDD power gadget.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lordsmurf

Well, that's something.

I pointed out that colour standard issue because you obviously didn't know that about OBS, which, how can I say this nicely, calls into question your claims about how OBS captures video from a digitiser as opposed to a simple screen capture:

Quote:

Given the fundamental design of the software, being a screen recording software, I just heavily doubt it can ever use anything other than the graphics abstraction layers. Not actual card data transfer.

Do you really think this is just a con?

Sources.jpg

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hushpower

There are plenty of current digitisers that work well with Windows 10: GV-USB2, USB-Live2 and USB3HDCAP to name some. Based on what I have seen,

But that's my question for you:
- How many have you seen?
- How many capture systems do you actually set up?

Because I'm betting it's far fewer than I do. This site was setup decades ago as my personal notebook, shared with the public. Eventually the forum was added, so I could interact with others, talk with them, not just at them via guides. When I speak about various concepts, it's because I have done them at volume. It's obviously grown beyond just me, and there are many conversations these days where I don't participate (and/or can't participate, ie thin to no knowledge on the topic). But when I do, it's often because I have a decent body of experience. Not just one-offs like your average Youtuber.

When I see something like "but my system did __" it doesn't disprove anything I write. All it does is show that you had a different experience. Great!

Now, sometimes I'm suspect of the claims.
And sometimes I know the claims are outright BS, not possible.
Other times, it makes me want to recreate that success on my end. And I often do try. Sometimes success, sometimes not. Success can alter what I do, adopt it.

I have no doubt that some folks are finding Win10 capture success. The conundrum is why, what hardware, what variables are at play. We have isolated some issues to Nvidia cards (and those WIn10 drivers), and found some workarounds. But others are still a mystery,

In the past few years of "Win10", I've run into issues. All cards, software, system hardware. It's always something somewhere. Sometimes it's like threading a needle, hoping to that perfect combo that doesn't give "Win10" a fit. (I write "Win10" because Windows 10 is more like a platform, not a single OS. Certain updates essentially make it an entirely new OS, sort of like Win95 to Win98 to WinME.)

Quote:

there is absolutely no need to up a dinosaur PC (Win 7, XP) just for capturing, although I do like that HDD power gadget.

XP/7 are legacy, not "dinosaur". Legacy OS still have use. "Dinosaur" is something like Windows 1.0 or 3.1, where it's a museum piece only.

Quote:

I pointed out that colour standard issue because you obviously didn't know that about OBS, which, how can I say this nicely, calls into question your claims

I don't make it a routine to constantly re-test software, unless new features are known, and need be tested. I have a life, work to do, family to take of. That said, I do have OBS installed on my new M2 Pro, but not had time to do much software exploring, busy.

Quote:

about how OBS captures video from a digitiser as opposed to a simple screen capture:

That has nothing to do with the capture mechanism, of direct acquisition vs. graphics display layer recording. That seems fundamental to the core of the software, not something that can easily be changed.

Quote:

Do you really think this is just a con?

No idea what you mean by that.

[Hushpower]

Quote:

No idea what you mean by that.

Yes, sorry, a bit cryptic. I meant that the developers would not have put all those separate options in a menu if all it (OBS) does is screen capturing. If it says "video capture device", why is it not reasonable to assume that OBS is, in fact, doing a proper capture from an actual device?

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hushpower

Yes, sorry, a bit cryptic. I meant that the developers would not have put all those separate options in a menu if all it (OBS) does is screen capturing. If it says "video capture device", why is it not reasonable to assume that OBS is, in fact, doing a proper capture from an actual device?

I think it's very reasonable to assume this:

The developer(s) made a nifty software to "broadcast" (a stretch of the term) game recording on game platforms. It did begin purely as a simple screen recorder, not too different from Fraps, CamStudio, and others (at that time; all are now defunct). But better for his needs.

As it became more popular, in came requests for it to "also do" other tasks. Some were naturals extensions, such as webcams. Others were not, such as analog capture.

OBS is a great tool, used properly.
But it's simply not an analog capture software.

You can read the history of the project here:
https://thenewstack.io/how-one-game-...ng-revolution/

I actually read some fairly complex documentation on OBS (no idea where anymore, it's all spread out like most open-source docs), and the analog capture seems to be an extension of screen recording. It's not the upper layer, where it'd record your mouse, or voice on a mic. But in a prior layer, intercepting the preview output, rather than the actual output. Although that was not "current" info (also not "outdated"), it does appear to be built on the existing framework. Analog capture would likely require an entirely different software approach.

This does make a difference in output quality. But those using OBS with crap hardware and H.264 compression never see it.

For the record, a group of us had been attempting to get VirtualDub stripped down to a more pure capture app, with a better interface. Not to make it pretty, but to make some confusing options less confusing (such as the consequence of disabling reporting by deselecting certain options). But the pandemic halted it, and no movement since.