Why not capture analog video/audio both lossless?

[hajes29a]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

You would be wrong. Analog video conversion still operates in a per-core world. Having multi-core CPUs simply does not matter. So in terms of CPU overhead, look at core speed, not # of cores. Almost all CPU gains in the past decade were just x86 adding cores, not really meaningfully improving speeds of cores.

you may be expert in video restoration, but your computing understanding lags widely behind :-P

In modern world, we use IPC (Instruction Per Cycle) measure - I bet all I have that my 16 core Ryzen 9 5950X @ 4.1 GHz beats any 4 core CPU (except the mighty gaming 5600X version optimised for single core performance) in IPC single core performance :-P

What you are basically saying, that single core performance didn't change since Pentium ROFL

I bet again all I have that any latest CPU (except the tourist ones) beats previous generations in single-core IPC performance no matter core-frequency because as we know that is only for PC tuners nowadays. Even the Ryzen 9 3xxx vs 5xxx series jumped >10% in IPC for the former ;-)

In other words, any modern CPU can do single-core/IPC faster than the previous generations. Perhaps except Intel that struggles last 10 years without proper leadership.

Of course, the 10% idle is average for all cores. And as any modern CPU does is switching cores to keep it cool. The only issue I see is that CPU load scheduling may cause some unexpected lag/frame drop that can be easily resolved by NUMA core pinning that forces to use a single core/node per process. I am sure this can be done even on MS Crapdows ;-)

I again bet all I have that even old obsolete HW will NEVER drop frames in Linux. Main frame dropper is in your OS

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hajes29a

What you are basically saying, that single core performance didn't change since Pentium ROFL

No. not saying that. The main advantages have been in caching, heat (TDP), RAM communication, etc. The conversation gets too technical, and I don't care to explain it. All that matters is that modern CPUs can drop frames just like older ones, there have not been major leaps in the tech, as it pertains to this exact legacy use, in order to prevent any drops.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hajes29a

I again bet all I have that even old obsolete HW will NEVER drop frames in Linux. Main frame dropper is in your OS

Too bad Linux (or Mac) never had any capture software that was worthwhile.

[hajes29a]

don't say "I don't care to explain" if you have no idea. It is ok not to know everything :-P

Why do you insist on GUI? It is for amateurs ;-) You are hardcore "YUY/RAW video" guy, the same hardcore guys use CLI only :-P You just need one stable capture rig where one doesn't waste time by fixing unfixable. Win is notoriously unstable with crap drivers, that never were fixed since Win 1.0

You guys seems to love old school stuff based on AGP, PCI/ATI Wonder in WinXP. With Linux you get most stable ATI/AMD drivers you will never see in Win.

then you type "ffmpeg -i "capture_device" -vc ffv1 -ac pcm capture.avi

get a beer, talk to your family, and live little bit...100% result 0% waste ;-) I never understood people wasting time by unfixable.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hajes29a

don't say "I don't care to explain" if you have no idea. It is ok not to know everything :-P

Or more accurately, not have time to argue on the internet.

Quote:

Why do you insist on GUI? It is for amateurs ;-) You are hardcore "YUY/RAW video" guy, the same hardcore guys use CLI only :-P

No.

Quote:

You just need one stable capture rig where one doesn't waste time by fixing unfixable. Win is notoriously unstable with crap drivers, that never were fixed since Win 1.0

No.

Quote:

You guys seems to love old school stuff based on AGP, PCI/ATI Wonder in WinXP.

Best is best.

Quote:

With Linux you get most stable ATI/AMD drivers you will never see in Win.

No.

Quote:

then you type "ffmpeg -i "capture_device" -vc ffv1 -ac pcm capture.avi

No.

Quote:

get a beer,

Can't, MS, alcohol really screws with your system, even a single drink. It's not fun at all. It's a disease with more limitations that most people realize or understand. I haven't had my favorite brews in over a decade now.

[hajes29a]

if you never tried Linux, how do you know it is crap :-P it is easy to say NO. Of course, if you expect to come, capture without steep learning curve...you will give up as most. I think in terms of energy/time/wealth/fun ratio. I regularly wasted hundreds of hours by keeping Win alive...it is kinda like cheaper marriage. 1000 hours per year for usual guy with 30CHF/h...you have lost annually 30'000CHF/USD.

You can buy every year the best gear money can buy, and the remaining 700 hours reinvest in gaining wealth. It is said that the average person acquires new wealth every 10'000 hours. If you are already wealthy (say you know the basics of PC operation) it is Albert's phenomenon of compound interest. You are done in less than 3 years (if you don't seek problems where are none, as normies do). You will be living happily ever after ;-)

I have started with UNIX, DOS, Win, in 2000 Linux, in 2011 freeBSD/macOS...since 2011 my path always goes first on macOS, then Linux...Win only for CAD/CAM, occasionally games, and VirtualDub2 again after 20 years. ffmpeg guys do they best, but VD is still king after all years.

[mbassiouny]

@hajes29a

Quote:

I doubt there are still bottlenecks in modern computing ;-)

huh?
No there isn't. you are right, which is why we're no longer developing new faster hardware, it is not needed...
ofc there is! There are various cases where you could be computing data using the CPU, and writing to an SSD and the CPU, no matter how strong, it will be holding you back and producing data slower than the write speed of the SSD.

When working on big clusters, writing to Shared (SSD-based btw) storage could take longer than the rate the CPU produces data with. It really depends on the nature of data, and the computation you're doing, the software/code you are running, how it uses the hardware and the computational problem behind. Feel free to doubt bottlenecks, but I know they do exist in general, now if you are talking about video capture (which you did not specify), they also do exist, just less common...

Quote:

if you never tried Linux, how do you know it is crap :

How do you know he never tried Linux? I am not defending him, I am not his lawyer, just curious to know how you make up these assumptions.


I have used different flavors of Linux since the age of 10 on my servers/VPS. Started With Centos 5 and 6 in CLI, I never even knew what GUI for Linux looked like until a couple of years ago and I also goofed around on mac and linux to capture videos since 2013-2015. I ended Up redoing many of my captures over the last couple of years. Does it make me worthy to you of stating my opinion since I know what a CLI looks like

The fact you're speaking about "Linux" as being a single thing weakens your positions. Speak about a distro, not the entire family. Because there is a huge gap between different distros.

The fact you say Linux has stable hardware drivers could not be any wronger. The fact is, that Windows has the widest compatibility for hardware. It is statistics and facts, not opinions.
Not even gonna talk about how shitty Linux can be, but also it can be great. It depends on your distro, hardware and your usage.


As for FFMPEG, I am not even gonna tell you how many times I had to fix and recompile it myself. So no, even your almighty ffmpeg has issues and all of its features are well-tested.

Many things changed in CPU architectures. Old capture software and hardware drivers are not written to make the best use of modern CPUs.


most of what you're saying is just you being happy with what you have and forgetting to take into account many other factors, such as the fact the many of the people are not stupid and you are not the only smart guy, that others have different experiences, they just do not feel insecure to need to state it here to make a point about an OS and capture software, etc also, You're forgetting convenience and reliability when it comes to capturing.


Yes, you can find something that works fine on Linux, but not everything will always work fine.

I am not even going to talk about how unstable Linux can be.

Quote:

Why do you insist on GUI? It is for amateurs ;

Quote:

as normies do).

Quote:

You are hardcore "YUY/RAW video" guy, the same hardcore guys use CLI only

Oh c'mon, do not be one of them. This is the first and second item in the "I just installed Linux starter pack". Just live and let live, nobody cares about the superiority of non-noobs, or non-normies.

Also why are you bothering trying to categorize people? People are not sets. Humans are not a normalized brainless cult. "You DO A and B like your brother. Therefore you have to do C since your fellow brother does it." No. Each person is free to like YUY/raw/uncompressed, without having to have the same tastes as others. People are free to disagree.

And to answer your question, people use GUI for convenience. Back when I was studying Ergonomics and HMI we were able to prove that there are things better done with CLI, others better done with GUI. Somethings require hybrid approaches. Like launching GUIs with predefined parameters and finishing the work while previewing.



You need to realize when you do multiple things that are all different, you end up being objective about OS and understanding they're tools, not your own kids. They all suck. They just suck differently. There is no good OS/OS family. We just use each for what it does best.

If you find your happiness with X and Y on OS Z, then be happy. Just do not decide that everyone who uses other methods is amateur, noob, outdated, etc.

General advice has to be general, and suitable for the widest array of people with different hardware and a reasonable amount of knowledge without huge learning curve. You are free to experiment outside of the common methods and you can still get good/excellent results if you are lucky and know what you are doing. It does not make us all inferior to almighty you because you captured using CLI.

[latreche34]

This whole argument about OS is useless, People use what works for them, there is no better or worse. If someone managed to make Win11 works as good as Linux with no issues then what's wrong with that? I know I have, I do post process in script though, but hey, some people post process in NLE, but they make good looking videos.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hajes29a

if you never tried Linux,

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbassiouny

How do you know he never tried Linux? I am not defending him, I am not his lawyer, just curious to know how you make up these assumptions.

I use Linux desktops daily, and actually prefer Linux for many tasks. I'm platform agnostic, equally using Windows, Mac, and Linux on a regular basis. My Win7, Win11, M2 Pro, Intel Mac, and Xubuntu share a desk. Mint on another desk, XP on others. These are just tools for tasks.

Linux for video capture is like trying to use a screwdriver to drive in a nail. Or the dishwasher for your underwear.

I started dabbling with Linux in the mid/late 90s, hated it. Tried it again around 2011, used it ever since. Referring only to desktops here, not servers. (Instead of playing with Linux in ~2011, I should have played with mining Bitcoin. Oops.)

Quote:

Many things changed in CPU architectures. Old capture software and hardware drivers are not written to make the best use of modern CPUs.

That's it. Video capturing has needs, you need to meet them, using the correct tools.

Quote:

They all suck. They just suck differently. There is no good OS/OS family.

Yep.

Quote:

General advice has to be general, and suitable for the widest array of people with different hardware and a reasonable amount of knowledge without huge learning curve. You are free to experiment outside of the common methods and you can still get good/excellent results if you are lucky

Yep.

Quote:

and know what you are doing.

That actually does not matter as much as some folks think. And many that think "they know __" actually have no clue. The tool has limits, and the tool will be the actual limiter when you have in-depth knowledge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

This whole argument about OS is useless,.

Yep.

[dpalomaki]

Bottom lines from my soap box:
- Use what works for you and best meets your needs. We do not all have the same needs.
- All commercial software availability and updates are market driven. There have to be enough buyers to support development of new updated releases through purchase. No income stream, not development.
- Some of this is planned obsolescence, force users into new hardware and software (a self feeding spiral). I recall a marketing video (from Ms) in the 1980 when they put out a new version of Excel to compete with 123. (Excel was a real hog but the video included Bill Gates in a cameo rolling out a cart of new PS and the tag line is "Now you have a reason to get a new PC.")
- An issue of a computer reseller trade mag had a cover story that the noted Windows 95 was great because at last users would no longer be able to setup/configure their own PC; consultants would be required meaning more money for the resellers.

IMHO, the only significant improvements to word processors since the 29K WordStar.COM of the 1980s are spell checking, fonts, and WYSIWYG, and maybe the ability to embedded graphics.