ClonerAlliance devices for VHS digitization?

[AndyO6322]

I am considering adding a ClonerAlliance device to my portfolio of VHS analog capture workflows. I use a JVC SR-MV45 that has both component and S-video outputs from the VCR section. ClonerAlliance has a Box Pro and a ViewLite AV that are geared towards VHS capture to mp4. The Box Pro allows for component input from the VCR, while the ViewLite AV does S-video input (but not component) and adds a small LCD screen as part of the device. The ViewLite AV also has a slot for an SD card, whereas the Box Pro only works with a flash drive. The two devices are similarly priced, the ViewLite AV is about $20 less expensive.

What are the opinions and recommendations from the folks familiar with this process on which device (S-video vs. component input) is more appropriate?

[lordsmurf]

That would be a huge mistake. Those devices are junk. The "MP4" (H.264) is a deinterlaced mushy mess. Like putting on dirty goggles to watch the video.

You'd essentially take the excellent quality from that S-VHS VCR with line TBC, then destory it. You could have made bad video with a $10 thrift store VCR.

BTW, the MV45 does not have component. Only composite and s-video.

[AndyO6322]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

BTW, the MV45 does not have component. Only composite and s-video.

Thank you LS for reminding me that the component outputs on my MV45 are for the DVD section only and not the VCR part. Sounds like S-Video is the way to go!

I realize that you believe ClonerAlliance devices are focused on recording gaming videos and not appropriate for VHS digitization, but would you help me better understand why that is and if deinterlaced h264 is generally bad news. I don't need h264 files that are compatible with YouTube upload, just using the files for archiving and playback on computer devices.

On an alternate thought, maybe using the MV45 to burn a DVD, putting it in my PC, and ripping the DVD to an MPEG-2 file on the computer is the best (simple) approach. I have no need for the DVDs but they are relatively inexpensive and possibly can be reutilized. I am just looking for a computer file that I can share with family and friends with little need to edit. BTW, all my tapes are homemade, no need to deal with MacroVision limitations.

[latreche34]

Capturing to DVD is as bad as the clonealliance, Maybe it is not fair to compare the differences in mediocrity but both are not the recommended ways of capturing analog video.

[AndyO6322]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

Capturing to DVD is as bad as the clonealliance, Maybe it is not fair to compare the differences in mediocrity but both are not the recommended ways of capturing analog video.

Can you please explain. Reading this forum I see many recommendations for using a DVD Recorder/HDD and then pulling the MPEG2 files from the DVD or HDD (using Isobuster) into a PC.

[aramkolt]

Most of the DVD recorder recommendations here are typically for passthrough use if you are getting "tearing" or upper picture shifts, or non-straight vertical lines/edge wavering as sort of a line TBC. Those models usually suggested are the ES10 and ES15, though most more modern European models continued to have good line TBC type effects as they continued to use a similar chipset that is different than the later US models. They are manufactured in a different country than China/Japan even.

The general consensus is that actually recording to DVD with the recommended passthrough DVD recorders can be kind of blocky. There are a few recommendations for specific DVD recorders that produce decent results to DVD, the one that comes to mind is the JVC DR-M10. Eventually I'll post samples of how that compares to something like 15 other capture methods, but it'll be a while lol. I also have some European Panasonic units with HDMI output that theoretically should be superior to the ES10 as there's only a single digital to analog conversion there and the player itself effectively becomes the capture card. At that point it's just a matter of capturing an already digital signal with an HDMI capture card. We often don't think of HDMI as being able to carry 480i, but it can and does on many European units. They also handle NTSC just fine and also work off of 110V, despite the back labels saying 220 only. I did double the size of my main filter cap on the unit I'll be using for testing as it'll be switching twice as often, though you could also use a travel converter if you don't want to modify anything or want to follow the label's voltage input recommendation.

Main advantage to not recording to DVD is you can capture in a much higher bitrate, no "blocky" artifacts, and have less losses as you edit as you've got more preserved information to work with. If better image processing comes along later (such as AI), it's better to go back and start as to as close to the original source as possible which is where lossless or at least higher bitrate video comes in. Downside is that the lossless captures can take up 10x as much space or more as DVD captures.

This video shows ES10 as a DVD recorder vs passthrough, but also unknown to what degree YouTube compression of the video is having an effect on both or what capture card was used on the passthrough sample: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DO0WSlmyLE&t=8s

I'm with you though, seeing actual samples of a bunch of different capture methods on the same source would make it a lot easier to have confidence in the method chosen as opposed to "trust me bro" Haha. Pictures and video samples are worth more than a thousand words when determining what capture chain to use or which are "good enough" for your needs and budget. I'll be trying to put something comprehensive together that directly compares almost all of the commonly used methods, but that's a decent undertaking as you can imagine. Designing the tests itself and obtaining source tapes with various problems is the current sticking points. Always looking for tapes with severe time base errors if anyone wants to donate some for the testing - PM me.

[latreche34]

The problem with that youtube link is that youtube compression mushes both sources and it becomes hard to tell them apart.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

The problem with that youtube link is that youtube compression mushes both sources and it becomes hard to tell them apart.

The macroblocking/"pixellation" is obvious on the ES10 used as recorder. It has some excessive chroma noise as well, for whatever reason -- lots of blue, green, and red flecks of color.

The passthrough (non-recorder) sample was hosed by user error, lots of ghosting, soft, mush.

That comparison had good intentions, but no follow-through. The main reason if because Youtube is garbage for samples, reducing everything down in quality, because it's a heavily compressed video site.

bad Youtube sample pass.jpg

You must be logged in to view this content; either login or register for the forum. The attached screen shots, before/after images, photos and graphics are created/posted for the benefit of site members. And you are invited to join our digital media community.

Even the ARs differ..

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyO6322

I realize that you believe ClonerAlliance devices are focused on recording gaming videos and not appropriate for VHS digitization,

The ES10 user error mush sample above is pretty close to what that Cloner Alliance box will do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

I'm with you though, seeing actual samples of a bunch of different capture methods on the same source would make it a lot easier to have confidence in the method chosen as opposed to "trust me bro" Haha.

On the other hand, a few cherry picked samples means nothing, compared to the advice of somebody that has dealt with thousands of videos for decades.

Most of the "samples" you see online are from people that are new to this as well. So it's the blind leading the blind, none of them know what they don't know. To even put samples on Youtube (of certain errors, especially noise/NR or sharpness), and exclaim "see! see!" shows a lack of knowledge. It's always amusing when the sample "proof" doesn't show what they think it does, or reveals other issues --- especially user error that makes you question any of their advice.

By contrast, I know where fail points are on most gear (used for consumer format SD analog videotape conversion), and the exact scenarios where certain gear is not going to function well (or at all). Something like the ES10 has multiple fail points, lots of quality hits, in all use cases. The DVD recording is vastly worse, due to strained bitrate, and lousy encoding quality. There are known knowns, and have been for literally almost 20 years now.

When you've handled countless thousands of videos, you learn what a "standard video" really is, and what sort of problems are edge cases. You know how various gear, compressions, codecs, etc, interacts with it. You know how various formats and recording modes weigh on it.

I even have a personal VHS library of at least 1,000 tapes (not retail), and these form the basis for R&D, testing, and calibration. These have been curated since the 1970s, with my oldest tape being an SP home recording, from 1977, of the Star Wars Holiday Special the night it aired on ABC!

I'm not a Millennial/GenZ/GenY that says "trust me bro". Sometimes you need to recognize who has knowledge and experience, and who's wearing their "big boy pants" (a pretender, a windbag full of hot air).

If you want to "see it for yourself", fine, have fun. There are people in this world that do not learn from the mistakes of others, they want to re-make it themselves (for "proof', or whatever)

I focus on helping others, that have pro/DIY projects to complete. They don't have time (or care) to "play around and see". Not even time to "doom scroll" all the random (often wrong) opinions online, certainly not the peanut gallery that is Youtube. They want vetted quality advice, to get the job done well.

I can appreciate the usefulness of sampels at times, and understand the false desires to see samples in our modern video-enabled internet era. But sometimes you don't need videos/samples/images to discuss bad ideas. I don't need to show a sample video of why it's a bad idea to stick your pecker in an electric socket, right?

[AndyO6322]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyO6322

On an alternate thought, maybe using the MV45 to burn a DVD, putting it in my PC, and ripping the DVD to an MPEG-2 file on the computer is the best (simple) approach. I have no need for the DVDs but they are relatively inexpensive and possibly can be reutilized. I am just looking for a computer file that I can share with family and friends with little need to edit. BTW, all my tapes are homemade, no need to deal with MacroVision limitations.

Let me add more detail to my question regarding the recommendations against capturing to DVD and then pulling the files from the DVD to a PC file:

- My DVD Recorder is the DVD side of an SR-MV45 so it is similar to the referenced good recorder (DR-M10)
- Recording bitrate obviously will be around 9 Mbit/s, is that inadequate for non-blocky video?
- I am archiving the SD VHS video as is, no post editing or processing

Is this method still considered as bad as using a CloneAlliance box capturing to h264?

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyO6322

Let me add more detail to my question regarding the recommendations against capturing to DVD and then pulling the files from the DVD to a PC file:

- My DVD Recorder is the DVD side of an SR-MV45 so it is similar to the referenced good recorder (DR-M10)
- Recording bitrate obviously will be around 9 Mbit/s, is that inadequate for non-blocky video?
- I am archiving the SD VHS video as is, no post editing or processing

Is this method still considered as bad as using a CloneAlliance box capturing to h264?

My comments thus far were only addressing the low-quality Cloner Alliance box, and the low-quality DVD recording comparisons from the Panasonic recorders.

The JVC LSI Logic based units, which the MV45 contains, should be fine, excellent even. It does have some IRE offset, as most recorders.

The only problem here is that you cannot inject a frame TBC between the JVC MV45 VCR and the MV45 DVD recorder. This can be a problem if the tapes are not perfect SP mode recordings. I've done it for hobby -- cartoons recorded from Cartoon Network and Disney Channel, late 90s to early 00s, on SP mode S-VHS-ET, using TDK/JVC tapes. But anything not that has been very mixed, especially VHS EP/SLP recordings (but not only). It "records fine", but the dropped/insert frames can be obvious. Even my S-VHS-ET EP mode tapes, which are arguably at least as good as SP mode VHS, sometimes balk with inserted/dropped frames. You must realize the intention of these units was pro settings, S-VHS to DVD, from camera sources.

Noting the ES10/15 dros/inserts as well. It's a DVD recorder, not a TBC.

It's DVD. The unit you have is one of the best DVD recorders made. But you have to know when it can and cannot be used. When it will fail and not fail. Verify all recordinsg, looking for dropped frames, audio sync issues, etc.

[AndyO6322]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

The only problem here is that you cannot inject a frame TBC between the JVC MV45 VCR and the MV45 DVD recorder.

Good point LS. If you need to put a TBC in-line you would need a second unit for either the VCR or the DVD Recorder. I wonder if there's a way to get the MV45 to play on the VCR out through a TBC and in to the DVD recorder input. Probably not.

[lordsmurf]

Correct, 2nd unit. I actually have the DVM700, so I have a large HDD inside.

Nope, no way to play out and back in, I looked at that myself almost 10 years ago. Non-starter.

I actually have no issues recording from JVC S-VHS, through frame TBC, into JVC DVD recorder. Then ripping those files (because sadly we cannot direct extract like other brands/models, using ISOBuster), then processing for use online. Most issues are tweaked in Avisynth, and nobody even know it was sourced from a DVD due to quality of the encodes.