RetroTINK 4K test for analog capture?

[latreche34]

480 or 720 makes no difference for youtube, it is still SD and it will look like $hit, Acceptable compression starts at 1080p, If you want VP9 you need to be at least at 1440p, but since no screen displays this natively, you will be left with one choice 2160p if you want VP9.

[briansemerick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

480 or 720 makes no difference for youtube, it is still SD and it will look like $hit, Acceptable compression starts at 1080p, If you want VP9 you need to be at least at 1440p, but since no screen displays this natively, you will be left with one choice 2160p if you want VP9.

720p is HD. I've tried both 480 and 720, and also anything that is under 720 gets downconverted to 480 and gets blocky. Did you look at my videos? They don't look like crap. I don't like to upscale beyond a reasonable amount - the display should mostly be doing any upscaling itself. My files are all H.264, so VP9 isn't a consideration.

[lordsmurf]

It is true that Youtube gives no respect to 720p now. It/they starve the streams of bitrate, and do not re-encode with any care or quality.

Animation has a way of hiding bitrate starvation, which is why those look great. But its one of several reasons why the non-animation (the family stuff) was only "eh, passable" in quality.

Yes, 720p is HD, but not "Full HD". Sort of like how 352x480 is a valid SD resolution (as are others), but is not "Full D1" (720x480).

However, I refer to NLE editing in suggesting that 720p is still fine in 2025.

Post-NLE, you can easily upscale again to appease Youtube. But my main concern is not Youtube. Never has been, never will be. Youtube is it's own PITA system, and does not dictate my local archiving, editing, or ingest needs.

[briansemerick]

yeah, Youtube isn't a my "goal", it's just a way to share things I've transferred. The original files will always look better. Animation may be helpful, but many of my home movies look really great in their original files - however a lot of the family videos I put up on youtube were only put there because my main sharing site only accepts videos under 20 minutes long. I have about 80 other videos that are not on youtube. Also keep in mind most of those family videos on yt are very, very old with maybe not the best camcorders, or VHS-C tapes.

[lordsmurf]

I have some older videos on Youtube (late 00s, early 10s), and I've seen in recent times where the quality was just sucked out of them. My local archives are 4:2:2 MPEG-2, broadcast bitrate, and look vastly better.

Most videos in a feed are now 2 years old at most. But sometimes you'll come across something from a decade ago, or even the 00s, and it's just bad. Not because the upload was bad at the time (though many were), but because Youtube just compressed the snot out of them at some point.

[latreche34]

Quote:

Originally Posted by briansemerick

yeah, Youtube isn't a my "goal", it's just a way to share things I've transferred. The original files will always look better. Animation may be helpful, but many of my home movies look really great in their original files - however a lot of the family videos I put up on youtube were only put there because my main sharing site only accepts videos under 20 minutes long. I have about 80 other videos that are not on youtube. Also keep in mind most of those family videos on yt are very, very old with maybe not the best camcorders, or VHS-C tapes.

If YT is not your goal keep your files at 480p and save the masters in their original 480i.

720p was a pro camcorder format to shoot 30p because the hardware back then was not up to the task to shoot 30p 1080, then such content was broadcast at the same resolution over the air, 720p monitors were made for it, but it died quickly and so did the hardware supporting it as soon as 1080p chips were available, 20 years later 720 does not make sense anymore, If you still have a 720p monitor to support it I can understand that, Otherwise you're just destroying your files, Resizing from 480 to 720 is very destructive, not even double resolution.

[lordsmurf]

It's always interesting to get differing opinions on resolution.

I'm not a purist on resolutions.

Obviously archive the source as digital equivalent max, meaning interlaced 720x480 4:2:2.

But where you go after that has a lot of room for preference, which is sometimes based on resource limits. Pre-NLE deinterlaced, even some NR, is fine. Upscale out can be desired for local DLNA/home watching, 720p is a good balance for it. I've done this, many times.

In this specific case, I'd not output to 480p.
480i, yes.
720p, yes.
1080p/4K/8K, fine, whatever, overkill, unless purpose dictates (and Youtube dictates 1080+)

While this does seem to have OT, it's really not too far off. Why? Because the Retrotink is not really suited to VHS, for resolution/interlacing reasons.

But if I ever decide to starting recording myself playing video games, RetroTINK would be where I'd look first. (I may not get it ultimately, but it's definitely where I'd started my gamer capture card research.)

[RayNotes]

I'm still seeing vintage content uploaded to YouTube at 480p and it's a little depressing. You've gone through the trouble of finding, digitizing, and uploading your newly resurrected vintage content just to have YouTube smash it to bits - no pun intended.

Even Vampire Robot - a reasonably popular classic video channel (160k subs) uploaded a 1995 home video from a high school at 360p. You can practically play Tetris with the blocking artifacts. I don't have any insight as to why, maybe it's just what he found already digitized.

For me, I always upscale my final output to 2880x2160 for uploads. The YouTube content looks almost exactly the same as my output file - where the quality is largely a function of the source tape I find.

As for the RetroTINK, they're releasing a budget version of the 4K that I'll likely buy and test myself this summer. If it works, it works. The classic TBCs are just too much money and too flakey for the average hobbyist to bother with anymore.

[Gary34]

Quote:

The classic TBCs are just too much money and too flakey for the average hobbyist to bother with anymore.

A DVD recorder is what you guys are using as a frame sync right?

[lordsmurf]

VCRs are vastly more flakey than TBCs -- and those can eat tapes!

Costs, okay, sure. **

But not unreliability. All VCRs, capture cards, TBC(ish) and TBCs have that issue shared among them. And always have, nothing new there.

RetroTINKs also don't replace TBCs -- those are just capture cards, and not even for videotapes (only video games).


_________________

** Everything is relative, and $1k is really not that unreasonable for a quality AV tool.

Too often, I think people see that Netflix costs ~$20/month, and therefore anything video should somehow also cost $20. Crazy logic. And not even monthly, just total cost. So $10 thrift store VCR, $10 Chinese card, and done? Ridiculous.

The same people who complain about TBC costs are generally the same ones with $K "gamer" computers, $K graphics cards, $1K cell phones, etc. (I know somebody that's always "broke", but then he literally smoke about $400/month -- Altria loves him! And yep, $K computer, graphics, phone. So broke? Oh, boo-hoo. World's smallest fiddle/violin.)

It's all about priorities, and smart money management.

I'm far from rich, but I've always lived below my means. I have some nice tools for tasks, but I don't have anything "fancy", no real vices (no smoke, drink, drugs).

Even boring tools like washing machines are about $1K now, and I rarely hear people grouse about those -- aside from non-homeowners, aka 20s-somethings kids, because they know nothing. All they see are dollar signs, money they don't have, no concept of the value of those tools. Or refrigerators, or lawnmowers, or table saws, or water heaters, or SLR cameras -- I could go on. The kids are still in a "beer money" and "gas money" mindset, not the "adulting" mindset.

At least you can resell video gear when done. The others ... not so much. (Either that, or these are long-term, hobby/pro tools. And, well, all hobbies and work tools cost money!)

Food for thought.

[RayNotes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary34

A DVD recorder is what you guys are using as a frame sync right?

Sort of. I can't be sure exactly what it's doing but it seems to work. And it isn't just any DVD recorder. People tend to use the Panasonic DMR-ES10 or ES15, though I've seen video about Pioneers that work too.

Quote:

** Everything is relative, and $1k is really not that unreasonable for a quality AV tool.

I agree completely. I was speaking relative to the hobbyists. I have no issue spending money on gear, but it's all relative to your goals. A hobbyist might make due, and be happy with with some modest gear that is guaranteed to greatly outperform any of those all-in-one solutions on Amazon.

Everything is relative. E.g., the below image is my $2,000 4K cinema camera with my $3,200 cinema lens and many accessories. My guess is, I'll end up buying a proper TBC and capture card if/when the time is right.
PXL_20220624_200219320.PORTRAIT (2).jpg

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayNotes

though I've seen video about Pioneers that work too.

PAL models, not NTSC.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayNotes

I was speaking relative to the hobbyists.

Most hobbyists are pretty spendy.

Take something as simple as Transformers action figures.

Look at sites like:
- https://tfsource.com/
- https://www.thechosenprime.com/
- https://www.bigbadtoystore.com/

The sizes of these toys communities are huge.
For example: https://tfw2005.com which has almost 90K members, who have made 20M+ posts.
Or the Reddit groups. Marvel Legends, McFarlane, Hot Toys, etc. So, so many toys.

Toys often cost $50 to $100 on average, sometimes as much as $500+ each. People lap it up. Many of them sell out within hours of being posted to Amazon, BBTS, the official Hasbro/McFarlane/etc sites. Sometimes mere minutes.

You'll look on Youtube, and see scores of collectors with complete walls, or complete rooms of displays. Even the displays are fancy and not cheap. The total prices of those figures dwarfs the costs of their cars/trucks, sometimes even their mortgage.

... and it's not even an expensive hobby compared to most!

I think most people would be shocked at how expensive sewing is! Grandma has money!

Take the RetroTINK here. The 'TINK owners often have many game consoles, with many games. Complete with a fancy computer with a $1k+ graphics card -- or even multiples.

Even stock/crypto spend can get crazy, and it's all knee-jerk with minimal research. Lots of fools are parted with their monies. They don't gripe, and in fact many enjoy showing off their "loss porn". It's pure gambling.

Anyway, I digress...

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayNotes

E.g., the below image is my $2,000 4K cinema camera with my $3,200 cinema lens and many accessories.

Very nice.

[NJRoadfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

480 or 720 makes no difference for youtube, it is still SD and it will look like $hit, Acceptable compression starts at 1080p, If you want VP9 you need to be at least at 1440p, but since no screen displays this natively, you will be left with one choice 2160p if you want VP9.

Umm, 2560x1440 monitors are very common these days.

@briansemerick, can you share your RetroTINK 4K profile that you used for capturing? One strength of the device is being able to save your settings and allow others to easily replicate your results.

[RayNotes]

Quote:

Most hobbyists are pretty spendy.

Point well taken. And technically I guess I proved your point with my own camera gear spend - which is essentially still only a hobby for me, despite $15k in gear.

[briansemerick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJRoadfan

Umm, 2560x1440 monitors are very common these days.

@briansemerick, can you share your RetroTINK 4K profile that you used for capturing? One strength of the device is being able to save your settings and allow others to easily replicate your results.

sure, the VHS profiles are in a zip at this post:

https://www.retrorgb.com/retrotink-5...s-capture.html

I've been using this one for awhile but I think I should look at them again and see if the S-Video profile is much different

NTSC 480i Capture - 2024-04-29.rt4

[Gary34]

Quote:

Most hobbyists are pretty spendy.

My other hobbies have been in the same ballpark as this price wise but this is the only one that the price is soo controversial to the general population. Before this I had bought a drone and goggles for 2 grand then bought accessories and an editing computer for it. I would talk to other hobbyist on YouTube about mine and they would talk to me about upgrading or w/e. Those lose their value really quickly because something else comes out. That thing could get ruined easily. If you bring this up to the same demographic on the same platform it’s a completely different reaction but these
werent really marketed towards the general population though.

[briansemerick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary34

My other hobbies have been in the same ballpark as this price wise but this is the only one that the price is soo controversial to the general population. Before this I had bought a drone and goggles for 2 grand then bought accessories and an editing computer for it. I would talk to other hobbyist on YouTube about mine and they would talk to me about upgrading or w/e. Those lose their value really quickly because something else comes out. That thing could get ruined easily. If you bring this up to the same demographic on the same platform it’s a completely different reaction but these
werent really marketed towards the general population though.

I think the response is usually that tech gets cheaper over time as new things come out. Since this is all for old tech problems, you'd think the equipment would be cheap - but that's not how it works sometimes.

[Gary34]

Quote:

I think the response is usually that tech gets cheaper over time as new things come out. Since this is all for old tech problems, you'd think the equipment would be cheap - but that's not how it works sometimes.

With TBCs they weren’t really mass produced. There really aren’t many now. There are only certain ones that are made for consumer analog formats. Then the world forgot about analog and the 08/09 recession made chip manufacturers stop making the right chips and that lead to things like the black AVT 8710s. We are trying to get gear but we are 20 years late to the show. I can see why it is expensive.

[briansemerick]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary34

With TBCs they weren’t really mass produced. There really aren’t many now. There are only certain ones that are made for consumer analog formats. Then the world forgot about analog and the 08/09 recession made chip manufacturers stop making the right chips and that lead to things like the black AVT 8710s. We are trying to get gear but we are 20 years late to the show. I can see why it is expensive.

it's a niche market, but I imagine there is still a big enough market out there to create something the same or better than those and sell it to that niche. Then people wouldn't need to keep scouring for the old conversion tech. Doing what Mike Chi is doing for game consoles, but for analog video.

[Gary34]

Quote:

it's a niche market, but I imagine there is still a big enough market out there to create something the same or better than those and sell it to that niche. Then people wouldn't need to keep scouring for the old conversion tech. Doing what Mike Chi is doing for game consoles, but for analog video.

You can see everything that was analog start to transition towards digital. The TVs went to hybrid analog/digital and VCRs started were made more cheaply. I don’t think it would make sense financially for someone to make gear that was better than gear that was made back then. Those guys had basically unlimited budgets. If they were going to do that they probably would have already. That would be cool if there was enough financial incentive but I don’t think there is.