RetroTINK 4K test for analog capture?
 

Whew, so it’s been a minute since I last posted on the forums here, bunch of life nonsense plus a general slump lasting well over a year ensnared me, but I’m finally ready to get back at this capture business with a potentially interesting topic.

I bought a complete workflow from LordSmurf a long time ago and am still sitting on it really.

Until today!

Now, while I intend to use the workflow for my overall tape transfer project, I was finally given the kick in the pants I needed thanks to a recent purchase of Mike Chi’s latest iteration of his RetroTINK line, the 4K. In a recent blog post from RetroRGB, it was reported that a firmware update had been pushed to the device that claims to be helpful with VHS capturing. Keyword: CLAIMS.

Since this device is a scaler intended for video game consoles and the like, it is no substitute for a dedicated VCR and TBC setup paired with VirtualDub, but I was interested in seeing how well it could perform just by itself based on what RetroRGB reported here: https://www.retrorgb.com/retrotink-4...-firmware.html

I will share my results of the comparisons, as I intend to do plenty of capturing of my game consoles for my YouTube Channel in any case. I’ll be sure to test the profile that’s in the blog post primarily but I’ll also mess around and see what else I can do.

I’ll get back to this presently, still recovering from a cold and am not exerting myself too much.

I bought a TI4K myself to experiment with VHS capture features too. It's absolutely with doing a test with an array of units and players, happy to contribute in any way I can.

My goal right now is finding a capture card that will either take HDMI, or HDMI->SDI at 480i/576i natively at full color spectrum!

Does the RetroTINK 4K support 480i/576i output yet? I know the RT5X eventually got that mode, but the 4K's initial firmware didn't come with it, since SD output isn't a targeted application for the product. Ideally you'd would want a device to simply digitize the signal and pass it direct to the digital output without upscaling, filtering, or colorspace conversion.

Just about every HDMI capture card will accept 480i/576i. You don't want RGB output for analog capture if that is what you mean by "full color spectrum". You want 4:2:2 YUV, which is the native color space of the video.

That I'm not sure, but I reckon the firmware will be updated in due time. The TBC capabilities look promising and could only really evolve from here.


Bingo

Yup! Do most HDMI cards support that on an SD tier?

Remember, "TBC" is a wide term. What exists there is not a TBC by our analog videotape ingest definition.

How do you know unless there's testing involved? The VHS-standard TBC units from 20 years ago are failing at a rapid rate; it wouldn't be smart to reach that conclusion unless it's been proven in a series of tests.

Yeah 4:2:2 is basically the default cards support if they support uncompressed capture (which not all cards do). A lot of these cheapest generic HDMI capture dongles don't support 480i/576i though and only progressive scan mode in SD resolution. (It was added in a slightly hacky way to the HDMI protocol or something afiak so not all HDMI ICs support it)

The 4k didn't handle signal loss on a VHS tape and had some bending at the top when retroRGB tested one on tapes a little back (the stream got nuked for copyright so can't link it) so will be interesting to see the changes, though you want 480i/576i output ideally ofc.

This is an interesting take; if it's showing the bending at the top, that means that's down to error on the line level- VCR's internal TBC needs to be on.
How does it behave when the signal itself is dropping in and out?

I think I saw the VHS capture series with the RT5X and I don't think the VCRs used were ones that had a line TBC and they may not have even been using S-Video. Sounds like from the retroRGB post that they just recommend using it for composite at this point.

I also kind of wonder where they are getting those snell and Wilcox test patterns - I know they have that pattern on the Digital Video Essentials DVD, but not sure that's the purest form of a signal generator per se in terms of testing 3D comb filters?

Someone over on videohelp posted a VOB with a whole bunch of test images, including the Snell & Wilcox moving test cards. If you are using a DVD player as an output device, it is pretty good for testing comb filters on capture devices.

It's in the known specs. It's also often discussed with lots of weasel words, and technobabble like "triple buffering". At least once, any official claims were backpeddled. Not only has this been discussed multiple times in the past year, but sadly mocked as ridiculous on some sites. So even sarcastic trolls called BS on it. The excuse term "good enough" is often used by defenders in many discussions, as the captured VHS is essentially butchered. Some have even compared it to ClearClicks and Easycaps overall, by the time you get to the final product.

This is true of both 5X and 4K.

Videotapes and not video games, even if both have "video" in the name. Any video is not any video.

So it's not just me. :2cents:

Use the right tool for the right job, Retrotink-4k is a display upscaler and should be used as such. There were a lot of expensive high quality HDMI HD upscalers for VCRs and DVD players back in the day with digital processing (memory buffer) ranging from $200-$2000 and they did a very good job at upscaling from a cheap VCR into Plasma and LCD HD panels but they were never intended for capturing analog tapes, Retrotink is no different.

Didn’t expect to get so much traction in a short time. Currently at work and haven’t had the opportunity to get down to the real meat of testing, will be able to tomorrow, however.

Should reiterate that I know the RT isn’t the tool for this job and this is just a brief experiment mostly for giggles while I do the actual transfers with the workflow. I also may be an enthusiast but I’m still not well-versed on all the technical specifics, so consider this a layman’s approach by every standard. I’m open to any suggestions about what to try with the RT if supported, etc.

This cannot be repeated enough. :congrats:

It's really good to see you again. (Your username didn't even register when I first saw the thread. It's definitely been a minute.) It's been a rough road for some of us these past few years. Time heals, let's us re-find our joy, and our giggles. :)

Bumping this as the latest firmware updates for the RetroTINK 4K has now added 480i passthru/output. Bob over at RetroRGB is planning on doing some VHS capture testing with this new capability in the future.... so stay tuned.

Very interesting. I'd say the weakness of the RetroRGB tests are that they don't really compare to traditional TBCs and their VHS players probably lack a line TBC which would probably make for more visual improvement than a frame TBC would anyway if you had to choose one or the other to pair with most capture devices. In my experience, just adding the line TBC cuts dropped frames by quite a bit usually.

I don't think it is "wrong" to capture in an upscaled progressive form if you weren't planning to do post-processing or hold onto the original raw files anyway. This would especially be the case if you try QTGMC on an interlaced capture and personally can't tell the difference in quality doing it one way or the other, and the progressive capture would certainly save a lot of resources.

I'd also say that if it's buffering 2 or 3 frames and still outputs 525i, it meets the definition of a Frame TBC to me. I'd also go so far as to say it'd at least be theoretically superior to most analog to analog TBCs since the output signal stays digital (525i over HDMI), meaning at least one less digital to analog and then back to digital conversion in the chain.

What ever happened to that Singmai SM03 that was supposed to already have been released? Just mentioning it since I think that's the only other "modern" TBC in the works.

The RetroRGB guy demonstrates the Retrotink 4ks frame TBC ability at 26:50. https://youtu.be/Br6YRkOM9jA?si=ofdToB90e4ISeyy8.

That TBC "test" actually makes zero sense. Running a magnet over a tape does recreate any real-world situations. That's not how you test a TBC. I really have no idea what that "test" is supposed to accomplish.

Me neither.

I asked him if it did line TBC stuff - apparently it does. Potentially useful, if true.

You guys are knowledgeable and kind of know what to expect. That would suck being a new person and buying one of those to digitize VHS thinking you’re going to get around buying a suggested workflow then running into nothing but issues. That TBC test he does is ridiculous. A bunch of inserted frames like that isn’t a good outcome. Jeff Foxworthy would say the term stupid tax. I’m gonna say the term ignorance because I think ignorance describes it better than stupidity but that seems like ignorance tax. From what I am seeing the one he’s recommending in that video is 750 dollars.

I truly do not think he understand what a TBC is, or does. Nor the difference between TBC types. Nor the fact that a "TBC" is a wide term, and mean almost anything. There are indeed actual TBCs that do not provide the function needed for analog consumer videotape formats like VHS (example = U-matic TBCs).

Blind leading the blind.

Bill Engvall in the 90s became fact in the late 10s and early 20s. A lot of people now proudly wear hats, yard signs, and flags. I always know who not to bother speaking to, because they believe in myth and nonsense. Thanks for the warning! "Here's you sign!" :laugh: :screwy:

Bob finally released that video on using the RetroTINK 4k and 5X for VHS capture using the new 480i passthru modes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N9mRJKk9ps

Oddly the biggest problem encountered is with HDMI capture cards failing to properly support 480i video. :smack: Proof that even digital capture cards are suffering from regression too. My decade old AverMedia HDMI capture card has no problems with this!

I don't know that I'd call dropping support for 480i part "regression" for capture cards - drop of an old technology maybe. It's kind of like when Apple stopped including floppy drives on their computers, and then later stopped including optical drives. My guess is that 480i was sometimes misidentified as a different resolution or it made the hardware more complicated to support a feature that most no longer use.

There are plenty of older Elgato HDMI capture cards that do support 480i, and that being the case, they'll be much cheaper on the used market than the newer ones that don't. The one I have for testing is an HD60 S. If you look at the difference in specs between the HD60S and the HD60S+, the Plus drops 480i support. I'm guessing that most of their capture cards older than that (looks like production stopped in Jan 2022) do have 480i support. I went with the HD60S because it's USB 3.0 (some of the older cards like the Game Capture HD were USB 2.0 and does support 480i, but they probably also work).

Alternatively, the Blackmagic Ultrastudio 3G Recorder is still made and does support 480i. Downside with that one is that it requires Thunderbolt 3 or later which a lot of Windows computers don't have. It's perfect for any modern Mac though. Yet Mac still lacks QTGMC deinterlacing since Hybrid doesn't work reliably on Mac (for me anyway).

Question is... what if the testing shows the Retrotink 480i capture pathway to be equal or superior to currently recommended workflows while also being less expensive and working on modern computers? Would admins change their recommendation on that being the new recommended workflow?

You're making too many assumptions here.

For starters, as it regards the RetroTINK, the term "triple buffering" means nothing outside of video games. I still have yet to see any precise definitions of what this actually is, in terms of analog videotapes. I need accurate jargon, not fluffy language.

Too many fail to understand what a TBC is -- as needed for consumer analog videotape conversion -- so they make many mistakes. Most entirely fail to comprehend that line TBC (in-frame, non-temporal) is not frame TBC (inter-frame, temporal). Essentially X+Y vs. Z axis. So a lot of the claims of it having "TBC", because they can "see" it, are simply a degree of line TBC (and yet unknown if weak or strong).

Nothing has shown RetroTINKs to have frame TBCs, a requirement of a quality workflow.

BTW, genlock is often mentioned by RetroRGB and RetroTINK (or "Gen Lock" as they write it), but genlock is a not a TBC. Genlock is for non-latency syncing two or more sources, somewhat a bi-direction non-TBC frame sync (without delay/latency), and exists without timing correction. Timing errors are speed bumps to a genlock, not something to be fixed. And the latency issues alone makes "tripe buffering genlock" an oxymoron. Genlock actually works extremely poorly with VHS, commonly inducing errors. A good analogy is that a genlock is a metronome for a school band. (Some players may still momentarily be too early, or too late, out of tune, whatever -- so not corrected -- but the metronome maintains overall sync of all the players involved.)

So, for those reasons, a non-gaming videotape workflow is unlikely.

I think you're too giddy to adopt "new" without proper vetting, and already wanting to fly the "Mission Accomplished" banner like Bush did.

Many of us at this site have always adopted better software, hardware, and methods, when it became available. In fact, I adopted digital video when 99.999%+ of people still used VCRs. Or, as another example, who here is still making DVDs? Anybody, anybody, Bueller? I was working at a studio in the 2000s, encoding H.264, before most people had ever heard of that format. I had to fight exec mgmt (including CEO) in meetings (and lost), because I saw that Adobe Flash (FLV) was a waste of time, and would be deprecated in the future (in practice, not necessarily officially, and I was right!)

But not everything new is good. In fact, rarely is it any good. I've always investigated new tech, but most of it ends up in the dumpster, as it fails to deliver as claimed.

The onus to be adopted is on the RetroTINK itself, not us.

Its nice to see that people are taking an interest in VHS again, and trying to create newer/better conversion tech than what has existed before. But too many people are far too giddy about shiny new hardware/software, like a dog ready to hump a leg. It gets vastly worse when info is telephone gamed, when people "learn" from random unqualified Youtube videos (as opposed to reading scholarly sources), and something as nonsense as "triple buffering" is suddenly a TBC, a genlock, a toaster, whatever. WTF?

I disagree with this reply, and I'm going to explain my thoughts why.

In this year, 2024 (and beyond), it's imperative now more than ever to experiment different procedures and expand our knowledge base with evolving technologies. The popular ATI + Datavideo pairing is often touted as an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" solution. While it has proven effective in the past and continues to work well, this approach is becoming increasingly outdated in terms of long-term viability.

The equipment is breaking and failing, by the day and minute. I speak from a Datavideo TBC-1000 unit too fried for servicing, and I refuse to spend $3,000 on another unit in good shape. Because guess what? That unit would only be good for now. Give it time and a few years, it will be a sunk cost before it's time to invest in yet again another TBC. I have not captured anything in 2 years for this reason.

There's plenty of people in this forum who buy the gear, capture their home movies, and resell the gear so there's no money lost, and the gear retains value. By this logic, it's a complete disregard for people like myself where VHS/bygone Television preservation is a full time hobby, and we need the gear to function reliably for many years to come.

If people are willing to share ideas in the means of scientific execution, this shouldn't be looked down upon in an age where we need to work together to combat time taking a toll on legacy gear which is dying rapidly. This applies to VHS-Decode, the RetroTink devices, SDI cards, and interlaced HDMI mediums.

Lordsmurf, I urge you instead of raising red flags on the mere concept of adopting new ideas (or God forbid HDMI), please reach out to the developers and give them pointers on how to make their unit function as a recommended unit here.

For what it's worth, there are many forum posts suggesting that Datavideo TBCs are the best option, while others claim they are only the best on a budget.

If someone had an unlimited budget, say twenty grand, to invest in a project like this, would you be able to confidently recommend a TBC as the best choice for VHS? I I have yet to see a definitive recommendation here, except the Brighteye family of products from other users (which have variable success rates depending on your region).

We're not allowed to use eBay, but we're also not allowed to understand the differences in models.... due to alleged NDAs on equipment that have been out of production for at least 15 years. Obviously you can't listen to the average joe telling you to go record OBS on a $20 Chinese capture card, but if there's a developer (or a team of developers) working night and day in an effort to bring accessibility to an important workflow, this research should absolutely be looked into and encouraged to reach a solution to an important problem which is very blatantly being pushed under the rug for some reason.

I am keeping a record of my reply.

Excellent. :)

This is the issue.

It's the cost of a serious hobby. A stack of best-quality analog transfer video gear is comparable to, or even dwarfed by, almost anything else. Photography, action figures, cars, fishing, sewing, coin/stamp collecting. You can do each cheap and crappy, or buy good tools/gear for quality results that makes it enjoyable. Each of those involves issues and consumables, and nothing lasts forever. It's harder to find a cheaper hobby, unless you're collecting pieces of string. So, for this aspect, I have less sympathy.

I've know a teacher for decades now, on a teacher's salary, that collects firearms, is a "carphile" driving a Corvette, is a serious bicyclist, pampers multiple pets, has nice camera gear, and some other things I surely forget. He has a small "man cave" (and garage) with toys and tools. He never complains about the costs. He simply enjoys those hobbies, and those hobby communities. He didn't buy it all at once, and acquired it over at least 15 years now. He saved up money, and also made some good stock market choices in 2020.

This is true ... but ... each tends to form cliques/cults, touting their method as "best ever" and poo-poo all else that came before it. That mentality comes from two place: (1) ignorance, (2) shilling. We live in a very tribal world, where "yer either fer us, or yer agin us!" Any negative comment is seen as a personal attack to all users, so they get out the pitchfork keyboards.

People often falsely whine that I sell hardware, but it's also the same hardware that I suggested when NOT selling it. I've not changed. All I do now is refurb the good gear for others. Many of these new-to-video folks have ulterior motives (either $$$$$, or social media "clout").

It's actually pretty rare for people to reach out to one another anymore. For example, I've tried to reach out to software devs (capture, encoding) several times in the past 5 years. Sometimes for bug reports, sometimes ideas to make it better or expand function. And for my efforts, I was ignored or rebuffed. "It's good enough for me" or "It does all I need it to do". I? Me? Selfish assholes, not software developers trying to be part of a broader video community. They didn't want help, they wanted to be praised. All of them eventually disappeared.

I do. :)

Most DataVideo TBCs are not "the best" units, never were. Just easy to find (B&H), decent quality, and under $500 MSRP (20 years ago). Then isn't now. A modded/preset DVK is the best budget option, while the actual TBCs need refurb work now. Other brands, certain models, tend to be less of a problem in the 2020s. Back in the 2000s, those were $1k+ models. Now all TBCs are in that $2k range, after 20+ years of AV/photo gear inflation.

My TBC-3000s are failed too. Costs to replace or repair are not great. In fact, there's not yet any consensus on how to repair the weird 3000 "interlace ghost" issue that many of us are suddenly seeing.

The issue is the "me too!" gear. Take these RetroTINKs, made for video game consoles. But uh-oh, analog tape conversion is also a thing! So add some code here, some code there -- BAM! -- "good enough" to "also do" this other task that is completely unlike video games. So I don't see this "working night and day" for videotapes, but an afterthought tossed our way. Blackmagic did that too, which is why their gear royally sucks for VHS tapes, even if that HD card can "also do" it. Add some terms like "Gen Lock" and "triple buffering", and the lemmings eat it up, all while having no clue what any of it means.

Odd comment. Where would it go? :hmm:

I really don't think we disagree that much here. :ohmy:

I've just lost that "kumbaya" feeling, as it doesn't exist in reality. Too many people try to prey on others, taking advantage of their lack of knowledge/education (or even willful ignorance). That extends beyond video. When somebody says "hey, wait, that's not accurate", some group always gets angry that you're disrupting their narrative.

I think if Retrotink really cares about tape capture they should have made a dedicated device to it, not an expensive multi purpose tool that does video tapes as a bonus feature, Why not a device with settings related only to tape capture so you don't have to go through a huge list of parameters just to capture a tape, For that much money may as well pay a little bit more and get the SingMai SM03 a dedicated device for capturing video tapes and Laser disc and based on the same architecture of FPGA, at least you don't have to babysit HDMI, SM03 has SDI out which is the gold standard of digitized video tapes, it is compliant by design.

I'm still trying to figure out what ADC is being used for the composite and S-Video inputs. The component and RGB inputs are handled by the TI TVP7002, which is the same chip used in the OSSC.

The original RetroTINK 2x used an Analog Devices ADV7280. The 4K is likely using a different chip as it advertises a 3D adaptive comb filter, while the ADV7280 only has a 2D filter.

EDIT: The markings of the chip on the 4K are obscured, but I'm going to take a very educated guess based on the chip being QFP and roughly by where the analog video is going into the chip that it is very likely a TI TVP5160.

Been using the setup outlined by Bob (at least mostly) to digitize both family home movies and also some out of print out of copyright VHS tapes lately. Works like a charm. Zero dropped frames in VirtualDub. I don't deinterlace with virtualdub though - I get an interlaced AVI and then later deinterlace/upscale to 720p for editing.

I used to have a Canopus ADVC-300 a long time ago in my earlier attempts at family video capture - it worked OK, and back then 15-20 years ago I thought they looked good. I was wrong, but hindsight and all.

However, these are damn near perfect with the new setup. Now I'm not saying this is the best or cheapest/most convenient way - it's NOT. I know someone above mentioned "if Retrotink wants to get into analog VHS decode" - Mike Chi does not. This is just a bonus. The RT4K isn't cheap and it's not made for this. It's for games. However, I like that there is a bonus function that works this week for clean 480i transferring. Next to vhs-decode, this is probably one of the better accessible ways to do this, short of paying $2K for a DataVideo on ebay, and probably still having to recap it.

Examples with the setup:

Muppet Babies episodes - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...WlJY--wuhJ72Y6

The Brave Little Toaster - https://youtu.be/lNX-t2E8raE

^^USA only. Any artifacts are on the original VHS, which was badly transferred from 4x3 35mm film

Obviously you must take into account youtube compression. I also have family VHS tranfers on my channel which I will not direct link, but you can sample them there.

When you deal with non-ideal setups -- be it budget-grade, or even non-budget/non-cheap "wrong tools" as it the case here -- you really, really have to know your source tapes. And/or you'll have lots of limitations, lots of "set aside" piles (ie, tapes that did not capture well, or at all).

I've never had an issue with this. My problem is always the people who wrongly insist those are the "best" methods, when they are most certainly not.

For example, you saw first-hand how craptastic Canopus DV boxes were -- something I always warn about, as do many others here (and elsewhere). It's not "best", often not even acceptable.

What I see there looks good. I wonder if it handles animation a bit better than other content.

BTW, if you're a Muppets fan, and/or collector of Muppets toons/materials, I know somebody in UK that you may want to meet. He's probably a bigger Muppets fan that I am of Smurfs! :eek:

Not great, but better than average (seeing as how the average is generally quite terrible).

No.

You can easily grab
- a $75-150 range capture card
- a Panasonic ES10/15 type recorder
- and a decent non-TBC JVC S-VHS deck, or even just a "good" VCR (Sharp, Sony)

You'll get better results in a more timely fashion. It won't have any of the halo/ringing artifacts, none of the insane space requirements, and no extra work required to dismantle and solder VCRs. That's an uber-budget method, but it's more viable for 99%+ of people out there. It's easier, and cheaper, than vhs-decode ever will be. (And if you want best quality, not cheap, then it's still not vhs-decode, that's where DataVideo/Cypress type frame TBCs come in.)

thanks for the detailed responses, LS. I agree there are cheaper ways then the RT4K, for sure. I have tried cheaper setups and often there just isn't a rock solid picture compared to what I've seen through the RT. But I have not tried everything, of course. I'm working with what I have, and I would NOT buy a RT4K to only do this. I already own one for gaming which was my primary reason for purchasing it. Do not buy one just for VHS capture.

However, if you already have one, S-Video to RT4K with 480i out seems to be a great way to get rock solid output from most VCRs. I have the Panny ES35 (two of them) but also a 4611 Panasonic blue line and a very good Sharp 4 head VCR, and in my experience the ES35 has the best output with zero visible tracking. I do not know if the 35 has the same TBC as the 10 or 15 (I assume not as you did not mention it) but it's been great for me. I really dislike the size though, since I do not use the DVD side and it is very deep. On the other hand, I love the S-video out. I've done tests with composite vs S-video, and S-video has better blacks and color. It does slightly crush blacks, but to my eye I rather have deeper blacks than digital noise with a tiny bit more gray resolution. Personal preference.

Yeah, that ES35 is essentially a VCR paired with the ES10/15.

So you're effectively being digitized on its output. It still does not have great frame timing (as it only has a non-TBC frame sync), but the end result isn't too different from the budget method. The Panasonic DVD recorders are not at all transparent, but the posterization/etc is less on animation. That now explains my observations.

I don't see that the RetroTINK was doing special anything here, and was just acting like an expensive non-suggested generic capture card.

I think it's worked fine in your case, but others won't be able to replicate this as easily (without also buying the Panasonic recorder).

That ES35 unit is also insanely heavy. But it does have that interesting longer-than-EP mode.

Nice chatting with you, and welcome! :)

same to you!

I believe, from what I understand, I'm mostly using the RT4K to export 480i 59.94 signal over HDMI since that's what I need for my capture, plus any pre-scaling or cropping if that's something I want to do. I have no current way to go S-Video to HDMI to try it without, so I can't say for sure if it's actually doing TBC, but I have absolutely zero wobble in my captures. I don't usually do line for line perfect copies - I usually crop off the signal at the bottom and crop to remove the overscan.

The ES35 is doing the "anti-wobble", the RetroTINK never gets a chance to do anything. The output from the ES35 is line-corrected, and anything at that point is burned in to the image. Or corrected. With any quality-reducing issues of ES35. Post-ES35, all that can be done is frame timing, but the ES35 has a non-TBC frame sync (not great, not perfect, but something better than nothing). The RetroTINK here, at best, can be said to "not screw anything up". That in itself is a challenge for cheap capture cards, aka the Temu/Amazon/eBay junk for under $100.

Tip: When cropping, be sure to do 8 from each side, before resize 4x3 and cropping in more for overscan removal. Or, better yet, just mask (cover overscan with black), "black bars" on not a bad thing.

I didn't dig deeply, but from a cursory glance of the cartoons, you're doing fine. The home camcorder footage is definitely degraded, but your method explains why I see what I see. Still, it's not terrible, and the defects here don't interrupt enjoyable watching (ie, no overwhelming detracting artifacts, neither analog nor digital).

I'm almost more interested in seeing your game captures. I waffle on whether I want to play my consoles again, or do something Youtube with them, or just sell them all off. Pong>Atari>NES was my generation, still have them all, including original boxes for everything!

I wouldn't want to do that, especially for editing.

I've never been anti-720p, and in fact preferred it for years. You can easily make a case for using it: (1) resources, and (2) time to encode out the edits. You can always upscale further post-edit. The reason for pre-NLE upscale (and deinterlace) is simply because those NLE are generally terrible at handling interlaced content, especially when applying modern filters.

yes, for my needs, uploading for family to youtube needs it to be a particular resolution otherwise it degrades it by a lot. Even 640x480 ends up looking very bad and blocky in a lot of cases, but if you upscale in ffmpeg to 960x720, it pretty much leaves it alone. And of course interlacing usually looks pretty bad on a computer or tablet/phone. So in my case StaxRip uses ffmpeg to deinterlace and also frame double so it's still smooth.

Currently outputting:

Video: rawvideo (Y42B / 0x42323459), yuv422p(progressive), 960x728, 59.94 fps, 59.94 tbr, 59.94 tbn

I have all consoles from NES to current, pretty much :) I used to have an Atari 2600 but not anymore.

I plan on capturing or streaming game footage once I get all my systems soldered and set up. Almost done with that. My current capture setup can't take 4K60 4:4:4 so I need to figure out something else for that.

All? :hmm:

I was always a sucker for a good clearance deal, and I frequented Incredible Universe (later Fry's) and KB Toy Works. In those mid 90s years, I accrued an Atari Jaguar, Atari Lynx, Neo Geo Pocket, and as many games as I could find at the time.

In the 00s into 10s, I'd do trades for video work/gear, and sometimes would get offered video games and consoles. So I have PS2, XBOX, and some others. I've not touched any of them for at least 10-15 years now.

yep, I have NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube, Wii, Switch. Xbox, XBox 360, Xbox Series. PS1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Jaguar, 3DO, Turbo Grafx-16. Sega Genesis, 32X, Saturn, Dreamcast. Atari Lynx, Sega Game Gear, Gameboy DMG01, 3DS.

Many of those are updated or modded in some way to add RGB output or fix the screens in the case of handhelds.

No NeoGeo stuff though. It's just too expensive. But I do have an Analogue Pocket which plays those, and also plays arcade games.