What about BrightEye TBCs?

[916Area52]

Good afternoon,

Roy here,

New to this hobby myself.

What about the various models of BrightEye TBC? They seem to be frowned upon, not clear as to why? Drivers, or lack of for older OS? Lack luster performance perhaps?

Thanks in advance,
Roy

[lordsmurf]

Those are not TBCs.

[thestarswitcher]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

Those are not TBCs.

Could you explain why?
Do you have strength tests comparing them to the exorbitantly priced Datavideos which are failing by the day without parts to fix them?

[latreche34]

They are not TBCs in a sense that they don't have analog output, They are capture devices with built in TBC and proc. amp. They have SDI digital output, so they don't connect directly to a computer, There are different types of SDI to computer adapters based on the connection type, SDI-PCIe, SDI-Thunderbolt, SDI-USB3, all of them are compatible with any OS, legacy or new.

[916Area52]

"latreche34... They are not TBCs in a sense that they don't have analog output". A detail I did not notice.

Thank you all for your feedback.

[aramkolt]

BE1, BE3, BE5, BE25, BE75 all have TBCs AND frame syncs.

Brighteye defines a TBC as follows in their manuals:

Quote:

"A Time Base Corrector is a system to reduce the Time Base Error in a signal to acceptable levels. It accomplishes this by using a FIFO (First In, First Out) memory. The incoming video is written into the memory using its own jittery timing. This operation is closely associated with the actual digitization of the analog signal because the varying position of the sync timing must be mimicked by the sampling function of the analog to digital converter. A second timing system, genlocked to a stable reference, is used to read the video back out of the memory. The memory acts as a dynamically adjusting delay to smooth out the imperfections in the original signal’s timing. Very often a TBC will also function as a Frame Synchronizer."

The manuals also refer to the "recommended use case" for their products being for VTRs. (Video Tape Recorders/VCRs). If you open up and look inside any of these units, they do have at least one large ram chip right next to the processor which is required to store a frame or two of video which serves as the frame buffer. These units are all ALSO technically frame syncs because you can feed them an external genlock signal if you need the output to match timing to a separate video feed. Genlock is really only necessary when you are doing live video transitions from one source to another while a TV station is live/on-air.

If using one of these gets your dropped frames to zero and there's no noticeable image quality loss, I don't know why they'd be considered inferior to the "recommended" TBCs.

Differences between models are as follows:

BE1 - Any-analog-in to SDI and Optical out (no audio embedding)
BE3 - Any-analog-in to SDI (no audio embedding)
BE5 - Composite-in to composite-out (audio not applicable as audio cannot be carried over composite)
BE25 - Composite-in to SDI (with audio embedding)
BE75 - Any-analog-in to SDI (with audio embedding)

*"Any-analog-in" means composite, s-video, or component video via BNC connectors. Component-in is ideal if using professional formats such as analog Betacam (which natively records in component video) and is noteably absent from all "recommended" analog capture cards.

I wouldn't necessarily let the lack of S-Video-in exclude the BE5 or BE25 devices if you can find one at a good price. It's often nearly impossible to tell the difference between S-Video and composite outs of a VCR depending on the hardware chain and source material - that'll be part of my more detailed testing later once I come up with the best testing to do for head-to-head comparisons. I'm not arguing that S-Video will always theoretically look better on paper, but the difference in reality on low resolution formats such as 25 year old Video8 and regular VHS won't be as stark as say looking at the S-Video vs Composite out of a DVD player which has a digital source to create those signals from.

I have one of each of the above models for testing aside from the BE1, but I've only done some basic initial testing so far. From memory, the BE5 and BE25 both pass the "VCR the blue screen" test whereas the BE75 does not at least with a JVC NTSC VCR. PAL BE75 users have told me the BE75 will pass a JVC PAL or multisystem blue screen. I don't remember if the BE3 passes that test or not, but I'm thinking since it's most closely related to the BE75 (basically the same thing, just without audio embedding). Solution to this in practical use is to turn off the VCR's blue screen setting so that it displays static when there's no video playing instead of a blue screen. It might also be possible for the blue screen to work fine with the BE75 if you feed it an NTSC genlock signal. I think what happens is that the BE75 tries to auto-identify the incoming signal type as NTSC or PAL and since a VCR blue screen is something like 270p, it is technically neither and won't lock on until it sees a real PAL or NTSC signal. Not sure why the BE25 doesn't have that issue, but the firmware must handle that a little differently apparently.

The 3 models that have S-Video input are all SDI-out only. In my opinion, SDI-out is preferable anyway because it leads to one less conversion back to analog and then back to digital, plus, the Brighteye products are doing it with a 12 bit ADC (Analog to Digital Converter) instead of limiting color depth to 8 bit like all of the "recommended" TBCs. You can then decide to use whatever SDI capture card you want and capture at whatever bit depth and chroma subsampling (usually 4:2:2) you want. The SDI signal remains 480i/525i over SDI, preserves interlacing, and does not do any upscaling.

Audio embedding is convenient, but not required if you capture audio separately from your SDI capture card. You could also use a separate SDI audio embedder box before the SDI capture card and achieve the same thing. Often, audio embedders will allow you to set a fixed audio delay as well, though the two or so fields of video delay added by any TBC should not really cause a noticeable lip sync issue, or you could just move the audio down by a fixed amount in post-capture editing. Some SDI devices will also have separate analog audio inputs to capture from such as the AJA Ki Pro and many of the Blackmagic Hyperdeck products that both generally record to ProRes 422 formats onto removable HDDs/SSDs/Flash Cards. You'll never see these products recommended on this site for capture because they aren't good at handling raw analog video (they do not contain TBCs), but if the incoming signal has already been appropriately digitized stable SDI by one of those Brighteye products, they are quite happy capturing that at their native SD resolutions with preserved interlacing, which they all support.

[lordsmurf]

Wait, wait...

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

They are not TBCs in a sense that they don't have analog output, They are capture devices with built in TBC and proc. amp. They have SDI digital output, so they don't connect directly to a computer, There are different types of SDI to computer adapters based on the connection type, SDI-PCIe, SDI-Thunderbolt, SDI-USB3, all of them are compatible with any OS, legacy or new.

This is the accurate definition. But I'll expand on it...

These BE boxes, most SDI boxes, are what you refer to as "closed loop" system. These boxes try to do everything from you in one pass. Unfortunately, since these boxes were created for non-consumer sources (not VHS, not Hi8, etc), the interactions with video can vary wildly. Our messy consumer signals don't always play nice with gear. When one area is not cooperative, you'll have to use another. But since "all in one" integrated, you essentially lose everything (essentially both TBCs and the capture cards), and must start over with gear for those tapes. Some aspects have menu on/off control, but pathways can still render that moot.

latreche34 has had better luck than most, at his low-volume use. But many others have not. There's a reason these were dumped on eBay for lesser prices, and not as often bought.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

BE1, BE3, BE5, BE25, BE75 all have TBCs AND frame syncs.

A mere "frame sync" is not a "frame sync TBC" (frame TBC). Those are very different items. The ES10/15 recorders have mere frame syncs. A frame sync clocks without correction.

Quote:

Brighteye defines a TBC as follows in their manuals:

Don't rely on manuals. When you know how copywriting works, you'll realize that the information gets "telephone gamed" to an extent. The person who wrote that probably doesn't know anything about TBCs or video theory. Some engineer gave some bullet point notes, and the copywriters attempted to turn that into sentences. It gets more fun when you realize those copywriters are often ESL, the engineers are ESL, and they speak different L, so the E never had a chance. It's just blah-blah-blah. People that understand TBCs cock their head, while newbies gobble up the gobbledygook.

For example, this sentence is horseshit nonsense: "The incoming video is written into the memory using its own jittery timing."

Quote:

The manuals also refer to the "recommended use case" for their products being for VTRs. (Video Tape Recorders/VCRs).

Format matters. Not consumer sources. Broadcast appliances did not expect low-end VHS tapes.

Quote:

If using one of these gets your dropped frames to zero and there's no noticeable image quality loss, I don't know why they'd be considered inferior to the "recommended" TBCs.

The keyword here is "if", which generally fails in some way.

Quote:

It's often nearly impossible to tell the difference between S-Video and composite outs of a VCR depending on the hardware chain and source material
I'm not arguing that S-Video will always theoretically look better on paper, but the difference in reality on low resolution formats such as 25 year old Video8 and regular VHS won't be as stark as say looking at the S-Video vs Composite out of a DVD player which has a digital source to create those signals from.

In general, this is a very false statement.

Quote:

plus, the Brighteye products are doing it with a 12 bit ADC (Analog to Digital Converter) instead of limiting color depth to 8 bit like all of the "recommended" TBCs.

This is a misleading statement. This is what Ken Rockwell refers to as "measurebating", where you think a bigger number is automatically better. That is completely false logic. Other factors tend to matter more, not megapixels for digital photography, and not bit depth for analog-source digital video.

Quote:

You can then decide to use whatever SDI capture card you want and capture at whatever bit depth and chroma subsampling (usually 4:2:2) you want. The SDI signal remains 480i/525i over SDI, preserves interlacing, and does not do any upscaling.

I'm not against SDI boxes, but you must understand what you're getting yourself into. It's not as simple as some would have you think. There are downsides, there are limitations, there will be frustrations beyond a standard workflow. It's not better, it's just different. Maybe different good, but more likely different bad.

[latreche34]

I may have better luck with these devices, but seeing from other people's feedback and the extensive tests I've done, they just work, and work very well, and I'm talking about consumer video tape sources.

Prices on used market don't define quality, everything starts out cheap when no one is looking for it and goes up in price when it catches attention, SDI capture devices are no different, they are around $1500 now and expected to go even higher.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

I may have better luck with these devices, but seeing from other people's feedback and the extensive tests I've done, they just work, and work very well, and I'm talking about consumer video tape sources.

Prices on used market don't define quality, everything starts out cheap when no one is looking for it and goes up in price when it catches attention, SDI capture devices are no different, they are around $1500 now and expected to go even higher.

Yep, when you have good luck, keep with it. I would.

Some other people, with other items, have had good unusual luck, with their lower volume use, but are way too vocal about it. It's led to countless newbies being led astray, wasted time and funds, on something that will not work for their needs. The highly unusual luck factor was left out by the overly vocal fellating reviews of those devices, as well as the low-volume aspect that arrived as those conclusions.

I've always been glad that you don't do that. You seem to be as pragmatic as I am, and recognizing the luck and volume factors.

I have a BE SDI setup myself, but it mostly collects dust, as I cannot rely on it for consistent results. To me, time matters most, and I cannot afford to recapture because the gear f'd up. And sometimes, the tape is "one and done", so that first pass matters. But it does look nice when it works. Sometimes it reacts better to some tapes, so it has a deserved place in a multi-gear workflow.

[latreche34]

The trend seems to be cheap analog to HDMI and HDMI grabbers and OBS, While visually attractive, it is nowhere near the standard of analog to digital conversion of SD materials as defined in the 80's, even before the computer was on the scene, just SDI when it was first utilized in Sony D1 machines.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

cheap analog to HDMI and HDMI grabbers and OBS, While visually attractive,

I wouldn't call it attractive whatsoever. Maybe the idea of HDMI wows the uninformed, but the method is crap, yielding garbage quality, essentially molesting the analog signal of any quality.

[aramkolt]

LS, which BE model do you have for testing?

It would be good to see a test of your unit against a recommended setup so we can see where it underperforms from your perspective.

Since I am more interested in seeing tests to "show" rather than "tell", what specific testing or head-to-head comparison could I do that would potentially change your mind about the BE products? It would need to be something that is reproducible, so needing to use a specific tape that has a lot of issues is probably off the table unless you are willing to send me that specific tape to test. If it is so hard to find a tape that the BE can't handle, I'd question the real world value of not being able to handle 1 tape out of, say, every 200 tapes will really matter to the average user who are unlikely to come across such a tape.

I know you've mentioned the Young Indiana Jones VHS releases as having particularly strong macrovision that may be a good test, but you've also said that not all of those tapes are particularly bad, so hard to say if the one I have is supposed to cause TBCs to struggle.

Recommended hardware I can/will put the BE devices against includes:

AIW 9000 AGP Theater 200 in a dedicated XP Capture PC - All electrolytic SMT/through hole caps replaced on AIW card.
Datavideo TBC-1000 with distribution amp bypass, fully recapped, with external ultra-low-noise 5V power supply
Tevion USB ATI 600 Clone (aware some units are problematic, would need to know what testing proves mine is a good one)
Pinacle 710 (aware some units are problematic, would need to know what testing proves mine is a good one)

For the AIW card, I have made a custom 8-pin to S-Video 3ft cable for shorter cable length and better quality cable using Extron Mini RGB double shielded 75 ohm coax (uses 25awg solid center core coax with foil and braid shielding).

As far as the "Perhaps you got lucky and got a good BE unit" statement, I think I can dispel that as well. I have access to at least two of each of the BE3, BE5, BE25, and BE75 which I can test to look for any variability. I also have 3 AIW AGP 9xxx cards with all capacitors replaced to look for variability there as well.

[latreche34]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

I know you've mentioned the Young Indiana Jones VHS releases as having particularly strong macrovision that may be a good test, but you've also said that not all of those tapes are particularly bad, so hard to say if the one I have is supposed to cause TBCs to struggle.

I've tested that tape here.

[916Area52]

What a wealth of information, expertise and experiences in the feedback here.

My journey started innocent enough. Just wanted to convert the few VHS tapes and DVDs that I had to a more portable format (mp4) for travel. Then I became more intrigued/borderline obsessed with the hobby (with a beer budget). As of today and this writing, I guess that I would be classified as the latreche34 definition “The trend seems to be cheap analog to HDMI and HDMI grabbers and OBS, While visually attractive, it is nowhere near the standard of analog to digital conversion of SD materials as defined in the 80's, even before the computer was on the scene, just SDI when it was first utilized in Sony D1 machines.” I use a Elgato Capture USB to mp4 with a JVC HR-S7800U purchased through LS (Please see attached video clip). Being “borderline obsessed” I’ve explored other methods/avenues for a better mp4 end product with minimal post editing (some trimming). So far, I’ve tried with a I-O Data GV-USB2 (most likely a weak spot) and VirtualDub 1.9.11, VirtualDub2, OBS, Adobe, PyroAV/Link and etcetera-etcetera. Please see my mp4 attached video clip compared to latreche34 set up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzQt2pOgRE0 .

As far as to a TBC, I’m more inclined to spend money on a newer TBC and the necessary supporting components as opposed to an older TBC that have fewer options available to repair when things go south.

-- merged --

Mods... Please edit my post #14 to read "VirtualDub 1.9.11"
Thank you

[aramkolt]

What was the capture chain and post-processing used for your clip? I take it that it's the Elgato video capture plus the 7800u using the standard elgato software?

Are you saying when you tried the other methods listed (Such as GV-USB2 plus Virtualdub) that the result was visually no better? I presume you've also tried this tutorial for OBS? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk-n7IlrXI4

I haven't tried that OBS tutorial yet, but I do plan to test it eventually against recommended methods.

[916Area52]

Quote:

"aramkolt,
What was the capture chain and post-processing used for your clip? I take it that it's the Elgato video capture plus the 7800u using the standard elgato software?"

That was the exact capture chain I used for that clip, along with a computer configured as follows…

Asus H110M-C motherboard (1151 socket)
Intel Core i5-6500 Processor
32G DDR4 2133
Kingston 240GB SSD (operating system)
Seagate BarraCuda 2TB Internal Hard Drive HDD – 3.5 Inch SATA 6Gb/s 7200 RPM (storage/staging for transfer)
500-watt power supply

I have since changed out the processer to an Intel Core i7-7700K Processor of which gives me a slightly higher quality end result than the Intel Core i5-6500 Processor. Don’t get me wrong, this computer is far from being the ultimate capturing machine. But at this place and time it is what I have to work with.

Zero post editing was performed for that clip using the Elgato video capture software.

Quote:

"aramkolt,
Are you saying when you tried the other methods listed (Such as GV-USB2 plus Virtualdub) that the result was visually no better?”

I am saying that.
Also, truth be told I did not give VirtualDub 1.9.11 and VirtualDub2 with the various filters and codecs options much of my time (perhaps at a future date). Getting to my desired mp4 format seemed to be post editing heavy.

Quote:

"aramkolt,
I presume you've also tried this tutorial for OBS? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk-n7IlrXI4"

Have not tried that particular OBS YouTube method. I did watch it after you posted here. I will most definitely be giving that procedure a try, thanks for the link. I’ve been messing around with the OBS settings using the I-O Data GV-USB2 and using this link method https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYuDSU-7LyI . Video is fine, but with sub-par results with the audio sounding “tinny”.

[lordsmurf]

CPU, RAM, graphics card, motherboard -- none of that really matters for capturing. It has no effect. It just needs a minimum, multi-core and SATA, which determines motherboard, which determines graphics. Even an old Intel dual-core and SATA-1 can work fine. Space matters most, so SATA2 and 2tb max (HDD or SSD).

There's a lot of bad videos on Youtube regarding capture, and anything suggesting OBS should be ignored. But know that AIW cards are "more sensitive" (in a good way, especially for testing).

[916Area52]

Good morning,

Quote:

“lordsmurf
CPU, RAM, graphics card, motherboard -- none of that really matters for capturing. It has no effect. It just needs a minimum, multi-core and SATA, which determines motherboard, which determines graphics. Even an old Intel dual-core and SATA-1 can work fine. Space matters most, so SATA2 and 2tb max (HDD or SSD).”

I’ve read/heard that as well from several sources.

Quote:

“lordsmurf
There's a lot of bad videos on Youtube regarding capture, and anything suggesting OBS should be ignored.”

Would whole heartedly agree with that observation.

Quote:

“lordsmurf
But know that AIW cards are "more sensitive" (in a good way, especially for testing).”

Definitely something for me to look into, I’ll start here… https://www.digitalfaq.com/guides/vi...e-ati-mpeg.htm

If still available, I’ll pull the trigger and buy. Having multi-OS support is important to me. I see that as of June 24 you have “Updated June 2024 Available: - Pinnacle USB*, NTSC, $175, similar to ATI AIW USB, WinXP/V/7/8/10/11** all work well - 1 available” https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/mar...ati-600-a.html

Any thoughts on the following… Other from being from FleaBay ��

https://www.ebay.com/itm/387271312573
https://www.ebay.com/itm/186431881252

[lordsmurf]

That's a random Pinnacle card. No. The Pinnacle cards I have are very specific. Not just the model, but the version of the model, and it's not something you can observe externally. Like everything else lately, I'm having a hard time sourcing these exact cards now. "Get 'em while I got 'em."

That ATI is probably fine, but that price is ridiculous. I have those for less, and I've replaced the crap OEM USB cables for mine. What you have there is just another recycler, a pure profiteer, and he/she thinks they found a brick of e-gold. They know nothing about the video product, nor care to. That ATI card may have been sitting in a non-temp-controlled storage unit for the past 20 years, and smell like cigarettes or rats (sadly common on eBay). Nothing that old is "new" anymore. I open "new" boxes, burn-in test everything. Because sometimes sealed items don't work.

eBay = gambling, not buying.

[916Area52]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

What was the capture chain and post-processing used for your clip? I take it that it's the Elgato video capture plus the 7800u using the standard elgato software?

Are you saying when you tried the other methods listed (Such as GV-USB2 plus Virtualdub) that the result was visually no better? I presume you've also tried this tutorial for OBS? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk-n7IlrXI4

I haven't tried that OBS tutorial yet, but I do plan to test it eventually against recommended methods.

Good afternoon/evening aramkolt,

Just to follow up…

Must say that I’m very happy with the settings outlined in the link that you provided for OBS ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk-n7IlrXI4 ).
The mp4 files are much larger than I’m used to, but the quality is much better than I expected.
Please see attached.

My workflow,
OBS
I-O Data GV-USB2
JVC HR-S7800U
Asus H110M-C motherboard (1151 socket)
Intel Core i7-7700K Processor 32G DDR4 2133
Kingston 240GB SSD (operating system)
Seagate BarraCuda 2TB Internal Hard Drive HDD – 3.5 Inch SATA 6Gb/s 7200 RPM (storage/staging for transfer)
500-watt power supply

Thank you,
Roy