Hi8 to PC s-video vs. composite, which looks better?

[Boppo]

I'm starting to transfer Hi8 tapes from 1993-1998 to my PC. I have a doubt wether I should use RCA (red/white/yellow) or S-video.

The tapes are filmed using a Sony Hi8 CCD-TR805E. As that camera is broken I've bought a Sony Digital8 DCR-TRV325E. It works playing the Hi8 tapes (filmed with a Hi8 camera). The camera is set with TBC On.

I've read that S-video is supposed to give better quality than RCA cables. Still when trying to compare I find no real difference (I almost think RCA looks better). I've attached two clips for comparison:
Hi8-5, AV: RCA cables
Hi8-6, S-video: S-video cables and audiocables from RCA (not using yellow video)

You eyes are propably more trained than mine. Which clip looks better?

P.S I use Elgato Capture Device and I know many of you dislikes the device. I also know that firewire would give better quality but I won't invest in those equipment. No need to comment on Elgato or firewire. My only concern/question is regarding using S-video or not.

-- merged --

Here is a screen dump for comparison.

To compare with. RCA-cable to the left and S-video to the right.

[lordsmurf]

I mostly see mushy video, though the s-video is the best mush. Elgato is just obliterating the quality.

[latreche34]

For analog tapes firewire does not produce better results, S-Video is marginally better than the firewire method. Only DV tapes (D8, miniDV) are better transferred over firewire.

[aramkolt]

Firewire would certainly give better quality than the elgato (but you already knew that). For one, it preserves interlacing and has a much higher starting bitrate with one hour with DV/Firewire takes about 12GB whereas the elgato is something like 2.5GB, loses the interlacing and can be blocky. Field rate is also cut in half. Firewire isn't particularly recommended here, but I don't think anyone would disagree that it is a big step up from the elgato. Audio is also pretty bad compared to almost any other capture option with the elgato.

Main downsides is that it produces larger files and does require some post-processing for deinterlacing and compression, so it's not really a one-step-to-distribution sort of capture path. But neither are any of the recommended methods here.

There's really not much to "invest in" with firewire since your camera already supports it, and odds are you know someone with an old laptop that they aren't using that has a firewire port. If your PC is a desktop, a firewire input card should be less than $20 and the cable should be less than $10.

As for your samples, it asically just looks like the luma levels are different with composite (brighter). I'm not sure to what degree the elgato clips black and white levels that are out of the legal range, but that could be why you're seeing detail loss with less brightness with the S-Video. In the same way though, you might be more likely to be clipping brighter areas with composite since the whole image is probably brighter.

[latreche34]

In this case of capturing lossy with Elgato, firewire is indeed better, But he is not going that route that's why I haven't mentioned it.

[Aya_Rei]

S-Video is better for multiple of reasons, especially for getting rid of dot crawl. So I would just say that S-Video is the better one here due to it being way better than composite in most scenarios.

But the problem is that the capture card creating mushy, low quality garbage, due to it recording the footage to a compressed, low bitrate mp4 file. One is just slightly better garbage than the other. It's like covering a turd with ice cream sprinkles.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

Firewire would certainly give better quality than the elgato

We're starting to enter my pet peeve territory...

There is no "Firewire" transfer method.

Firewire (aka IEEE1394) is just a digital/computer communication method. It's just a port/hole in the back of the computer, and the clean/black "Fire" wire that you stick into it. On the other end of that cable is a device. Firewire is not more special, nor much different, than USB/HDMI/etc.

(Where was this "fire" anyway? Shouldn't the cable have at least been an orange shade?
That was a marketing and branding failure!)

I equally despise it when somebody says "USB transfer", because they often denigrate all USB cards in the statement, because they had bad experience(s) with cheap Chinese USB dongles/cards. But that's their fault for buying cheap, and the Chinese card for being garbage -- and USB itself should not be blamed. Don't blame the (data) messenger, nor even praise the messenger, which is literally what USB (and Firewire) are in this use case.

Obviously what you refer to here is an ancient 1990s DV box, likely the Canopus ADVC or DataVideo DAC -- and using tons of adapters these days (as nothing has native Firewire cards/ports anymore, and hasn't for decades).

Just like USB, there are bad Firewire-connected devices (unusable even!), and "good" (actually just not-as-bad devices, still not suggested devices).

So please, in the future, be more specific.

There actually were some Firewire/IEEE1394-connected non-DV devices that existed.

Quote:

DV/Firewire

This is not a synonym, no more than "cat/dog" or "dry/wet" would be.

Quote:

DV isn't particularly recommended here, but I don't think anyone would disagree that it is a big step up from the elgato.

Yep.

Quote:

with an old laptop that they aren't using that has a firewire port.

Any 90s/00s laptop old enough to have a Firewire/IEEE1394 port should not (and probably cannot) be used.

Quote:

If your PC is a desktop, a firewire input card should be less than $20 and the cable should be less than $10.

OS matters. Most post-XP Windows is very workaroundy, and only certain Firecard card chipsets work properly. Only Mac still provided true legacy support up to the 2020s, but even that has dropped off in the M-era CPUs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

In this case of capturing lossy with Elgato, firewire is indeed better, But he is not going that route that's why I haven't mentioned it.

Analogy time:
You're hungry, you're considering Italian tonight.

- Elgato = cat turd from the litter box
- DV = expired (20 years ago) can of Chef Boyardee that was in the back of the pantry
- broadcast-bitrate MPEG = homemade spaghetti
- lossless (and using quality hardware) = Olive Garden

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aya_Rei

S-Video is better for multiple of reasons, especially for getting rid of dot crawl. So I would just say that S-Video is the better one here due to it being way better than composite in most scenarios.
But the problem is that the capture card creating mushy, low quality garbage, due to it recording the footage to a compressed, low bitrate mp4 file. One is just slightly better garbage than the other. It's like covering a turd with ice cream sprinkles.

This.

[ThumperStrauss]

I haven't tested the Elgato, but I read that it is possible to use VirtualDub 1.9.11 as the video capture software with the HuffYUV video codec, instead of the software that ships with the Elgato.

Here are the possible benefits of switching the capture software:

• Capture as lossless instead of H.264
• Capture interlaced instead of on-the-fly deinterlace
• Adjust the procamp settings in VirtualDub before the capture to help mitigate the overly bright whites (clipping)