Panasonic DVR to HDMI capture card?

[anton harboe]

I recently bought a panasonic dmr-eh65 and have been using it as a tbc for VHS capture. I capture with the IO data gv-usb2 through s-video, but i'd like to try an HDMI capture method. Would it be possible to simply plug the HDMI output from the panasonic straight into an HDMI capture card? And is it worth it to make this change in my workflow?

IMG_5230.jpg

*edit (for lordsmurf): i know i should be using s-video input on the panasonic, but i only have 1 cable currently

[aramkolt]

Can't hurt to try! If you can get the Panasonic to output in standard definition 576i (assuming PAL based on the model of Panasonic there) over HDMI and your capture card also supports interlaced capture, you very well might get better results than the S-Video output as it is one less digital to analog then back to digital conversion. Not a whole lot of modern HDMI capture cards will capture 480i/576i though. Certain Magewell Cards, most older Blackmagic, and some of the older Elgato cards (HD60S comes to mind) will capture interlaced SD HDMI. Simple as Googling the specs or just trying it.

[latreche34]

Some modern BM slot cards or external devices and SSD recorders can do HDMI NTSC or PAL 525/625 very well, no TBC required since the signal is already digital. But I'm afraid that model is limited to only 1080i or 720p.

[aramkolt]

Agree with Latreche34, there are several standalone capture devices that can capture 480i/576i at a high bitrate, typically into ProRes or uncompressed from AJA and Blackmagic. I personally like the AJA KiPro series due to overall reliability, but there's a bit of a cost curve when investing in the hard drive modules (which you can swap for whatever capacity 2.5" SATA SSD or HDD). It'll accept analog Component video, SDI, or HDMI, so if you have a source like S-Video or composite, you'd want to convert that to most likely SDI first with something like a TBC that has SDI output, or if the signal is already stabilized, a Blackmagic analog to SDI converter might do the trick. The AJA line won't record HDMI with HDCP on it, but it'll work if an HDMI splitter is used. I did successfully use the AJA KiPro to capture a sample from a D-Theater DVHS tape over HDMI in 1080i.

Probably out of the scope of the original poster if the concern about not using S-Video is not having enough cables as the AJA would probably cost 50x as much as getting another S-Video cable, but it's a good option to be aware of.

I personally think the AJA series is kind of a goldilocks capture chain that allows for realtime capture without a PC, preserving interlacing, some relatively light compression, and 10 bit color. ProRes422 is about 20GB/hr for SD video, with some mixed opinions on whether theres much of a visual difference in going to ProRes422HQ which has a 50% higher bitrate at about 30GB/hr.

Caveats of such Blackmagic or AJA ProRes capture devices are as follows:
-They tend to use Mac formatted drives which may require additional drivers for Windows PCs to read
-Audio tracks are stored as multiple mono tracks which you then would need to combine into a single stereo track after capture.
-They can't add an audio delay, so any TBCs in the chain that delay video by a frame or two will then need to have the audio delayed post capture to get back in sync. A workaround to that would be a pro TBC or SDI audio embedder that does have audio delay options.

The Blackmagic Hyperdeck Shuttle 2 is a more economical alternative that can directly use 2.5" SSDs (but without a screen, no way to change settings without a computer, no separate analog audio inputs). If only capturing HDMI, settings probably don't need to be changed often and the separate audio inputs are unnecessary. Inputs for this one are limited to HDMI and SDI (though requires an adapter to get to a standard size BNC for SDI).

[lordsmurf]

The issue will always come back to quality.

1 frame is not enough to worry about for audio sync. A/V naturally has some desync, 1 frame is about 17ms, negligible.

GV-USB2 is a weak link, though less bad for PAL, not too different from DV.

[RayNotes]

This issue will be finding an HDMI-to-USB converter that can handle native 480i @ 59.94Hz (assuming you're looking to preserve original video). Almost all consumer HDMI-to-USB capture devices deinterlace the video and knock it down to 30 FPS. 80% of people wouldn't care but it's a substantial kick in the shins if you're intent on preserving the genuine aesthetic with a proper deinterlacing like QTGMC. One notable exception is the generic Newhope converter (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0F3YZT5YG..._asin_title_14) which at least outputs 60p from a 480i source. The deinterlace is "ok" not certainly not archival quality. 99% of people couldn't tell the difference.

The only affordable option I've found is the Magewell USB Gen2 - when bought used. New they're pricey ($300+ USD) but I got mine for $45 used off eBay and I use it every day. The deals are there is you're patient.

Will you see any improvement? Highly unlikely. The IO Data GV-USB2 already surpasses most consumer grade capture devices, and paired with a workflow that uses QTGMC to deinterlace, nobody, even people on this board will be able to tell the deference between that and any other high-end workflow - unless your source tape is in interstellar condition and they're pixel-peeping to find differences.

[latreche34]

If one wants to capture HDMI 480i/576i the first thing is stay away from amazon, aliexpress, timu or any chinese device, Name brand is a key here as discussed above, Aja, BM, Majewell ...., prices range from $50 to $250 in the used market, But the OP DVD model does not output those resolutions as far as I know from glancing in the manual.

[vwestlife]

Don't use HDMI to USB converters. They compress the video using MJPEG and drop frames like they're going out of style.

Why not use the DVD recorder for its intended purpose, a burn the video to a DVD? Then rip it on your computer using a program like DVDVob2Mpg. Use a high-quality de-interlacing method, like QTGMC, and you'll get results that are superior to HDMI capture.

[RayNotes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vwestlife

Don't use HDMI to USB converters. They compress the video using MJPEG and drop frames like they're going out of style.

Why not use the DVD recorder for its intended purpose, a burn the video to a DVD? Then rip it on your computer using a program like DVDVob2Mpg. Use a high-quality de-interlacing method, like QTGMC, and you'll get results that are superior to HDMI capture.

HDMI-to-USB converters vary widely in what they present to the computer for capture. It's true many cheap capture dongles/cards knock the video down so 30 FPS and render poorly deinterlaced video but this isn't how they all work.

Blackmagic and Magewell converters support native 480i capture and when paired with VirtualDub2 offer a ton of different codecs - many lossless.

Why not capture direct to DVD? Well, it's H.262 (a very old and very lossy codec). This is not ideal for capturing archival copies of your video. It may be fine for hobbyists.

[vwestlife]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayNotes

This is not ideal for capturing archival copies of your video. It may be fine for hobbyists.

Anyone using a DVD recorder as their TBC is a hobbyist.

[RayNotes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vwestlife

Anyone using a DVD recorder as their TBC is a hobbyist.

Funnily enough though, that setup kicks the crap out of the rigs many professional services use. El Gato dongles or transcoding through MiniDV. LOL!

[Aya_Rei]

Alas, we live in a world where most "professionals" don't actually give a crap. We are the small minority of people who do care about quality. They only care about profits and getting these orders quickly done. I especially hate seeing that they do handle moldy tapes and whatnot, going above my skill set to fixing physically broken tapes.. only to capture them using their crappy workflow.

As I've read 'professional' can mean 'paid to do their job' doesn't 100% mean they are doing their job correctly.

[RayNotes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aya_Rei

As I've read 'professional' can mean 'paid to do their job' doesn't 100% mean they are doing their job correctly.

Absolutely. They're being paid, but that's why I carefully chose the words "many professional services" - instead of "many professionals". I can't call them "professionals".

[dpalomaki]

Keep in mind that a business (paid professional doing it to put bread on their table) should charge enough to cover their time and equipment. Notionally $75 or more for every hour they spend dedicated to the project they are working on including setup, take down, delivery, editing and so on (think of auto mechanics shop rates). The $20 per tape number only works for projects that are no time involved (insert the tape, insert the bank DVD, press play/record, come back 2 hours later and mail it back to the customer).

Many a Joe and/or Jane Sixpack are satisfied to get their old VHS/Video8 tape dumped to DVD to thumb drive so they an watch it once again - its been perhaps 20 years since they could last play it on their now dead VCR or camcorder. To them almost any playback is better than none. And a dump from a decent VCR to a decent DVD recorder may well look better than a playback direct to a TV from a ratty old VCR. It is a matter of meeting the expectations and/or balancing cost to final product.

[latreche34]

Those capturing services are not professionals, they are businesses or service providers. Professionals are the ones who learned the technical skills and did it for the living, the ones who do the archival of important materials of their own media library or for other companies. Think of it as a driveway mechanic VS a full service shop with certified techs.

Capturing to burned DVDs and ripping them to HDD is the desperate way, though requires blank DVDs, It is an idiot proof but it is nowhere near what a hobbyist can be satisfied with, Maybe for an average Joe who's been around the 90's and familiar with DVD recording/ripping, not for young folks who grew up with tablets and phones.

[dpalomaki]

Quote:

...not for young folks who grew up with tablets and phones

Please don't confuse youth with appreciation of quality. Its likely the long in the tooth who appreciate how far we have come.

A true professional will balance quality and cost, and charge accordingly (except for pro bono work). Hobbyist does it for the love of what they are doing, cost and time being secondary considerations at best.

For some vocations to use the term 'professional' requires a government issued license (medical, engineering, law, etc.) but of course we have all seen examples of not so professional professionals. And advertising outside those narrow fields is not regulated.

IMO: Bottom line is use the workflow that gives you the results you want to achieve, (some clearly have higher potential than others, as evidenced by discussions on this site) and when you find results that satisfy you declare victory and move on to your next challenge. If someone says "your work flow is crap" just shrug it off and make changes, or say "it gives me the results I want, but you don't have to sue it."