![]() |
Compare DV vs. ATI AIW vs. Osprey capture?
3 Attachment(s)
Here are three screen shots from a HI8 NTSC tape shot with a Sony CCD-TRV 128, first is DV capture though a DCR-TRV103 digital 8 camera. Second is the ATI All in wonder AGP card method and lastly a more modern PCIe capture card the View Cast Osprey 206e. I cant decide which looks better I would really appreciate some opinions and analysis.
|
This isn't a detailed analysis, but the luma levels appear most appropriate with the DV capture. DV might have a slight green hue to it overall for whatever reason, but that's just eyeballing it.
I'd have to say I like the Osprey the least for some reason. Others will be able to tell you more if you can post short video clips rather than screenshots. |
The DV is
- definitely distorting AR (aspect ratio) - as-expected giving slight color tint changes - seems to be underexposing, possibly for misguided/wrong-headed "auto exposure" reasons - and you can literally see the macroblocks, even on a still, in the dark underexposed patches The ATI AIW tend to be very precise on color/contrast accuracy, so I'm guessing the tape is just dark. The Osprey values confirm it. Maybe still a tad washed and hot, but that can be tuned down in the software proc amp. (It's within tolerances, not yet needing hardware proc amp.) The Osprey is a tad soft/blurry, and yet also adds some tiny sharpness seen in ringing/halo. That's odd. ATI = 1st choice Osprey = 2nd DV = no choice |
Quote:
|
The main issue that I've observed (starting back in the early 2000s) is that the "previewed values" for software proc amp don't always 100% match the actual captured values. Because, as I've long said, driver/software "proc amp" is really just altering post-digitized values. It's not a pre-amp, but post-amp.
However, also understand that drivers/software is often responsible for the preview you're seeing. Those are not necessarily 100% faithful to the analog input -- and, in fact, rarely are. Some are well regarded for being very faithful (many/most AIW), and some are known to molest/abuse the values (Easycaps, Elgatos, etc). So, understanding all of this, nuanced adjustments are fine. The problem comes from non-nuanced adjustments. The actual adjustments can vary further from previewed, and often has nasty side effects. Because, again, rough digital manipulation is going on, not smooth analog adjustments. (No such thing as "smooth digital" coming off analog consumer videotape formats.) Proc amps inside TBCs, especially that rare-gen TBC-3000 DataVideo you have, are more analog than digital (and I really want to trace the route on it sometime; but low priority for my time use). Those are always preferable, even if nuanced. Minor adjustments are mostly acceptable when no actual proc amp is available. I know you're skittish of overusing hardware, "wear and tear" reasons. Me too. But that's why we bought gear. To use it, not put it on a shelf. TBCs are not status symbols, not collectible (vintage actin figures, etc). Just be careful, realize the risks, and understand there are people out there (many whom I know) that can fix problems. Not free, of course -- it's not Star Trek (even Star Trek wasn't Star Trek -- looking at you, Feringi!) Long question. Long answer. TL;DR = keep doing what you're doing. :congrats: |
Quote:
Regarding the Osprey sharpness, in the proc amp if you set the sharpness to anything above 0 it adds a noticeable checkered pattern sharpness grain to the image. Thanks for recommending the AIW BTW Smurf. |
That’s a good answer. I’m glad you took the time to explain the reasoning behind that choice.
Quote:
Quote:
|
Site design, images and content © 2002-2026 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2026 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.