Deck recommendations for fast forwarding tapes?

[SomesSirGuyDude]

Hey! This might be a silly question but I'm looking for a VHS deck which can play cassettes in fast forward (Without going to blue screen) at the fastest speed possible.

The goal is to charge clients a lower price to preview cassettes and determine if they are worth preserving.

The model can be mostly garbage, as long as we get an idea of what is being played and it fast forwards at high speed.

Any other outside the box solutions are welcome.

Thanks!

[RayNotes]

I think I get the idea - let customers preview a high-speed video version of their tapes to see if they want to pay higher fees for transfer.

My gut reaction is two fold:
1.) The business model: What sort of niche market exists for this - since VHS capture is itself a niche market. So even if the operating model were solid, the business model may not work due to a scarcity of interest.

2.) The operating model: The service suggests whipping old, fragile, and deteriorating tape media through the VHS tape path at high speeds over the rotating head. This risks destroying the only copy the customer has, and the only chance they had of capturing at normal playback speed. The ROI, at first glance, looks upside-down to me.

But there may still be a market here - maybe. Consider this: A properly captured VHS tape, in the first raw captured format is almost useless to a consumer, since it's mammoth file size and video format make them virtually unplayable in any reasonable way. But initial capture is usually the easiest leg of the journey in providing a customer with portable, high quality digital video. It doesn't include any video restoration, conversion to a progressive scan format compatible with modern display technology, or conversion to a modern CODEC compatible with modern computers or social media. if there were a convenient way to have customers review that without any of your other services (like outputting an 8x version per se) you could charge them a low rate for initial capture, but a premium rate for delivery. If they don't what the remainder of the services, then they provide their own capacious SD card and take home the raw video.

So maybe compartmentalizing your services to be sold separately could net the same advantages without the need for specialized hardware or risk of damage to customers' precious recordings. I'm not sure how to work all that out, but perhaps it's worth thinking through in more detail to see if there's an operational model to employ.

Just my 2 cents.

[SomesSirGuyDude]

Thanks for your reply.

I'm thinking of offering this service because a lot of people have mystery tapes and it's an economic risk for them to process them all. With this approach, I can lower the processing time to convert previews, even getting a garbage machine with no TBC so I can run it parallel while I convert quality stuff.

With regards to fast forwarding. Is there a difference in risk with fastforwarding on playback versus rewinding or fast forwarding on stop?

Basically if there's not a substantial risk on the VHS tapes, I think its a good way to attract extra tapes people wouldn't have bothered with and it upsales the ones that end up getting processed, adding a small preview fee.

I'm wondering if some models fast forward faster than others on playback?

[RayNotes]

Yes - FF and RW speeds do vary by model and some models have variable speeds. I had a Mitsubishi that was super fast. My JVC has a few speeds. Seems like VCRs advertised fast speeds, and it was common on the cheaper models.

[aramkolt]

Definitely a question I haven't heard before.

I don't think it is possible to do what you are suggesting at least in the way you describe. With the tape moving at full speed fast forward (the kind that takes 1-2 minutes to shuttle through the entire tape), the tape is moving so quickly that you wouldn't be able to make a picture out of it using the video head. The fastest I've seen would be the JVCs with 7x realtime in the regular FF modes, though even then a 6 hour tape would still take at least 45 minutes to actually look through all of it. But, if it happened to be an SP tape, then it'd only take 15 minutes to capture that way and then let the customer decide if they want to do a full capture after looking at the preview.

What would probably be better is offering to do a short capture (say 15 seconds) every 15 minutes and see if it is something they want the full tape captured. Doing that does require you to fast forward and then stop to play every so often though. You could use something crappy for the preview capture like the elgato which customers could play back easily on their own and you could email a small file like that to them.

Otherwise, depending on your setup, you could put up a station that has a lower end VCR for customers to shuttle around on their own and decide for themselves if they actually want certain tapes captured or not. I assume they'd do this themselves at home if they had working VCRs, but my guess is that many don't.

Agree that it's possible tapes could degrade with extra FF/Rew cycles, so I guess that risk is up to the customer if they want to put some extra stress on the tape for preview purposes. Sometimes tapes do benefit from a FF/Rew just to losen things up though, but for that, I'd usually just use a tape rewinder.

The closest I think you could do for a preview in the much faster speeds would be to prevent the audio muting from the linear audio head as that will still output sound information regardless of the tape speed, it's just usually muted in FF/Rew and you might be able to bypass the "muting" electrically. The idea then might be to do an audio only capture from the audio head in full speed FF and then slow it down by a lot with a nonlinear audio editor later. Voices won't be very accurate, but there's *a chance* you'd be able to tell if it was TV shows or otherwise from the sort of audio collected - maybe.

[latreche34]

It's much easier to capture the entire tape than going into the trouble of capturing a sped up version, You wouldn't gain anything by doing so, and your labor time will increase, After all even if you want to capture segments of the tape you would still fast forward it between segments, so the wear on the capturing VCR is the same if not worse. You should charge per tape not per minute, If the customer still doesn't want to pay for the entire tape you can encode the entire lossless capture that you have made to the lowest unwatchable bitrate, send him the file and have him give you the edit points, Then apply them to the lossless version you've captured and charge him per minute.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SomesSirGuyDude

Hey! This might be a silly question

Welcome.

However...

This is a failure of a business model. Tapes will be destroyed this way. I'd literally wager money on that happening. You'll also be sued by the those clients, I guarantee it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

Agree that it's possible tapes could degrade with extra FF/Rew cycles, so I guess that risk is up to the customer if they want to put some extra stress on the tape for preview purposes.

Nope. That will never fly. The onus of telling clients known risks is on the service. This is referred to as a "duty to warn".

I see this sort of service ending very, very badly for all involved. Do not do it.

[latreche34]

This is why I suggested to capture the entire tape in one pass, fiddle with the file digitally rather than fiddle with the tape mechanically which probably will not end well for all parties, plus the time it takes to do those tape manipulations.

[RayNotes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

This is why I suggested to capture the entire tape in one pass, fiddle with the file digitally rather than fiddle with the tape mechanically which probably will not end well for all parties, plus the time it takes to do those tape manipulations.

That was my suggestion as well. Capture the tape, create something simple for the customer to review and decide if they want the remainder of the process completed.

[Gary34]

Quote:

Sometimes tapes do benefit from a FF/Rew just to losen things up though, but for that, I'd usually just use a tape rewinder

The rewinders are tough on tapes. They are very fast and they don’t have anything to slow down tapes near the end of the tape like a VCR does.

[aramkolt]

I'd say rewinders are less tough on tapes overall compared to using the machines as the tape goes through fewer bends and doesn't have the head spinning/passing over the tape. They also tend to move much more slowly than the full speed rewind/ff of a VHS. It is true that they stop by running into the leader, so I suppose theoretically the tape could get a little stretched at the very beginning/end of the tape if you did it enough times, but I've never had a rewinder actually snap a tape though. The rewinders can also be modified to be a little more sensitive to stopping when it hits the hard stop, but I doubt most people would bother.

Further, if you still think the rewinders move too fast, you can actually make them variable speed by attaching a cheap light bulb dimmer which does not require modification to anything.

I've got one of these just to play with, but it does indeed work for that purpose:
https://www.amazon.com/DEWENWILS-Dimmable-Incandescent-Programmable-Extension/dp/B0865XTK36

[Gary34]

I have been been touching the tape to check and see if the particles come off then playing it for a second and watching it on my crt to again try and check for something bad like sticky shed (which I’ve never seen), then I press stop and fast forward to the end. Then stop the tape and let it set for a minute or so then rewind it and take it out of my regular VCR and let it set for 20 or 30 minutes afterwards to cool down then play it. The playback seems better for a scene in the middle of a tape than if you fast forward to that spot then start there. You get a clean wind that way.

I know LS doesn’t recommend fast forwarding and rewinding and I am aware of why. I definitely wouldn’t fast forwarding for preview. With rewinding VCRs I just look for a VCR that won’t eat tapes or break and has a counter.

[SomesSirGuyDude]

Thanks everyone for the replies!

I thought I had a neat workaround to allow people to preview tapes before transferring, but there's clearly good reason not to take this approach. One of those reasons is getting sued, which I'm not too fond of!

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary34

I have been been touching the tape to check and see if the particles come off then playing it for a second and watching it on my crt to again try and check for something bad like sticky shed (which I’ve never seen), then I press stop and fast forward to the end. Then stop the tape and let it set for a minute or so then rewind it and take it out of my regular VCR and let it set for 20 or 30 minutes afterwards to cool down then play it.

I approve of this diligent method.

Noting that more refinement may be needed, but your approach so far is quite wise.

Continue to be acutely aware that stopping, halting, may always be required. You don't want to push for test #2 if test #1 failed. A test #1 fail means to stop. Pressing forward anyway entirely negates the careful methodology. Sadly, this often happens, and in anything (not just video). Don't be them.

Never use your transfer decks for this. Use a less important deck. Some may think I mean a generic VHS VCR, or non-TBC S-VHS VCR -- and those will suffice -- but I use a SR-V101, as it's easiest to clean (but also often not better than B+ grade performance on my scale, with rare exceptions).

In winter, you never want to let the VCR heads cool down to cold, as it can strip oxide. Keep a "fluffer" tape for this sole reason. Something that may ruin, but you won't care.

[aramkolt]

Seems odd that you could be sued if the tapes that they bring you are in bad condition. Can you sue them if their tape breaks your machine? Seems kind of silly since these are both risks that are implicit during tape transfers.

If I was worried about that, I'd probably have them sign a waiver about that tapes could already be degraded to the point where they don't play well or are further damaged during playback and that they are accepting of that risk in using your service.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

Seems odd that you could be sued if the tapes that they bring you are in bad condition. Can you sue them if their tape breaks your machine? Seems kind of silly since these are both risks that are implicit during tape transfers.

No, it's not the same. In fact, it's somewhat absurd and naive to suggest it is. As a service, you take the risk of your machines breaking down -- not the customer (unless they did some malicious and intentional).

Quote:

If I was worried about that, I'd probably have them sign a waiver about that tapes could already be degraded to the point where they don't play well or are further damaged during playback and that they are accepting of that risk in using your service.

Waivers (contracts) can still be voided in a legal tort, if it's determined that the contract failed to adequately disclose the nature of risk involved. That includes not just the wording, but the presentation. "You signed a piece of paper" isn't as impregnable as some wrongly think it is. Contract paper can quickly turn into toilet paper.

Don't do this.

[RayNotes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

Seems odd that you could be sued if the tapes that they bring you are in bad condition. Can you sue them if their tape breaks your machine? Seems kind of silly since these are both risks that are implicit during tape transfers.

If I was worried about that, I'd probably have them sign a waiver about that tapes could already be degraded to the point where they don't play well or are further damaged during playback and that they are accepting of that risk in using your service.

There's little risk to worry about while conducting ordinary business along customary lines of operation. Whether or not you're liable depends on what you say, and what you do. Was there due diligence in your disclosures of the risks (what you say), and the was there due diligence employed through out the process (what you do)? If you fail to disclose risks or follow unorthodox procedures, it could be regarded as negligence. So the bar for liability is high so long as you avoid anything plainly dumb.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayNotes

If you fail to disclose risks or follow unorthodox procedures, it could be regarded as negligence. So the bar for liability is high so long as you avoid anything plainly dumb..

Yep. FF "playing" is easily proven as unorthodox, dumb, and likely negligent. Decks were not made for this. It will not be difficult to line up experts to testify to this, nor to create exhibits that showcase this.

FYI, I am aware of "better" models to "FF play" a tape, but it must be monitored, as stuff starts to go sideways within 10 minutes. Tape is already moving at a high speed through the VHS M-load, and doubling that is not good. It's vastly worse for LP and EP than SP. At least an SP FF is sorta-kinda like EP speed.

A lot of VCRs have safety mechanisms that halt "FF play" or "REW play" after some duration. That also includes the "better" models I reference.

[vwestlife]

If there are no obvious signs of mold/damage, let the tape play unattended into a DVD recorder set to SP speed (2 hours per disc). Most DVD recorders have an option to automatically end the recording and finalize the disc after a few minutes of no video signal, and most VCRs will automatically rewind the tape and eject it when it reaches the end. Come back in a few hours and repeat the process.

The quality of DVD conversion will already be far superior to the "experts" who use Elgato or EasyCap USB garbage devices, and for long recordings, 2 hours should be enough of a preview for the client to determine if the entire tape is worth transferring, using whatever your preferred method is. Likewise, having it on DVDs rather than as files on a USB drive is enough of a deterrent to keep them from accepting a low-effort "preview" transfer as the final result and then walking away, rather than coming back for proper transfers in a more convenient/future-proof form.