As a bit of a continuation of my previous thread but I managed to get my hands on the Nintendo 64 "Change The System" Promo tape from 1996 to do a proper comparison between it and the vhs decode copy uploaded on archive.org back in July of 2023 (Was decoded by me a week ago)
Now, the tape was only ever produced in Extended Play mode sadly, so I'm wondering if a Panasonic 1980 would fair a better chance at getting a higher quality extraction compared to my JVC MV-45U. The JVC was set to EDIT mode too
That or I could acquire a different copy of the same tape. Had to do that for some blooper tapes were the HiFi audio track produced a lot of crackles, bought a different copy of the same tape with much cleaner audio.
Here are some image comparisons, in my eyes decode is a bit better in the sense that you can make out text more easily, but the ringing problems are at full force. The only thing I did was resize the images to a 4:3 resolution.
But, the more and more I'm looking at this, the more I'm thinking "how much of this is an actual boost in quality rather than just all the extra noise disguising itself as an overall sharper image"
-- merged --
And here are some video comparisons
The following users thank Aya_Rei for this useful post:
ge0dude (08-01-2025),
lordsmurf (08-01-2025)
Kind of looks like the difference between having gone through a noise reduction circuit versus not. Kind of akin to the degree of an edit mode leaving things "unprocessed" which will vary from brand to brand and model to model.
Can't lie, decode looks quite a bit better in this comparison specifically.
Ironically, I see there's a copy of that tape that is less than 20 miles from me on ebay, but I'd probably still pay to have it shipped if I were to do my own comparison between higher end machines. It's unfortunate that it is EP as that excludes the SVO-5800 and JVC BR-S series that'll only do SP.
The other issue I think is that the same machine didn't play both of those tapes, so it's not the greatest comparison. I am a little surprised that the decode copy still has quite visible line dropouts as that's one of the things it is supposed to be very good at covering up.
The following users thank aramkolt for this useful post:
lordsmurf (08-01-2025)
Kind of looks like the difference between having gone through a noise reduction circuit versus not. Kind of akin to the degree of an edit mode leaving things "unprocessed" which will vary from brand to brand and model to model.
Can't lie, decode looks quite a bit better in this comparison specifically.
Ironically, I see there's a copy of that tape that is less than 20 miles from me on ebay, but I'd probably still pay to have it shipped if I were to do my own comparison between higher end machines. It's unfortunate that it is EP as that excludes the SVO-5800 and JVC BR-S series that'll only do SP.
The other issue I think is that the same machine didn't play both of those tapes, so it's not the greatest comparison. I am a little surprised that the decode copy still has quite visible line dropouts as that's one of the things it is supposed to be very good at covering up.
I do remember skimming through my decode of it and yeah, had lots of dropouts.
Honestly going to buy a different copy and play it in my JVC-SR-VS30U instead to see if that would help at all. Maybe, maybe not. From the small comparisons I've done between the two VCRs the image quality is basically the same, the SR-MV45U tends to have better linear audio quality.
Who knows, maybe your Panasonic would prove better results than my JVC. But yeah we have no idea what deck was used for the decode capture back in 2023.
The following users thank Aya_Rei for this useful post:
lordsmurf (08-01-2025)
You might find this slightly interesting, it's from the guy on ebay that sells rather expensive refurbed JVCs, but the comparison aspect is still interesting.
My favorite comparison would have to be the 7600 vs 9600. The 7600 looks much more detailed all else being equal. Oddly, he's capturing into DVCPro50, but that's not a variable here. My guess is capturing to ProResHQ would have looked better for the same bitrate as ProRes has more color depth and is visually lossless.
The black levels and saturation levels also vary quite a bit which makes it hard to tell if decode is better or just not crushing the blacks as much on certain captures. VS30U(Domesday) vs 9911 is also an interesting one where there's still technically more detail in the domesday, it's just that the chroma and luma levels make the 9911 look more appealing overall in most scenes unless the blacks are being crushed.
The other issue is that there aren't comparisons of say two or three different units of the same model to show what can be expected of machine-to-machine variation.
For example, could be the 7600 has less worn heads than the 9600 and that is why it appears sharper. Hard to say.
The following users thank aramkolt for this useful post:
Aya_Rei (08-01-2025),
ge0dude (08-01-2025)
Well I do like how the site is setup, but I thought you weren't a fan of his comparison video?
Anyway, made more comparisons between my VCRs. Different Nintendo Promo tape, this time being Donkey Kong Country Exposed from 1994. It was released in EP mode as well.
First set (Gameplay) has the VS30 picture mode set to Edit with the Pinnacle 510's sharpness set to 2, The MV45 picture mode is also set to Edit, Pinnacle sharpness is at the default value of 0.
Second set (Developer) has the VS30 picture mode set to Norm, MV45 picture mode is set to Edit. Pinnacle's sharpness is left at the default of 0 for both. Though keep it mind the live action footage was filmed in choppy bit crushed slow mo.
Third set (Diddy Kong model) has both VCR's picture mode set to Edit, Pinnacle sharpness is left at 0
The following users thank Aya_Rei for this useful post:
ge0dude (08-01-2025)
Now, the tape was only ever produced in Extended Play mode sadly, so I'm wondering if a Panasonic 1980 would fair a better chance at getting a higher quality extraction
You also lack the best AIW. PM me when you're done getting your captures.
Quote:
but the ringing problems are at full force.
It's awful. I can even see ringing where none usually exists.
In the "decode2" image, you can actually see the outline of his face in the sky. Even low-end VCRs didn't make that mistake. In a tiny preview window, sure, you may think it's not a big deal. But view it large (as people normally do), and the ghosting is obnoxious.
Quote:
But, the more and more I'm looking at this, the more I'm thinking "how much of this is an actual boost in quality rather than just all the extra noise disguising itself as an overall sharper image"
That's it entirely. That's been the argument for 30 years now. Noise is noise, not detail. Lots of people are easily fooled by optical tricks, and they refuse to acknowledge it. Terms like "most aesthetically pleasing" are misused here as well, as a backup excuse when they're confronted.
I don't find noise pleasing anymore than I find a dirty tile floor pleasing. I never hear somebody say "the dirty floor looks good", unless they're trying to avoid mopping.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aramkolt
You might find this slightly interesting,
The black levels and saturation levels also vary quite a bit
This is why it's not interesting at all. He's using non-suggested gear, and likely getting non-quality as a result. So the comparisons are invalid.
Too many variables, as you've correctly pointed out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aya_Rei
for the decode capture back in 2023.
No, don't make excuses for them. Or rather, don't give in to their common backpeddling.
We were told "software will make it better later", but that was obvious BS, as I've correctly stated for years. Now the goalpost has been moved to "that was done with the old way, you have to use (this month's) new way, which is now final (it's not)".
Quote:
Originally Posted by aramkolt
Can't lie, decode looks quite a bit better in this comparison specifically.
I am a little surprised that the decode copy still has quite visible line dropouts as that's one of the things it is supposed to be very good at covering up.
That's almost an oxymoron statement. It looks "better", but has obvious problems?
No, don't make excuses for them. Or rather, don't give in to their common backpeddling.
We were told "software will make it better later", but that was obvious BS, as I've correctly stated for years. Now the goalpost has been moved to "that was done with the old way, you have to use (this month's) new way, which is now final (it's not)".
I'm just saying that the file was uploaded back in 2023, I myself decoded that file using the latest version of the software, keep all the settings at their defaults. But I guess the file was uploaded as a bit of placeholder, so we have no clue what deck was used to play back the tape
So it's an old file I decoded just recently, but I bet if they were saying "oh that's invalid now, go recapture it using these tools" then doesn't that go against their claim of "capture it once, just decode it over and over again the future it'll be fine"
I really don't care now to spend like around 2 hours downloading the file from archive.org which always has slow as balls upload and download speeds, and spend up to 2 more hours decoding only half of the video because I'm not using some ultra $2000 gaming PC but a $1000 mobile workstation laptop.
As to which is "better", depends what you look for. If you can't stand ringing or "grain type noise" the U-Matic capture probably isn't going to be your preference. However, if you prefer more detail and fewer dropouts, you'd probably say the U-Matic is better. Both could be further improved with avisynth wizardry.
Comparison is a little apples to oranges (both are NTSC at least), but the idea is if you played the same tape in two different VHS machines and got the two above results, you'd probably prefer the output of one machine over the other for that tape even though both have flaws.
Neither will be what the master looked like (as there's generational losses for both), butyou can only do as good as what is recorded on the specific tape you have. Decode should theoretically look "at least as good" as the next best option, but if it's basically indistinguishable from a traditional capture, the extra time/storage/complexity still wouldn't be worth it for me personally.
That's an outstanding video to show the weakness of Youtube (over)compression.
Quote:
Both could be further improved with avisynth wizardry.
Nope, just yours. That other video has too many flaws to get much help.
Quote:
Decode should always look "as good" as the next best option, but if it's basically indistinguishable from a traditional capture, the extra time/storage/complexity still wouldn't be worth it for me personally.
And that's the irony. It's lots more work, but for an inferior output. At least for the expense (fast "gamer"-quality desktop, lots of storage), and all the time involved, you'd think you'd at least get something better. But nope, that's never happened, and probably never will. At least for VHS.
Other formats may do better, such as Betamax. Maybe.
So I guess ringing isn't the norm for VHS, but the norm for U-Matic? I think if there was ringing from a VHS tape it'd usually be a TV recording that was recorded from a channel with poor reception, hm.
Guess on the topic of noise and grain, this reminds me, I captured footage from an NFL game on FOX back in 2002 that was recorded in SP Mode. You can easily tell that compared to most tapes, the footage here is extra noisy and extra grainy, that's just because of the recording itself.
So hey, a traditional capture was able to preserve this extra noise. Keep in mind I had the VCR picture mode set to Norm and a Panasonic ES15 in the chain, that was a leftover when a previous section of the tape was a copy of a camcorder tape, so it had flagging.
I actually did order a copy of that same promo tape and will play around with it just for the heck of it with a few different VCRs. I'll try it include a D-VHS machine, WVHS machine, AG1980, a few JVCs, and possibly decode if I can get it to play nice with my computer hardware. It could be that EP has more to be gained from decode than SP, haven't really seen specific comparisons on multiple tape speeds, but I'm sure they are some out there. I'll plan to post back with some of my captures if I can do any better than yours and the posted decode.
The following users thank aramkolt for this useful post:
Aya_Rei (08-01-2025)
Honestly I'm most curious about the Panasonic, I've heard they are better for EP tapes, but I wonder how much of that is quality wise and not tracking wise.
And I think his logic is that I guess EP tapes have a much lower signal to noise ratio (SNR) so apparently decode could be able to extract more 'data' from those kind of tapes.
After spending two hours downloading the ldf file and decoding around two minutes of it again, here are two raw screencaps to show how bad the ringing is
Ignoring most of the top rated comments dunking on the guy and saying that he's a stupid old cranky man. I feel like Oln's comment is the most pleasant to read. He seems rather grounded in reality.
Another interesting-ish comment would Iknowityoudont's where he made his own comparison between his thrift store quality setup and a decode capture he grabbed from archive.org back in 2024. The main takeaway being that the ringing is still present, it's most noticeable on the edge of the banana.
I don't have the images anymore, but there is also that Wacky Adventures of Ronald McDonald decode capture Titan did back in 2022, the video files were oversharpened to all hell and had serious ringing problems. I myself decoded the same raw .flac file a couple of days ago, in which while it was no longer oversharpened, the ringing was still present.
There is also that Gatorade ad that was posted to the archive.org page in 2024 where the comparison was between decode and some composite only VCR hooked up to a Pioneer DVR-530H and a Black Magic Analog to SDI Converter.
When I went into the drama filled discord server there was a comparison that was posted like around month ago that had some ringing, yes it wasn't in your face bright as can be, but it was there, and that is when the excuse was "something something rf filtering" Man at least Latreche34 had some sense and said something was wrong with those comparisons, believing the conventional capture was too soft and the decode capture was too noisy.
So much for "capture today, decode tomorrow" huh? These aren't "random bad examples" no it's a pretty common problem...
Last edited by Aya_Rei; 08-01-2025 at 08:05 PM.
Reason: Added a third reported example of ringing
I feel like Oln's comment is the most pleasant to read. He seems rather grounded in reality.
oln = hodgey = Oyvind (his actual name) = the guy who actually forked/"invented" vhs-decode.
Notice that the Github has "oyvind" in it.
He's always been a pleasant chap. But my understanding is that life has intervened, and he's not active much anymore. That's what has created the current situation, where "the inmates are running the asylum".
oln = hodgey = Oyvind (his actual name) = the guy who actually forked/"invented" vhs-decode.
Notice that the Github has "oyvind" in it.
He's always been a pleasant chap. But my understanding is that life has intervened, and he's not active much anymore. That's what has created the current situation, where "the inmates are running the asylum".
He gave the keys to the house and the house is now a mess
But yeah, I know he is the actual developer behind the project, it's the way he writes sounds more, professional to me and overall down to earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf
you'd think you'd at least get something better. But nope, that's never happened, and probably never will. At least for VHS.
Other formats may do better, such as Betamax. Maybe.
From what I've heard the decode quality output for video8/hi8 is around the same as a high end workflow. So for somebody like myself, I have no need nor desire to make the jump. It'd be a complete waste of my time.
U-Matic seems to be Aramkolt's thing so he'd be the judge on if Decode could be a benefit to that format specifically.
It's like, the only format we can all agree on was the one where the decode project was born from, Laserdisc, but that's mainly because Laserdisc and VHS, while analog formats, are wildly different.
Isn't Laserdisc a composite only format, so something like s-video would not be a benefit. So yes, bypassing composite by doing an RF capture of a Laserdisc is the right idea and does provide the best quality capture. But with VHS and 8mm we already have a way to bypass the quality loss of composite, an S-VHS VCR and Hi8 Camcorder respectively.
I understand s-video isn't the only reason why we use those tape players, but still.
My copy of that tape already arrived, so I'll see if I have time to dig everything out to try a few different captures with at least 4 different machines that can do EP. I still like capturing into ProRes422HQ without the use of a computer (AJA KiPro via SDI), so it won't be quite the same, but should give you a good idea if the capture can look better than the decode one that was posted.
