#1  
04-01-2012, 11:58 AM
via Email or PM via Email or PM is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 173
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
My understanding is that the ADVC300 has a TBC -- which makes it far above a "dumb DV box." I have a Pinnacle unit which is VERY dumb (doesn't work at all and has many sync problems) so the 300 has to be better than that. I've read numerous user reports and comments from pros who swear by the 300.

GCW
--gwebb


This question was asked in a private message. Rather than hide our tech advice in private conversations, Site Staff will often answer PMs (from any site) here in the digitalFAQ.com forum, so that others may read and benefit from our expertise. Please continue the conversation here. Either login or join as a Free Member, and we can continue troubleshooting your video, photo or web related issue. Thanks for understanding our tech Q&A policies.

Reply With Quote
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Ads / Sponsors
 
Join Date: ∞
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #2  
04-01-2012, 12:02 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,508
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
Most of us swear at the ADVC units. While they proclaim to have TBCs, there's generally no observable effects from it -- which isn't the desired function of a TBC. Additionally, in the NTSC domain, it crushes the colorspace of incoming VHS 4:2:2 (comparable) video to 4:1:1, distorting color and detail in the process.

DV was made for shooting, not converting.

Some people like the units because they're easy to use (basic dummy-friendly boxes), but that still doesn't change the fact that it's not doing a very good conversion job. It's butchering the video just as much as it's transferring it. Better hardware will correct the video -- not just say it does (and then not).

Thanks for writing.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
  #3  
04-01-2012, 01:30 PM
Acden Acden is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Russian Federation
Posts: 22
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Better hardware will correct the video
Which one?

Maybe it is better to use miniDV cameras with S-Video in -> IEEE1394 out to capture VHS?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
04-02-2012, 06:54 AM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,508
Thanked 2,449 Times in 2,081 Posts
Better = LSI Logic chipsets, which can pass video to MPEG-2 or DV25. Much better than Canopus quality.

The MiniDV option also often adds a real TBC with certain models/brands of DV camera, so that would be an excellent solution, too. Plus it often costs less than a Canopus DV box. And as an added bonus, it's a useful camera, not just a dust-collector on your office/home desk!

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canopus ADVC300 vs Matrox G400TV - DV vs HuffYUV via Email or PM Capture, Record, Transfer 6 07-23-2013 06:01 AM
A Canopus DV converter box does not replace a TBC ?? lordsmurf Capture, Record, Transfer 2 02-17-2010 03:11 PM
I have a dumb question???? MagnificentMarcus Author, Make Menus, Slideshows, Burn 3 07-16-2007 03:44 PM
One More Canopus/DV Question dminches Capture, Record, Transfer 1 12-07-2004 09:05 AM
DV myths vs. Canopus (hype?) GRSmith Capture, Record, Transfer 8 06-04-2004 07:35 AM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:50 AM