Can we make some sort of mirror site-thread here? I.e. description from that site goes to the thread and attached are the files.

Back on-topic... and to anyone still interested in capturing video on a Mac (hobbyist approach, no miracle workers here)...

It seems that the USB capture stick I am using cannot sustain 25fps (for PAL S-VHS-C) upon receiving footage from the beginning of a cassette tape (or the first couple seconds of playback in general). A couple seconds into the file, QuickTime generally reports 25fps with a few times dropping to 24fps.
As for editing and creating a video file for DVD use, I have downloaded a trial version of Final Cut Pro X. As a matter of fact, the new iMovie 10.0 was no use due to a lack of export options (no iDVD, no QuickTime export), and the earlier versions were suffering from color loss upon importing the .mov container (not DV). The latter is a problem regularly highlighted and discussed in Apple support forums - and there is no fix.

In short, I am okay with the results for DVD finalization, given the fact that there are no immediate alternatives (except for prosumer capture cards in a 1st gen. Mac Pro, or a dedicated Windows PC). While this forum has proven to be more of an experts' resource with respect to my thread and the suggestions made, I truly appreciate the vivid feedback. On the other hand, I have learned throughout the past couple weeks that there is not a lot of up-to-date knowledge here or in other dedicated forums with regard to Mac video capture. Probably due to the fact that most people will switch to a Windows PC upon facing the obstacles described in this thread. In fact, most of the times I read how people would just condemn Mac video capture right from the start without being much of a help (unlike here). Furthermore, I couldn't even find Mac related reviews on prosumer AJA or Matrox devices, and the few Mac user reviews on USB stick alternatives, i.e. devices such as Intensity Shuttle, Elgato Game Capture HD, Hauppauge HD PVR, did no focus on analog video sources such as S-/VHS or Laserdisc.
If anybody is interested in a more detailed explanation of all the software and hardware I tested, incl. feedback from some of the manufacturers, I can write up a couple more lines. :)

Absolute rubbish. I have a business which specialises in the digital conversion of analog(ue) video assets for businesses, archives, libraries and corporations. I use a large variety of video source hardware - some of which dates back to 1972 - and of the four main computer devices used at the heart of this enterprise three of them are Macs!

I've been working with video technology since the 1970s and I've used pretty much everything in that time, including Mac and PC capture hardware and software and if you think that Macs are totally useless for capture then you really don't know what you're talking about!

I've recently completed volume capture and archiving jobs for the British Imperial War Museum and several large public archives in the UK; they impose very stringent standards on the quality of the resulting files (believe me) and my Macs have worked flawlessly. We use a variety of Blackmagic capture devices - Teranex 2D, Intensity Shuttle Thunderbolt, H.264 Pro Recorder, and so on, in addition to a number of Windows-only devices. The hardware that produces the best, most consistent results are the Blackmagic ones for us. We turn out 10-bit and 8-bit 422 Uncompressed Quicktime, ProRes422 (all profiles), MPEG-4/H.264, 10-bit AVI, DV-AVI, DV-MOV and lots of other stuff as clients require. No problems - no complaints.

So to say that Macs aren't appropriate for video capture is a stupid claim. Really.

One thing that has been overlooked in this thread (in which a load of nonsense has been typed by people) is that analogue video sources need to be timebase-corrected in order that stable and properly-timed frame sequences are presented to the converter BEFORE the conversion job is undertaken. If you don't use a decent pro-grade TBC you'll very likely have problems - and even if a capture device allows the stream through it won't necessarily be properly timed up. That will be the case whether you're using MacOS, Windows or Linux.

But don't say that Apple Macs aren't suited to video capture and make it a general reference, because it's very misleading to those who are just trying to get to grips with this stuff.

Without details on exactly what you use, nobody here will take you seriously. :wink2:

That's nice. I've been working with video since the early 90s. And everything that I did for the first decade of my hobby/career (it's both!) had to be replaced or redone later. The methods yielded low quality. We were really limited in those days. So whatever you were doing back then has little to no relevance now, aside from understanding the player. Everything else after the player is meaningless in the digital realm.

Until around 2001, referring purely to tape-to-DVD work, everything that existed was pretty much rubbish. Those old 90s workflows were proprietary (usually Matrox or Canopus based), and had tons of flaws. All through the 2000s to today, the market was also saturated with junk making big promises (that it could not deliver on). Worse yet, today many good devices no longer exist, making a majority of what exists the low-end cheap junk.

I established this site more than a decade ago to help others with digital video -- speciflcally capturing/transferring and restoring. (The alternative sites at the time were mostly interested in copying DVDs.) And in that time, Mac has never had a quality transfer workflow. I wish that it did! Macs has always been excellent for editing, as well as DVD authoring. It mostly only has/had some very DV-centric workflows, which yielded color loss. It is/was unfit for archiving.

Several of the devices briefly mentioned here have horrible flaws. And it's not just this site, but you can read about them on Creative Cow and others. Dropped frames is the biggest issue. Not to mention some of them are grossly overpriced for what little they do.

You'd better cap that attitude. I won't put up with that here. This site is not troll-friendly. :no2:

You'd better look around. We talk about TBCs all the time. :wink2:

You are mistaken. Most of 'pro grade' TBCs are the wrong tool these days. Most 'pro grade' TBCs do not play nice with digital equipment. It was created specifically for analog workflows, and will never work well in anything else. Again, without specifics, you're just ranting. This site has covered TBCs in many threads, for many years -- with specifics.

Well, sorry, but it is the general truth -- Macs are NOT ideal for capturing video. A few very expensive niche-use devices, and on specific Mac setups, can indeed work just fine. No arguments here. But then that's not exactly 'in general', now is it?

Linux is worse.

Windows, specifically XP through 7, has many devices in many price ranges, that work perfectly. It's not that we love Windows, but that it's simply the tool that needs to be used for the task. When capturing is over, sure, edit and export on that Mac. I do it myself quite a bit, and have for more than a decade now.

Blackmagic Intensity Shuttle Thunderbolt drops frames without informing the user. It has been confirmed by your truly doing it on Mac.

http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...y-shuttle.html

As for the picture quality the $250+ Blackmagic Intensity Shuttle Thunderbolt did not outperform the $40 worth USB stick device VC500 and didn't outperform $40 worth ATI Theater 750 PCIE HD TV Tuner Card.

Sure the clients didn't complain because they wouldn't notice the dropped frames to begin with. If they knew about dropped frames, some of them would complain.

-- merged --

Correction! I was comparing the picture quality of the component inputs of Blackmagic Intensity Shuttle for Thunderbolt with S-Video input of USB stick device VC500 and with composite input of ATI Theater 750 PCIE HD TV Tuner Card.

As far as I remember the picture quality of both S-Video and composite inputs Blackmagic Intensity Shuttle for Thunderbolt plainly sucks big time.

Blackmagic Intensity Shuttle for Thunderbolt is overpriced POC.

Very interesting post. The top Google hit when I searched for how to best convert VHS tapes to digital was a thread in this forum which had countless members describing the importance of TBC and giving hardware suggestions. There's even a thread stickied at the top of this subforum titled "VCR Buying Guide FAQ," and the second question answered is: "Q: Why use a VCR with a TBC vs no TBC?" You haven't exactly lent yourself any credibility to back up the wild claims made in your first post to this forum. Stories about being emotionally invested into particular brands of software and/or hardware are all fine and dandy, but are ultimately useless to everyone here seeking factual and objective advice and information.

Sounds like valuable information to add, and there's a good chance others in your situation or even just in general will stumble across your thread and find all your info extremely helpful.

Yes. :congrats:

We've mirrored a lot of content in the past, from sites that were likely to (and many did!) go missing in the future. We've tried to archive and save as much video information (and blank media information) as is possible.

Nice summary. :laugh:

@ColinB: Thank you for sharing your experience with Mac OS workflows. As mentioned in my initial post, I am using a JVC VCR with TBC enabled. Judging from the buying guide, I assume there are better VCR decks than my HR-S9600, just like there might be better TBC solutions. But you gotta start somewhere and my goal has been a tech-savvy consumer approach at "backing up" a couple dozen S-/VHC-C tapes and Laserdiscs. So far, the results (see my additional information below) have been satisfying.

@mrmuy97: Sure, here are my current "lessons learned" and opinions summed up...
Obviously, my lines below were written for beginners, people who do not make a living with this stuff, nor spent a couple of decades following the industry, but rather want to capture old tapes or LDs before they vanish while sticking to their Mac OS setup.

The general statement regarding video capture on a Mac is to use a Windows PC instead. For that matter, a lot of decent guides and user experience reports can be found in this forum. However, not all Mac users are willing or capable to buy or build a suitable Windows PC. Some Mac users probably own software (e.g. Adobe, Apple iLife, and so forth) already providing various options to alter and enhance video material. Moreover, there are several freeware programs available as well.

Useful software for Mavericks (Mac OS 10.9) or older Mac OS:

VideoGlide — came with my USB capture device. Updates can be found here.

QuickTime — QuickTime 10 has the tendency to convert files before loading which in case of captured footage is very time consuming. Therefore, you may want to download QuickTime 7 in order to avoid this process and to play certain file formats/codecs that are otherwise not supported.

JES Video Cleaner — this is a neat freeware featuring the following functions: general noise reduction (adaptive), remove logo, average two movies, remove cross-luma, remove periodic brightness variation. I found it extremely helpful to remove noise from old tapes, achieving results similar to VirtualDub’s smartsmoother filter. This freeware and other, such as JES Deinterlacer can be found here.

iMovie — the newer iMovie 10 no longer supports exporting to iDVD or QuickTime, which makes it basically useless unless you want to stick to creating footage for YouTube, and so forth. There is no chance to configure video format, compression, et cetera. I was using iMovie 8.0.4 from iLife ’09 to avoid these limitations. Updates for iMovie can be found here.
However, it should be noted that the video files I imported to iMovie, similar to the experience of numerous users, suffered a loss of colors, especially for shadows and darker colors. I did not encounter this problem with Final Cut Pro X (trial version).

Final Cut Pro — due to the above-mentioned problems, I have decided to test FCP (30-days trial version). The layout is similar to iMovie and pretty much self-explanatory if you have dealt with video edit software suites before (here is a great guide for beginners). The software supports export with QuickTime, thus allowing various customized settings for video codec, compression, format, and so forth.

iDVD — no longer included with Mac OS. I was using iDVD 7.0.4 from iLife ’09. Updates for iDVD can be found here.

Short review on Mac compatible video capture devices supporting analog (!) video sources:

Blackmagic Design Intensity Shuttle (USB 3.0 or Thunderbolt) — although analog input (Composite, S-Video) is supported, various reviews highlighted problems with unstable video signals, e.g. from old VHS tapes, thus calling for mandatory TBC use. Even Blackmagic Design staff admitted in their support forums, that their devices require a stable analog video signal, preferably from a DVD player. Contrary to DV (Canopus) or H.264 (Elgato) devices, the Intensity Shuttle captures in uncompressed .avi. Although the software offers a broad choice of settings, I have not looked further into this device, with respect to the price and the obvious negative foreboding. Supports NTSC, PAL, but not PAL-60 (according to Blackmagic Desing support staff).

Elgato Video Capture USB (USB 2.0) — unlike most of the USB based devices with Empia chipsets, this capture stick comes with a proprietary software, providing a step-by-step workflow but no additional options with regard to audio/video file formats (codec, compression ratio/quality, format,…). Available options are brightness, contrast, saturation, and color tone. However, at this point in time, only MPEG-4 and H.264 (MPEG-4 Part 10/AVC) are supported, hence resulting in mediocre results from analog sources (Composite, S-Video). Supports NTSC, PAL, and PAL-60. Not recommended.

Elgato Game Capture HD (USB 2.0) — comes with an adapter for Composite and S-Video. The software does not provide options to configure audio/video formats (codec, compression ratio/quality, format,…). Although the hardware specs suggest a decent alternative for capturing analog media, as the name already suggests, the software layout and overall functionality are focused on capturing footage from videogame consoles. Supports NTSC, PAL, but not PAL-60 (according to Elgato support staff). Not recommended.
Note: the more recent Elgato Game Capture HD60 does not support analog input.

Hauppauge HD PVR (USB 2.0) — Mac software must be purchased separately (demo version offers full functionality). Although analog input (Composite, S-Video) is supported, the device encodes straight to H.264, so that additional options for audio/video formats obviously cannot be supported. Not recommended.

LogiLink VR0010 (USB 2.0) — probably similar to most USB capture sticks, this device is based on the Empia chipset and comes with VideoGlide capture software for Mac. This software supports a broad variety of settings for audio/video formats, enhancements, et cetera. The resulting capture footage is good enough for the hobbyist approach (I stick with this device for the time being). Supports NTSC, PAL, but not PAL-60. Recommended for starters.

I'm really tired now, and I'll look at this more tomorrow, but it's a really nice post. :clap:

I will be using this, with my own knowledge, to create a new site sticky for Mac OS workflows. I'm also creating an article on Windows vs Mac vs Linux for video capturing (and optional DVD/BD output), and this will make mention there.

@lordsmurf: Thanks for the feedback. Feel free to incorporate my lessons learned to this site's knowledge base.

In addition, I am tempted to say that AJA products (both capture card and external capture device) could be the most suitable capture device for Mac OS, however I am still awaiting feedback from AJA staff with regard to some questions I had.

edit: One more note, contrary to the majority (?) of user experiences, my JVC VCR did not destroy or "eat" any of the S/VHS-C cassette tapes used with a battery powered adapter case. I like to think that JVC VCRs should at least be tried out individually (where available) and not be prejudged with regard to compact cassette tape use.

A very old thread but thank you ame-otoko, and all others who participated. :congrats:

I am a beginner and I am on a Mac. I purchased the Elgato device and, like you, noticed the video while it's capturing looks a lot better than the end result. So my quest starts a new. Or not. I want a way to capture my videos lossless, HD space isn't an issue at this point, but it doesn't look like that's possible. I will most likely just live with the poor quality. However, if anyone sees this old thread and feels like commenting, I would be grateful.

Thank you again, ame-otoko. You've helped people more than you could know.

Does the Mac Elgato software give you any options to use uncompressed or Animation?

The software gives the option of two formats. Actually it says it will select an option automatically based on how fast it can save (or process or something) the input. I don't have access to the software right now but I manually selected the faster option (I think MPEG-4 vs H.264).

Good point. I'll play around with that. I was hoping there was a new piece of hardware out that was plug and play (like the Elgato) that gave better quality, or there was some software that would improve my capture. But I'm getting through my old videos which is much better than letting them sit in a box.

Thank you for the reply.

In response to Mac video capture questions
 

In response to this thread http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...-os-vhs-3.html
(how is 139 days not recent enough, when the info is still valuable?)

Did someone mention the Thompson Canopus ADVC-300 (it delivers DVCpro25)? It features a TBC. I don't know of capture software other than buying an old PowerPC Mac and running iMovie6.

Regarding the Blackmagic Design Intensity Pro or Shuttle USB3/thunderbolt there is a german guide http://forum.gleitz.info/showthread....en-(und-andere)

It explains that the method with the Intensity card works, but the analog in/outputs of the card have strange signals, this is why they use a Panasonic DMR-xxxx as capture device, you go out with hdmi and then use a splitter to bypass a protection on the Intensity. Then go with the spliter into the Intensity card and then in the Mac. You then are offerred several different formats (better than simple DVCpro25). For simple cutting there seems to be a software called media express coming with the intensity card.

You missed the checkbox: "I have good reason to make a reply here, and wish to proceed."
I'll merge this.

The Canopus DV boxes don't have TBC based on testing. Yeah, the 300 claims it, prints it on the box, but it's not doing anything that we can tell. Dropped frames still happen. It's either not a TBC, or it's really weak. The 300 does a lot of really ugly things to video, too, so it's doubly bad.

The BM is a real disappointment. The SD ingest simply does not work as it should.

Mac was just never a great capture platform. It's DV centric, mostly for movie makers (ie, cameras). The lower Canopus 50/55/100/110 and DataVideo DAC-100 are fine for DV capture.

Regarding the BM. The site I have this from have tested numerous devices (on Windows to be fair, but still) and they found out that the best you can get out of consumer devices under 400,-EUR is a combination of the BM (it functions as an adapter, that is needed for the hdmi signal that is produced) and a Panasonic DMR- xxxx, which will create YUV422 at 80GB/h and a hdmi splitter to bypass a certain signal lock.

I already mentioned, that the BM is having problems. But it is needed as an adaptor. You might say that is an expensive adaptor (not, if you buy and resell it on Ebay). There are Pros on that forum and they tested it.

Too bad you can't read the German thread and my english and my brain (I am very sick) is not capable enough of translating it to you. Maybe you can get the idea of the Guide presented by wathcing the pictures and the names of the devices. Or just test it yourself.

Do read my previous posts. BM drops frames without informing the user. You wouldn't even know.

In the the method described in my lnk the BM is just used to make the hdmi connection from the Panasonic DMR to the Mac. The Panasonic is doing the capturing/digitalisation. Well, if you say it, I'll believe you - on the other hand, if one can't see that frames are dropped it might not be such a big problem.
In your previous post you say you tested composite and component video. The guide I am referring to is using the hdmi in/out only as a connector, no digitalisation.

I also never had dropped frames with ADVC-300. Some (windows-Users) also said that video and audio on ADVC-300 would get asynchronous. When I use iMovie-6 (very old version, not comparable to iMovie 8 and upwards, because the "newer" versions manipulate the video) and an ADVC-300 plus an old Siemens VCR I didn't see/hear this problem. Either way my eyes/ears are bad or it is different with different set ups.

I didn't come here to fight. I was just happy, that in the other forum they had found a working solution and wanted to share it. Well, I guess everyone has to try for his own, then, when even you experts have different opinions on it.

It's not fighting, it's just discussing facts. :)

The Panasonic is not really "capturing" because it's a DVD recorder. You have no idea what the recorder is doing, including also dropping frames internally. The Panasonic DMR-ES series made several great models of recorders -- but due to the TBC-like abilities, not the recording. The recording was awful. It wasn't better than BM, just different. Both are lousy.

True, frames drops are not always a dire problem. It depends on how many, and what caused the drop.

The Canopus DV boxes also record internally, like DV recorder, and you're not privy to drop information. The 300 has some nasty side effects that easily led to artifacts.

It is good to let others know what your solution is. Thanks! :)

As long as you're aware of drawbacks (and anybody else that you're doing video work for, be it personal or professional), and can accept those flaws, then there's no issue with the method. Everything has some sort of flaws; noting some more than others.

OK :) Seems we agree.

What you say, that the Panasonic is merely a to-DVD-converter was on my mind, too, when I read the Guide from the other forum and I was sceptic, since they often not even offer h.264 compression, but used to use something like divx.
But they told me, the stuff is not going to DVD, but directly going out of the Panasonic box and one can choose several different bitrates. They sugguest 8bit YUV422 @ 80GB/h.

I was ok with ADVC-300 + iMovie6 + Mac OS X 10.4 and an old PowerPC-Mac and an old VCR from the early 90ies (since recent ones tend to be really strange in colour), but I thought, maybe there is even a better way, this thought was what led me to find the Guide referenced to above and the people there hail it as the ultimate consumer solution. Whether or not it is of any good, everyone has to decide on their own what drawbacks they are willing to take, as you say, too.

BTW. before they wrote the above guide, they tested stuff and discussed on more than 50 pages http://forum.gleitz.info/showthread.php?46713-Zeitgem%E4%DFes-hochwertiges-analoges-Capturing-per-USB-oder-HDMI this is what led me to think they might have done their work properly. :)

Hello again,

revisiting my old thread to share my more recent lessons-learned and to reply to the registered members who PM'ed me throughout the past years.

No real surprise here, my current S-/VHS setup as follows:
JVC HR-S9600 {S-video/RCA audio} > Panasonic DMR-EH495 {HDMI} > HDMI-Splitter {HDMI} > Intensity Shuttle {Thunderbolt} > Mac

I am using the same setup for Laserdisc, replacing the JVC with a Pioneer CLD-D925, sticking to S-video because the composite video out (RCA, Scart) of the D925 is fed with a merged Y/C signal anyway.
On the HR-S9600 Digital 3R is turned OFF per suggestion in various forum threads, and TBC is left ON. On the D925 the HQ-circuit function is turned OFF as it softens the video unnecessarily.

In addition, I am running the video/audio signal of the EH495 to a small multiformat TV that supports S-video through Scart and also offers seperate S-video and RCA connectors for testing purposes. It's easier to read and configure the device settings that way, too.

So far the Intensity Shuttle has been a hassle-free experience both in terms of the hardware and the software suite containing the apps/drivers (i.e. Desktop Video 12.4.2 running on macOS 12.6.5). The abovementioned S-/VHS setup works for PAL sources whereas the LD setup also allows for NTSC (NTSC 3.58, not PAL-60) because the D925 and the EH495 both support it.

Lessons learned:
- The tv format (PAL/NTSC) must be set accordingly in both software applications, Desktop Video (where you select it in the source settings) and Media Express (where you have to select the tv format in project specs), otherwise you'll end up with a black capture screen.
- Changing the tv format on the EH495 resets the HDMI settings to AUTO so you need to adjust them again to 576i/480i for use with the Intensity Shuttle.
- I couldn't catch a difference between setting the JVC to B.E.S.T. OFF/Picture Control NORM or B.E.S.T. ON/Picture Control AUTO. With the latter option however B.E.S.T. automatically kicked in on some tapes that otherwise failed to display the video for a couple seconds, so that's nice. Your mileage may vary...:wink2:
- The NR function of the EH495 (remote press Display > Video > NR ON) improved the flickering I encountered with various Laserdisc.
- At this point in time, the Intensity Shuttle is apparently discontinued but still supported for Intel based Macs according to Blackmagic Design's support documents.

Well, I guess nowadays there's already an overwhelming ammount of user feedback on the benefits of the abovementioned capture method (DMR+Intensity Shuttle). So, drawbacks? While the Media Express capture software offers the option to "stop capture if dropped frames are detected" I see no way to confirm this since it never stopped on me. Other than that? Cables, adapters... any of which can fail, too... :D

Since LD is composite by nature you may want to check if using composite yields better results, The catch is which one has a better comb filter, Your LD player over S-Video or the EH945 when LD in composite? I would test both under the same conditions and post samples here.

You would want to use EDIT mode to minimize digital processing since you are relying on the EH945 processing, B.E.S.T should be always kept on, It is like the tape bias for analog audio tapes, It checks the level of RF signal in the recordings and adjust head coils current accordingly making up for RF signal loss minimizing artifacts such as comets, streaks and so on.

If you are using it for analog capture it will detect dropped frames, However since you are using it for HDMI ingest anything before the EH945 is already baked in, If the EH945 drops frames there is no way Mediaexpress would know about it because it was already been digitized and routed over HDMI, That's why it never reported dropped frames because the signal is already digital.

Thanks for the advice. I was under the impression that the S-video output of the D925 is the superior source compared to the composite output, because the latter receives the merged Y/C signal by means of the internal video processing design of the D925. As if I connected a S-video to composite adapter to a S-video source, which is why people mod the D925’s internals to avoid splitting and remerging (layman’s terms) the composite signal before it is fed to the output/connectors?

Thanks, I wasn’t aware of that as the manual only mentions that EDIT “minimizes picture degradation during editing”. So when the manual states picture degradation that would be digital processing then?

Thanks, that’s good to know. I was wondering how feasible that option is since I read some user reviews complaining about dropped frames while simultaneously capturing to a PC’s internal capture card. I didn’t find any clue as to the frame dropping by the EH945. Then again, I am well aware that there are always more reliable solutions.

The B.E.S.T function adjust video EQ and various things depending on the output from the tape (haven't found exact specifics for the newer JVCs though) so the degree of difference between it on/off is going to depend a bit on the tape.

It's going to turn down/off some of both digital and analog processing to varying degrees to avoid too much of a compounding effect of all the filtering on successive dubbing. It can be helpful for digitizing as well to avoid the VCR over-processing the output, and leave more of the noise reduction up to much more modern post-processing in software if you want to squeeze out the maximum detail from the tape.

It's more the analog part of the processing that is turned down as the digital noise reduction from the TBC/DNR function is still pretty active. Using the EDIT setting is going have a more pronounced difference on tapes where the video signal is weak.

Thanks again for the advice, and thanks to lordsmurf and team for the possibility to upload/host samples.

Laserdisc sample as follows:

D925 set to NTSC 3.58; EH495 set to NTSC.
Media Express settings: 525i59.94 NTSC, QuickTime Uncompressed 8-bit YUV.

S-VID.mov = S-video
S-VID_NR.mov = S-video, EH495 NR ON
S-VID_NR_HQ.mov = S-video, EH495 NR ON, D925 HQ ON
COMP.mov = Composite
COMP_NR.mov = Composite, EH495 NR ON
COMP_NR_HQ.mov = Composite, EH495 NR ON, D925 HQ ON

(I forgot to mute the samples for composite video.)

That would be a strange design, to take the composite signal from the Laserdisc, split it out to Y/C for the S-Video output, then merge the two signals back again for the Composite output.

You might try using your JVC VCR in passthrough mode to convert the composite signal to S-Video and see if that looks better than using the S-Video from the D925 directly.

With regard to the video processing design choice made by Pioneer for the D925, I learned that is common knowledge ever since the player was reviewed on the site “laserdisc archive” ages ago, and later modded by people on LDDB forums to circumvent this.
I’m totally okay with that because it was the best choice for PAL & NTSC playback in the EU back when I purchased it in the 90s. There are certainly more capable LD players for NTSC, there might be for PAL, but given the fact that I capture my LD library for fun, not preservation, I don’t really mind.

Perhaps I misunderstand your point, but since the composite signal is split to Y/C before even “leaving” the LD player for the sake of the S-video output, only to be merged again when it is actually fed to the composite output, I do not understand how that butchered up composite signal can be improved or why it should be. I was under the impression that video signal clarity lost is, well, lost.
Feel free to check out the samples though. I am interested in everyone’s opinion because I’m certainly not trained to spot slight nuances in colors or sharpness, and so forth.

The 3-D comb filter in the JVC HR-S9600 will be far superior to the 2D adaptive comb filter in the D925. What I wonder is whether the external comb filter improves the recombined composite signal enough to make it better than the D925's internal comb filter or whether you need the composite out mod to see any improvement.

@traal: Yeah, I’ve read through most if not all those LDDB forum threads throughout the years. Even checked out the service manual out of curiously. But back on topic. i.e. capture workflow on Macs, which of the six samples above yields the best quality in your opinion?

The attention span and patience is getting shorter and shorter nowadays, I think the OP miss-understood my point in my previous post, I never asked to capture LD over S-Video and convert it back to composite, that would be totally wrong and un-necessary, I asked for two samples:
1- LD -> Composite -> DMR -> HDMI (testing DMR comb filter)
2- LD -> S-Video -> DMR -> HDMI (testing LD comb filter)
No need to post six samples.
I'm pretty sure the comb filter in the DMR is far superior to the one in LD but I though I would confirm with real samples. So which two out of the six samples are the ones we're looking for? doesn't matter what setting for DNR as long as test conditions and setting are exactly the same for both samples as I outlined in my previous post.
Not sure what a comb filter is? here is a nice write up.


Edit mode in the VCR means it is used as a player only, feeding an editing deck, Capturing is no different than this task.

Take it easy mate, it’s right there… :D

S-VID.mov = LD -> S-Video -> DMR -> HDMI
S-VID_NR.mov = LD -> S-Video -> DMR -> HDMI + EH495 NR ON
S-VID_NR_HQ.mov = LD -> S-Video -> DMR -> HDMI + EH495 NR ON, D925 HQ ON
COMP.mov = LD -> Composite -> DMR -> HDMI
COMP_NR.mov = LD -> Composite -> DMR -> HDMI + EH495 NR ON
COMP_NR_HQ.mov = LD -> Composite -> DMR -> HDMI + EH495 NR ON, D925 HQ ON

And yeah, I threw in additional samples where I also enabled the NR feature on the EH495, and where I also added the HQ circuit setting on the D925. Why? Because this thread is easily found through web searches and I also received PMs regarding this thread over the years. I like to think there is someone out there who might be interested in that comparison.

Me take it easy? I couldn't be more easier than that, I sometimes edit my posts more than once to make sure the message is clearly delivered and yet (generally speaking) some will gloss over it like a todler flipping thru a political magazine pages.
I will examine the samples and get back.

COMP.mov seems to have less rainbowing in the subtitles but otherwise more red/green chroma noise than S-VID.mov.

I thought so too, I don't know what type of comb filters both the LD and the DMR use, line or 2D but it looks like the OP could benifit from one of the modern 3D comb filters found in modern devices like the Eval board, SingMai or similar devices.

https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/att...1&d=1683490907

Thanks for the info, I felt the same about the subtitles the moment I switched cables.

Thanks, mate, I’m sure that info will come in handy to someone using a similar capture setup/workflow like the one I described earlier, but looking to achieve better results.

LOL! :laugh:

That's a terrible sample image. The 3D is hot as can be, overexposure. The 2D is better. I hope nothing butchers that badly, then is consider to be "better" in anyway. I'd almost rather have color-accurate dot crawl.

That sample picture is for demonstaration purposes only, I think it mainly shows the effictivness of 3D comb filter at getting rid of dot crawl, In the top image with the girl the levels are actually more right in the 3D one than the 2D one if you look at the background behind her, the bottom pictures are not that far apart in terms of levels.

That's what I was thinking. The problem becomes that the 2D vs. 3D aspect is also suspect, not very realistic. I hate fakey samples. (I know you didn't make it.)

Nah, I think the exposure is pumped, regardless of the background.

Manufacturer marketing depts really suck when it came to "simulated" (FAKE!) images. Or cherry picked, just as bad.

I know why you posted it, and we've now pointed out the surreal nature, so that's all it needed. Context. :salute:

@lordsmurf: In case you checked out the aforementioned samples, would you also agree that S-video with the NR function of the EH495 enabled produces the most feasible results for LD in light of the described workflow and the hardware at hand?

To make a more informed decision, we need another sample from the LaserDisc, a short clip with high spatial frequency like a pattern on on a person's shirt, both moving across the screen and not moving.