Since there is no threshold setting, it doesn't matter. Huffyuv doesn't capture anything. It's a compression codec. The threshold setting in older versions is a throwback to earlier days, no longer needsed.

VirtualDub doesn't deinterlace during capture.

Thank you for information. So this "normal" version of HuffYUV available in this forum is fine for the best capturing, if I understand correctly.
So VirtualDub captures video only in interlacing ?
And whether in the editing mode and already saving a movie - this program: VirtualDub - writes video only in interlaced ? Because I don't see any option to change it.

VirtualDub captures in "upper" or "lower field first"[HuffVUV, PAL] ?

EDIT:
Probably I found reply: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...eld-order.html

But I still have a question: On VHS recorded in PAL what was the interlace used ? "Upper" or "lower field first" ?

VirtualDub captures interlaced video as interlaced.
VirtuaLDub captures progressive video as progressive.
VirtuaLDub captures telecined video as telecined.

Interlaced and telecined PAL and NTSC analog are recorded almost always as Top Field First, unless the person who made the tape was high on drugs or was simply stupid and decided to do it another way.

Consumer DV is usually Bottom Field First, but you never can tell what some maniac will do to it before you get to it.

In any case, VirtualDub does not change field order during capture.

After you have made a capture, you can determine the field order of the video by studying it frame by frame in VirtualDub or another editor, and make whatever changes you want. How would you do that? You consult articles such as the famous and classic html document: Neuron2: How To Analyze Video Frame Structure.

So, about when do you plan to actually make a capture so that you can finally see for yourself what happens?

As soon as I can.

Good show. You have to get accustomed to a handful of settings at first. But they're pretty straightforward. The rest is much less hazardous than you imagine at this point.
:wink2:

I want to be prepared for it the best - not to miss something and by accident do not do something that could harm the quality of the lost materials or do something that could harm them.
I hope that you will help me(just like it's been until now), according to your possibilities. :)

The usual mistake often made the first time by beginners is to try to capture too much. Your first 1 or 2 captures should be short, no more than 10 or 15 minutes each. Even the most experienced users make a short test to start. You will learn a lot from those first tests, and they can always be deleted.

Will I find instructions and description of the VirtualDub program functions on the internet or somewhere ?

Does capturing the analog signal to a digital file (AVI) to the interventions affect the functions and settings from the "main menu" or only those from "Capture AVI ..." ?
And the other way round: is the VirtualDub's editing functions ("main menu") affected by the settings from "Capture AVI" ?

Can I save somehow the settings from the "main menu" and "Capture AVI" so that each time after leaving the program (and even the "Capture AVI" itself) do not reset them ?

Start Virtualdub.
Press the F1 key on your keyboard
Navigate the resulting dialog menu

They don't affect each other.

They don't affect each other.

Filter,compressor,video processing mode, and audio process settings from the main menu dialog can be saved using a .vcf file. Loading the settings in a .vcf file will overwrite any other filters that might already be loaded. After loading a .vcf file, always re-check your filters and compressor to make sure you didn't forget that you might have changed something. You create a .vcf file by clicking "File..." -> "Save processing settings...", then give the .vcf file a name and location. DO NOT SAVE VCF FILES IN YOUR VIRTUALDUB PLUGINS FOLDER. Save them somewhere with your video project or in any other location you want. A .vcf is a plain text file that can be opened and examined with Notepad or any other text editor. Do not make changes unless you know what you're doing.

There is no way to save all capture settings, and no need to do so. Almost every setting will revert to the last setting used each time you open the capture app. In any case, even if there was a way to save everything it's not recommended. If you have the idea that all you have to do is use the same settings for every tape, click a command button, and nothing will go wrong, you'll be terribly disappointed. Analog being what it is, every tape will be different and should be checked before making the full capture..

1. I noticed that in the version 32-bit (from this forum) there is a version of HuffYUV v2.1.1 with the Threshold setting. For PAL capture (720 x 576 or even 768 x 576) should this be set to: 288 ?
The 64-bit version is without this setting. So it probably sets everything up by default(best) ?
Can I use some other version of HuffYUV(x32) to capture (which does not have the Threshold option) ? Will it be the best ?

2. For: "RGB compression method" should be best set: "Convert to YUY2" ? If it is capturing in YUY2 then the option: "RGB compression method" does not matter, does not work - does not affect the capture ?

3. For better capture, do not select the option: "Enable full size output-buffer (might fix crashing)"?
Do you know from experience how this option works and what does it do during capturing ? What are its effects ? It is better to uncheck her during the capturing ?

4. How many fps(frame rate) should be set for capturing interlaced PAL: 25 or 50 ?

The illustration in post #4 of http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...html#post45239 shows the proper setup for the older version of huffyuv and explains why "288" is the preferred threshold for interlaced NTSC, interlaced PAL, progressive NTSC, progressive PAL, telecined NTSC, and telecined PAL.

http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/atta...v-configurepng

"288" is the universal threshold that works for all of those formats. The only reason the older version is still used is because very old captures that used different thresholds can't be read by the newer huffyuv without some way of matching the threshold used in older captures.

The 64-bit version is the newest.


The 64-bit version sets everything by its own internal default encoding and there is no way to change it.

You can use any huffyuv version you want. However, you cannot use 32-bit versions with 64-bit Virtualdub, and you can't use or 64-bit huffYUV with 32-bit VirtualDub.



The compression quality is the same for all versions.

Use the "predict median" and "predict gradient" methods shown in the above image. The other methods are no longer recommended, they are for older processing you'll never use.

If you are using Windows 3.1 and older Intel or AMD CPU's from the 1990's before Windows 98, you might need those options, but they didn't stop anything from crashing. They result in slower operation and lost/inserted frames with today's computers.

Don't use any of those blank check boxes for captures with operating systems newer than Windows 95. The optimum settings are shown in the image.

[/quote]
You are not capturing individual fields. You are capturing frames.


PAL standard definition analog VHS, SVHS, VHS-C, 8mm camcorder, video8, BetaMax, and laser disc = 25 frames per second.


NTSC standard definition analog VHS, SVHS, VHS-C, 8mm camcorder, video8, BetaMax, and laser disc = 29.97 frames per second.

Thank you so much sanlyn.

Help with PAL settings
 

Hello, I finally got my Windows XP Ati-all-in wonder computer up and running and now I'm wondering what are the correct settings for capture. I'm going to capture PAL VHS tapes, which have been recorded in Finland with different VCRs and Panasonic NV-RX10EG. So at the moment I'm wondering which PAL version should I pick?
http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/atta...1&d=1565674735

Also I set up custom settings in "custom format" menu and I would like to know if they are correct for capturing PAL with huffyuv.
http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/atta...1&d=1565674999

I was going to ask about framerate too, but luckily it has been explained above in great detail, thanks for that :congrats: (So 25 fps for PAL, since capturing whole frames.)

PAL-I. (When you select it, you'll know right away if right or wrong.)

Correct. :congrats:

Correct. :congrats:

Let's assume I'm not going:
- put the material on a DVD (and even if I can change the size from larger to smaller - probably without losing quality in this direction).
Let's assume that:
- the capture device or software has no restrictions on the resolution of the captured image.

For VHS capture in PAL resolution: 720 x 576(1.25:1) is recommended to capturing, where 768 x 576 is 4:3 image format(1.33: 1): VHS image format. I know that by increasing the resolution (examples two resolutions given) of capturing for VHS material I will not get "better quality".

Are the only reasons it is recommended to capture VHS in 720 x 576(and not in 768 x 576) for PAL is: DVD and more space taken by a file captured in a higher resolution ? Is it not better to capture the image in its original proportions(768 x 576) ?

Honestly, stop mentioning 768x576. It's not a valid resolution for anything. You'll just confuse yourself.

Capture native 720x576, the end.
If you want to force it to square pixel 4:3, such as for streaming use, then downconvert it to 720x540 in post-capture software.

This is not the answer to my questions from the above post...(at least not fully) :)
Maybe someone could answer me so that I would dispel all doubts and understand what's going on... ?

I can reproduce this resolution (768 x 576) without any problem from what I know (and I checked at least partially) on a TV (also through a decoder), a computer. I wouldn't need this captured material on DVD (and even if I could convert it down to 720 x 576 in postprocessing).

A tape of PAL VHS video is designed to play an image having a 4:3 aspect ratio. If you want to capture a frame whose aspect ratio is 4:3, the standard capture size would be 640x480.

Some reasons VHS is usually captured at 720x576 is because (a) the usual goal is produce a DVD or standard definition Bluray for final output, (b) 720x576 is a reasonable frame size offering adequate resolution for further processing and restoration work, and (c) 720x576 is an industry standard for PAL standard definition video.

768x576 is not a 4:3 image. If you are trying to stretch that captured image to fill a wider screen, you are distorting it. That's up to you. If you like watching distortion, that's your business. Don't expect anyone to gladly give you instructions on how to distort a video --= you have already managed to do that for yourself.

If you capture a 4:3 image at 640x480, you can process it after capture for different frame sizes that would still be 4:3 images. Some standard 4:3 frame sizes are 400x300, 768x576, 960x720, and 1440x1080. Apparently you don't yet have an understanding of what an aspect ratio is, and you don't understand anamorphic or square-pixel frame display. Several replies have attempted to explain the choices you have for processing, but you continue to try to re-invent the wheel. Perhaps you should browse through some of the forum posts in the capture forum and the restoration forum to get a better idea of how other users are properly processing their videos.

No one can help you with further details unless you submit a sample of an unaltered image or section of video. Screen captures and altered images are not usable. You can can capture a frame directly from a video by opening the video in VirtualDub. Scroll to a frame that you want to be studied. Then in VirtualDub's top menu click "Video.." -> then click "capture source frame to clipboard". You can then open an image processing program and create a new jpg or png image that you can post. One imageprogram that can accept images saved to the clipboard is the free Windows Paint or MSPaint.

Understanding image aspect ratios is fundamental to working with video. If you don't understand it, you're working against yourself for nothing. On the other hand, you can make the frame size anything you want. It's your video, not ours.

https://idearocketanimation.com/1666...t-ratio-guide/
https://www.red.com/red-101/video-aspect-ratios
https://www.mediacollege.com/video/aspect-ratio/
https://nofilmschool.com/Aspect-Rati...For-Filmmakers

If you capture PAL at 640x480, you'll screw up the interlacing. It must be 720x576.

Most capture software will not even go to 768, because it's not valid.

Capture the spec res. You can convert it to whatever else is needed post-capture. Noting that 768x576 is wholly useless, the 4x3 is 720x540, and deinterlaced. I guess, technically, 768x576 would retain interlace, but no interlaced (player) device will view it, not a valid res. The source does not contain 768 detail, nor even 720.

I never dismiss with "it's your video" because the person is not an island, and will always try to share the video. I refuse to give them that excuse. They shouldn't screw it up, use lower quality, etc. Don't subject others to your own laziness and stubbornness. Most people appreciate good video quality, even if you (the person doing it) does not.

The forum has many examples of PAL video captured at 640x480 (by users who say they "can't work" with an anamorphic frame size because it "looks strange" in their editors). On the other hand, if dima resizes to the suggested 720x540 he'll get a very unpleasant surprise with interlaced footage unless it's first deinterlaced -- and VDub and many NLE's don't deinterlace all that well. On top of that a 540 height isn't mod-8, so some Avisynth and VDub filters that require mod-8 dimensions will either refuse to run or will crash or distort. And many encoders/decoders/compressors don't care for mod-4 dimensions.

My preference would be to capture to 720x576 and learn to use Avisynth at very basic levels to deinterlace and resize as desired. He doesn't need an in-depth knowledge of MaskTools or dither tools to get the job accomplished.

I captured the image directly from the source (via VirtulDub) and it is 720 x 576 (1.25:1; it was also captured), and not like the playback program it showed in 768 x 576 (1.33:1).
------------------------------------------------------
I read about image formats (not from today)... But I still may not know much about it.
768 x 576(1,33:1) is OAR and 720 x 576 (1.25:1) for VHS tapes... is a non-original, distorted image (image format) compared to the original(for PAL) ?

"Capture the spec res. You can convert it to whatever else is needed post-capture. Noting that 768x576 is wholly useless, the 4x3 is 720x540, and deinterlaced. I guess, technically, 768x576 would retain interlace, but no interlaced (player) device will view it, not a valid res. The source does not contain 768 detail, nor even 720."

Source quote: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...html#post63434

Most player(devices) will not display interlaced video in 768 x 576 ? At 720 x 576, yes ?

The reasoning is because it's the standard, decided on years ago, predating even my own foray into video. It just is. 768 was never a standard, no support, often not even possible.

Realize that I find lots of stuff to be strange, but the reasonings are generally very technical. Sometimes arbitrary. For example, why did head-switching noise need to be visible? It's my understanding that this could have been hidden, but wasn't due to laziness of relying on overscan. In fact, much of the overscan noise could have been removed. I could ask why all day, but ultimately it does not matter. It is what it is. We just work around it, correct in post-capture edit/restore.

So, you capture 720x576, and you later resize to the desired viewing size. The end.

But noting that 768 is probably not a wise choice. Either leave it 720x576 interlaced, or 720x540 deinterlaced/progressive. PAL VHS has zero detail past 300x (give or take, depending on if you worship Kell factor).

I edited my earlier post.

-- merged --

Most player(devices) will not display interlaced video in 768 x 576 ? At 720 x 576, yes ?

-- merged --

Does ATI AIW USB (ATI TV Wonder USB 2.0) have integrated (internal) A/V capture timing ?

I think which of these five settings would be best for this device... An S-VHS VCR with built-in TBC (without external TBC) and a tape that is in good condition, but in literally at most a few places (short-lived - what for a maximum of three seconds, and most often a second or less) may have a broken (completely) or distorted signal - sound and image...

1.
Resync mode:
[x] Sync audio to video

[x] Correct video timing
[x] Automatically disable resync

2.
Resync mode:
[x] Do not resync

[ ] Correct video timing
[ ] Automatically disable resync

3.
Resync mode:
[x] Do not resync

[x] Correct video timing
[ ] Automatically disable resync

4.
Resync mode:
[x] Do not resync

[ ] Correct video timing
[x] Automatically disable resync

5.
Resync mode:
[x] Do not resync

[x] Correct video timing
[x] Automatically disable resync

General options: all two of these are set up in all variants on: OFF.
Audio latency determination: DEFAULT.
DirectShow options: all set up on: OFF.
[I think that these options are fine set in every variant and used equipment and cassette, although I read that Lordsmurf "advised" to leave all options in the tab "Timing" as default so I'm not sure how it is the best. Maybe practise will show this - because every case could be different than other/s.]

Number 2 is recommended for USB devices in the earlier notes posted in this guide, because most USB capture devices perform their own a/v sync internally. That's what I use for my VC500. if you want to experiment with other settings it's up to you.

Thank you.

lordsmurf Can you comment on my question - especially in the context of (thinking) about ATI AIW USB(ATI TV Wonder USB 2.0) ?
I mean especially this my question: Does ATI AIW USB (ATI TV Wonder USB 2.0) have integrated (internal) A/V capture timing ?

I'm not sure it matters. I'm more worried about the capture, if it's in sync, not hardware timing. I think you're really overthinking some things.

Let me turn things around here: Why are you asking this question? :question:

Because I would like to know how it is in the context of the best "parameter" setting for capture in VirtualDub.
And I just want to know how this device works on this subject.
So do you know does ATI AIW USB (ATI TV Wonder USB 2.0) have integrated (internal) A/V capture timing ?

USB capture devices tat we recommend have their own internal a/v sync in their processing chips, as far as we know. If you want to conduct your own experiments with non-recommended products you're free to do so. The reason VirtualDub has sync options is to accommodate those devices that do their own sync work. My experience with telling VirtualDub to resync and handle its own inserting/dropping frames is that you'll usually get inserted and dropped frames unless you're using an external frame-level tbc, which you don't want to use. You can expect dirt-cheap Asian copies of recommended devices to use undocumented and unidentifiable components give unpredictable and undesirable results. The settings I entered for USB devices are those that I've used and have seen recommended by others who use the same products. Different system setups can often yield different results with the same device. The capture guide is a guide, not a bible.

Thank you for this information.

Most players(devices) will not display interlaced video in 768 x 576 ? At 720 x 576, yes ?

Your question makes no sense. Do you want 720x576 video to play at 768x576, or do you want 720x576 video encoded to play with a 4:3 display aspect ratio at any frame size on any display device? Does your display device measure exactly 768x576? Is your PC monitor or TV or other display device limited to 768x576? Can you configure your media player to play video at exactly 768x576 on any display? If you have an NTSC video or DVD at 720x480, do you want NTSC to also play at 768x576? Why do you want 768x576 specifically? How are you capturing? What is your final goal for output? Do you want square pixel video or anamorphic video? Do you know the difference? Do you want DVD, BluRay, web mounting, SmartPhone, one or two of these, three of these, or all 4 of these? Has it previously been mentioned in earlier posts from lordsmurf that 768x576 is a nonstandard frame size that would mean trouble for many display devices and encoders?

I would like this image resolution because: I would like the image of "my" movie to be always displayed in the aspect ratio: 1.33:1(4:3) (OAR) on every screen*, not in 1.25:1 (not original image format).

* In a situation when I know that my screen is a 16:9 display and when the aspect ratio is set to: 16:9 (not stretching to 16:9 "narrower" images, only entering them in this aspect ratio: black stripes on the sides screen for 4:3 format). Without using any stretching or narrowing of the aspect ratio - just in the native format of the TV or other devices that it will be displayed in 1.33:1 (4:3).

Can I do it differently without losing quality (if possible) than after capturing the image in 720 x 576 (5:4; 1.25:1) stretch this image to 768 x 576 (4:3; 1.33:1)?
[If the image were captured in 768 x 576, there would probably be no "problem."]
Even if the image quality is "lost". Let's assume that the correct image format is more important than image quality and that someone chooses the correct image format.

Unfortunately you still don't understand that 1.25:1 for 720x576 is the physical aspect ratio of a standard PAL video frame. As a lossless and un-encoded video it plays at 720x576 because un-encoded AVI has no display aspect ratio and always plays at its physical frame size. If you encode using MPEG or h.264 and specify a 4:3 display aspect ratio (DAR), the final 720x576 video video will always play at 4:3 regardless of the size of the display device.

You should also know that every PAL DVD recording that you own or watch in other people's homes has a frame size of 720x576, whether its playback aspect Ratio is 4:3 or 16:9. Some of the PAL DVD's might play at 4:3 or in CinemaScope or Panavision, but the frame size on those PAL DVD's is 720x576. If you own any NTSC DVD's, the frame size on those NTSC DVD's is 720x480, which is a 2:3 aspect ratio frame, but they can play 4:3, VistaVision, Panasvision, or CinemaScope frames st the proper aspect ratio because of the way they are encoded. You can get the same results when you encode your 720x576 AVI's, but you simply don't understand it and explaining the same thing again and again is getting tiresome. Unfortunately, if you transfer a PAL DVD to your computer for editing, the VOB files will play at 4:3 in a media player but in an editor they will display as 720x576. (1.25:1).

Capture to lossless 640x480, which is an industry standard 4:3 square pixel frame size. Don't use an oddball frame size like 768x576 -- it's asking for trouble. 640x480 will always display at 4:3 on any display device and when it's encoded it will still display at 4:3 unless you specify another display aspect ratio. Note that 640x480 cannot be used for DVD or for standard definition BluRay, both of which require 720x576 for PAL or 720x480 for NTSC. 640x480 will play on most DVD or BluRay players when encoded with MPEG, but a BluRay player is required for playing h.264 encodes. A modern SmartTV can display either of those encodes if you encode it according to the requirements of the TV -- and remember that smart TV's are not computers and can often be very stupid when it comes to different formats.

It is a pity in my opinion that by setting "No display" you cannot change this while capturing.
From what I checked, this option consumes probably the least CPU and RAM, probably also among all three display options to choose from. As for Preview and Overlay, CPU usage looks very similar (I don't know what RAM is like).

1. Suppose I use: Overlay or Preview. Is it best for capture (among other things, probably CPU consumption, etc., but not only) to minimize the capture window and the entire VirtulDub or leave it open on the screen ?

2. Is the best for capturing (among other things probably about CPU consumption, etc., but not only) is to set the computer screen blanking or is it better to keep it awake (though I can't remember, but I don't know if sometimes when capturing the screen despite settings from the capture will not expire) ?

Another good option replacing the inability to turn off "No display" during capture may be connecting the VCR to a second computer via any other converter via e.g. SCART or Composite and observing the image there, cassette end etc.
3. Using a VCR at the same time on two devices can cause some problems with the VCR so that e.g. the proper signal (which is captured via S-Video) can be weakened, distorted or completely not delivered at some point in time if it could not be delivered using it on two devices (connections) ?
4. Does using it on two devices during cassette playback and capture cause any problems for the signal ?
5. Perhaps because it is an analog signal: there may be interference from additional devices, cables, transmission nearby... Yes ?

Thank you for the explanation.

Can you say something about this: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...html#post63712 ?

Lordsmurf likes overlay mode, for whatever reason. I prefer the more efficient preview mode, for reasons stated in the quoted material. Also, the capture histogram won't work in overlay mode. Use the mode you prefer or the mode that gives less trouble.

Why anyone wants to capture without seeing what's happening is a mystery to me. But everyone is different.

Thanks for the detailed guide! This helps a lot for non-technical people. I'm assuming this is still correct, as people were recently submitting question. I have couple of questions:

Wouldn't that always be a good idea to use Preview so you can tweak your white/blacks with histogram? - but anyhow - no matter which I choose Preview or Overlay, shuttering or not shuttering - this does not effect capture?

My default resolution is not 720x570. When I tried to set it, it says the resolution is not supported by the Capture device. I'm using the VC500. Why is that?

NTSC didn't work for me. I'm assuming that because I'm not from the US. PAL did work. Actually, couple of PAL variants worked for me. PAL G, PAL B, etc. Is there is differences between the PAL options? or as long as I can see the the record on the overlay/preview I'm fine as all I checked had the same FPS?

In what Huffyuv and Lagarith differ? is there a reason to prefer one over the other? or at the end is just how efficient the compression is in term of size?

I do plan to do it while at work. Im assuming I should use a time-limit. How long is the longest VHS tape in term of time (assuming it's full of content)? 4 hours? 5 hours?

Well this getting more complex. As I mentioned, I own a VC500, and I'm not sure if It has internal audio input and timing correction or not. I'm assuming that I will have to play around and experiment what works best for me. Sadly I don't own TBC device, and it seems almost mandatory. the VCR is a DVD/VCR combo unit, so I assume I will have to try it. But correct me if I'm wrong - Timing only effect Audio/Video sync. So if my Audio/Video sync is fine - there's nothing here that I should worry about? Does it also means I don't need TBC? or TBC does more than just sync audio/video?

I only tried to single capture yesterday before heading to bed, I will fiddle with it more later on. I didn't tested the audio sync, but I check the video itself and it looks like some section along the recording had a problem. I could see a thin strip showing on and off across couple of places. they appears for less than 1 seconds and disappears. I somehow remember this being an issue when I used the VHS, but I'm not sure why. There's a chance the source is the problem, I need to connect the VCR directly to the TV and check. If I see the same when directly connected to the TV - Could it be the VCR itself? I remember we used to play tapes that used to 'clean' the VCR. Was that a real thing? and maybe I need to do it? I will attach more screen shots later of the exact problem after more research.

And lastly, before finding this guide, I found this YouTube video. It mentioned that post capture, it's mostly a good idea to fix the interlaced fields using deinterlace. After doing so, he compress the video at 60FPS, because now that the fields are being deinterlaced, it's not longer 30 FPS.
Is there a guide around on post filtering? filers I always want to use to improve the general quality of the capture?

Thanks again for the guide and help!

-- merged --

I did some more research for couple of questions , I had. Sadly I can no longer modify the original post, but I'm writing the answers for some of the question I wrote:

It's possible to set Preview mode, set the Blak/White levels with Histogram, and once set - go back to Overlay. Lordsmurf has mentioned Overlay is takes less CPU/Mem. I'm not sure it's an issue with today's CPU/Mem, but I'm going to try both just in case. I'm still not clear if what's happening in the preview/overlay is what really getting captures (so if the Overlay shutters for example - does it mean the final capture will also shutter?)

That's because I was setting VirtualDub to PAL.

Lordsmurff commented that Huffyyuv is a bit safer, because it takes less CPU power. Will be using it to start with.

For everything else, I pretty much still looking for answers :-)
Thanks!

Preview affects capturing in the sense that it uses CPU/RAM and could therefore cause dropped frames. But a stuttering preview doesn't necessarily mean the capture will stutter.

720x576. You may need to set the frame rate to 25 fps first to get the device into "PAL mode". Otherwise it thinks you're forcing 720x576 @ 29.97 or 720x480 @ 25 and doesn't work.

Those are obsolete broadcast variants that will all be the same for tape capture.

Lagarith takes more CPU to compress & decompress but produces smaller files.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHS#Tape_lengths

It digitizes audio, but you will get A/V desync with the VC500 in VirtualDub if you don't use any sort of TBC. If your combo unit includes a DVD recorder rather than just DVD player, you can try to engage its Dubbing mode to see if it helps.

Definitely does more.

http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...time-base.html

Hello msgohan! Thank you for the answer. I posted another post couple of seconds before you did answer some of the questions you answer :-)

In that case, I will just sit it to whatever PAL it currently is (I think B).

Oh, awesome. I'm not sure how to identify the Tape type I use. I'll check the Tape home, maybe It got an indication on the TAPE itself.

Thanks for confirming it. In that case, I found an early sanlyn post that mentioned for most USB devices works the best with the following time settings, I will start with that:

Resync mode:
[x] Do not resync

[ ] Correct video timing
[ ] Automatically disable resync

It actually fix some image quality. Because I own a DVD Record/VCR combo unit, there's a chance it does come with some of the features describe in the document, but it also state being a bad capture device all around. I'll check around, maybe I can a different capture unit.
But there is something I'm not sure about. It sounds like TBC just fix issues with the video buffer. Isn't it something that can be done today with a software post capture? a software that detects the same issues and try to fix those?

Thank you!

TBCs operate on parts of the analog signal outside of the active video area. In captured files, none of the Vertical Blanking Interval is present and only a portion of the Horizontal Blanking Interval is. So it's impossible for software to correct except by guessing based on image content.

"PAL" uses 625 lines per frame; only 576 of these are the active portion that's captured.

The project below refers to a digitization method and software that bypasses the typical capture card operation, and all processing of the playback machine itself, instead digitizing the recorded signal close to its original form:
VideoHelp thread: Current status of ld-decode / vhs-decode (true "backup" of RF signals)

While I'm very enthusiastic about it, I would say it's still in "alpha" status for PAL VHS, and I think it will only ever be of interest to Advanced users because of how many steps are needed just to get a normal video file that can be played back.

In this YouTube clip you can see how much non-visual information is actually present in an analog video signal. All of those borders are actually part of the recording on tape.

Oh, I see. Thank you, I didn't know that. It's funny, because today we doing so many amazing things. From landing things on the moon to fully emulating gaming consoles. I guess it's just that not many people are interested in converting VHS to digital format.

That being said, the project looks very interesting, and who knows where it take us later on. The problem I assume is that the source is getting older. I don't know how age impact Tapes, but I'm assuming ages does have some sort of impact.

My folks has a large amount of Video Tapes with us being children. They take a lot of space, and I wanted to digitalize it, and throw those away to save some space. But it looks like I might hold tapes a bit more - as maybe later on, it will be possible to do a better conversion. I might Air tight the tapes in a Vacuum bags to keep them from ages faster.

But to the current setup - I will try to get my hands on TBC, even though it sounds very hard. It's a big unit, and I don't live on the states, to shipping is going to be pretty expensive. I will start without one, and adjust. I'll try to post a sample tomorrow. Perhaps you can tell me if the artifact I see are part of the hardware I'm using or the quality of the tape.

One thing I noticed in almost all videos, is the lower part of the video have touch stretchy white/black lines? Is that the quality of the tape?

Thanks!

The reason is because overlay operates without CPU usage, in the GPU. This results in smoother playback during preview. I see no need for histograms during capture (nor audio meters), the video is what it is. I'll preset hardware proc amps, as needed, by eyeballing the input (something you can do with calibrated monitors, and experience). But then let it capture. I'll mess with histograms, as needed, in the post-capture workflow.

This is evergreen content -- it's unlikely to ever go "out of date". Analog video capture has a fixed process, and has for at least a decade now.

This card may have mid-production changes, as results have been variables for different users. AGC issues, amongst others, have been confirmed on some VC500 cards. My own VC500 defaults to an excessively dark input IRE/contrast.

You're PAL. No real difference for I/B/G/etc for s-video/composite input. That was mostly an aerial difference.

Lagarith has excessive CPU overhead, not recommended for capture, often reported issues when usede for capture. Huffyuv is slightly larger files, but not a major difference. Lagarith does work faster/better for post-capture intermediaries in editing and restoration.

SP mode T120 = 2 hours
LP mode T120 = 4 hours
But depends on tape length (T120, T180, etc), and mode used.

All USB cards do.

It is. Read this: http://www.digitalFAQ.com/editorials...g-workflow.htm

And specifically, this quoted section:
"Timing" is a broad term, meaning many things. In reference to that single setting in VirtualDub, yes, timing refers to audio sync. However, hardware really controls the sync, not software. At best, software can attempt to correct bad incoming (from hardware) audio, but that's it. You can easily lose sync from dropped frames, and that's the the TBC comes in.

No, to all 3 questions.

The author of that video is a dipshit. If you follow that horrible advice, you'll end up with low-quality videos. And I mean really, really low quality. He's using an infamous Easycap (aka Easycrap) card, and then monkeys around with VirtualDub settings that will easily cause massive amounts of dropped frames.

The issue persists, even to systems from recent years. It's not the amount of CPU used, but the simple interruption of the CPU being used at all. VirtualDub doesn't operate in more than 1 core, and a single CPU core can get saturated easily, even if briefly (all it takes is 1ms for drops), thus causing dropped frames.

Correct. :congrats:

Not entirely.

No. No such thing exists, and probably never will.

... and the quality, at the moment, is unimpressive. I've been asked about it multiple times, weighed in on the thread tonight as requested. It is interesting, bit it's far from truly usable. And (to be honest) will likely end up long-term vaporware, never having lived up to its promise. Still, I wish the developers well, will keep watching the project.

Sadly, not really. We've not been to the moon in 50 years, and emulation has been possible for at least 25 years. Due to my own health issues, I'm actually more interested in medical breakthroughs, but that field is sparse as well. We as a society right now really are NOT experiencing an abundance of scientific or technological breakthroughs. Most are just mild improvements on what was discovered in decades past. Video capture is really not much different, same basic processes, hardware and software from 20-25 years ago.

Most physical damage: bad storage, oxide shedding, etc.

Don't do that. Yes, keep the tape. No, not air tight, as it will trap moisture, then you'll really have problems (mold, oxide shedding, etc).

Timebase correction (TBC) is not optional. Something is needed, even if minimalist TBC(ish) sorts of setups. Do not assume shipping is higher overseas, as it usually is not (I would know, I have TBCs available in the marketplace, and ship worldwide). Feel free to start without one, but you will have issues. Without any TBC whatsoever, you'll encounter dropped frames, audio sync issues, general degraded quality, and often violent errors (false MV detection being a main one, but not the only one).

Yes, do so -- but in a new thread, not the capture guide thread. We're veering a bit off-topic now.

Again, post a sample. You may be seeing overscan (head-switching noise), but unknown without seeing a sample image or capture. Again, in a new thread.