JVC HR-S9600 TBC settings modes?
 

Learning to use a JVC HR-S9600. Good beast. Tbc is very efficient, but the manual is very unclear about the different settings. My concern is about interlacing. Want to keep it and manage deinterlace myself.
It seems "edit" mode keeps it, but not auto or '+' and '-" sharpness.
Sometimes it seems random ... Will go on with testing but if anybody used to this model, advices are welcome. thanks

TBC = ON

Calibration = OFF. Supposedly this would help the tape track better, but it never worked well, excluding some of the highest end later SR units. Calibratin ON/OFF is what changes AUTO/NORM settings name, though it essentially means the same thing.

Picture mode = NORM/AUTO removes chroma noise especially, some errant tape noises. Sometimes this setting harms the image, as can the TBC, but not usually. Leave it on as much as possible. EDIT turns off the NR, and that negates the reason you probably got the deck (ie, better quality output than normal VCR). Please do not confuse "detail" with noise, a common mistake made by newbies. Never use SHARP.

R3 = OFF, edge correction that is sloppy.

Interlaced is retained always. Nothing in the VCR deinterlaces.

I believe the equivalent to video calibration on US decks is called B.E.S.T on the European ones (and D.S.P.C on Philips).

Very unclear, it seems a mix of dynamic tracking, easy to verify with on and of ... and "calibration".

BEST seems first relative to dynamic tracking. According to manual : "The B.E.S.T. (Biconditional Equalised Signal Tracking) system checks the condition of the tape in use during recording and playback, and compensates to provide the highest-possible recording and playback pictures. The default setting for both recording and playback is “ON”.

-- merged --

Manuals explanations differs from US ou UK manual. BEST is called "video stabilizer" in US, which (for me) is related to tracking. Denoise and TBC stay active if BEST is off. But, most important ; interlacing seems here, and not random ...

Test confirmed with check in the digitized file. Interlacing is here all the way.
So this leads to another question :
Does anybody compared different deintrelace methods. The AVySynth QTGMC versus DaVinci Resolve, which i often use
as a second denoise tool and finishing grade ? (but needs a pro Resolve for that ...

What kind of "pro" video format and processing sources have been giving you so much misleading information?

Depending on how the tape has been mastered, VHS is either interlaced or hard-telecined -- VHS always plays as interlaced. Interlaced and telecined video should remain that way unless you have a good reason for making it otherwise.

There is no cleaner deinterlacer/denoiser than Avisynth's QTGMC. There is no better inverse telecine than Avisynth's TIVTC. Use Avisynth for denoising. Use DaVinci for color grading. For newer QTGMC and processing details see http://avisynth.nl/index.php/QTGMC.

Well,a JVC HR-S9600 do NOT always play interlaced. Its "Best" system, associated with settings lead to reading with frame blending deintrelace, which i want to avoid. please don t go in pro advices ... it s my work since 1986 ... so i know all what you said. In Pro workflow, if old tapes are to be mixed with progressive rushes, they must be déinterlaced ... if its for computer consultation, they must be déinterlaced ... There is none absolute configuration nowadays. "What kind of "pro" video format and processing sources have been giving so much misleading information?" None. I just test and try to understand what the obscure consumer manuals mean with out of context "pro words". And reverse telecine is nor better or bad in any logiciel, it works or not. It s not supposed to modify the picture in any way. Not even touching original codec. So avisynth is bad for this,because of décode-re encode. Can de done without any

-- merged --

By the way; never tried MadVR. Is it possible to record it s output to a file ?

-- merged --

Confirmed. On JVC, "Best" must be set to "off" (beware it resets at each tape change) and to "edit" mode (witch resets also at each tape). Time to try QTGMC. I use it from editing software, with a frame server

There is some accuracy to what you say, but mixed with much nonsense. For instance, you say that inverse telecine doesn't modify the images. If so, then why would you re-encode? And if you are capturing to lossless media, as you should be, there is no "re-encoding". Capture and post-processing with lossless media involves no lossy encoding until final output.

You are decided, so more information wouldn't help. Proceed at will.

Ok, to be clear , it would not modify the color space of the image. And in good tools, keep metadata, audio ... No need for avisynth for this case. And its very quick. Its implemented in any good editing software ...
I m not digitizing home video ... Industry archives. From VHS to very high end Raw and log

That's not the way I've seen it done in pro broadcasting. "Must" is not correct, there are plenty of ways to mix interlaced/telecined and progressive without destructive processing. Everyone knows that computer media players know how to deinterlace on the fly. A pro knows better than to deinterlace just for computer use, and experienced pros know about deinterlacing using motion-compensated interpolation as in QTGMC. Perhaps you are targeting internet and low-quality home streaming.

Correct. :congrats:

While the JVC manuals are helpful, they are not always accurate to video reality. I've been using high-end JVC S-VHS decks for 20+ years now.

QTGMC is the best deinterlace, period.
NLEs like Davinci use vastly inferior methods.

That's all that matters for this conversation, don't confuse the person more. ;)

No. :no2:

I have no idea how you're coming to that conclusion, but it is false. VCRs do not contain deinterlacers, never have, never will. The output is always interlaced. BEST/calibration has nothing to do with interlacing, and are simply terrible methods to "help" tracking. I do try to leave BEST on with my HR-7965EK, but usually must turn it off as it actually causes tracking errors or bouncing/jitter.

So did I, for studios, for years, until health forced me to quit. There actually are some absolutes, things were you have zero choices (example: DVD-Video, BDMV specs), but I know what you mean here. Generally, yes, mixed modes are deinterlaced -- though sometimes you actually telecine the progressive, leave the whole thing interlaced. Yes, streaming must always be deinterlaced for web viewing -- an absolute, no choice.

Avisynth also have several superior IVTC.
And you also stay as lossless intermediary until delivery/output, so no loss on re-encode occurs.

That's just buggy freeware, isn't it? If you really are a pro, why don't you have an encoder like MainConcept TotalCode? When sticking to freeware, which I sometimes do as well, it really depends on the output needs. And you've not given us those. But it's somewhat off-topic to this thread, best suited for a new thread on that topic.

Now you're on the right path... :)

And that's why he posted questions/confusion, and why we're posting helpful replies. :congrats:

The same processes apply to both home videos and professional archives. When it comes to the hardware, and certain software, there is zero difference. It's only post-capture that professional methods and home methods differ. And if anything, Avisynth is used more in pro or serious hobby settings than your average home movie user. At least if the person is good, which sadly too many are not (just monkeys with sticks in an NLE).

I've had to do that before, and didn't like it. The specs of the video were like 500kbps, audio was under 100kbps, but I found a way to make it look decent with pre-processing and some other tricks. When I wanted to bang my head in the keyboard was when the CEO said "that looks good, let's do some more of those". So yeah, that happened. :screwy:

I know Total Code. Strange travel from Main Concept to Rovi then coming back to Main Concept. So its just a rename of the old "MainConcept Reference"
By the way, the Main Concept Mpeg2 codec is everywhere, in Adobe or Episode (with i mainly use).
Din't tried MAdVR, most used by "pimp my video geeks", so i ask advices.
And off course i m not stuck in any software, even DaVinci Resolve. I look elsewhere if something is better, and it seems there are better deinterlace in Avisynth, so i will try.

YES, my UK version JVC deinterlace ... and i don t want it. Is it a feature or a bug , i dont know, but i have eyes to see ... especially when you digitize ... easy to see the frame blending in the files. Only "copy" mode take this off, and this parameter is not related to tracking of course, but video signal processing.
Being dogmatic is useless. Thats my reality. And the reality of people funding this job is "what are this strange tooth in the picture?' when they consult the database preview ... so yes i deintrelace. May be they will ask for 4k files with do NOT support interlacing, so yes i deinterlace... Yes it s a complex system, with multi referenced médias. So i need severals different versions, may be size and data rate. But i'm fed up , do i need to explain all the workflow to obtain advices on a simple question ?

Yes, of course.
And what is your simple question?

It's simply not possible. Again, there is no deinterlacer. However...

That's not necessarily deinterlacing. What you're apparently seeing is bad reaction of NR with your tape content. Odds are, the tape had some marginal ghosting issues, and NR just made it worse. You can have NR go awry, and be so severe that interlacing somewhat disappears (though not entirely, viewed frame by frame). I've only seen this a few times in the past 25+ years.

I'm not into dogma either. There are aspects we cannot fight, technical limitations, but variables must be dealt with intelligently.

Education is key.
Q = What is this (saw)tooth? -- ie interlace
A = Explain it to them.

An exception, of course, is if it's for streaming viewing. Or situations like that. But you should never deinterlace just top avoid questions by those that don't yet understand video.

Yes, you need to explain, mostly because you've said some things that seem off. That requires backing up a bit, to try and suss out the question and issue.

As sanlyn asks, what exactly is the question at this point? :question:

Even if technically its not deinterlacing, frame blending occurs. Its not related to any particular tape, i have many.
I can reproduce the problem. Keep in mind its the UK, menu are a bit different from US. Electronic too. And it s for multi purpose use.
As an archive , just for looking at on computer, but also as a source for future editing needs. So i need both, interlaced and deinterlaced. May be upscaled for convenience. Re digitized 5 tapes yesterday, Edit mode (called copie in UK FR menu) seems stable at keeping interlacing,. And it does not disable all denoise. May be chroma, but temporal is still active. Easy to see on blue or red titles. Anyway this scope will go back for a little servicing, S-Video out is not active. But i must show some digit results before ...

VCRs do not blend frames. This would be done by your capture device and/or software. We do not know what kind of capture device you are using. Otherwise, if there is any frame blending it would be embedded in the source tape. VCRs cannot make changes in frame structure. They simply play the video structure as-is.

NO, i know what i do and use. Tried 4 differents capture cards. Intensity Pro PCie, Same version in Thunderbolt, AJA Io HD, MXO Mini. Stop thinking because YOU never saw it it, it will never happen. NO frame blending is not in the footage,If it was i would never be able to get them back, and it"s the case. As i said , stop dogma and useless advices. Stop thinking i m "home user". Its insulting

Hi Oliver. Can you attach a short sample from one of your captures? This would help users answer your question.

But why do you keep using a VCR that blends frames? There are other VCR's. All you need to do is find a VCR that doesn't blend frames.

Yes, sample required. Attach a small clip to a forum post.

Question is, are all of your tapes from the same origin? Because that is essentially "one tape source" for some conversations. When it's not a single tape, you must see if the group origin is also the root cause. That happens very often when I person has made dozens (or more) tapes on a single camera/VCR. All of them act the same.

PAL and NTSC really are similar, not that different whatsoever. And if anything, PAL tends to be a bit more pleasant to work with, as no EP/SLP, and color loss is less often (though overly rich).

That's rarely a good idea. Only when you're forced, usually due to making a documentary with mixed footage. 720p tends to be decent in those times, whereas 1080p just makes it uglier.

No, it's not. EDIT/COPIE disengages the NR, however TBC may still be applying some different NR. Chroma noise is by far the worst inherent noise of the VHS format, even more than grain. Chroma NR happens on both TBC and AUTO/NORM fronts, not a single attack.

Then how are you capturing? SCART, composite?

This is entirely accurate. :thumb:

Blackmagic cards have well-documented issues with SD source, especially VHS. MX02 gets odd reports as well, though those can often be resolved. Most HD cards have SD as an afterthought feature, and sometimes those just "do stuff" that you're not aware of. It's not as easy as just buying whatever you want for capture, for VCR, TBC if you feel like it, and then it burps out a quality capture. If that were the case, sites like this would never exist.

There is no "home user" or "pro user" with VHS tapes. The format is a consumer analog, and whatever you are or are not is immaterial. The format has certain needs, and has nothing to do with you. Pros actually mostly deal with consumer formats, when not film or broadcast. Even in a studio, when not film, you're going to deal with many mixed formats.

Although this is an easy answer, maybe even facetious, I certainly don't want misinformation online that a VCR deinterlaces, because that's not accurate nor even possible. Again, VCRs do not contain deinterlacers, and frame blending is not possible. Some aggressive NR can react badly to some tapes, but that's about it.

I wonder if this might be a result of a defective comb filter?

It is of course facetious and should be recognized as such because Olivier won't find such a VCR, not anywhere. I can think of no other way to convince him that his VCR isn't blending frames. Even if a VCR were going to blend something it wouldn't be frames; in interlaced playback it would blend fields, not frames.

Considering the cards and software being used, that could be possible. Maybe. If the playback is interlaced, where are the full-size "frames" coming from?

Dont need to show capture and i m not allowed to show any picture of them. . Juste listen what i say. VHS Tapes are from many different sources. MXO can be matched with a AJA IO HD ... just did it with contour correction . I dont rely on "reports",i rely on direct tests.

"it would blend fields" Yes; i explained it already above.
Yes the question is, as a new user of this kind of semi pro player ; is it defective ?
SO the question is; for those who used one ;
do 9600 keep true interlacing in any modes ? Mine does not. Only in copy mode

Maybe find a non-proprietary tape that does not have content-sharing restrictions?

https://i.goopics.net/X0ZPb.jpg
https://i.goopics.net/w43DZ.jpg

Here it is. I don t know how to make them appear directly.

The interlaced one is done in "edit mode". Only way to keep interlacing constant.
All other are random. Same story with Best on or off.

AS i said somewhere, the VHS as out of order YC out. Spoke with seller, he will fix it, but i must send him back, in another country. So i want to collect as much info as i can before sending back.
Comb filter failing seems a good option.

Please attach images to posts
Read this for how: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/news...ly-upload.html

Blend versus interlaced
 

Attachment 9267

Attachment 9268

Her is an example.

We're missing something. But not sure what.

I'd still like to see the capture card eliminated as a variable, potentially even the entire capture system or software, so as to be 100% sure it's actually the VCR with some sort of really odd issue that I've never seen. Because, again, VCRs do not contain deinterlacers.

I checked with 4 different capture cards ... the same. I can switch my BVM SD monitor (wich i love) to 'direct VHS out' or "after external TBC out" or " live capture out' . I can see interlacing in quick movement. I m trained to. So i can easily recognize a kind of progressive ... Its the VHS. AS i say i can lock it to interlace in EDIT mode. But i loose some DNR ... And yes it was bought for this. Also have a BR 7300 in a box, but didn t tested it yet, and i suspect it was used a lot. And it could fail a start ... old capacitors ...

A sample clip would also help, 99mb max, ideally longer MP4 interlaced 4:2:2 sample.
Attached to forum.

With all corrections On, sometimes it s interlaced. But in case of a big "hole" in the tape, it can jump randomly off, or the opposite case : start with this "fields blend" and jump to interlaced if it encounters a big "hole" ...

Hmm...
What sort of TBC do you have between the VCR and the capture card?

Some kind of temporal noise reduction in the chain?

TBC is a Snell&Wilcox TBS24. Input in composite at this time (but in YC as soon the JVC will fe fixed), output in YC. There is a RVB out, but with separate synchro (RGBS) ... Know it can be converted to true RVB, but i try have less possible chain. It have not the NR option. It also will transcode Secam to Pal. Yes, i m in France ... country of secam, scart connector and Concorde ... (also have many secam tapes to digit, need to buy another player) But this problem occurs before it. If it was, it would happen any time. Edit mode woulndt lock to interlaced. TBC also have a "dub-Beta" in, wich will be used soon behind a BVW75 pal). Many kind of tapes ... Some DV too; no DvcPro at this time.

I dont think any (French) Secam player was ever made with an internal TBC ... Can somebody confirm ?

other question. I have severals VHS-C. Spoke with a seller, he told me to avoid cheap converters, which can destroy JVC tapes. Off cours those i have are JVC ... Should i buy a true JVC converter. Not many to sell, but i think i can find some. Or go to a manual swap of tape to a classic enclosure ? (I'd prefer to avoid this ...)

-- merged --

Well; i searched the forum and found the answer ...From Lordsmurf : "VHS-C sucks. Just transplant them into full VHS clamshells."

That seller has mixed-up information. Either that, or you misunderstood.
- VHS-C itself is lousy, flimsy.
- JVC S-VHS VCRs tend to eat/feather VHS-C form factor tapes.
- JVC VHS and VHS-C tapes are among the best quality tapes that were made. That excludes the above info, refers only to the grade and quality of the tape itself.
- Anytime you use VHS-C, even in the better Panasonic decks, you must use one of the higher quality metal converters. Those are metal (probably aluminum) with a reason-like hard plastic. Not junk from Memorex and no-names, cheap stuff you'd find in stores.

I don't have faith in that TBC for VHS. What happens when you capture a sample without the TBC in the chain?

Well, the seller was kind enough to say "don't buy the adapter i sell" ...
I found JVC adapter to sell; but as i only have a JVC player (at this time) i will respool the tape. The more difficult seem to be fiding screwed enclosure ... any advice ?
TBC. Will (re) test without, but at this time (and i need to show results soon), as i m outputting composite from the VHS, i have cross color, and the Snell gets rid of it. Good machine. An "analog " feel. Much better than any ForA or Kramer i used in the past, very "numeric". But i was unable to find the manual, even at Grass Valey site. A true rack machine. Not even a power switch on/off. its in the metal case, as the dip switches to generate black or bars (useful) and other stuff. It s also used as a Proc Amp, classic White, Black, Chroma. Yc delay too. With clean tapes, i will take it off the chain. Hoping synchro will be good enough. Need a rolling rack, hard access to back connectors at this time. Won't go in building a patch, but still have my stock of BNC ...

Image1 is field blended.
Image2 is interlaced.
Neither frame size is valid for PAL. They look like cropped screen captures.

I dont know how works the "signal processing" of the 9600, but as a S-VHS, i suppose it works at minimum in YC. Or does it decompose to RVB (or YUV) to process ? I have the technical-maintenance manual , but this is over my skills.
The boss who fund this (not exactly a boss, im a free lancer) is pleased with first results, which involve Resolve for deinterlacing, (even if we will keep Interlaced in stock). Yadiff still exist as an OFXplug, but its not GPU, so terribly slow. We need to build a reasonably time consuming workflow ... so i use integrated deinterlace, which is ... basic
Resolve 15 have new features with canhelps, but if there is even better ... i want to to try QTGMC. I can't stand not trying better options if they are affordable and more or less equal in computing time. Have many Xeon cores ... let them do what they are made for ...

Yes they are hand made screen capture. Just a quick search in my first tests.
Just to show the "impossible blending" ...

Capture is Apple Pro res; 720-576. Well above bandwidth of VHS. No need for total uncompressed YUV. Total loss of disk space, wich is an economic part of any workflow.

You're a professional and you don't know how to capture a frame directly from a video? But what do the images tell us? Perhaps you can help us with a little more information. How were the tapes played? How were they captured? How were the images made? What is the difference between the field-blended frame and the interlaced frame?

You might also consider that animation is usually not interlaced but is more often progressive with pulldown.

QTGMC deinterlacing is far superior to Resolve, which is not a restoration platform. Most set top players and TV's are even better.

A direct frame capture is more ideal that a screen capture, though I'll admit to sometimes using it myself. However, not for a thread like this.

720x576 is above resolution (not bandwidth), and uncompressed is a waste when lossless is possible. If using lossy ProRes422, just be sure the compression is zero or near-zero, and quality will be essentially lossless as well (~30gb/hour).

Not everything uses GPU, and even many that do are not any faster than CPU. Don't get the false impression that GPU is always faster, it's not. That's why computers have CPUs, after all.

I'm not convinced the S&W isn't doing something odd. Again, it's not a recommended TBC, and for a reason.

I'm also not one to use something inferior when something better exists. And it's even foolish if better is free!