The statement was that the NX version was "YUV, not DV". The NX version and the DV version are both YUV.
|
4 Attachment(s)
Ah, sorry, I misread. Disregard that.
Anyhow, I don't have an AVDC or a ATI 600, though I made a small comparison how DV compression can affect a PAL image. This is a shot from a lossless capture, followed by an image of a DV-encoded version of the same sample. (I forgot to adjust levels before making a snapshot so there may be some slight clipping due to RGB conversion.) The DV encoding was done in software with the Cecocida DV codec, though the DV encoding is simple and a constant bandwidth one so the result should be approximately the same regardless of what did the conversion. 5x Zoomed comparison, lossless on top, DV on the bottom. Notice the blocking and loss of details on the trees: Attachment 10426Attachment 10427 Original: Attachment 10422 DV: Attachment 10423 |
Thread title renamed, as it's a request, not a comparison thread.
Quote:
But it is a huge difference, the DV loss is noticeable even to non-video folks. Most see it on their own, the rest once pointed out to them. Rarely does a person "not see the difference", and generally it's being facetious and purposeful/willful ignorance ("just video", to wit my response is generally that dog food is "just beef"). Quote:
The ATI 600 PCI is completely different from the ATI 600 USB. But the ATI AIW USB uses the same Theatre chipset as (almost all of) the ATI AIW AGP cards. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This is the same issue that dSLR cameras had for years. Only in more recent times have cameras had no OLPF (optical low pass filter). The OLPF was lossy chroma subsampling that kept images from being tack sharp without Photoshop sharpening. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
NX is (H)DV. The VC500 has some darkness issues, some observed oddities with AGC, and potentially mid-production changes that explains oddities. sanlyn seemingly has a good card, but I've seen samples from others that have a miserable time with it. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Lossless (or uncompressed) ideal for capturing for editing/restoring. Filters used depend on errors present. But also noting some filters are destructive, so you'll often need compensation filters to undo damage. The end goal matters. Restored video is better, not necessarily perfect. But with the caveat that "not perfect" not be used as an excuse for shoddy work. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
However, that is from 2003 (posted here in 2005), and applies mostly to Theatre Rage/100 chipsets. I believe that was fully fixed in the Theatre 200. Maybe even later drivers that affects Rage/100. I know drivers can affect sizing, and multiple Rage/100 cards had alterations in later MMC versions. So I don't know that any of this applies unless using the oldest 7000 ATIs with original on-disc drivers. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
RE Cedocia:
Quote:
In any case the loss and the difference will be evident, even with pristine source. It's inevitable. "Lossy" means "loss', period. You can't have data loss and end up where you started. It's not possible. Don't just count raw data loss. In digital video, data loss involves distortion as well as detail content. VHS color is also distorted -- if you have a sensitive color eye (many people do, many don't), you'll see that "something" in the original colors has changed and "something" seems off-balance. Even original DV source has plastic looking color IMO. |
Quote:
- lossless can have loss (and so can uncompressed) - lossy can be visually imperceptible to loss, especially higher bitrate lossy like H.264 and ProRes422 Stuff like that really screws with people trying to learn video. Mind blown. :laugh: So always remember: every rule has exceptions. But also remember: when you think you're the exception, you're probably not. Honestly, when somebody starts to get overly dogmatic with video, or tech in general, I find it fun to throw these monkey wrenches in their gears, and watch smoke come from their ears (ERROR! DOES NOT COMPUTE! BZZT!) Graphs and charts and benchmarks and test patterns are sometimes more for entertainment value than not, and it takes experience to navigate this complex topic. Those often oversimplify, sometimes to the absurd and unrealistic. The data can be skewed, and marketers know this. It's how myths get started, how BS is propagated. This reminds me of baseball this season... When a good batter walks up to the plate, good stats (good batting avg, slugging %, on-base), that's really all you need to know. Get ready for a likely hit, maybe HR. But no, some announcers stat you to death, % this and % that, and in the end none of it matters anyway. The guy hits well, probably gets paid a lot for it. It's those guys that get overpaid and can't bat that irk you, non-quality that costs $$$. Even worse are newbies/rookies that strand runners, complete amateur hour. If you follow baseball, you probably see the parallels here. |
Quote:
|
Regarding DV versus lossless, you can look at the VHS comparison shots here. To my eyes, the DV images clip some of the reds in the uniforms compared to the lossless image at the top. When color is clipped like that, it's gone. No amount of postprocessing will get it back.
|
There are DV codecs that would yield better qualty.....DV25 uses the 4:2:0 color space some some quality is loss colorwise, while DV50 maintains the 4:2:2 colorspace in which the color information is retained.
|
Quote:
NTSC DV(25) = 4:1:1, quartering It's why PAL color loss isn't bad, while NTSC is obvious. |
Quote:
Yeah, that's right on the 4:1:1 for NTSC DV25. I'm getting a little rusty lol. Either way DV50 or DV100 is superior compared to DV25 |
Quote:
[Screenshots of the same picture frames and / or movie fragments.] Remember that I checked it myself (I can be wrong): all filters in the Canopus ADVC-300 can be turned off by the program: Picture Controller 300. (When connecting the signal via Composite - Y / C Sepration 2D (W) or 3D (H) unless always one of them will be active (which we choose) - probably. By connecting via S-Video these two options are inactive (although they can be switched in the program) - I think.) |
1 Attachment(s)
Hello, I have thinked about one week if I should write an answer if nobody needs testsample or won't accept the results.
First let me say this; I'm from a PAL country (the home of the original Oktoberfest) and could only speak about PAL hardware and expirence with PAL content. Another thing what I will remember. I wrote here not in my own language and if I'm in a hurry I could make some mistakes if I didn't checked back my writings. (@sanlyn: YUV,DV) The Test patters are test patters and just should show if a capture card could record the full resolution for PAL 720x576 and if the card could capture the full range from 0-255 or if some parts are cropped or be clipped and if the capture window is centered. The luminace range from 0-16 is often called super black and the range from 235-255 is often called super white. The broadcast safe range is 16-235 but on analog sources like vhs the highest white & deepest black point could be different on each tape and could be in the super white/black area. With some capture cards you could make them visible with the brightness/contrast slider but not with every card. Some cards just clip this area and this will be lost during capture and it couldn't make visible in the post production. You should do this during the capture process with virtual dub (but I always want to know how you adjust this for the whole capture? You guys always watch the whole video before the capture just to know where the whitest/blackest part is in the movie?). I just would like to know what's wrong with the test patters and the result. The first 2 test patters are a 3 second long black and white change. Where the black are with luminance 16 and the white scene with luminance 235. At the bottom of the test pic I have added the waveform monitor how it looks like under the waveform monitor from the original mpg file. -- 404 link removed -- -- 404 link removed -- The 3rd test patters are a pal test chart from the belle nuit website. Which show the full resolution & full range. The super white part is all above 100 & the super black part is below 0. -- 404 link removed -- the fourth test patter is a black/white picture with full range. In the range from 0-16 & 235-255 the font is written with range it ist. -- 404 link removed -- the fifth test patters is in full resolution 720x576 & have some grids to compare. -- 404 link removed -- the sixth test patters is the hello world test. hello world is only written in the super black/white part. It is useful to to understand if your hardware like dvd player/lcd can show the super black/white part. If you can't see hello world some of your hardware is clipping this part. -- 404 link removed -- the seventh test patter are just some color bars. -- 404 link removed -- Now I have tried to find out what captures card deliver a capture who looks like as close as possible to the original mpg file. Limitations of this test are: I have made no adjustments during the capture and I have no dvd/blu-ray player ( I have tested about 17 different ones) who can play this test dvd correctly with all available outputs (composite,y/c (S-Video), component, hdmi). For example the Pioneer DVR-630 play it correctly but has no hdmi output. The Panasonic DMR-495 I have used offers all 4 outputs but the output from composite & Y/C are only in the resolution 704x576. It might be useful or not. But it shows me that for example the default sharpness setting for the ATI USB 600 at 2 is oversharpening the picture. You can see sharpening artefacts. Here is the capture wtih sharpening setting at 0. -- see attached Test File ATI USB 600 no sharpness.avi -- I have to correct something. I have said the capture from the ATI AIW AGPs is different and I have to stretch the files. I have compared the 3 captures from the AIW 7200,9000 & 9600 again and the capture from the 7200 is close to the same resolution as the original mpg file. The capture from the AIW 9000,9600 I have to resize to the resolution to 700x576 to get as close as possible to the original mpg file. For this testing I have used the differenz filter in Edius 8. The test files shows in my eyes that if you didn't adjust the settings during the capture that all usb card clip the super black range. Another thing I have to say if you compare files is that you never should trust your eyes. If one capture have higher contrast it can look much better as another capture. I must correct something about he Canopus NX. The canopus nx exist as a PCI-X or PCI-Express card. With the card you can capture in YUY2 uncompressed and there is no internally compression to lossy dv codec before it capture to YUY2. To reduce the filesize from uncompressed I have use the lagarith codec after the capture with virtual dub. The card only works with Edius but offers an s-Video output where my studio control monitor is connected. You can find this card these days if you search a little for about 120,- Euro included Edius 3,4 or 5. sanlyn asked how my workflow looks like? Usually I capture with the canopus nx or the Blackmagic Shuttle (over HDMI) uncompressed YUY2 avi. Then I made the adjustment for the broadcast safe range 16-235 with the edius YUV-Filter, zebra overlay & vectorscope,waveform monitor. Edius should work internally with YUV and it should be no RGB conversation. After this I cut and correct the color shift with the JPDSR Filter (which work in YUV colorspace) in Virtual Dub and save this master file with the lagarith codec. Then I do some noise reduction or ... with Avisynth. That's my way. The test patters test file are only the first part of my testing I have do more test with real VHS video. With problematic tapes, tapes with macrovision. But you should remember the capture card is only on second or 3rd place in your capture hardware. Sooner or later you'll need an "TBC" and this could change the results again. Most people won't see big difference because they have nothing to compare. My advice for PAL users is the Canopus NX (with Edius) if you could grab one for about 150,- Euro. But you should make your own tests and at the end of the day it has all to do with money & availability of the hardware in your country and if you want to use a laptop or desktop pc. And now fire-free sanlyn & Lord Smurf |
Quote:
Test pattermns are a big problem. The biggest problem is that test patterns neither look nor behave like real video. But some people love to stare at test patterns and pixel displays all day 24/7/365. I wouldn't last 10 seconds watching a test pattern, and still images of test patterns make me want to go to sleep immediately. Thanks for mercifully not posting any samples of NX and Black Magic plastic videos. I've seen enough ugly video for one thread and really have seen too much ugly crap during the past year or so. I think I'd be better off staying away from newbie crap in a/v forums and just posting my own stuff, which are problems enough themselves. Noobs and BM fanboys never look at anything beyond their own stuff anyway, which is likely why they have so little to compare it to. This is really depressing. BM? it just gets worse out there. I have a friend about 2 hours' drive away with a 35mm projection room and real film. I think I'll take a drive. |
Quote:
Reattach. I'll merge and fix the post. Just let me know 1st/2nd/3rd/etc, to match the tests. |
7 Attachment(s)
@sanlyn, stay tuned I will upload the same VHS samples made with different capture cards.
The biggest problem for me is your behavior about users who have made other experience as you. You call them fanboys, newbies or insult someone or just say the users haven't the same quality standarts as you. There are a few threads here on this forum where you do this. If you really want discuss and compare samples from different hardware with useful arguments your opinion is really important but if you just wanna insult someone or lower some hardware without testing it is better you keep silence. I have started capturing vhs video about 20 years ago with a radeon vivo, radeon aiw, tv cards, canopus advc 50, dvd recorders, pinnacle usb, blackmagic shuttle, canopus nx, canopus advc 300 and a few other capture devices. I'm interested in how other capture cards works. Inspired from another forum thread here about a matrox capture card I have bought the Matrox Mini (for 11,00 Euro) to do some testing and to compare them with the other cards I own. |
Quote:
I'll be downloading some of mine, too. Quote:
|
Quote:
However, sanlyn does have a valid point, even if sometimes stated with gruff language. Don't dismiss it with soft language like "not the same standards". Lots of people have this false idea that VHS transfer quality must look terrible. And that myth stems from user error, bad software, and bad hardware. Many people can be educated about this, and can then either DIY better, or select non-amateur services for conversions. For those folks, problem solved. But some folks are real head-in-sand (head-up-ass) about video. Video has rules that must be followed, specs that exists. Every rule has exceptions, but some folks just do whatever the hell they want, complete disregard for norms of quality and acceptability. That includes not just users, but even hardware/software makers. The real "WTF" moment comes from capture cards especially. You can buy excellent SD cards for under $100. Yet it seems folks want to spend either pennies on known-junk Chinese KO cards (Easycaps, etc), or go the complete opposite and spend $200+ for a "better card" that actually isn't better either (HD cards like Blackmagic, Magewell). It's as if everybody wants to only put either homebrew fuel/gas/petrol in car -- or premium grade. And the vehicle will probably hate both of them. Yet there's perfectly good regular unleaded gas easily available. So why not buy it? That's the source of this. Understand that I wish it was as easy as picking a card based on price and features, and all of them gave you good quality. But it's just not reality. Quote:
"Newbie" can be a derisive term, and I favor "novice" instead. A novice is less experienced, teachable, probably eager to learn. A newbie often thinks he's suddenly an expert. But the term newbie is often inclusive of novices, hence wider use. "Fanboys" are generally people that are defending their choice/purchase. The defense is not based on quality of the item, just defensiveness for defensiveness's sale. This is the main reason I can't use certain sites, because it's a cesspool of "facts" and opinions that contradict reality (and I refer to non-video topics). Quote:
You have knowledge and experience to share at this site, and we're glad to have you. Also realize some of the information regarding capture cards is very NTSC-centric. PAL differs. So if you're able to give us good tests for PAL gear, post it. We'll all look at it. |
I'll try to maintain some equilibrium, cut down on the coffee (I hate Keurig's stuff anyway), and will use "novice" when it applies. When it doesn't, I'll just try to avoid people who don't care. They won't learn or change their minds about anything anyway.
I'll be waiting for comparison posts myself, from which we can all learn much. I've been collecting samples of how to work with challenging sources from several of my own projects, including caps made with less than perfect players and 3 different capture devices -- I can appreciate the proposed card comparisons, considering the effort and delays involved in getting up my own posts. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
This is good stuff and information. Yeah there are many folks that just cheapens out with the modern capture stuff (like the ezcap junk at walmart) that we know obviously never cuts the mustard, but those that support such weak hardware line them up with praise and think its the best since sliced bread. I even seen some try to capture VHS with the Elgato capture devices, which is mostly designed for video game capture.
Ever since my VH days, I have came a long way when it came to capturing VHS material, and getting the right hardware to do the job, which I learned on this forum. It also helps to learn the weaknesses of the VHS format to where we can make the best capture as we can with what we have. Sure, the quality will never be HD standard; its simply not designed to be that way. I would rather watch older SD material the way it was originally presented, even if not the best. For me it just captures the nostalgia of what things were like back in the day. Folks like to stretch SD material to match their widescreen HDTV, which looks ugly. Unless the material was formatted that (amaphormic) way its always 4:3. And though I have sold one of my XP based systems, I still have one that I will keep on hand, as I have alot of older hardware that works best with it. I know Black Magic products aren't that popular here, and with good reason since alot of their stuff is mostly based in incorporating HD workflows, but I think with alot of these newbies (and some fanboys) they don't realize that upper-end gear requires a clean, synced signal from SD sources despite their 'support', and most of them don't know how to do that properly and therefore get crappy results. I have done a few test captures with the AJA LHi capture card to DV50 and it turned out fine. I can always do the rest of the finetune in software. TBC's are obviously the most important device in the signal chain to get clean transfers, with line based TBCs in the deck and the external full frame TBC working together to clean and stabilize the image. That's what most of the BM (and even AJA) gear look for when digitizing the signal, especially if going the SDI route. I love using pro hardware, even back during the days where I couldn't even afford the stuff back in the 90's when this stuff was mainstream. But the desire was there. Nowadays, I'm able to afford more pro gear (via ebay in some cases) to where I can do my video the best way I can. With this type of hobby (or business for some who do it for a living) its important to recognize the material one is working with, and having the appropriate hard/software to get the job done right. It just depends on how deep in the rabbit hole you want to go once you get into this thing. Not all capture cards capture exactly the same. You have one that captures perfectly, while you may have another that has a quirk to it, and one that requires alot of adjustments to get it right. For me personally, I have alot of VHS tapes to work on, some from my late mother that I wish to keep. And once I am done with transferring and archiving the material, I will move on more towards HD workflows. But one thing I do know, there is a wealth of information to be learned here, whether one just have a few months under their belt or those who have been in it for decades. The common goal most of us have is to preserve what we have on the legacy formats for the future as long as we're able. Trust me, in probably 10 or 20 years, SD capture hardware or the video decks may no longer exist, and you see how tough it is now to get them serviced with most of the techs retired or passed on. |
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.