Go Back    Forum > Digital Video > Video Project Help > Capture, Record, Transfer

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21  
07-20-2019, 03:24 PM
sanlyn sanlyn is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N. Carolina and NY, USA
Posts: 3,648
Thanked 1,307 Times in 982 Posts
The statement was that the NX version was "YUV, not DV". The NX version and the DV version are both YUV.
Reply With Quote
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Ads / Sponsors
 
Join Date: ∞
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #22  
07-20-2019, 04:11 PM
hodgey hodgey is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,672
Thanked 443 Times in 380 Posts
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:
lossless_zoomed.png
You must be logged in to view this content; either login or register for the forum. The attached screen shots, before/after images, photos and graphics are created/posted for the benefit of site members. And you are invited to join our digital media community.


Original:
DV_zoomed.png

DV:
You must be logged in to view this content; either login or register for the forum. The attached screen shots, before/after images, photos and graphics are created/posted for the benefit of site members. And you are invited to join our digital media community.



Last edited by hodgey; 07-20-2019 at 04:39 PM. Reason: Split scaled comparison so it doesn't get jpeg compressed
Reply With Quote
  #23  
07-21-2019, 08:10 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,355
Thanked 2,431 Times in 2,066 Posts
Thread title renamed, as it's a request, not a comparison thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dima View Post
s there any material on the internet showing image screenshots showing these image comparisons of the same picture frames: Canopus ADVC(100, 110, 300) vs ATI AIW USB (and/or ATI 600 USB) ? I would like to see the difference (if any) in the image between these devices.
I have all of the cards, plus many more. But my time is finite, not always able to spend hours and hours with test comparisons. I'll consider doing an ADVC-300 vs. ATI AIW (Theatre 200) in the near future, when my time and equipment is freed up some.

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:
[Does it make a difference for the image quality which type of device(USB, PCI, AGP, PCIe) - for example ATI 600 USB - is used to capture the image(from VHS to digital file) ?
Maybe.
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:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
The actual difference is that DV capture devices use a lossy DV codec that is outdated, incompatible with new devices and capture color at half the resolution for NTSC, While a PCI or a USB capture device gives you the option to capture lossless first if you plan on editing or saving as master footage and you can always compress later to a video format of your choice with decent color resolution and decent encoding bitrate.
This is the correct answer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
Though the first sample is from JVC S-VHS using S-Video cable, the second is from a Toshiba VCR using composite cable, Not really a good comparaison.
While good intentions, unfortunately a useless test, too many variables.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwillis84 View Post
definitely a unique request
Not really.

Quote:
comparing a lossy format to a lossless format (DV to Uncompressed), by definition the DV will be missing information from the Uncompressed..
Yes, that's all the test would show.

Quote:
to my inspection when I had to "see for myself" the DV always appears "fuzzy" or out of focus on all captured video
I think the technical term is "softer" or lacking detail
That's it. 50% chroma loss makes fuzzy color.

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:
ADVC came from an era plagued by marginal analog signals so was and "is" very tolerant of bad analog video signal "acquistion".
Pfft. No. ADVC isn't more tolerant, that's just Canopus marketing myth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogilein View Post
a test file which I have burn onto a dvd.
Unfortunately, again, good intentions, but useless testing. Too many variables.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwillis84 View Post
although its a bit more pronounced than I recall.
It's because you're double dipping. 4:4:4 patterns > 4:2:0 DVD MPEG > either 4:2:0 DV (different from MPEG) or 4:1:1 incurs extra loss.

Quote:
Originally Posted by latreche34 View Post
PAL chroma is almost the same as the other samples because it's 4:2:0, You should post a NTSC file for DV it will reveal its weakness.
Yeah, PAL DV isn't terrible, DVD-like acceptable loss, NTSC has the 50%+ color destruction.

Quote:
I may be wrong, but I would probably put together a list of the best of these devices in terms of the quality of the presented image, where the first four devices are very close to each other:
1. Diamond 500 USB
2. Canopus NX
3. ATI AIW USB (ATI Wonder USB)
4. ATI AIW 9600
5. ATI 600 USB [or vice
6. Canopus ADVC 300 versa]
I'd say wrong.

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:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
So far, all nonsense. This thread has nothing to do with capturing from analog sources.
When I finally had time to click into this thread, that was my observation as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogilein View Post
The test files from dvd should show you the limitations of your hardware
Not really.

Quote:
The ATi 600 USB just oversharpen at default.
I don't really agree with that. Sharpening is a complicated topic. Everything applies some degree of sharpening somewhere, be it in chipset, registry, or software. Sometimes a bad combination of choices oversharpens.

Quote:
The thread starter ask for samples with PAL content. I have upload captures which were made always with the same hardware. I don't think he can find better samples but maybe you could upload samples, sanlyn?
I'l be sure to do both PAL and NTSC when I have time to make samples.

Quote:
If necessary Lord Smurf can delete the nonsens I have post.
Nah, not really nonsense, just potentially flawed testing, it's good to leave those posts there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
LS, they're living in a different universe out there.
Don't forget, everybody has a different skill level. And with this, PAL vs. NTSC differences to consider. So any one of us may sometimes learn new info, update our knowledge. Overall, I think Bogelein is fine, has good intentions, but maybe some room for improvement in testing. He's not getting angry over this topic, so neither should you be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
OK, after a couple of cups of Tension Tamer tea,
Yeah, you were wound a bit tight in that last post.

Quote:
Can anyone in this thread answer the question: what does restoration and repair consist of?
What are the properties of the required media?
What software and what filters are used, and why?
What analysis tools or other objective/aesthetic analysis or measurement tools are used to determine what gets done and what gets fixed, and what remains as-is?
What does "editing' entail, precisely?
Hardware + software ideal to restore.

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:
How do you judge your own results?
What do you compare them to?
You're not a professional, you don't have pro gear, you don't have pro training, but in light of what pro's do and the results they get, how do your methods and results compare?
Where do your results fall short, and why?
Good questions for others.

Quote:
why do you need a/v forums when the product's user manual has all you need to know?
Why not take your tapes down to Walmart?
What would be different about what they do and what you would do?
Facetious questions, amusing, but the answer here is what drove people to this site, unsatisfied with the cheap and shoddy work from the cheap item or service.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogilein View Post
Another thing I have left off is the audio part which would be important too for the capture card. But if the video part is worse....
Audio is really bad on some cards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by enois View Post
at Bogilein: i don't know exactly wich is your capture flow, but remember that in PAL standard ATI AIW have resoultion/aspect ratio issue:
ATI MMC and 704/720 resolution thoughts?


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:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
I notice in the videos that there is no motion.
Don't you analyze videos that have motion?
This is why I've never put much stock into test patterns. Limited usefulness.

Quote:
The readout for your Canopus NX capture looks incomplete to me. The NX cap seems recompressed with Lagarith.
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0

Scan order : Top Field First
Compression mode : Lossy
Agreed.

Quote:
DV is YUV.
Yep. 4:1:1, 4:2:0, and 4:2:2 are still YUV.

Quote:
My ATI captures are NTSC 720x480.
I generally leave it as native UVYV, don't change AIW to YUY2,

Quote:
700x576? Is that a typo?
My thought as well. Weird sizing, must be typo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hodgey View Post
The Canopus NX is a pci or pcie (depending on the version) analog capture card, not a firewire box like the ADVC models.
But still a DV card.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hodgey View Post
the Cecocida DV codec
The problem here is that DV converters don't seem to subsample well, and just drop colors. Software subsampling can look better, but depends on the codec. Cecocida is somewhat crappy compared to Matrox.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
The following users thank lordsmurf for this useful post: sanlyn (07-21-2019)
  #24  
07-21-2019, 10:42 PM
sanlyn sanlyn is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N. Carolina and NY, USA
Posts: 3,648
Thanked 1,307 Times in 982 Posts
RE Cedocia:

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
The problem here is that DV converters don't seem to subsample well, and just drop colors. Software subsamdetailpling can look better, but depends on the codec. Cecocida is somewhat crappy compared to Matrox.
The Cedocida installation has a configuration menu that should be set up for the source video you're working with. Its defaults aren't ideal for everything. The configuration is accessed via Virtualdiub's "compression..." menu. Click the compression menu item, then click Cedocida, then click the "configuration" tab. Results will differ depending on the setup for specific video source.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
07-22-2019, 12:57 AM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,355
Thanked 2,431 Times in 2,066 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
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.
Not to sidetrack the conversation, but
- 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.

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.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
  #26  
07-22-2019, 04:49 AM
hodgey hodgey is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,672
Thanked 443 Times in 380 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
The problem here is that DV converters don't seem to subsample well, and just drop colors. Software subsampling can look better, but depends on the codec. Cecocida is somewhat crappy compared to Matrox.
Yeah there will probably be some difference. I thought the DV spec didn't leave much room for differences in implementation, but looking at it now, I see that that was incorrect. In any case, DV compression will incur a noticeable loss of image quality, and make post-processing more challenging.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
07-22-2019, 03:11 PM
traal traal is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 388
Thanked 74 Times in 67 Posts
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.

Last edited by traal; 07-22-2019 at 03:12 PM. Reason: postprocessing
Reply With Quote
  #28  
07-22-2019, 03:38 PM
VideoTechMan VideoTechMan is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 186
Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts
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.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
07-22-2019, 03:42 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,355
Thanked 2,431 Times in 2,066 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by videotechman View Post
dv25 uses the 4:2:0 color space
PAL DV(25) = 4:2:0, alternating halving, like DVD-Video, but different axis from DVD-Video MPEG
NTSC DV(25) = 4:1:1, quartering

It's why PAL color loss isn't bad, while NTSC is obvious.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
  #30  
07-22-2019, 04:01 PM
VideoTechMan VideoTechMan is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 186
Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
PAL DV(25) = 4:2:0, alternating halving, like DVD-Video, but different axis from DVD-Video MPEG
NTSC DV(25) = 4:1:1, quartering

It's why PAL color loss isn't bad, while NTSC is obvious.

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
Reply With Quote
  #31  
07-24-2019, 04:22 AM
dima dima is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 131
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
I'll consider doing an ADVC-300 vs. ATI AIW (Theatre 200) in the near future, when my time and equipment is freed up some.
In my opinion, it would be very good to make and publish the results of such a test, if possible(VHS recordings captured on a digital file - lossless (eg HuffYUV), PAL standard, resolution: 720 x 576, via S-Video and so on vs in the same way in the DV codec (Canopus ADVC-300) (changing only the converter)).
[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.)
Reply With Quote
  #32  
08-02-2019, 05:59 PM
Bogilein Bogilein is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Bavaria
Posts: 256
Thanked 93 Times in 67 Posts
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


Attached Files
File Type: avi Test File ATI USB 600 no sharpness.avi (78.95 MB, 14 downloads)

Last edited by lordsmurf; 08-03-2019 at 04:42 AM. Reason: removed 404/bad links
Reply With Quote
The following users thank Bogilein for this useful post: lordsmurf (08-02-2019), sn1p3r (12-17-2021)
  #33  
08-02-2019, 06:56 PM
sanlyn sanlyn is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N. Carolina and NY, USA
Posts: 3,648
Thanked 1,307 Times in 982 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogilein View Post
The broadcast safe range is 16-235
The YUV range for chroma is 16-240. If you use that range, you'll corrupt colors and lose details in the brightest areas in RGB. In any case, y=16-235 has more to do with proper display than broadcast safeguards. Saying it's broadcast-safe is an oversimplification.

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.

Last edited by sanlyn; 08-02-2019 at 07:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
08-02-2019, 08:27 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,355
Thanked 2,431 Times in 2,066 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogilein View Post
And now fire-free sanlyn & Lord Smurf
The attachments are corrupt.
Reattach. I'll merge and fix the post. Just let me know 1st/2nd/3rd/etc, to match the tests.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
  #35  
08-03-2019, 03:43 AM
Bogilein Bogilein is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Bavaria
Posts: 256
Thanked 93 Times in 67 Posts
@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.


Attached Images
File Type: jpg Test1.jpg (17.4 KB, 32 downloads)
File Type: jpg Test2.jpg (17.4 KB, 17 downloads)
File Type: jpg test3.jpg (99.5 KB, 11 downloads)
File Type: jpg test4.jpg (57.1 KB, 9 downloads)
File Type: jpg test5.jpg (102.0 KB, 10 downloads)
File Type: jpg test6.jpg (38.3 KB, 10 downloads)
File Type: jpg test7.jpg (47.2 KB, 8 downloads)
Reply With Quote
The following users thank Bogilein for this useful post: hodgey (08-03-2019), lordsmurf (08-03-2019)
  #36  
08-03-2019, 04:59 AM
sanlyn sanlyn is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N. Carolina and NY, USA
Posts: 3,648
Thanked 1,307 Times in 982 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogilein View Post
@sanlyn, stay tuned I will upload the same VHS samples made with different capture cards.
Makes perfectly good sense to me.
I'll be downloading some of mine, too.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogilein View Post
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.
A lot of users don't have quality standards, period, and wouldn 't know quality if it bit them in the tush. Lately we're seeing more and more dudes who are mighty proud of their mediocre material, are not ashamed to say so, and they get pissed if you don't congratulate them for nothing. Sorry, folks. My standards are those that I learned from the pros and by observing their work. Most of us can't always go all the way up to that level because we don't have the resources that the industry pros have; no one expects perfection, and I certainly don't. But rather than asking others to lower their standards to suit yours, maybe you should raise your standards to try to match criteria that advanced users have learned from. You don't need a forum to make ugly video -- anybody can do it. It's nothing to be proud of. And frankly, I'm getting very weary of looking at more and visual crap. It ain't good for your brain.
Reply With Quote
The following users thank sanlyn for this useful post: lordsmurf (08-03-2019)
  #37  
08-03-2019, 05:18 AM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,355
Thanked 2,431 Times in 2,066 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogilein View Post
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.
He gets grumpy at times. So do I, but it rarely shows. And sometimes it's warranted. We all have pet peeves. Video folks have video pet peeves. If sanlyn goes too far, I'll clean it up. If anybody else thinks he's gone too far, that what the report button is for, available on every post, and Site Staff will look at it. Same for any forum member, even Staff posts. (FYI: I hate referring to other forum members as if they're not here, reading the post. I'm sure you're reading this sanlyn!)

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:
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.
Thus you're not a newbie or fanboy.

"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:
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.
That's really what matters. I'm interested to see your tests.

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.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
  #38  
08-03-2019, 05:39 AM
sanlyn sanlyn is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N. Carolina and NY, USA
Posts: 3,648
Thanked 1,307 Times in 982 Posts
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.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
08-03-2019, 05:54 AM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is offline
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,355
Thanked 2,431 Times in 2,066 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
I'll try to maintain some equilibrium, cut down on the coffee (I hate Keurig's stuff anyway)
Tired is why I get grumpy, not overstimulated. MS causes chronic fatigue. Not to OT too much, but tea started to give me headaches, diet cola upsets guts, regular cola too fattening, so I may have to start drinking coffee. And I've never liked coffee. This is the sort of stuff that sidetracks me.

Quote:
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.
Nah, give them the benefits of the doubt. Sometimes newbies/fanboys can be educated back into novices. Some can graduate to various levels of competency, while a few even go on to become true experts. I've seen that happen many times. That's really what education is about. I'm really humbled, and honestly somewhat jealous of, a person I was mentor to for years, starting a decade ago. A few years back, he started to surpass me. I know my health is largely to blame, as I've somewhat stagnated in that specific area.

Quote:
I've been collecting samples
I've been collecting cards. Lots and lots of card. Taking samples as I have time, but not done. Having to use my dev system for capture right now, overflow.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
  #40  
08-03-2019, 12:04 PM
VideoTechMan VideoTechMan is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 186
Thanked 26 Times in 23 Posts
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.
Reply With Quote
The following users thank VideoTechMan for this useful post: lordsmurf (08-05-2019), sanlyn (08-03-2019)
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For sale: Canopus ADVC-55 (used) discmeister Marketplace 0 05-06-2019 10:55 AM
Canopus ADVC 300 user - considering ATI 600 USB JoRodd Capture, Record, Transfer 4 06-22-2016 09:33 PM
Canopus DVRex-M1 vs. Canopus ADVC-110? XP instead of Win7? via Email or PM Capture, Record, Transfer 1 09-30-2013 11:25 PM
Should I use a Canopus ADVC-55 or ATI x800 ? JLegnon Capture, Record, Transfer 3 06-09-2012 09:40 AM
Canopus ADVC as just Y/C separator? metaleonid Restore, Filter, Improve Quality 6 01-03-2012 05:37 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:03 AM