Blu-ray vs. DVD for digitized VHS?

[wallen]

Hello. I had several dozen VHS tapes digitized as AVI files in 720x480 resolution. I've cleaned and edited them down to about eight hours of video, and now I want to burn them to disc. I'm unsure about whether to burn to DVD or BluRay, and I'm unsure about a reasonable bit rate for the re-encoded files. Obviously, the resolution of VHS is much lower than even 480 lines, but I can tell a visual difference when comparing files re-encoded as 480p mpeg versus 1280p mpeg. And while I don't need the high data rate available from BluRay, using BluRay would result in fewer discs. I can see arguments in favor of each medium, but I'd like to hear the opinions of others.

I have used TMPGEnc Authoring Works for other projects digitizing film, and I would use it again for this project. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated. Thank you.

[sanlyn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallen

I'm unsure about a reasonable bit rate for the re-encoded files. Obviously, the resolution of VHS is much lower than even 480 lines, but I can tell a visual difference when comparing files re-encoded as 480p mpeg versus 1280p mpeg. And while I don't need the high data rate available from BluRay, using BluRay would result in fewer discs.

There's a visual difference, all right -- 1280 is bigger. Bigger doesn't mean better. Experienced eyes can tell you, 480i blown up to 720p doesn't look anything at all like HD. What it looks like is someone using software to blow up a small image into a big one, with all the compromises it entails. Advanced users know that your external players and TV can upscale better than you can.

If higher bitrates are of no interest, why go to BluRay? DVD has MPEG2 bitrate limits, but keep in mind that DVD still outsells BluRay and most people can't see a difference until they exceed 37" screens. Higher bitrates in either MPEG2 or h.264 or VC1 are allowed for BluRay (and with low-res VHS it does make a difference). BluRay disc capacity is certainly an advantage. Do keep in mind that DVD and BluRay have similar but also different requirements concerning GOP and other factors. And don't kid yourself: a good number of BluRay issues out there today are standard definition, which is part of the BluRay spec.

High definition gets its qualities from source resolution, not from frame size. You can upscale in your PC until you're blue in the face. It won't look like HD. it will just look like upsized blurry VHS. And don't forget the the damage done by deinterlacing in software and resizing/upsizing to get the bigger frame. Multiple operations are not better than a single hardware optimization for proper rescaling and playback.

[wallen]

Hello sanlyn, and thank you for the reply. I understand that I cannot make a digitized VHS tape look better by upscaling or adding lines. Regardless of whether I use BluRay or DVD, I know the image will never look better than the source. Having said that, I do want the final product to look as good as reasonably possible. What I will be doing will be handing the AVI files (30 Mbps) over to TMPGEnc Authoring Works, and allowing it to re-encode as it sees fit. And this is where I am puzzled about the best approach. If I author for a BluRay, TAW will use, by default, H.264 at a maximum bit rate of 16.8 Mbps. I suspect that is far more than I need to achieve my goal of "as good as reasonably possible," and using a lower bit rate would allow me to shovel more minutes of video onto a single disc. Similarly, TAW will, by default, author a DVD with the MPEG2 encoder, at a maximum bit rate of 8.22 Mbps. I have no idea whether or not this will get me to "as good as reasonably possible." And again, lowering the maximum bit rate would allow me to use fewer discs. Can you shed any light on this for me?

[sanlyn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallen

I know the image will never look better than the source.

That's not really true. You can make the final image look better than the source in terms of looking cleaner, clearer, more stable, chroma denoised and color corrected, and visibly more free of the defects that are innate to VHS. That process is known as restoration. Unfortunately lossy encodes are a big hurdle to restoration, since many noisy VHS defects become permanently embedded as compression artifacts that don't exist in the original, which is why lossy encodes aren't used for capture if restoration and improvement is what you want. One lossy encode -- even at a high bitrate -- followed by a second lossy encode can't look "better": math and the laws of physics are against you.

You can make some improvements by decoding your lossy material to lossless AVI and using Avisynth and Virtualdub for cleanup, then re-encoding with TMPGenc Authoring Works. It won't look as good as lossless originals, but it will look "better" than what you have now. Otherwise you don't have much choice. TAW's suggested bitrates will be as good as it gets, but you could drop to 8 tor 12 mbps/18 max 2-pass vbr for BD, and 6500 to 7000 target/8500 max 2-pass vbr for DVD. Keep in mind that lots of action and high detail segments need more bitrate, and a lot of your bitrate will be wasted for the encoding of VHS noise. Specifying target and max bitrates for 2-pass vbr (Variable BitRate) will make the most efficient use of the data bits you make available for encoding. The "max" numbers you quoted for TAW reflect the official bitrate limits for DVD and standard def BD, including audio.

If you have a DVD that's too long for DVD-R single layer, use DVD-R double-layer. Almost all retail DVD's are double-layer discs anyway.

[wallen]

sanlyn... Thank you again for the information.

[latreche34]

Although I'm not in your shoes I see no point of authoring to optical media, It makes sense if you are just storing your work to optical media as extra data backups but not for playback, If sharing your work is your goal, households nowadays have more smart devices, media players and smart TV's than disc players if at all have a disc player so making more efficient compressed files for sharing that keep the original resolution and interlacing intact is the better way to go.

[sanlyn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

households nowadays have more smart devices, media players and smart TV's than disc players if at all have a disc player so making more efficient compressed files for sharing that keep the original resolution and interlacing intact is the better way to go.

Whose household are you talking about? Not mine. Not my sister's. Not my parents. Not my brother or my other brother. Not my brother in law. Not my 2 nephews nor either of my nieces. Not my nephew in HonKong. Not my wife's cousins in Connecticut nor her widowed godmother in New York. Not any neighbor on either side of my house nor across the street nor the next two houses to the west. Among all the people mentioned here I'm the only one with a BluRay player (no BD discs, though).

DVD and BluRay maintain the original resolution and interlacing from 720x480 captures, don't they? What's wrong with quality DVD and BluRay encoding? You can always keep copies of the encoded material on media other than disc and you can always encode a VHS capture to 30MBps h.264 if you want, even if it's a waste of time and bitrate. Everyone I know, except a few kids who watch nothing but noisy toons off the internet, have lost all visual literacy watching low bitrate garbage off USB sticks in mediocre smart tv's and game devices. Everyone I know who wants a real video experience goes to a movie theater for it or to their DVD players and projectors.

On the other hand, maybe the O.P.'s friends and relatives obsessively ditch any product made longer than 3 months ago, so the latest gadget might be the way for them to go. The problem with the devices you're talking about is that they will all be obsolete and in new versions a year from now. I've had my DVD players and discs since the early 1980's and late 1990's. The last USB stick I bought was defective and had to be returned (they're said to be poor bets for long term storage, and I've already had three of them go bad after very little use, so I don't trust them). Frankly I have no intention of getting rid of my calibrated TV's for the latest mass-produced defects. My current tv's and players will stop performing before I have them replaced -- which would be a huge headache because it takes 3 months to break in a display panel and a full afternoon to calibrate one to D6500 broadcast standards.

These are the fuddy-duddy thoughts that flash through my head every time someone mentions ditching everything in sight and taking off to BestBuy.

There are all kind and manner of playback media and devices. The O.P. will have to use what's best for his own situation.

Some handy thoughts to keep in mind, though.

[sanlyn]

@ latreche34:

Somehow, a short piece of paragrpah in my previous post was deleted and never made it inmto the post. Sorry about that:

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

keep the original resolution and interlacing intact is the better way to go.

That does bring up a good point: Rather than re-encode you can use the high bitrate captures as-is by writing them as .mpg data to BluRay discs or storing on external USB hard drives. MPEG is recognized by just about every player, even older DVD players that have USB input ports. Of course you don't have those handy menus and chapters.

[latreche34]

I'm talking about the vast majority of households that got kids or teenagers, not the ones still live in caves ..lol

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallen

Hello. I had several dozen VHS tapes digitized as AVI files in 720x480 resolution. I've cleaned and edited them down to about eight hours of video, and now I want to burn them to disc.

The process =
capture
> restore (if needed)
> edit (if needed)
> encode MPEG-2
> author assets for DVD
> then burn authored image or folder set

Quote:

Obviously, the resolution of VHS is much lower than even 480 lines, but I can tell a visual difference when comparing files re-encoded as 480p mpeg versus 1280p mpeg.

You're confused about resolutions.

VHS is lower than DVD, but only on the horizontal. Both formats are x480 (VHS in equiv). Thus both are 480i (interlaced). VHS is about 300x480, while Full D1 DVD res is 720x480, or Half D1 352x480.

You cannot compare progressive to interlaced (480p vs. 480i).
Thus even worse is trying to compare to 720p (1280x720) or 1080p HD.

Quote:

And while I don't need the high data rate available from BluRay,

Well, actually, no, the better datarate of BD 15mbps for MPEG would work nicely compared to the 9 max (6avg) of DVD.

Quote:

using BluRay would result in fewer discs.

Yes, this and aforementioned bitrate.

Quote:

I have used TMPGEnc Authoring Works for other projects digitizing film, and I would use it again for this project. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated. Thank you.

For authoring, sure, works well for BD. The menus are crap (lots of aliasing, terrible templates), but the menu-less authoring is nice. Do not use it for encoding, quality will suffer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wallen

I understand that I cannot make a digitized VHS tape look better by upscaling or adding lines.
I know the image will never look better than the source.

You can make VHS look much better than the tapes ... just not by upscaling. It starts in hardware (VCR with TBC, external TBC), color correction (proc amp hardware, or in software), other restoration and editing. Just not upscaling. In fact, upscaling generally makes it worse, not better.

Quote:

TMPGEnc Authoring Works, and allowing it to re-encode as it sees fit.

Do not do this. The encoding is terrible. Even freeware like Avidemux is much better.

Quote:

And this is where I am puzzled about the best approach. If I author for a BluRay, TAW will use, by default, H.264 at a maximum bit rate of 16.8 Mbps.

SD for Blu-ray is MPEG 15mbps.

Quote:

Similarly, TAW will, by default, author a DVD with the MPEG2 encoder, at a maximum bit rate of 8.22 Mbps. I have no idea whether or not this will get me to "as good as reasonably possible." And again, lowering the maximum bit rate would allow me to use fewer discs. Can you shed any light on this for me?

Bitrate resulting in good visual quality depends on the source noise.

sanlyn also gave you a lot of good/accurate information.

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

households nowadays have more smart devices, media players and smart TV's than disc players

That's not correct. You may have streaming in addition to discs, but disc players and discs still sell well.

[dpalomaki]

Quote:

I'm talking about the vast majority of households that got kids or teenagers, not the ones still live in caves ..lol

What do you have in your man/woman cave ? The crux of the matter is to whom will the final video be distributed? Who will be the user? Should the content be split onto separate media by subject matter or similar considerations? In any case the distribution media should fit the user. On the other hand, the archival back-up should fit your work flow.

For best results with DVD the content should be limited to what fits at the max bit rate (typically about 90 minutes). Note that TAW can be used to author HD content to a DVD disc that many Blu-ray players can playback although the time limit is about 20 minutes at typical HD data rates.

More specifically VHS capability was about 240 video lines horizontal resolution, SD TV broadcast about 330, S-VHS perhaps 400 video lines. DVD and DV perhaps 500 lines. All (in NTSC) are 480 (or 486) scan lines. But these are theoretical numbers, and the gear used from lens, sensor, signal path to encoders/decoders to display determine what one actually sees.

As noted, noise in the source video kills the quality of most home made DVDs. Commercial DVD devote a lot of time to optimizing the source video and the encode process for each scene; something most consumer tools do not do. That is a large part of why commercial DVDs look better than home made DVDs.

[latreche34]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpalomaki

What do you have in your man/woman cave ?

In my man cave I have VHS, S-VHS, D-VHS, Betamax, Super Betamax, ED Beta, Video8, Hi8, Digital8, Betacam (all formats), DV, DVCAM, HDV, DVD (never used it much), HD-DVD, Blu-Ray, UHD, 4K media player, 8-track, Audio Cassette, Reel2reel, Vinyl, CD, DCC, DAT and more.

But to judge the world based on what I have doesn't make any sense. Although I see it in my family, schools I go to, friends houses, coworkers, I see it on TV, on the forums ... that physical media is dying and that's a fact backed by a lot of evidence such as stores are closing (Frys for example), Bestbuy and other stores disc section is 1/10 smaller than what it used to be, Netflix is focusing more on streaming since disc rental is dwindling, Thrift stores are packed with DVD players and DVD's, I can go on and on but I think the picture is clear.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

that physical media is dying and that's a fact backed by a lot of evidence such as stores are closing (Frys for example), Bestbuy and other stores disc section is 1/10 smaller than what it used to be, Netflix is focusing more on streaming since disc rental is dwindling, Thrift stores are packed with DVD players and DVD's, I can go on and on but I think the picture is clear.

Well, no, that's not quite accurate.

1/10 smaller compared to when?
Pre-recession (08/09/10), the market had more blank media manufacturing companies. Many of those were shuttered during the recession, while others struggled. M&A happened throughout the 10s, leaving us with just a few large media companies (CMC, Ritek). To a lesser (more complication/muddled) degree, Verbatim/Mitsubishi, Falcon/FTI, few others. Not to mention that blank media sales were always an online affair, not overly B&M. The B&M offerings were always reduced, often with second-class (and worse) "brands" to make the consumers feel more familiar with said CMC, Ritek, etc.

Netflix is more shifting the pressed disc market -- but even then, not really. If anything, modern Netflix supplanted thr mailed-disc Netflix of old, where people often did rip/copy DVDs. But piracy was never the main seller of DVD-R/+R anymore than was the case with VHS. Streaming has not overly disrupted the sales of physical media, especially given the fickle nature of licensing where shows can "disappear" from your watch queue.

TiVo can be easily blamed for timeshifting away from DVD recorders, thus needing less blank media, even if it did (somewhat) pre-date recorders (at least in a market saturation sense). But that's really not accurate either, a weak minority argument, as TiVo users rarely overlapped with keep-recording users (VHS, DVD-R).

"Thrift" stores are simply expanding. Dollar General is a major force on par with Walmart. The new DG location down the road is now stocking produce (fresh fruits/veggies) and some other perishables like eggs and ground meat.

So, no, it's not really that clear.

[dpalomaki]

Quote:

...that physical media is dying and that's a fact backed by a lot of evidence such as stores are closing...

Well, you can credit that to Amazon and other mail order as much as anything. The convenience of next day (or even same day in some locations) delivery to your door at no additional cost, often cheaper than the neighborhood brick and mortar store to which you have to drive.

NETFLIX's streaming and DVD sides do not carry the same content. The overlap is minimal.

Amzon streaming seems to be more expensive then NetFlix DVD, and requires a decent Internet connection. And often content is lip-locked to certain services vs. others, Hulu, Disney, Sony, etc.

But the media giants are pushing 5to killoff physical media and push 22people to streaming for several reasons:
- more effective copy protection than physical media
- minimal distribution cost including
-- no physical media authoring, manufacturing, packaging, and distribution cost
-- no whole sale and retail chain to take a cut
-- just the minimal cost of open internet and a few server farms (the viewer pays for the bandwidth)
- difficult swapping/sharing of thus media protecting the revenue stream
- the rental or purchase left on a server farm or in an on-line que, is volatile and can be "recalled" from public access once it is no longer PC (think Song of the South).

But it is your option to distribute the content you control as you see fit. My point is the distribution method needs to respect the capabilities of receiver of that content.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

But the media giants are pushing 5to killoff physical media and push 22people to streaming for several reasons:

Typos?

Netflix still does DVD rentals?

But yep, that post is pretty accurate.

[latreche34]

Where I live physical media whether blank or pre recorded is on the verge of disappearing, Maybe where I live (Bay area / California) is totally different from where you guys live but get this, none of the local stores in my 10 mile radius sells blank DVD's (except thrift stores), not that I need them but I last checked was 2 weeks ago.

Lordsmurf, Thrift stores expansion is based on how much junk comes in, their profit is not used to buy more merchandise, they get it for free, I don't know of any thrift store where I live sells produce.

[dpalomaki]

[QUOTE...]Maybe where I live (Bay area / California) is totally different from where you guys live...

Read more: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...#ixzz69y7DTJ3T
[/QUOTE]

May qualifies as the understatement of the year.

Thrift Shops (e.g., Salvation Army, GoodWill, etc.) arise where there is a market need. Often where the population mix includes low income people that need thrift store bargains (or rich kids making a fashion statement) and a more affluent population with used goods to donate.

Quote:

Netflix still does DVD rentals?

http://dvd.netflix.com/
They go both ways, separate pricing options.

Interesting that Verizon's FIOS includes NetFlix streaming as a channel option, and many newer traditional "caveman" devices (e.g., TVs, BD Players) offer AMAZON, HULU, NETFLIX, etc. services as menu items.

Sorry about the typos.

[traal]

For those with high speed internet, a link to the file or the unlisted video is convenient enough. That would cut down on the number of DVDs you would need to burn for everyone else.

Also remember that older DVD players sometimes could only play DVD-R, sometimes only DVD+R, and sometimes neither (pressed discs only).

I'm afraid there's no one solution that works for everyone.

[latreche34]

Indeed, DVD-Video was a big deal in the capturing business 20-25 years ago, it was selling, and a lot of people used it as the archival medium by getting rid of their tapes (big mistake). People are always for convenience and if convenience happen to come with a better quality nowadays (better compression algorithms, bigger storage, better connectivity, different sharing platforms) why not utilize them? So if I want to share my work with people surrounding me I make sure I would make it easy for them to enjoy the contents using modern tools not going back 20 years ago. But like you said the OP is the only one knows what works best for his situation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpalomaki

May qualifies as the understatement of the year.

I don't know about that:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/08/the-...-13-years.html

[dpalomaki]

Another factor not mentioned in the decline of media sales is the evolution of the ultimate streaming service - Cable TV, that has gone from a 13-channels for $13/month and only a few movies per week 30 years ago to ~1000 channels (most of which are IMHO garbage) for $250+ per month, and dozens of movie channels.

Who has time to deal with hard copy media when they are already paying for multiple channels of HBO, MAX, TNT, TMC, STARZ, SHO, EPIX, MGM, AMC, etc.