Digitized Video8: What is this analog video effect?

[sven.luebke]

Hi guys!

Could you please help me with my question.

I digitized some "Video 8" camera tapes 10 years back (without any good knowledge) and now I try to improve the quality a little bit using AviSynth+. I'm nearly satisfied with the results. I am just wondering, whether I can reduce these strange black shadows above and to the right of some white sources.

How is this image/analog error called? Ghost? Halo? Chroma issue?

Do you know a AviSynth filter to reduce these effects?
ImageIssue.jpg

Thank you for your help!

BR

[lordsmurf]

Welcome.

Which error? I see
- chroma offset
- bad deinterlace jaggies
- leftover interlace from bad deinterlace
- harsh halo
- blown out highlights
- crushed shadows

What was the capture method?
Fun fact: Most "video" errors are actually added by bad tools, bad software. The original video didn't look so badly processed.

We need to see actual sample clips, attached to the forum.

[sven.luebke]

Thanks for your answer!

If I remember correctly the supplied picture was unmodified/unrendered. It was captured with a Canopus AVDC-55 device which I bought used at ebay at that time. Connected to this device was some Sony (or JVC) Digital8 camera.

I can imagine, that if you spend a lot of dollars, you'll definitely get better results. But it's a low-cost private video, and I didn't want to spend more than 100 dollars for it at that time.

Obviously you see a lot more errors than me . The error I meant is visible on all white objects that adjoin darker background/objects. It looks like a shadow to white shirts (in this sample).

ImageIssueMarked.jpg

[lordsmurf]

Ah, Canopus DV box.
That explains the
- unevenness is the chroma offset
- blockiness seen around the backboard and air vents
- mushiness of the wood grains

I thought it might be a typical bad method, of OBS + cheap capture card.
This is still not great, but for a different reason.

What we see there is called "halo" or "ringing". When you capture with DV boxes, cheap cards, and using wrong software like OBS, it actually intensifies it. The card/software distorted it from the original tape, blurred it into surrounding pixels on recording. It's now so harsh, that nothing can be done to remove it. However, may be it can be shrunk in Avisynth. The problem is that Avisynth will harm the linear wood panels in the same video.

You may have to live with it.

I can contact somebody, see if hell give his input here. My Avisynth-fu is quite good, decades of experience. But I know a few people that are better, especially when it comes to "remove harm, but don't add harm" situations like this. The code gets far more complex.

But honestly, that error is not your main problem. The bigger issue here is the nasty deinterlace, and all the blocks. That's far more distracting.

Ideally, this is a re-capture job. Otherwise it will require some harsh filtering to remove bad deinterlace artifacts, and suppress blocks. Only after that, would I even consider addressing the halo/ringing. This is because block edge and deinterlace jaggies will entirely throw off dehalo/deringing filtering.

If ignore deinterlace/blocks, only address halo/ringing, the video may actually get worse!

[vwestlife]

What was the original camcorder used to record it? A lot of consumer-grade single-chip camcorders added artificial sharpening to make up for the image sensor's lack of resolution. For example, some Sony Hi8 camcorders had a CCD sensor with as little as 200k effective pixels, resulting in visible pixellation and halos, even on a live feed to a TV, not even recording to tape.

In other words, if a consumer-grade camcorder was used, a lot of these flaws may be baked into the original recording, and even the best capture won't be able to undo them.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vwestlife

What was the original camcorder used to record it? A lot of consumer-grade single-chip camcorders added artificial sharpening to make up for the image sensor's lack of resolution. For example, some Sony Hi8 camcorders had a CCD sensor with as little as 200k effective pixels, resulting in visible pixellation and halos, even on a live feed to a TV, not even recording to tape.

In other words, if a consumer-grade camcorder was used, a lot of these flaws may be baked into the original recording, and even the best capture won't be able to undo them.

Good call, that too.

Primitive "enhancement" added black lines to edges, to make the image "pop" in terms of perceived contrast and sharpness on a blurry CRT. In hindsight, that was a huge mistake. (Thankfully we never made that mistake on our 80s-shot family home videos.)

[Haunted_TBC]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vwestlife

a lot of these flaws may be baked into the original recording, and even the best capture won't be able to undo them.

Some of my own tapes have had these sorts of issues, even with Lordsmurf doing his best at addressing fixable issues, they’re inherent to the source. The sort of thing we’ll just have to wait five decades for Artificial Intelligence to be able to completely regenerate the footage to address.

[Selur]

"regenerate" more likely "re-imagine",...
For general amusement, playing around: script => filtered => ConfyUI output

Cu Selur

[sven.luebke]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vwestlife

What was the original camcorder used to record it?

Thanks for pointing that out. It was EXACTLY a (rebranded) Sony camcorder CCD-FX400E bought in ~1990. I tried to find out the resolution of that CCD chip, but couldn't find any information.

[EDIT]

Sony used a ICX045BKA in this camcorder: Number of total pixels: 320k, number of effective pixels: 290k.

[lordsmurf]

Chip resolution should be fine. That's a standard Sony sensor of the era.