I think you're looking at it backwards. Most capture devices I've used don't truncate anything. A few do clip superblacks, regardless of how you set the Proc Amp. With a normal device you set it so that your blacks are at 16, whites at 235, and it captures the superblacks and superwhites.

Well then if you tell it to allow Full Range, then Black till be 0 and White will be 255 right?
Simply allow Full Range in virtualdub, and adjust the brightness/contrast?

I'm afraid I have no idea what you mean. "Allow full range"?

In virtualdub, when you capture the default is TV range right?
So anything below or above 16/235 is clipped.

But if you check Extend Luma white/black point this goes to 0-255. (this is what i mean with Allow full range).

No; if you're capturing YUV by default in VirtualDub what you get is whatever the device outputs. As I said above, for most devices this keeps superblacks and superwhites intact (it's up to you to ensure that actual black and white are calibrated to TV range).

I believe the options you're referring to interpolate the incoming data outward, thus clipping the ends.

Ah i thought so much, but hoped i was wrong.

So extending is simply altering the already received data, which would be the same at just changing TV -> PC with Avisynth later, which would lose it's purpose anyway in the way i wanted.

Well i guess all Capture cards capture in TV range. Exception may be Digital input.

Did anyone here try the Kramer FC-400 mentioned earlier in this thread? It's one of the few sub-$1000 TBCs still available to buy brand-new (although discontinued by the manufacturer) and yet reviews/user opinions online are non-existent. It doesn't seem to show up on the second hand market either.

I need a TBC to provide reliable sync from the S-Video output of my LaserDisc player before feeding the corrected signal to an AV Receiver/video processor. It appears that modern video processors don't like 'unstable' sync from LD players, which surprises me because LD players have line-level TBCs built in. When outputting S-video to an AVR from my LD player, the AVR frequently loses sync for a couple of seconds before video is restored, especially when selecting still-frame or using picture search.

I'm not concerned about video capture at this stage, and I don't like what I've read about the AVT-8710 and other TBCs in this price range which all have cheap video processors included. I'm pefectly happy with the video quality from my LD player when upscaled by the AVR, I just need a TBC to maintain sync without having a detrimental effect on the picture.

I advice to check your LD player. The output from the LD player should be as stable as rock. Try the DVD player's S-Video and see if u get the same problem. Also S-Video from the LD player might not be the best idea.

The LD player works fine when connected directly to a TV via S-Video, so I know the player is OK. The 3D Comb Filter in the player is superior to the 2D filter in the AVR, so using an S-video connection is still my preferred option.

I've noticed that the AVR's video processor only loses sync when using 3D processing in the LD player. If I switch the player's 3D Comb Filter off, so it's operating in 2D mode, then there's no loss of sync, but of course that introduces other issues such as cross colour contamination and dot crawl. I'm hoping if I use a TBC, I'll be able to continue using the player's Comb Filter.

I've tried a direct composite video connection to the TV (by-passing the AVR's video processor), and found that whilst the TV has a very good 3D Comb Filter built-in, de-interlacing performed by the TV is useless and produces an unacceptably soft picture. I much prefer the image clarity produced by the AVR.

If I can't solve these sync problems by using a TBC, then I suppose my next option would be to try a dedicated video processor from DVDO or Lumigen.

Something is not right in your LD player's 3D comb filter. I doubt TBC will help. What player is it? Also keep in mind that the LD player's built-in 3D comb filter converts analog signal to digital, than back to analog for S-Video.

Honestly, if I were you, I'd digitize all of the LDs losslessly and then produce either DVDs or BDs or whatever. What are you going to do if your LD player breaks?

But the 3D Comb Filter works fine when S-Video is output directly to a TV, so if anything's 'not right' it's the way the AVR'S video processor is overly fussy about timing.

The player is a Pioneer HLD-X9 with very low usage. You're right about the digitizing though, I will eventually need to capture any content which isn't available on DVD/Blu-ray. I have a back-up LD player, but it's nowhere near as good as the X9.

I chose a different approach. Instead of X9 which converts the signal to digital and then back to analog I chose Elite LD-S2 which is produces the best analog picture with very little noise. I'll be using external 3D comb filter from ATI HD 750 PCIe capture card and from Panasonic DMR-ES25 DVD Recorder.

Yes, I've heard the LD-S2 is a great player. I prefer the convenience of a double sided player, although I'm sure I wouldn't turn down an LD-S2 or HLD-X0 if they were offered.

I asked Kramer what Comb Filter they use in their FC-400 TBC when converting composite to S-Video, and all they could tell me was that it's "done digitally in firmware" and they're not sure what algorithm is used, which seems a little vague. I suppose it's a product I'll just have to try for myself, if I can find a retailer with a good enough return policy.

Given that all you're looking to do is sending your existing S-Video signal to your AVR in a format that doesn't lose sync, I would say look on your local Craigslist for any DVD recorders with S-Video input and HDMI output (analog output would also work but then you incur an extra DAC step). Get the model numbers and Google the manuals to check whether they can output 480i over HDMI, because otherwise you will be stuck using the recorder's deinterlacing which may be even worse than your TV's.

That should be far cheaper than a TBC, at least if your area is anything like mine for DVD recorder prices ($15-40 for non-combos) and if the seller is agreeable you may be able to test before you buy.

The DVD recorder option is one I might consider as a last resort. I'm trying to avoid buying even more old, bulky equipment at this stage and would prefer a tidier solution if at all possible.

Having said that, I believe the Panasonic DMR-ES20 series have really good 3D Comb Filters (possibly superior to the one in the HLD-X9) which would enable me to use a composite video connection from the X9 if required. I would have to look into the deinterlacing quality of those recorders and whether there's an option to output 480i as you said.

The DMR-ES20 does have a decent y/c comb filter but it doesn't have HDMI output. Like most DVD recorders, it records interlaced video. It does so because by strict specification, DVD (and standard definition BluRay/AVCHD as well) are interlaced. The ES20 also has elementary built-in line-level and frame-level sync tbc's on its Line 1 input. It can output progressive-scan 480p thru its component output.

The deinterlacer in the DMR-ES25 (HDMI) is truly horrible when it's actually operating in interpolation ("Video") mode, but it does have film mode detection that you can switch on for each individual input. (Progressive "Off" does nothing for HDMI on this unit; it's for the component output.)

Attachment 4881

The 3D comb filter is the same as the DMR-ES15 and DMR-ES10 so it's probably the same as the DMR-ES20. The comb filter of my DMR-E20 (2002) looks very similar too, though a little worse. Not sure how these compare to the HLD-X9 or X0. There are some images available throughout this thread, but you do have to keep in mind that most of the DVD recorder test patterns are being fed from low-noise DVD outputs, while the LD tests are done with analog players and analog pressings that may have complicating factors going back as far as the master.

Unlike the DMR-ES25, (some of?) Panasonic's later NTSC models have 480i output over HDMI, and it seems like all of their PAL models with HDMI output I looked at can do it interlaced.

Yes, here is an example.
Panasonic DMR EH595...see screens

[Also works with a Pana DMR EH65]

What's the example of later NTSC models with 480i output over HDMI? And what's their 3D comb filter? Is there also a Posterization artifact?

Actually I'm relying on ATI 750 HD PCIe for 3D comb filter, if I don't get AGC issues. I do get them on couple of LDs with LD-S2, but not on others and not with CLD-703 player.

The setup of Panasonic DMR-ES25 + Conexant based Component USB stick is there just in case.
If this can be replaced with better 3D comb filter and HDMI output, I'll look at the possibility.

DMR-EZ28 for example. I have no idea about the comb filter for these late models. It could be 2D for all I know.

I think I sent you an email about a 3DYC card that can be set to manual gain.

I'm aware that this thread is few months old, but since I have a question about TBC I didn't want to create a new thread for it.
Since full frame TBC's digitize the analog video and convert it back to analog after fixing it, Do they make TBC's that skip the last step and send digitized frames to the computer? Is there any noticeable loss of quality from going from A to D and then D to A inside the TBC and then from A to D in the capture card ?

Yes, they do. Every broadcast-level TBC that has SDI output, for example.

"Noticeable" is subjective, and the quality loss will depend on how good the DAC of the TBC is, how good the ADC of your capture card is, and your ability to configure it to minimize losses.

I have the VMC-1 except from being a DV device it does not convert back to analog only in a stand alone TBC configuration - see attached picture - So basically it takes the analog video applies the AGC and converts to digital at 10bit and then applies the full frame sync//TBC//3D Y/C processing and route the digital signal to the DV encoder, The same digital signal goes to a D/A 10bit chip and out to analog output needed if used as a stand alone TBC.
Why they don't make such device with MPEG2-4 instead of DV for non studio use?

Attachment 5775

They did, in Japan. (But for MPEG-4 only Simple Profile, not AVC.) Doesn't help those of you with PAL sources...

You were asking about TBCs before, not encoding devices.

Yes, the two questions are related, Can a TBC be a digital converter? sort of a question.
What is the name of the Japanese device?

Oh, these two specific cards do support PAL.

http://www.expandore.com/product/edi.../MVRD2200V.htm
http://www.expandore.com/product/edi...s/MVRD4400.htm ("Developer" board: no software to make it work)

Thanks for the links, I don't have any means to use PCI cards, Do they output 4:2:2 losseless though?

First you want MPEG-2/4 and then you want 4:2:2... :laugh:

They aren't intended to.

Is there a limit on how many questions you ask in the forum?

Time Base Corrector - Defective Chipset; Cypress CTB-100
 

It is mentioned that the Cypress CTB-100 has a defective chipset?

What symptoms of the defective chip would there be (what will I see on the screen)?

How do I compare a Good unit with a Defective unit?

Yes. You may only post 65535 questions before the site self destructs! But seriously, no, no limit.
In 10+ years, nobody has ever asked that. :laugh:

See: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vcr-...-8710-doa.html

Without the use of a TBC, will a capture card freeze up trying to capture static VHS noise? (Usually on the part of a tape that has been recorded over) If so would the ES-10 capture everything on screen, without losing frames?

Often, yes.

Not necessarily, no.
The DMR-ES10 is not a TBC.
It has some TBC-like abilities, which should only be used when certain conditions exist (tearing, unstable visual timing, etc).

FYI: If you need a TBC, I have a TBC-1000 available. PM me. :wink2:

Thanks. I may do in future, but don't need it at the moment. Still to buy/build a capturing rig, and get my main pc up and running that i built (after much trial and error!)

Ah crumbs, i bought the ES10 a little while back, thinking i got a really good TBC for a cheap price.. knew it was too good to be true :laugh: But it has it's uses.

There are varying degrees of tbc power and action. The ES10 has a powerful line-tbc function, and somehwat nominal frame sync function. A "true" frame-level external tbc has more powerful frame sync as well as signal timing cleanup that defeats Macrovision. The ES10 won't defeat copy protection but it does have an effective line tbc -- and you'd better disable its input line DNR, which causes ghosting and excessive posterizing. You need the Panasonic's remote to do that. You should know the difference between the two types of tbc, both of which are needed for analog tape capture. Don't even think about capturing analog tape without a line tbc of some kind, either builtin to the VCR or as pass-thru with your ES10.

Here was interesting post on another thread over from the videohelp forum.

That was what convinced to buy one really. But not having full frame tbc functionality, this is false information surely?

And then there's the issue of posterization. I think i'll only use it for tearing, or for some dodgy tapes recorded in LP mode, as they are more prone to shaking/jittering.

You can avoid problems by turning off the ES10's input and playback DNR. This aggressive noise reduction is common with many components, including VCR's with heavy-duty builtin DNR like JVC and Panasonic players, as well as many TV sets. The noise reduction in these components is primitive compared to shop-grade units and to denoising in software with something like Avisynth. Also, bear in mind that the frame syc function in DVD recorders is there to help ensure a/v sync and frame rates, not to defeat copy protection, so these pass-thru units do have some level of frame sync.

Analog tapes are noisy crummy awful dirty source signals to begin with. Clever denoising in post processing is used to defeat it, and this itself can cause posterization and hard gradient edges. There are plenty of filtering techniques that avoid or fix it, especially with anime. Complaints about posterizing usually rise from users who don't know what they're doing, or who expect a perfect capture and final output with Step #1 of their projects and are too lazy to realize that analog sources are lousy and require some cleanup work. Their wok is often characterized by no cleanup at all, or by overkill such as over filtering, over sharpening, illegal video levels, and other boo-boo's resulting from sloppy work done in a rush.

I read from others that the ES10 can still have some posterization, even with the DNR turned off? Those users must have their VCR's DNR turned on then. Though i do have a Panasonic NV-HS860, where you can turn it off, but still have the TBC on, which is nice.

Also bear this in mind: "Copy protection" is nothing more than artificially injected errors into the video signal. Then video equipment is trained to either listen to, or ignore correction of, those types of errors. And there are many types of copy protection. What this means is that actual video errors can trip up "copy protection", even when no such protection exists.

At its most basic, frames syncs hold a frame until the next frame is fed to it. So yes, I'm sure it does have this minimal ability. But frames syncs can do more, which all DVD recorders lack. Note that "frame sync" isn't TBC, but TBC can be frame sync (but not necessarily). For example, the DataVideo TBC-100/1000/3000/4000 are true frame sync TBC.

Note to all: I have some extra TBCs that I'm parting with. PM if interested.

Not just visually, but signal-wise, too! :old:

I'm one of those users ... so no. :no2:

I'd know better. :wink2:

I agree with lordsmurf. The frame sync "TBC" in pas-thru units are OK for helping to stop dropped frames and bad audio sync, but as lordsmurf says there are other signal problems that require a "rel" TBC like man AVT-8710 or TBC 100/1000/*. One example is a project I've spent sometime on, a VHS recorded on cheap tape at 6-hour speed with a abd cable signal and a really cheap VCR.

I recorded this msyelkf off a really crummy cable signal, so you'd expect to copy protection problems. Right? Wrong. This home tape was obviously not Macrovision, but playing it with a non-tbc VCR I used the ES10 as a line-tbc pass-thru. I was getting good frame rate and a/v sync, no sync problems, no dropped frames, etc. But I was getting the kind of top-border flashing that looked like Macrovision. Clue: the signal had so much imbedded noise that the capture chain was picking up false-positives that looked like Macrovision. Fix: I used the ES10 for line-tbc and the AVT-8710 for signal-cleaning tbc. So I couldn't take the cheap lazy way out and had to use both the pass-thru and the full frame-sync tbc. I then tried that same tape with an AG-1980 and it's builtin line tbc but no AVT -- result: I still got false Macrovision detection.

Moral: sooner or later, whether you use a VCR with line tbc or a pass-thru line tbc, you're going to need a full-fledged external frame-level TBC. People are always trying to beat City Hall on this. Sometimes they succeed, but many times they don't. People have known this for a very long time, but you still have outlaws who try to trick the system. Pros and experienced users don't just hook up stuff because it looks cool. Every piece has its function.