07-08-2011, 01:52 PM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
I think I've been reading this forum too much! I've learned a lot, which is why I'm more confused at the moment.
My VHS tapes... regular home video footage, 120's taped in what I suppose is SP mode.. each is 2 hrs long (that's SP right?). No real issues with lines or bouncing. Issues with clarity. A couple are dark but that was an issue with the recorder used at the time. Most of my dissatisfaction is with the clarity of the faces. Closer looks ok, but watching people distantly is very unpleasant. Oh, and I also have the Hi8, mini vhs, and mini dvd's to transfer. I have the original recorders used to tape these, and assume the workflow will be the same, just using the original recorder as my source?
My source VHS player... Recently purchased JVC sr-v10u. Tested them out (got more than one) and my tapes appear clearer but still not where I want them to be. I know what the settings should be (read it here). I honestly couldn't see a difference when I turned those settings on which should be off.
Things "In Between"... I am looking for the following. I think I've found a TBC-1000 (datavideo). I also have my eye on finding a Vidicraft Detailer III or maybe a II if that will help with my clarity issue. I may be interested in a proc amp if I can find one at a good price. I'm also looking at getting an ES15 for pass-through, again aiming at getting these as clear as possible.
My capture device... JVC dr-m10 or 100 (no idea which is better, if such a thing).
Now the confusing part. I want to have the ability to edit (eg- all Christmas's together one right after another), and create menu's. I don't think I can do that with the setup above. I think I'll have to take the resulting dvd, put it in my computer and do "something" with it... convert it or something. I don't know what I need to do this and I suppose I'll be happy just to get these transferred with great results. I tend to want things as perfect as possible.
I've read about the TBC-1000... some known issues... and modifying it into what could be considered the TBC-100 (only in standalone version). But then I wonder, would it be better to somehow transfer all these using my computer instead of each hardware device above? I suppose I would still need most of those units as pass-through? Again, too much reading = confused.
One more note. I am toying with the idea of doing this on a more professional level. I haven't decided yet, but I want to know how to do this with best results (the right way). I can get the TBC1000 ordered today with a very small return policy, so would need to know how to test it when it arrives.. haven't ordered yet because unsure if I should get it or the TBC100. I know I'm asking a ton of questions here. Thank you...
Angela (ps.. not one of the women who uses tons of lotions LOL, nor do I smoke)
|
Someday, 12:01 PM
|
|
Ads / Sponsors
|
|
Join Date: ∞
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
|
|
|
07-08-2011, 05:31 PM
|
|
Site Staff | Web Hosting, Photo
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,311
Thanked 376 Times in 342 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Angela (ps.. not one of the women who uses tons of lotions LOL, nor do I smoke)
|
Hahaha....
You've been reading past posts on this forum for sure! I think at some point in time, every "used goods" buyer has run into some slimy/stinky item that's been subjected to somebody's filthy habits., lack of hygiene, etc. YUCK!!!
Quote:
I think I've been reading this forum too much! I've learned a lot, which is why I'm more confused at the moment.
|
Too much? Never. Being confused is a good thing. It means you're having to digest everything. It just takes time, and well as guidance -- which is what you're getting from Site Staff when you post questions as a Premium Member. The only thing that may offer confusion is when you dig into really old posts, from 2003-2004 or so. There are certain changes in encoding, media, and hardware that have matured since then. Not to say any older advice is "too old" but simply that a few things may need to be put into a current perspective from time to time. And that's done by, as you've just done, asking questions.
Quote:
My VHS tapes... regular home video footage,
|
This is usually good, though sometimes old cameras weren't recording properly.
Quote:
120's taped in what I suppose is SP mode.. each is 2 hrs long (that's SP right?)
|
Correct. T120 tape = 120 minutes, and 2 hours filling a tape = SP mode
Quote:
No real issues with lines or bouncing.
|
That's good.
Quote:
Issues with clarity. A couple are dark but that was an issue with the recorder used at the time. Most of my dissatisfaction is with the clarity of the faces. Closer looks ok, but watching people distantly is very unpleasant.
|
VHS era consumer camcorders often have cheap glass, cheap imaging components, etc. On those lousy cameras, the videos commonly have ghosting "mouse trails" on lights, fuzzy out-of-focus images, off white balance, grain, dull audio, and color deviations. The older the camera, the more crappy it was.
Quote:
Oh, and I also have the Hi8, mini vhs, and mini dvd's to transfer. I have the original recorders used to tape these, and assume the workflow will be the same, just using the original recorder as my source?
|
Hi8, yes. Those tapes should be gorgeous.
Mini DVD is already digital, just rip the discs.
VHS-C is a nightmare, and probably the one thing that truly hate doing. Because it's such a hard format to work with, many people send us their VHS-C tapes for conversion. Conversion and restoration of these tapes often causes me to get extremely creative with our equipment, and rarely can I get through a tape stack without having re-wired everything several times, due to playing "musical equipment" to get the perfect combination of hardware put into a workflow compatible with the crummy tape. (In fact, because of projects in 2010-2011 getting progressively worse each time, we'll be increasing rates on VHS-C tape conversions in the near future. It's just gotten out of hand how much work is needed for those little 30-minute cassettes.) An SR-V10, AG-1980, and metal JVC adapter are a minimum requirement. The original VHS-C cameras are probably one of the worst choices, because of blue-screen drops, tracking issues, poor playback heads, and impossible nature of removing an "eaten" tape (should it occur, and it often does). SP mode recordings are not nearly as much of an issue as the SLP mode recordings (90 minutes on a TC-30E tape).
Quote:
My source VHS player... Recently purchased JVC sr-v10u. Tested them out (got more than one) and my tapes appear clearer but still not where I want them to be. I know what the settings should be (read it here). I honestly couldn't see a difference when I turned those settings on which should be off.
|
Follow the guide: http://www.digitalFAQ.com/guides/vid...k-hardware.htm
The forum is also full of related discussions, most of them just repeated that guide, some slightly expanding on it. If you don't see much difference in quality, the errors may be too severe to correct outside of buying more hardware, and/or some advanced software work.
Quote:
I think I've found a TBC-1000 (datavideo).
|
That's good.
Quote:
I also have my eye on finding a Vidicraft Detailer III or maybe a II if that will help with my clarity issue.
|
It might, however, it's composite. By using composite instead of s-video, you risk dulling the quality somewhat, due to crosstalk of the luma and two chroma channels of the signal. They blur together, further impacting visual clarity. Better detailers have s-video, but admittedly cost quite a bit more. Vidicraft gear is from the 1980s, pre-svideo, and the later SignVideo (or Studio 1 Production rebadged SignVideo gear) is ideal. Hard to find used -- impossible, really. New, you're looking at a few hundred dollars.
Quote:
I may be interested in a proc amp if I can find one at a good price.
|
There have been several Elite Video BVP-4 units on eBay lately. They're all selling below value, too!
Quote:
I'm also looking at getting an ES15 for pass-through, again aiming at getting these as clear as possible.
|
Only use this for video with tearing errors. It's not transparent, and will harm the signal. The only reason it's good for tearing correction is because tearing is far worse than the posterizing and overly-aggressive NR caused by ES processing. Yes, that includes NR when NR is supposedly turned off.
Quote:
My capture device... JVC dr-m10 or 100 (no idea which is better, if such a thing).
|
If you nitpick, the DR-M100 is better. But we're talking about measuring mosquito noise levels at SP/LP compression. They're basically the same. The difference is simply due to different generations of the LSI Logic DoMiNo chipset. One is 8602, and I forget the other. I'm sure it was discussed in the forum, many years ago, when the machines were still new and being dissected by members for study.
Quote:
Now the confusing part. I want to have the ability to edit (eg- all Christmas's together one right after another), and create menu's. I don't think I can do that with the setup above. I think I'll have to take the resulting dvd, put it in my computer and do "something" with it... convert it or something. I don't know what I need to do this and I suppose I'll be happy just to get these transferred with great results. I tend to want things as perfect as possible.
|
Define "edit". Are you going to try to alter the footage (insert titles, commentary tracks, etc)? Or just chop it up as if it were a scrapbook, and you had a stack of photos, scissors and tape? If the latter, that's an easy workflow. All you need is the DVDs (DVD-RW suggested), DVD Decrypter, Womble MPEG Video Wizard to edit, and a DVD authoring program. DVDWS2 is still a favorite, most suggested for pro-quality menus. Because that's getting to be a hard-to-find program, we need to start looking for alternatives. (Get it while you can.)
Avoid converting, re-encoding.
Quote:
I've read about the TBC-1000... some known issues... and modifying it into what could be considered the TBC-100 (only in standalone version). But then I wonder, would it be better to somehow transfer all these using my computer instead of each hardware device above? I suppose I would still need most of those units as pass-through? Again, too much reading = confused
|
This is the rule:
Workflow #1 - If the video is high quality already (including after hardware processing), the you can go right into a good quality DVD recorder. LSI based DVD recorders, like certain JVC models, will also clean up chroma noise commonly found on VHS tapes.
Workflow #2 - If you need to do advanced edited work, or the video is severely screwed up, you'll be putting them through a number of softwares to edit/restore. For that, you don't really want MPEG compression on the front end, so you capture to lossless or uncompressed formats, massage the video as needed, then output to DVD/MPEG.
The exception to this rule is when you want to remove excessive chroma noise -- a process that best done in hardware. In those cases, you pick a max bitrate on the DVD recorder (XP mode), and record. Then rip the discs, convert to lossless AVI, and the continue workflow #2.
A lot of people ignore these workflows, and end up with DVDs that look like crap -- either the same as the VHS tape, or more commonly creating a DVD that looks WORSE than the already-crummy VHS tape. The latter tends to be the most common method of conversion, including even by so-called "professional conversion services" (the ones you find in strip malls, or your local phonebook). Lousy DVDs are made with lousy equipment, in shoddy workflows -- most of them missing hardware to improve the quality.
I'm always glad to see folks like yourself that want quality, not just the "good enough" lazy quality. (I truly hate the term "good enough", as it's little more than an excuse to dismiss critical comments on image quality. If the word "enough" follows the word "good", then it's not good at all.)
_______
On a side note, I have two brand new ( new in box, never used) TBC-100's that I'll be selling for $300 + shipping. These are tested, and guaranteed to work. With the recent outbreak of defective AVT-8710 units, the fact that the TBC-100 is an unavailable model of TBC, and considering it's potentially superior to the TBC-1000 due to lack of interfering distro amp circuits, I'm thinking these will sell very quickly. I've been to busy to post an ad on the marketplace forum. I'm temporarily holding one in reserve for a client (he's away for 2-3 weeks, doesn't want to talk business at the moment, understandably), but the other one is up or grabs!
I can provide a creative rig for anybody wanting to run it as an external unit, instead of in a computer PCI slot. It will run about $25 extra, but has been flawless. The homemade enclosure is good for about 8 hours at a time, before it needs to let the card cool down for 8 hours. I've not yet figured out a way to create an aluminum enclosure, which would let it run for at least double that time.
- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site. - Please Like Us on Facebook | Follow Us on Twitter
- Need a good web host? Ask me for help! Get the shared, VPS, semi-dedicated, cloud, or reseller you need.
|
The following users thank kpmedia for this useful post:
cc4npg (07-09-2011)
|
07-08-2011, 10:20 PM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
VHS era consumer camcorders often have cheap glass, cheap imaging components, etc. On those lousy cameras, the videos commonly have ghosting "mouse trails" on lights, fuzzy out-of-focus images, off white balance, grain, dull audio, and color deviations. The older the camera, the more crappy it was.
|
Yes, and I had one of the very first ones made. I think I bought it in 1989, and I think it was Panasonic. Some videos are worse than others. Shots filmed at a distance are, in my opinion, just terrible. The ghosting you speak of is a good word I'd use. Maybe when I can see the video with more clarity, I'll notice all the other things you speak of that may be off... color and such.
Quote:
VHS-C is a nightmare, and probably the one thing that truly hate doing. Because it's such a hard format to work with, many people send us their VHS-C tapes for conversion. Conversion and restoration of these tapes often causes me to get extremely creative with our equipment, and rarely can I get through a tape stack without having re-wired everything several times, due to playing "musical equipment" to get the perfect combination of hardware put into a workflow compatible with the crummy tape. (In fact, because of projects in 2010-2011 getting progressively worse each time, we'll be increasing rates on VHS-C tape conversions in the near future. It's just gotten out of hand how much work is needed for those little 30-minute cassettes.) An SR-V10, AG-1980, and metal JVC adapter are a minimum requirement. The original VHS-C cameras are probably one of the worst choices, because of blue-screen drops, tracking issues, poor playback heads, and impossible nature of removing an "eaten" tape (should it occur, and it often does). SP mode recordings are not nearly as much of an issue as the SLP mode recordings (90 minutes on a TC-30E tape).
|
I suppose these are VHS-C? They are tiny and say "Mini DV" on them? Thankfully, they are what I have the least of... only five of them and I think only three have actual footage I need. The other two are inventory I think. So I will need the AG-1980 as well. I guess I have been lucky. I watched these tapes through the original recording device (Sony I think) and didn't have any issues with them being eaten. Technology moved SO fast during those years that we didn't use the Hi8 or Mini DV or even the Mini DVD very much at all.
Quote:
Follow the guide: http://www.digitalFAQ.com/guides/vid...k-hardware.htm
The forum is also full of related discussions, most of them just repeated that guide, some slightly expanding on it. If you don't see much difference in quality, the errors may be too severe to correct outside of buying more hardware, and/or some advanced software work.
|
Will Do. I think the majority of my problem is with ghosting of images, the further away the footage was shot, the worse it is.
Quote:
It might, however, it's composite. By using composite instead of s-video, you risk dulling the quality somewhat, due to crosstalk of the luma and two chroma channels of the signal. They blur together, further impacting visual clarity. Better detailers have s-video, but admittedly cost quite a bit more. Vidicraft gear is from the 1980s, pre-svideo, and the later SignVideo (or Studio 1 Production rebadged SignVideo gear) is ideal. Hard to find used -- impossible, really. New, you're looking at a few hundred dollars.
|
Uggg... that's what I was afraid of. I've been looking at the S1 and SignVideo and yes, more expensive. I'm not going to invest in something that won't do the job though. I'll be patient... and it will turn up either on eBay or Craigslist somewhere.
Quote:
There have been several Elite Video BVP-4 units on eBay lately. They're all selling below value, too!
|
Will look for one. I'm not sure I'll need it, but it's quite possible I'm just not seeing the color being off because of the lack of clarity. I'll probably not worry with the ES15 at the moment. After researching a bit more on the "tearing", I do have a tape that fits that description. Fortunately, it isn't one of my home video's I'm trying to restore so that's good. However, in my spare time (insert sarcastic laughter here), I may toy with it to see if I can get it fixed.
Quote:
If you nitpick, the DR-M100 is better. But we're talking about measuring mosquito noise levels at SP/LP compression. They're basically the same. The difference is simply due to different generations of the LSI Logic DoMiNo chipset. One is 8602, and I forget the other. I'm sure it was discussed in the forum, many years ago, when the machines were still new and being dissected by members for study.
|
Then the DR-M100 is what I want if possible.
Quote:
Define "edit". Are you going to try to alter the footage (insert titles, commentary tracks, etc)? Or just chop it up as if it were a scrapbook, and you had a stack of photos, scissors and tape?
|
Just "cut and paste" if you will. I'm not wanting to add anything to the original footage. I just want to organize and have consecutive Easters or Birthdays one right after the other. I want to create a Title for the DVD (Christmas 1989 and 1990, for example), and then Chapters (Christmas @ Moms, Christmas @ Home, etc). I want to have the ability to place the Chapters creatively on the screen, and have a background image. I'm in the process of getting DVD Decrypter, Womble, and DVDWS2.
I felt I knew I didn't want to convert, because I noticed significant loss in quality when I did that.
Quote:
... you don't really want MPEG compression on the front end, so you capture to lossless or uncompressed formats, massage the video as needed, then output to DVD/MPEG.
|
Not sure I understand how to capture to uncompressed format. My fiance' is helping me and he's not certain he understands either. I know it's a huge file. Does DVD Decrypter or Womble do this?
I don't think my issue is chroma noise... most of that is gone with the SR-V10U. It cleared up a lot of the ghosting too, but some remains. At least I can see the whites of my child's eyes again. I'm assuming the max bitrate (XP mode) is the slowest recording mode, yielding one hour on a dvd.
Quote:
I'm always glad to see folks like yourself that want quality, not just the "good enough" lazy quality. (I truly hate the term "good enough", as it's little more than an excuse to dismiss critical comments on image quality. If the word "enough" follows the word "good", then it's not good at all.)
|
I've never been pleased with "good enough". I've been called OCD as a result at times, but granted, there was a time when I really abused the term "perfectionist". When I do something, it's usually 200% and I expect much of the same from anyone around me, or at least, I have in the past. I very much appreciate the fact that those on this site really strive to teach and help those of us who really want to learn and excel. I found this site from a simple search on Google, which led me to several posts from "lordsmurf", and ultimately led me here. I'm absolutely certain I'll have more questions. You guys are amazing!
|
07-09-2011, 04:44 PM
|
|
Site Staff | Video
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 14,238
Thanked 2,585 Times in 2,197 Posts
|
|
There are several "small tape" formats:
- VHS-C
- S-VHS-C
- MiniDV (DV)
- Video8 (8mm)
- Hi8
- Digital8
- MicroMV (Sony)
These are all quite different formats. So if you have MiniDV tapes, you're not dealing with VHS-C, and that voids that portion of the above conversations. MiniDV is rather eas to work with -- plug the camera into the computer via Firewire, and "capture" (transfer) the DV to a DV AVI file, and then encode it. You can also feed it to a DVD recorder if you must, but you'll get best possible quality with DV slowly 2-pass encoded with a quality MPEG encoders ( MainConcept Reference, for example).
I would not make a big fuss over DR-M10S vs DR-M100S -- get what you can get. Note that there is a lousy "100" type model out there from JVC, in later years -- the MV100B. Don't buy that one, as it's not using the LSI chipset. At least not that I'm aware of, and I used to follow chipset makers like a hawk from about 2003-2009. I gave up in recent years, because all new DVD recorders are bulk-grade junk now.
Uncompressed or lossless capture happens with only certain computer capture cards.
I can be OCD about video, too, but only up to a certain point. I have run across people that are willing to extract a video into tens of thousands of individual frames, and clean them up in Photoshop, one at a time, over a period of many years. Personally, I think they're insane. I would not do that even if paid. Yes, it sometimes looks good, but it's not worth that much effort.
|
The following users thank lordsmurf for this useful post:
cc4npg (07-09-2011)
|
07-09-2011, 07:41 PM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Well, I'm sure getting a ton of info and my brain is on overload as I try to digest all of it. It appears I need to get my hands on a computer with XP, at least 1.5 ghz, in order to do the ATI AIW capture card. I'm taking things one at a time, but I try to always be one step ahead so I know I have everything I need. If I want to make a menu for my dvd, and if I want to "cut and paste" portions of each dvd so I can get all Christmas's/B-day's/etc. organized, I will need to capture the video uncompressed. To do that, I need either that AIW card or a pci 600 card (I currently operate with Windows 7). I know nothing about these cards. My fiance' knows about computers so I'll have to ask him, but from what I'm reading, I need an older system. I also need to get Firewire.
There is a lot involved in doing this right... but I'll get there.
|
07-09-2011, 08:55 PM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Ok... I want to make sure I have this right. I need a capture card in order to transfer my Mini DV and Hi8 to dvd, because I have to do this with the computer in order to get the best quality, right? Or is there some other form of capture if I'm not adding titles? Do I still need to concentrate on the All In Wonder card or will the ATI pci 650 still give me excellent quality?
Capturing to uncompressed or lossless formats is only for video that needs additional major editing or correcting, right?
I don't want to lose the quality/clarity I achieve in transferring my VHS tapes in the process of adding a Menu. And then, in transferring the Hi8 and Mini DV, from what Lordsmurf is indicating, I will need to capture these using my computer (again meaning I'll need some sort of capture card I presume).... so I'm still going to need to invest in one of those two capture cards above right?
I'm hoping to do these using an AMD Phenom 8400 Triple Core with 2.1 ghz proc and 3 gb ram and I just had a secondary terabyte (sp?) hard drive installed in it for my footage.
|
07-11-2011, 09:26 AM
|
|
Site Staff | Video
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 14,238
Thanked 2,585 Times in 2,197 Posts
|
|
Quote:
I need a capture card in order to transfer my Mini DV ... to dvd
|
No. Just a Firewire port on the computer.
Quote:
I need a capture card in order to transfer my ... Hi8 to dvd
|
Yes, correct.
Quote:
because I have to do this with the computer in order to get the best quality, right? Or is there some other form of capture if I'm not adding titles? Do I still need to concentrate on the All In Wonder card or will the ATI pci 650 still give me excellent quality?
|
Re-read this quote from several posts earlier:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kpmedia
This is the rule:
Workflow #1 - If the video is high quality already (including after hardware processing), the you can go right into a good quality DVD recorder. LSI based DVD recorders, like certain JVC models, will also clean up chroma noise commonly found on VHS tapes.
Workflow #2 - If you need to do advanced edited work, or the video is severely screwed up, you'll be putting them through a number of softwares to edit/restore. For that, you don't really want MPEG compression on the front end, so you capture to lossless or uncompressed formats, massage the video as needed, then output to DVD/MPEG.
The exception to this rule is when you want to remove excessive chroma noise -- a process that best done in hardware. In those cases, you pick a max bitrate on the DVD recorder (XP mode), and record. Then rip the discs, convert to lossless AVI, and the continue workflow #2.
|
This thread may also be helpful: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...r-capture.html
"Best quality" can come from several possible ways. If I were doing these tapes, I'd run them through a JVC DVD recorder in on the FR170 setting, which maximizes bitrate at 352x480 (slightly better than XP mode for bitrate allocation). Rip with DVD Decrypter, chop up the footage in Womble MPEG Video Wizard, then author in TAW4 (no menus) or DVDWS2 (menus). We can talk about authoring software much later -- still too early for that tidbit. Let's get over the hump of capture and edit.
Quote:
Capturing to uncompressed or lossless formats is only for video that needs additional major editing or correcting, right?
|
Generally speaking, yes, correct.
Quote:
I don't want to lose the quality/clarity I achieve in transferring my VHS tapes in the process of adding a Menu.
|
This damage is avoiding by using good software.
Quote:
And then, in transferring the Hi8 and Mini DV, from what Lordsmurf is indicating, I will need to capture these using my computer (again meaning I'll need some sort of capture card I presume).... so I'm still going to need to invest in one of those two capture cards above right?
|
No.
Hi8 = needs a capture card or DVD recorder. I use a DVD recorder for this quite often -- looks great. Only when requested will I capture losslessly, often because it's going to be advanced edited. Because Hi8 doesn't really suffer from chroma noise like VHS, quite a few DVD recorders can make great looking DVDs from that specific source.
DV = no capture card required. Only a Firewire (aka IEEE1394) port is needed on the computer. If the computer doesn't have on, only then would you need to add a card (Firewire expansion card). You can, of course, play the DV in as analog and have the DVD recorder encode it. Some DVD recorders also have "DV inputs", but I just assume use analog via s-video if possible.
Quote:
I'm hoping to do these using an AMD Phenom 8400 Triple Core with 2.1 ghz proc and 3 gb ram and I just had a secondary terabyte (sp?) hard drive installed in it for my footage.
|
Computer sounds great. Your spelling is correct: terabyte.
The only problem may come in trying to add an ATI All In Wonder card -- I doubt it will work, as you likely have a non-AGP slot motherboard, as well as using Windows Vista or Windows 7. But I'm not really advising that route at this point in time anyway, so a bit of a moot point.
|
07-11-2011, 10:46 AM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Thank you for your help, both of you as well as all contributors on the site. I tend to go too fast when doing things so I appreciate you keeping my mind set on the beginning process instead of jumping right to the end.
I don't expect to find a SignVideo or Studio 1 DR-1000 used, but am looking. So far the cheapest I've seen is $299. I'm certain I can find the ATI TV Wonder 600 USB. I've read posts pertaining to drivers for Windows 7 that I have bookmarked and will consult you if I have issues. Yes, my system is Windows 7. I'm looking for a BVP-4 unit. And I think I've found an M100. I have gotten almost all of the software mentioned so far. I know if I remain focused and patient, I'll be able to acquire everything I need.
I'll be back with questions (I'm sure) after I've gotten the items needed. I am so glad to have found your posts on google, lordsmurf. You are how I found this site. And I was immediately amazed by the wealth of information and detail found here.
|
07-15-2011, 12:29 AM
|
|
Site Staff | Video
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 14,238
Thanked 2,585 Times in 2,197 Posts
|
|
Thanks much for your kind words.
|
07-28-2011, 10:02 PM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
I snagged an Elite Video BVP-4 for $150! I am pretty excited. However, the SignVideo DR-1000 is another story. I was down to two remaining pieces of equipment... the enhancer and the JVC DR-M100. I found what appeared to be a Vidicraft III in excellent shape on ebay and placed a low bid. Well, I won it but just not sure if I want to use it as my enhancer since it doesn't support S-video.
I need good advice guys. Should I resale the Vidicraft III and continue my search for a DR-1000? My understanding from a comment above was that it may cause some issues if I use it so I need clarification. I know lordsmurf and the administrator have used this professionally. I want to bring out as much detail as possible from these home video's.
|
07-28-2011, 10:42 PM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 126
Thanked 14 Times in 12 Posts
|
|
If you are referring to the vid. detailer 3, I have one also.
VHS is soft to start with, in that it generally isn't as sharp as say other formats.
VHS was the infancy of consumer electronic video.
Detail on VHS is about in the same frq region as noise so to bring out detail where there wasn't much to start
with then it can add more noise...so there is a balancing act.
So with really good looking video some sharpening can be done but if there is a big lack of detail
in the videos chances are a detailer wouldn't do much.
Just my take....IMO the pic sharpener on the Pany 1980 is better than the detailer 3....which I generally left
in its normal position. Yet getting a perfectly functioning 1980...might be fairly remote since it is a very old model.
|
07-29-2011, 05:19 PM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Yes, I'm referring to the Vidicraft Detailer III. I have the JVC SR-V10 as my source unit. Then I have the standalone TBC and the Elite Video BVP-4 plus. I "wanted" a DR-1000 from SignVideo, but haven't yet found one. And I'll be getting either the JVC DR-M10 or DR-M100.
Again, I realize I can only clean so much from these videos. They're not in bad shape really.. no jumping.. no tearing that I've seen. My chief complaint in them was the clarity issue, which I realize is due to the media type and camcorder used as well as the fact that now all our TV screens are different (LED or Plasma) than the old analog TV's. I know I'm combating many factors, but I know these videos should come out looking better on DVD than they do now on VHS. I've read way too much here that has taught me if I "do it right", I will be happy with the outcome.
So that's my thing. On one hand, I've read many of the professionals here using the Vidicraft Detailer III and have read that I (being a novice) may not be able to pick up the difference between component and S-video results, or they may be so slight that it's not worth the headache. However, that being said, I certainly don't want to take all the hard work in fixing the tapes and then add a piece of equipment into the mix that will turn around and add problems back into it. I'm certainly no professional at this, but I guess my expectations and the way I'm "wired" is to expect perfection or as close to it as possible. This being 2011, with more experience under everyone's belt, maybe more is known now about the best workflow for this job.
If the response I get is, "It should work fine for your application and you probably won't notice a huge difference between the component vs. S-video on these two machines", then I'll consider my search for the DR-1000 on hold. If I instead get the response of, "There will be some blurring because the signal with component will be different" OR "Simply put, if you transfer two videos with identical equipment except one would be using the DR-1000 while the other using the Vidicraft Detailer III, you will definitely be able to see noticeable difference in quality between the two"... then I'll resale the Detailer and continue my search.
|
07-29-2011, 08:49 PM
|
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 126
Thanked 14 Times in 12 Posts
|
|
I think s-video connections are the way to go because if there is any color correction to be done in hardware, composite just doesn't work as well.
You can do a real time look at how the detailer works, I forget whether it is a wiper that can split the screen or turning a knob to cutoff detailing circuitry.
Also while you are doing this, you can record short clips of this....for a "before and after".
For me, the detailer just didn't do enough to justify running the video through it but hopefully
Admin can come in and give you his opinion since I am relatively new at this as well.
I think he will likely tell you if you want a detailer to go with signvideo.
I think they still sell them new but the price is stiff.....yeah.. I just checked their website and it is listed.
|
07-30-2011, 04:17 PM
|
|
Site Staff | Web Hosting, Photo
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,311
Thanked 376 Times in 342 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve(MS)
VHS is soft to start with, in that it generally isn't as sharp as say other formats.
Detail on VHS is about in the same frq region as noise so to bring out detail where there wasn't much to start
with then it can add more noise...so there is a balancing act.
So with really good looking video some sharpening can be done but if there is a big lack of detail
in the videos chances are a detailer wouldn't do much.
Just my take....IMO the pic sharpener on the Pany 1980 is better than the detailer 3....which I generally left
in its normal position. Yet getting a perfectly functioning 1980...might be fairly remote since it is a very old model.
|
Every bit of your commentary is excellent. Very accurate assessments.
_________
Detailers can be great tools, essentially acting like the "unsharp mask" filter within Photoshop. It's an edge sharpener, creating "detail" by way of pixel contrast along already-contrasting image elements. It makes the video "pop" more than actually add any detail. These can be quite helpful when dealing with already-decent VHS tapes. In most cases, it also exclusively works on SP mode VHS tapes, especially anything that was from a home video camera or a retail release.
The sharpen slider on the Panasonic AG-1980P is very similar. The downside is you have to use this VCR for playback, and it's not always the best one. It has trade-offs with the JVC line.
The different in DR-1000 and Detailer III is really just the s-video vs composite connections. When using s-video connections, you can better sharpen the luma portion of the signal, as opposed the composited/merged luma+chroma. Not that the III is bad, but just that it's maybe not as perfect as latter generation models. The III is very much the precursor to the DR-1000. Same company, though it changed names.
Used professionally? Sure. They were created for professional use, for broadcasters and dub houses.
The Elite Video BVP-4 has the resolution knob, too, which is not like the Photoshop unsharp mask filter, but more like the Camera Raw "raw sharpen" method that increases pixel density and uses a non-edge method to create contrast for the illusion of sharpness. (If you're not a photographer, some of the analogies to photography software may be lost on you.)
I don't know that I can answer your question exactly, but maybe you can at least partake in more knowledge?
- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site. - Please Like Us on Facebook | Follow Us on Twitter
- Need a good web host? Ask me for help! Get the shared, VPS, semi-dedicated, cloud, or reseller you need.
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:37 PM
|