Need better then DV to inmortalize my tapes

[El Enmascarado]

Hi I am Fernando Martinez...

I recorded from a tape to a DV file. I used Studio9 to view my recorded DV file on the TV. I wanted to compare same scene both on the tape and the dv, so I first put the tape in the scene I wanted to compare and press stop then went to the same time on the dv. I then pressed play on the tape and view it for 5 seconds looking at the details, then viewed the dv file on the same tv for 5 seconds and it was clear there was some detail lose, it wasn't exactly as on the tape even though I was using UHF for the TV and s-video for the canopus input... the tape is only VHS.
Does anyone know a better codec or method to transfer my tapes to the computer having all the details? :scared:

[juhok]

I've captured a lot of VHS material using Edirol VMC-1 and Canopus ADVC-300 to DV. I would say the DV codec itself isn't the limiting factor. Do you have any processing turned on in your ADVC? Some models (if not all) incorporate basic noise reduction etc, which should be turned off IMHO (if you're archiving). Also the cabling may play a role in this..

[El Enmascarado]

I've captured a lot of VHS material using Edirol VMC-1 and Canopus ADVC-300 to DV. I would say the DV codec itself isn't the limiting factor. Do you have any processing turned on in your ADVC? Some models (if not all) incorporate basic noise reduction etc, which should be turned off IMHO (if you're archiving). Also the cabling may play a role in this..

I'm using some philips s-video+audio cables that cost me 15$ on k-mart. the advc is 110 I don't think it uses any process that may affect this? I have the audio on 44k not 32k, audio unlocked, digital in sync altough I'm using analog.

[juhok]

How does the video look if you just pass the analog signal thru ADVC110?

VCR -> ADVC -> TV

Did you use composite (yellow) or s-video to connect from PC -> ADVC -> TV in the first test?

I'm pretty sure that the perceived difference is caused by different signal paths rather than DV compression. ADVC's digital->analog conversion might be weak link too, I've never needed that so wouldnt know..

[El Enmascarado]

How does the video look if you just pass the analog signal thru ADVC110?

VCR -> ADVC -> TV
Did you use composite (yellow) or s-video to connect from PC -> ADVC -> TV in the first test?

I'm pretty sure that the perceived difference is caused by different signal paths rather than DV compression. ADVC's digital->analog conversion might be weak link too, I've never needed that so wouldnt know..

You're first options sound great for testing but it would be PC instead of VCR that way the signal doesn't have to go back to the VCR s-video and then to my TV with UHF is one link less... :D

the second one is like this. PC to ADVC is firewire and then to VCR using S-VIDEO and then UHF to TV.

[juhok]

You're doing it like this;

Capturing; VCR (SVHS-Cable) ADVC (Firewire) PC
Viewing capture; PC (Firewire) ADVC (SVHS-Cable) VCR (UHF) TV

(Where obviously inside brackets is the cabling used.)

Did I get it right?

My earlier suggestion was to try VCR -> ADVC -> TV to check if there's any detail loss compared to direct VCR -> TV. If there isnt, most likely your capture is fine too and just playing it back to analog from computer has some clitches (and indeed it does if I understood you right).

I suggest leaving the whole UHF thing out and using svhs/composite signals. If your TV doesnt have those inputs (scart), then get one that does :)

Btw.. I just capped Betamax tape with ADVC300 and there was some "white noise" recorded from TV = random b/w noise. It was capped in great detail, but the DV codec got saturated, too much compression for that source :D. It resulted in blocking artifacts - not lost of details per se!

Just out of curiosity, could you post few short samples of your caps? 10-50 frames untouched DV.

[El Enmascarado]

You're doing it like this;

Capturing; VCR (SVHS-Cable) ADVC (Firewire) PC
Viewing capture; PC (Firewire) ADVC (SVHS-Cable) VCR (UHF) TV

(Where obviously inside brackets is the cabling used.)

Did I get it right?

My earlier suggestion was to try VCR -> ADVC -> TV to check if there's any detail loss compared to direct VCR -> TV. If there isnt, most likely your capture is fine too and just playing it back to analog from computer has some clitches (and indeed it does if I understood you right).

I suggest leaving the whole UHF thing out and using svhs/composite signals. If your TV doesnt have those inputs (scart), then get one that does :)

Btw.. I just capped Betamax tape with ADVC300 and there was some "white noise" recorded from TV = random b/w noise. It was capped in great detail, but the DV codec got saturated, too much compression for that source :D. It resulted in blocking artifacts - not lost of details per se!

Just out of curiosity, could you post few short samples of your caps? 10-50 frames untouched DV.

Why you want me not to use the UHF connector? I need the AV inputs on my TV to connect it to the CANOPUS anyway.

I did what you suggested... hmm it seems there is a bit more closer quality to the original tape now. about 90% match. Even though I was using UHF TV to the VCR and COMPOSITE coming from the CANOPUS' outputs... (same video) I compared both videos playing at the same time... I just hit VIDEO on my remote and it changed signals now I don't have to to stop my VCR and view it's L3 input signal which the canopus was previously connected.

Now my problem is my camcorder I think I damage the HEADS too much head cleaning trying to fix some distorted sparks on a tape which wasn't there before. I think it just needs use and use will dry the molecules of fluid still there??? maybe I'll do a manual head cleaning on the camcorder using Chamois Tips

[grannyGeek]

I'm going to stick my long nose in for a minute -

You say you are using Studio 9 to play the dv capture out to tv.
Maybe some of the problem is in the Studio 9 playback, and maybe it is not giving a true idea of how good your video looks. (I know the editing preview window only does 1/4 resolution, and looks a little fuzzy and soft.)

Can you use another software to display your dv capture on tv?


I started using VirtualDub to capture to avi with Huffyuv lossless codec, because to me it looks like better quality than DV.
But Studio 9 *sometimes* won't recognize those Huffyuv avi files, you could try some small test captures to see if your installation of Studio would work with Huffyuv files.

[juhok]

El Enmascarado; Your "viewing chain" had unnecessary UHF step, use direct ADVC->TV composite if possible, putting UHF in between just degrades the quality and distorts your results. Using UHF for anything instead of svhs/composite is not recommended. Why? I don't have technical explanation at hand. It's just not that good for the job. In my experience it adds noise by it's own etc. Maybe someone else can tell us more about that.

About cleaning your video.. ouch. The cleaning fluids vaporize quickly(alcohol). I've never had to wait for it to dry. Maybe you've ran the same spot one times too many? Try another tape / scene..

grannyGeek; Huffyuv would be great, but Canopus is external DV only -converter.

[grannyGeek]

juhok - good info (canopus dv-only) to have, thanks.

I still wonder about his software player, though.
just because I have a long snoopy nose :)

[El Enmascarado]

juhok - good info (canopus dv-only) to have, thanks.

I still wonder about his software player, though.
just because I have a long snoopy nose :)

Like the witch on snow white?

[grannyGeek]

Yup.
and when I have all the necessary background information, I can watch you in my crystal ball
:D

[neuron2]

Please take your chat to PM. Thank you.