Samples

[dar1us]

How is this for an idea, because we are always going on about what is the best hard-ware for capping... Who's who and what's what. Can some of us post sample frames (single ones, poor me and my ISDN cant handle much more) of a capture in JPEG format so we can have a look and really get good idea on what people are capturing like.

You hear stories and reviews but RARELY ever see samples. The only time you see samples is when someone has a problem like: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39412
lectric, i am not getting at you

I know we really need to see a wide range of scenes captured but if people just give an idea of what there quality is like with a frame or 2 or 3 and SPECIFIC details on where it came from; what card, what source type (tuned, analogue, digital...). It would certainly benefit all. We could have a kind of gallery. I know I am on the look out for a new card to replace my crusty old card because it is sooo blury.

See a motion sample - 2.43 megs big i think at www.btinternet.com/~weatherjack (its FTP listing). I am just wanna know whether mine is quite good or not great, i seen quite a few captured files in my time and many of them really suck. But some are really good, but the only details you get are, 'Captured in VDub with and AVI codec'.

Yay


dar1us

or am i 2 much of a n00b to be making such a bold statement/idea?

[^^-+I4004+-^^]

this is quite good idea and i thought of it myself
(only wasn't prepared to do it on myself->i more or less
hate html etc.,but i have FPexpress (from my win98
partition..LOL!)

i'm willing to give any support and even 2-3MB of my web space (5mb total).....we could fit few jpeg's here and there i guess!
jpeg is a good parameter for quality too!

i've posted some to "tested capture cards" thread..but i can do
even better than those qvc samples (ie. i have programmes with less
noise etc.)...sure you can use that for sample on your page...

it would be good idea to do some vhs caps too,etc.

also system of capturing should be agreed,not direct captures
but shots from .avi itself etc.


this would be the best test (the VISIBLE one!) but somehow i doubt people will get interested enough!anyhow
you have my full support for a start!


(btw. is the sample image of star trek yours?
that sucks!hehehe....i don't like philips capture solutions
i think i can do better from my analog satv.....star trek is always
on it seems ,so it shouldn't be problem to capture some of it!)

cheers

Ivo

[dar1us]

if we did something like that, if a lot of people were to respond, i am sure the doom9 crew wouldn't be 2 happy with all of the files on the server...

??

it doesn't have to be through this forum, though based from this forum

we can have a totally seperate area 2 upload to...

ideas people...??

[dar1us]

The samples so far...

CJV Presents... MSI TV@nywhere (CX23881)
Digital Cable Source (non DVB capture)

SVCD Sample 1 (2 megs) SVCD Sample 2 (4.5 megs)
AVI Sample 1 (2 megs)


dar1us Presents... WinFast GeForce 4 Ti4200 [x] (Phillps 7108)
Digital Satellite (non DVB capture)

AVI Sample 1 (2.42 megs)


please, please upload your samples and post them here.

someone with DVB card and access, desperatly requested


dar1us

[cjv]

MSI TV@nywhere

Card: MSI TV@nywhere
Chipset: Conexant CX23881 (10-bit)
Connectors: S-Video, composite, audio passthrough (crappy), 125 channel TV tuner
Cost: $50 USD
Source: NTSC Digital Cable (Canada)
Video connection: S-Video
Audio connection: Y-splitter direct to SBlive Value
Capture program: iuVCR
Capture video format: 720x480, HuffYUV
Resulting average capture bitrate: approx. 750mb/minute!!!
Audio format: 48000Hz PCM stereo
Card calibration: sharpness 2, the rest defaults
Sync issues: none (iuVCR master stream audio, short audio samples)

Sample
Size: 2.0mb
Interlaced: no, 23.976fps (IVTC via Decomb.dll)
Filtering: none
Resizer: Lanczos (480,480)
Encoder: CCE 2.66.1.07
Quality: Easy (on slider)
Bitrate: 2530 CBR
http://members.shaw.ca/cjv99/sample_msi_2.0mb.mpg

Comments:
Great quality from this card...if you can get it to work right. Lots of people are unhappy with this card because it does not have all the features that are advertised, the drivers are relatively immature, and it does not work with Virtualdub for capping. On the other hand, the CX23881 provides unmatched quality IF you have a decent source without a lot of noise. With a noisy source, the card captures _every_ detail and will end up taking up over 1gig/minute Huffy. Developers have made this card work with the latest Dscaler alpha (no tuner sound as of 12-05-2002) and although support is lacking right now, many are hoping for a bright future.

cjv

[cjv]

ATI All-In-Wonder Radeon 7500

Card: ATI All-In-Wonder Radeon 7500
Chipset: Rage Theater 1
Connectors: S-Video, composite, audio passthrough (all on breakout box), 125 channel TV tuner
Cost: $150 USD
Source: NTSC Digital Cable (Canada)
Video connection: S-Video
Audio connection: Y-splitter direct to SBlive Value
Capture program: iuVCR
Capture video format: 720x480, HuffYUV
Resulting average capture bitrate: approx. 350mb/minute
Audio format: 48000Hz PCM stereo
Card calibration: all defaults (128)
Sync issues: none (iuVCR master stream audio, short audio samples)

Sample
Size: 2.0mb
Interlaced: no, 23.976fps (IVTC via Decomb.dll)
Filtering: none
Resizer: Lanczos (480,480)
Encoder: CCE 2.66.1.07
Quality: Easy (on slider)
Bitrate: 2530 CBR
http://members.shaw.ca/cjv99/sample_ati_2.0mb.mpg

Comments:
ATI's Rage Theater capture chip appears on many ATI cards, from the Rage Pro 128 to the Radeon 8500DV. I bought this card and used it for a few months, but always noticed the captures were blurry. There is no sharpness control with the ATI cards. While this sample is decent, most are "flat" and 2-dimensional looking. The included Multimedia Center software is buggy, bloated, and generally disliked by the community, although it has gotten much better with the recent 7.6/7.7 releases. I would not advise anyone to buy anything ATI for quality capturing. For watching TV on the PC in a window, the occasional capture, and record-and-delete PVR functions, I suppose it would be fine.

cjv

[Narler]

Pinnacle PCTV Rave

Card: Pinnacle PCTV RAVE
Chipset: Conexant BT8x8 (8-bit)
Connectors: RF, RCA, S-Video
Cost: $100 AUD ($1AUD = approx $0.52 USD)
Source: Free-To-Air Analogue using Roof Top Aerial 50KM from Capital City. Using Pinnacle onboard Tuner. (PAL)
Video connection: RF using RG59 cable to wallsocket
Audio connection: RF (as above)
Capture program: AVI_IO
Capture video format: 384 x 288, HuffYUV
Audio format: 41000Hz 16bit STEREO PCM, encoded to 44khz 64kbit MP3 (Lame 3.92) Mono (tuner is only MONO)
Card calibration: using version 4.00 VFW drivers, Brightness 145, Contrast 140, Saturation 120, Hue N/A, Gamma N/A.
Sync issues: none. I do have problems capturing for long durations at 768 x 576, as my capture pc is only Pentium III 850mhz, but at 384 x 288, 8+ continuous hours the sync is perfect.

Sample
Size:384 x 288 2.2mb, 768 x 576 4.6mb
Duration: 14 seconds.
Interlaced: no, 25fps (PAL)
Filtering: Brightness Contrast filter in Virtual dub, Brightness up 10% and Contrast down 7% for Div-X Sample. No filters for MPEG samples (they appear slightly darker than the divx due to this, but you can adjust BCS for mpegs in Interview's WINDVD anyways)
Encoder: Virtual Dub using Divx version 5.0.0 Build 413, TMPGenc for Mpegs
Bitrate: Div-X 1-Pass Quality based 93%, Mpeg CBR (at specified bitrates)

Divx 384 x 288 QB93 2.2mb
Divx 768 x 576 QB93 4.6mb
MPEG1 384 x 288, 1,150kbit 2.2mb
MPEG 1 384 x 288 2,520kbit 4.6mb
MPEG 1 768 x 576, 1,150kbit 2.2mb (looks terrible due to large frame size and low bitrate)
MPEG 1 768 x 576, 2,520 kbit 4.6mb

For more samples at other MPEG bitrates inbetween the above, please go HERE. For some more indepth codec comparisons by me using this card please go HERE. For frame comparisons between the codec tests please go HERE Warning last page is about 3mb due to lots of frame images.

Comments:
For a BT8x8 card using Analogue source, I'm very happy with the quality and abilities of this card.

I'd like to point out that viewing 768 x 576 Div-X AVI files uses insane amounts of cpu power. for instance. on a Intel Celeron 1.2ghz cpu usage is 90 to 95% when viewing 768 x 576 Div-X. For some captures from Sysmon during playback of divx and mpeg. check out this PICTURE (size: 12kb).

Capture PC: MSI 6153VA motherboard, Pentium III 850mhz cpu, 128MB PC133 RAM. Matrox Millenium AGP Video card. Promise ATA100 controller card, Seagate hdd's. Operating System: Win98SE

Feedback is most welcome.

Cya
Narler.

[dar1us]

YAY people started replying to meh' thread

If anyone wants to add their sample, by all means do so (contact me if you need a little fast space).

If you could use the format kindly !invented! by CJV! Nice one

Apprecieated all (i must have spelled that wrong, and excuse me if i broke into german at anypoint, i just did my exam in it

Remember... a picture is worth a thousend words, and at 25 odd pictures a second, a ten second sample would have to be worth - 1000x25x10... 250000 words!

So send in your samples, maybe it would stop, 'whats the best hardware'


dar1us

[Zhnujm]

Hauppauge DVB-S Card
Source: Digital Satellite

DVB-Captures with no recompressing.
192kBit mpa Sound.

704x576 average 3MBit/s 16:9
Film 1 Screenshot
Film 1 6.3MB
Film 2 Screenshot
Film 2 5.8MB

720x576 average 4MBit/s 4:3
Film 3 Screenshot
Film 3 6.6MB

720x576 average 4MBit/s interlaced 4:3
Film 4 Screenshot
Film 4 2.8MB

the links do not work with internet explorer , try ftp://zhnujm.dyndns.org and browse the files
anybody know why they dont work with ie ?

[^^-+I4004+-^^]

{ @ Narler & cjv...i am impressed with the way you did it !
very nice,very precise! i'll go a bit further (as i always must.hehe)
and state OS too (remember,sync issues...seems like some people's machines don't like WDM ! mine included ! ) and drivers used }




[>and browse the files
anybody know why they dont work with ie ? ]

perhaps ie's ftp engine cannot go directly to
file but has to be in the directory first(?)



d>people started replying to meh' thread

yes,after a lil' push from here and there.......(hehe)
and you thought you're gettin' out easily?

so,who's idea was it then?(LOL!)

it doesn't matter who got the idea first,or who made a
first post on it,or who's making the web-look (hint ?
no,not me ! heh,the biggest obstacle for me to implement
idea ( some while ago ) was that html design was
needed.....although some forum members come into mind on
that...Swan for example...) for it,but what matters is
that we ALL get this thing started (as we obviously did)
and SEE WHAT CARD PRODUCES WHAT RESULTS !


i see canopus ADVC is mentioned A LOT lately here ,
it looks like some kind of dream for a lot of people
here....(no, not mine dream -> it's not worth the money )
DarkSoul's name popped up on that one ,
so DarkSoul go ahead and be our guest.......
[if you don't have space i'll be glad to host 2-3MB's of
video (or stills ) produced by that device for some
time,and i think dar1us is willing too....]


[and now for important part _ ]
another thing:
why have i proposed the jpeg as a format for stills?
well png's get really big as do bmp's.....so what choice
do we have?
to put 10png's and fill up the web space?
i think optimized jpeg is ok and at higher quality
setting
it can produce decent results....
i hear you say "but what about mosquito's"?
well if you capture to huff then you KNOW that no
mosquitos appear in the source and that any mosquitos
introduced are
the effect of poor jpeg job so you have to do it all over
again.......
[ i think we should use huff.avi as a source for jpeg
production, even if it's unacceptable for the capturer to
use it constantly because of frame drops etc.,still you
can grab some frames with huff and convert to jpeg ]

also,if we take a video and compress it to mpeg2 or
divx or,or....i think the relative compression,the
smoothing (by the video-codec) still speak in favour of
the jpeg concept....mpeg2 on 2500kbit/s on full-pal
resolution is not good enough from the tests i recently

done for some SVCD considerations etc.....
( even on 480x576 resolution SVCD bitrate is lousy image)
i very much doubt 3000 is good enough either....
[but if your work convinces me that i was wrong i'll
apologize! i have yet to dload all this stuff.. ]

i can perfectly well see the image quality of the
device if i see some optimized jpeg's in full res.....

how to do it?
well,use the raw format u usually do (wether it be
huff,mjpeg or DV -> as disscussed in some recent thread ,
bare in mind that huff is preffered as it's lossles! )
load video to VD and copy source frame to clipboard ,

just as cjv said..... ,paste that to any image viewing
util. and make .bmp,and after that use some kind of jpeg
optimizer (i use one in PSP) and convert your bmp to jpeg
and there you are...
images that are NOT 500kb-1MB (as .png) and still look
mighty fine......

off course,i'll lead the way and will produce some jpeg
samples today and you be the judge.....

[ update: something for your viewing pleasure-> go
***deleted web-link***
and grab that bt8x8 samples.. ]

all things considered you decide wether you prefer small
video samples of lo-bitrate or mid sized jpeg's(100kB
jpeg from 720x576 has mighty decent quality)....

i opt for latter as i think this gives us better
opportunitty to see what does SOURCE look like,and not
what has BECOME of source after mpeg2 or divx "saw"
it....[ let's see....mpeg2 on 3000kbit=cca 375kB/s and
let us divide that on 25 frames per second =15kB for each
frame in mpeg2 stream....and that's being optimistic
because temporal redundancy is exploited in mpeg2 too so
it's even less than that for majority of frames as mpeg2
is no mere mjpeg! i think optimized jpeg beats
that mpeg2 stream..... ]
you'll miss motion ? well for image quality
considerations that doesn't matter.......we CANNOT judge
the huff's motion even if we could transfer it over the

web as it
requires fast CPU's to play it back at 25FPS
(i know my cpu can't do it! )
so huff transfer is a bit of a silly idea to me....

and yes.....a hi-quality jpeg image is worth more than
25 lousy ones in second (to paraphrase dar1us...heh)
let's see what's on the telly now.....

also...do we need DVB cards people?
OFF-COURSE!
i think we are all interested in that way of capturing
too....as most of us analogue people obviously don't have
that...

cheers

Ivo

[edited_samples have been deleted and therefore web link too]

[dar1us]

I stand by my short HQ movie samples thingies because people can edit out noise easily per/frame, where as a motion sample can really show how a card works, shows ghosting/deinterlacing issues tackled... That kind of thing.

One JPEG cant really do a card full justice but they are still a good starting point if you dont have much bandwidth. I am gona re-upload all of the files to a fast server which I can easily pull about 240k/s off. I can get 150k/s off my weatherjack stuff but more on the force9 one I got going. (www.force9.co.uk) . I also heard it is still fast if you are as far a field as western-US but I don't know about Narla and Australia. Good luck.


oh, and did you think i meant for people to link to bad samples? and how can a JPEG sample taken from a video be better quality than the original souce I hoped more people would share?

no worries anywho, let's not get into an argument about all this.


dar1us

[^^-+I4004+-^^]

d>I stand by my short HQ movie samples thingies because people can edit out noise easily per/frame, where as a motion sample can really show how a card works, shows ghosting/deinterlacing issues tackled...

_my intention was NOT to edit noise out,and you'll see it in my
images ( on some of them there's LOTS of noise..those are the most interesting ones in my view ! )

divx motion sample speaks more of codec ,but less of source !
denoising is another issue alltogether.....

also you can view video as a succesion of still frames... ( as in cinema for example )

we're currently focused on capture devices,not codecs and encoding....but you can open thread on that too i guess (so i can show you some more muscle!hehehe)



also i think i pushed my bt device to itts limits with huff capturing and bt8x8 tweaker.......
i must say that these images beat all samples i saw (DVB stuff,Narler & cjv's stuff ) as it gets closer to the source than divx,mpeg1 or mpeg2

again, you be the judge....
stuff will be shortly uploaded.......



( i've been on Narler's web.....this guy is really neat,i tell
ya' ! but he cranked that brightness too much on that divx...heheh
btw. it played ok on my cel600+ffdshow!miracle or what ??? )

[cjv]

@^^-+I4004+-^^:

Can't wait to see some of your samples, even if JPEG.

I agree that Narler's site is _quite_ impressive, there sure was a lot of work put into making all those samples. What impresses me most is that those samples were taken from a OTA rooftop antenna...WOW!!!! Compared to my OTA signal, or even analog cable signal, those samples look like they were from DVD. I would say that over 98% people here have cable, so possibly the OTA broadcast is just a legal formality . Does the rest of the world actually have decent television signals?

You mention tweaking your setup, and from reading your past posts, you obviously know what you're doing. Any advice on how to properly calibrate capture cards..levels, colour, hue, etc..? I desperately need to tune mine properly, I for one know my colour levels are not right, and I've read it makes a world of difference.
I've read about "preview with histogram" in VDub, and tweaking that way, but it's difficult because I cannot pause live TV. I've also seen some screenshots of these crazy circles and stuff, some sort of test patterns. How do you do it, and are there any uncompressed BMP or AVI test patterns you could post/send? Hopfully you can write a detailed post about it..I'm eagerly awaiting what you have to say.

About a separate site, I can help with the backend programming PHP, MySQL, Perl, etc.., but unfortunately I don't have a lot of spare time, but I do have some. Also, if anyone knows a 100% undetectable url-redirector/hop-to service, then I can probably host the site (and short movie clips) as well.
1) There must be NO way for the actual sitename to be determined (resolving IP address is OK because there is no other way)
2) it must be FREE!!
3) if it does not meet those criteria, I will get in major shit
Any ideas?

cjv

[Narler]

Hi -+I4004+-,

{ @ Narler & cjv...i am impressed with the way you did it !
very nice,very precise! i'll go a bit further (as i always must.hehe)
and state OS too (remember,sync issues...seems like some people's machines don't like WDM ! mine included ! ) and drivers used }

I just copied CJV's post format, so the credit goes to that person.

I did briefly mention driver and OS i use, but I'll recap now in a little more detail:

Drivers:Original Pinnacle version 4.00 VFW
(from Device Manager: BT848.VXD version 4.0.0.0 Pinnacle Systems 1999 : PCTVCAP.DRV version 3.0.0 miro Computer Products AG 1996)

OS: Windows 98SE version 4.10.2222

If there's any other info or specifications anyone requires, please ask. Check here first though.

also i think i pushed my bt device to itts limits with huff capturing and bt8x8 tweaker.......
i must say that these images beat all samples i saw (DVB stuff,Narler & cjv's stuff ) as it gets closer to the source than divx,mpeg1 or mpeg2

Sounds great, although the only thing I'd consider, is the format that these images are in, (and I know you mentioned earlier about codec discussions versus capture card quality), but everyone's final product has to be in a codec eventually? But I agree as there are so many variants with codecs it would be difficult to do a direct side by side comparison, which is why I made some divx and mpeg samples, just for those people who don't use/like divx.

But as a comparison, here's 3 frames from that same show ripped directly from the Huffyuv footage with Virtual dub (hotkey CTRL 1). then pasted into Adobe Photoshop version 4.0 and saved with JPEG quality factor of 9. No Filters, completely untouched:

Frame 01 - Huffyuv 768 x 576 (221 kb)

Frame 02 - Huffyuv 768 x 576 (187 kb)

Frame 03 - Huffyuv 768 x 576 (173 kb)

*edit*

Frame live TV Viewing screen capture 768 x 576 (360 kb) (a bit bright, due to it being a commercial)

*end edit*

For more frame samples (all at 384 x 288) please check HERE Warning this page is 3 MB

( i've been on Narler's web.....this guy is really neat,i tell
ya' ! but he cranked that brightness too much on that divx...heheh
btw. it played ok on my cel600+ffdshow!miracle or what ??? )

Thanks for the feedback and the kind words. I'm glad the files played back fine on your system. Those CPU usage figures were taken while using Windows Media Player, so it's quite possible that other viewer programs are more efficient.

With respect to brightness, I've spent ages trying to find a setting that views the same on each pc, and in reality it's just not possible, with everyone having different BC settings for their capture cards, monitors and video cards, even the amount of ambient light in the room has an effect , so now I only focus on what looks acceptable on my pc, even when viewed on one of my other pc's it looks different. The div-x looks slightly bright on my system, and the mpegs look slightly dark, but other samples i've downloaded from here, are extremely dark on my pc. (maybe its the timezone differences )

Hi CJV,

I agree that Narler's site is _quite_ impressive, there sure was a lot of work put into making all those samples. What impresses me most is that those samples were taken from a OTA rooftop antenna...WOW!!!! Compared to my OTA signal, or even analog cable signal, those samples look like they were from DVD. I would say that over 98% people here have cable, so possibly the OTA broadcast is just a legal formality . Does the rest of the world actually have decent television signals?

Thanks once again for the kind words. I've got quite a few other tests I wish to perform in the next few weeks, which others may also find beneficial, so I'll keep you posted.

I've done some comparisons between my FTA reception quality, versus optus cable, and I find the optus cable very soft and grainy. Foxtel Satellite is slightly higher than the optus cable, and slightly better on some channels than my FTA. (this is within australia)

Any advice on how to properly calibrate capture cards..levels, colour, hue, etc..? I desperately need to tune mine properly, I for one know my colour levels are not right, and I've read it makes a world of difference.

The only way I've tried to do it is, is by viewing the same footage in real time on a TV. It's still no indication of the true source settings, but atleast it's another comparison.

However I'm not as much of a video purist as I was a few years ago. Now I just use the settings which I'm comfortable with watching. Also adjusting the Brightness and Contrast, can yield huge benefits to filesize (for divx encoding only). So if filesize is a concern, then slightly adjusting the contrast and brightness can yield a large benefit. Adjusting the BC on the file doesn't concern me as using the BCS adjustment during playback still yields adequate viewing:

Quick example. Movie duration: 103 minutes

526,868,480 Bytes... Brightness +00% Contrast -0%
489,254,912 Bytes... Brightness +10% Contrast -7%
456,910,848 Bytes... Brightness +10% Contrast -13%


If there are any additional tests that anyone would like done, I'd be more than happy to accommodate them. (if my equipment is capable)

cya
Narler

[dar1us]

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN

da da da daaaaaaa!

http://www.aa981752.force9.co.uk - well whatta da you know

all i gotta do is put some links to each card at the top of the page, actually link the samples to their locations and we are done. see directory listings of samples at http://www.aa981752.force9.co.uk/samples

I am yet to upload the last 3 PCRave files, means connecting to expensive internet access number, this one is free ATM.

Also, i am yet to here from Mr Lucky DVB-S with details but they are pretty obvious already and dont concern us lowly analoguers'.


dar1us

[cjv]

Dude, that site looks great...hopefully we can get LOTS of people to post. (Hmmm, not worried about hosting copyright material..guess you're not in North America?)

In case you want OS/Driver details to add to your site:
ATI
WDM drivers: 6.13.10.6168v1
OS: Win2k SP3

MSI
Conexant capture driver version: 2.3.75.0
OS: Win2k SP3

cjv

[dar1us]

thats the beauty of it, noone knows whos hosting it, and they are only 10 second samples anyways. who could care less. they arn't comming from MY pc.

btw, can someone reasonably fast download one of the big files, my sample 2 (winfast) is 8.5 megs, tell me what kinda speed you pull from it.. cheers


dar1us

[cjv]

sample 2 (winfast) is 8.5 megs

very decent speed...approx 80k

cjv
EDIT: Just watched it. Its very intersting, everybody's captures look drastically different. This is weird, as capture cards can't be THAT different, all they do are A/D conversions?
Your capture has a nice smooth look, its hard to describe. It's not blurry, but very pleasing to the eye...almost looks like PDTV. Did you filter it at all?

[Narler]

Hi -+I4004+-,

Just to help yield a better huff vs divx frame quality, here's a single frame removed from the divx 768 x 576 avi, and the same frame removed from the original huff 768 x 576 avi file:

Huff 768 x 576 frame (261kb)

Divx 5 768 x 576 frame (246kb)

It's quite evident that divx yields some substantial detail loss in fine areas.

Cya
Narler.

[Owen]

OS: XP Pro
Hardware: P4 3Gig, 512Meg PC3200DDR, ASUS P4PE board with Excellent intergrated ADI SoundMax Audio Chip.
Card: Magic TView with WDM Drivers from http://btwincap.sourceforge.net
Chipset: BT8x8
Connectors: S-Video
Source: PAL DVD and PAL Digital Satelite (Australia)
Video connections: S-Video
Capture program: FlyDS
Capture video format: 768x576, HuffYUV (Normally I capture 720x576, Xvid or DIVX at fixed Quant 2)
Card calibration: Sharpness 70, Contrast 101, Brightness 950, Colour 115
Sync issues: none (FlyDS, master stream Audio, audio interlieve Capture) Have captured over 6 hours with perfect sync.

Sample Images: 50-250kb each (No filters used, just cropped and lightly compressed)

http://users.bigpond.com/omd1/FF1%20DVD%20BTCapture.jpg DVD Capture
http://users.bigpond.com/omd1/FF1%20DVD%20Rip.jpg DVD Rip
http://users.bigpond.com/omd1/FF2%20DVD%20BTCapture.jpg DVD Capture
http://users.bigpond.com/omd1/FF2%20DVD%20Rip.jpg DVD Rip
http://users.bigpond.com/omd1/Gwen1%...0BTCapture.jpg DVD Capture
http://users.bigpond.com/omd1/Gwen1%20DVD%20Rip.jpg DVD Rip
http://users.bigpond.com/omd1/Gwen2%...0BTCapture.jpg DVD Capture
http://users.bigpond.com/omd1/Gwen2%20DVD%20Rip.jpg DVD Rip
http://users.bigpond.com/omd1/Digita...0BTCapture.jpg Satelite Capture
http://users.bigpond.com/omd1/Digita...0BTCapture.jpg Satelite Capture
http://users.bigpond.com/omd1/Digita...0BTCapture.jpg Satelite Capture

Comments:
I thought it would be a good idea to use DVD for comparisons and use frame captures ripped from original DVD using Sonic Cineplayer 1.5
compared with the same frame captured with TV capture card useing a DVD player for input. (In this case I used my Compaq P4 notebook
with ATI Radion 7500 TV output (S-video) with Sonic Cineplayer 1.5 as a player.
I also captured some frames from my Digital Satelite reciever useing S-video cable.
It looks to me, like the old BT8x8 can do a very good job. But I still want better. CX23881 next I think.
I highly recomend the ASUS P4PE Main Board with the ADI SoundMax chip. This chip dose not sit on the PCI bus and uses the system clock as referance.It gives perfect audio sync and great sound quality.

Comments on noise:
To all thoughs people with video noise problems with there S-video or composit inputs on BT8x8 cards.
The PC is the cause not just the card. All my PC's under 2Gig P4 (and I've had many) had noise problems with my capture card.
When I upgraded to P4 2Gig with SIS chip main board and now 3Gig with Intel chipset board all my noise problems have gone.
Memmory and CPU clock speed has a big effect on TV card noise pickup. So run out and get a 2Gig+ P4 system and never look back.
The speed is usefull for realtime DIVX or Xvid capture as well.
The small amount of noise in the DVD samples is due to the TV output on my Notebook (I hope ATI TV out is better on desktop PC's because the TV output on my main PC (Geforce 3 Ti500 with CX25872 TV out chip and TVTool is MUCH better.)

Regards,
Owen.