Compression Question

[ses]

I know that Huffyuy is a lossless codec. Suppose I capture in Virtual Dub as uncompressed video, then edit and deinterlace the film and save it as Huffyuv compressed video. Then at a later time, do more post editing work and again save it as compressed Huffyuv, won't there still be some deterioration in picture quality with 2 rounds of compressing before I even get to compressing to MPEG2 or another format?
I'm still unsure if deinterlacing is the right way to go, but I'm doing it anyway with a look towards the future and the probability that most playback equipment will be progressive in nature.
On my current equipment, it looks fine.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

As HuffYUV is really lossless, you can convert from Uncompressed to HuffYUV (and vice versa) as often as you wish. There will still be no loss!

Of course the filters you apply might cause some loss! For example Deinterlacing will cause loss for sure, as there is no "perfect" deinterlacer in existence!
Also color space conversion might cause some small loss. Some filters only work on RGB, so they will cause a YUV => RGB => YUV conversion...

[ses]

I would have liked to leave my NTSC VHS captures as Huffyuv files on external harddrives, but I would have to buy so many external drives that it really isn't a practical idea, I have around 50 US VHS tapes to convert to digital.
I would like to see something better than MPEG2 come around. It looks pretty good most of the time, but sometimes it looks like an old 264 colors graphic card, for example when you see a pitcher walking around the mound in a baseball game, the background grass on the field in MPEG2 looks like the afore mentioned 264 colors graphic card, but in the original avi file, it still looks like real grass.
Films that are around 1:45 long are around 35 to 40 gig. Is there a lossless codec that would do the same job as Huffyuv and create smaller AVI files that I can save?
I'm getting brilliant results with an ATI Theater 550 card, Virtual Dub or iuVCR as the capture program and a JVC SR-V101US VHS player that I imported from the US.
Hardware is an AMD 4200 Dual Core.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

I would like to see something better than MPEG2 come around.
Ever heard of MPEG-4 ASP (DivX, Xvid, etc.), H.264 (x264, Nero Digital, etc.), VC-1 (WMV 9) or Theora ?!?!?! :p

Is there a lossless codec that would do the same job as Huffyuv and create smaller AVI files that I can save?
FFv1, MSU Lossless Video Codec, Alparysoft Lossless Video Codec, Lagarith, H.264 Lossless-Mode, .... :rolleyes:

[NerdWithNoLife]

If you're capturing VHS, keep in mind it only records one field so there is no need for full 720x480 resolution - 720 x 240 is fine. Also, if you have film based material (telecined "24"fps) on VHS every fifth frame is a duplicate so you can use decimate(5) to save 20% more bandwidth (23.976fps will result).

[squid_80]

If you're capturing VHS, keep in mind it only records one field so there is no need for full 720x480 resolution - 720 x 240 is fine.What are you basing this information on?

[foxyshadis]

It's actually the opposite: There's usually less horizontal information in VHS (especially long-play), and 352x480 is a good compromise, which is one reason it exists as a standard SVCD/DVD resolution. If it's slightly higher quality VHS, 480x480 SVCD res could fit, or you could just make up your own. SVHS has much more bandwidth and horizontal resolution and can easily fill a 704x480 resolution. (The mathematics behind determining information resolution is sort of complicated, mp4 guy knows more about it than I do.) Fields are definitely kept intact, unless your specific capture card drops them.

[NerdWithNoLife]

Sorry 'bout that - but it's expected people keep you in check on this forum.

Here's why I though that: On the film-based VHS tapes I have - if you pause and step frame by frame there are four progressive frames and one repeat - like after you telecide() but before you decimate. But maybe the VCR has a built in telecide (not decimator) to improve pausing clarity. Unless there's something else to learn about this. Combine that with the old memory that VHS has about half the resolution of live TV, and I concluded it was vertical, not horizontal. But I take it back - sorry! It's a good thing VHS is less and less relevant now - TV is so much better these days.:thanks: