Capturing VHS-C at a high quality with a low cost

[mikesown]

I have around 20-30(maybe 40) VHS-C tapes which have been aging for around 10 years. I want to digitize the tapes(and convert them to DVDs) at a high quality(as high as possible, as the tapes will deteriorate in quality if they haven't already) but I'm on a _bit_ of a budget(~$100 for capture card and VHS deck is what I'm looking at). So, I'm soliciting recommendations for both VHS(-C) decks and capture cards. Do you guys have any wisdom to share about the topic. Looking around, TBC and DNR seem like the things to have - but can I get this in an affordable package, and does anyone even make decks with TBC/DNR anymore? Maybe a D-VHS deck?

For the software side of things, I'm somewhat familiar with the process. What I'm planning to do is import the video using VirtualDub with the Huffyuv codec(as an intermediary), then encode the video to MPEG-2 with 2 or 3 passes using CCE. Does that sound good?

I'd appreciate any input you guys have!

Thanks,
Mike

[Blue_MiSfit]

Your overall idea sounds good.

TBCs are a very big deal when capturing analog tape. You want a deck that has these :) That's going to be tricky to find - possibly a used pro S-VHS deck?

~MiSfit

[yup]

Hi mikesown!

If You have original VHS-C tape recorded at camcorder, You can use ordinary VCR. I have some expirience with VHS capture and do not have problem with capture original VHS-C. Many problem begin after dubbing from camcorder to VCR. Use good capture card (I use Pinnacle PCI) and good cable (S-Video preferable RCA composite), after denoise using Avisynth (plugin MVTools with function MVDegrain3) and after CCE or HCEnc.
yup.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Another option to consider: if you don't plan to edit the video at all, you could get an external DVD recorder and go directly from VHS to DVD in real-time. It will certainly be much, much faster than the capture-encode-burn option.

I've always been very happy with the results and I'm a fussy bugger.

[Blue_MiSfit]

If the OP is looking for quality, then a standalone DVD recorder is hardly the best solution. It's definitely the simplest, but a real-time hardware based (probably CBR) MPEG-2 encoder with limited filtering will fail by comparison to an AviSynth + HC powered encode ;)

~MiSfit

[JohnnyMalaria]

It's a viable option for VHS quality source. If I had VHS material that didn't need editing, I'd avoid the capture/encode/burn option and go with a DVD recorder. If the source was DV then I *may* do otherwise. Having said that, I've got perfectly acceptable results with DV source. Of course, this relates to just watching the DVD under ordinary circumstances and not analyzing individual frames for artifacts.

For VHS, it's debatable and I throw it out there just as an alternative to consider.

[mikesown]

JohnnyMalaria: I'd rather import them via computer for the simple reason that these are irreplaceable home videos. 10 years from now the topes probably won't exist, so I want the video to be as perfect as possible, and importing via computer allows me to do a 2 or 3 pass encode coupled with noise reduction and TBC. While it may be a very slight difference from doing an on-the-fly MPEG encode with little or no noise reduction, I think it's worth it because of the necessity to preserve as much quality as possible.

Do you guys have any suggestions for specific models of VHS decks / capture cards?

[JohnnyMalaria]

Given that, you will do well to not use the DV route for capturing (assuming you have NTSC material). You should find a capture card that supports 4:2:2 capture. NTSC DV uses 4:1:1 but MPEG-2 does not. This will cause much of the color information to be lost. This isn't a limitation for PAL DV which is 4:2:0 (like DVD).

[2Bdecided]

A VHS-C discussion
http://forum.videohelp.com/topic353122.html
(is it you?)

Answer to the question of equipment:
http://forum.videohelp.com/topic347374.html

If you have a good VCR, with good TBC and good DNR, and the source is VHS, it's really hard to see any difference between 8Mbps CBR MPEG-2 from a decent DVD recorder and a capture into a 4:2:2 capable capture card for your PC.

However, if you want to capture the noise, and then remove it in software, then things are quite different: MPEG-2 doesn't like noise!

Consider this: they are VHS tapes. Whatever you do, they will still look like VHS tapes. On your deathbed, you will not be thinking "I wish I'd spent 10x longer transferring and processing those tapes to make them look 1% better!".

Some VCR's DNR is pretty good. It's not mc_spuds, but it's real time.

Cheers,
David.

[mikesown]

I bought a SVHS-C camcorder with builtin TBC today. I still need to buy a capture card though. Basically I need s-video input - that's it(my computer has decent onboard audio). However, all of the capture cards on newegg in my pricerange(<=$50) seem to be flaky based on the reviews. Can you guys recommend a good capture card solely for S-Video in my pricerange?

Thanks

[Blue_MiSfit]

IIRC The ATi Theater 550 pro is a very good capture card, but I'm not totally sure on that :)

~MiSfit

[Piper]

IIRC The ATi Theater 550 pro is a very good capture card, but I'm not totally sure on that :)

~MiSfit

I own an ATi TV Wonder 550 and can vouch for its capture quality, however given the issues I've had capturing with VirtualDub in Vista lately, I would advise capturing your tapes in XP. The latest round of catalyst drivers have caused me nothing but grief with VirtualDub as it often complains about not being able to connect to ATI driver. The odd thing is Vista's Media Centre continues to work flawlessly. Just a word of caution is all...

[Piper]

To update my earlier comments regarding the use of the ATI Theatre 550 capture card in Vista. I had recently upgraded to the 8.6 Catalyst driver release which ended up causing capture issues with VirtualDub and Media Centre. Reverting back to an earlier release (8.3 in my case) resolved the issue. Unfortunately, driver issues like this are nothing new with ATI, so they are something to look out for if you do end up having issues capturing. In this case it wasn't an XP vs Vista issue, just buggy drivers...