How to compress/ deinterlace with iuVCR [Archive]

View Full Version : How to compress/ deinterlace with iuVCR

EasyRider_

27th May 2009, 23:47

Inspector.Gadget

28th May 2009, 00:14

Use one of the Avisynth deinterlacers.

EasyRider_

28th May 2009, 00:24

You mean in VirtualDub..? i just look for better capture results.. sure, Avisynth Scripts is the best way to edit/encode..

Inspector.Gadget

28th May 2009, 01:01

Your problem is interlacing, right? If you can't somehow capture progressive - and I know very little about capturing video - then the best software deinterlacers currently available are all Avisynth plugins and scripts.

EasyRider_

28th May 2009, 07:58

Yes exactly, so you thing is better only use Avisynth in encode, nothing else.

But in capture..? is ok to leave the built-in deinterlace filter..?

Thank you for reply.

Inspector.Gadget

28th May 2009, 16:34

Try to compare them. Capture two segments of the same program, one using the built-in deinterlacer and one without. Take the segment that you didn't deinterlace and then deinterlace it in Avisynth and encode both deinterlaced files. Then compare them and see which one you like better. Repeat as much as necessary to feel confident in the result.

EasyRider_

28th May 2009, 21:10

Good idea, I will try it.. thanks friend :)

Some Avisynth script suggestion..?

Inspector.Gadget

28th May 2009, 21:18

For reasonably fast deinterlacers, you should examine Yadif, TDeint, TomsMoComp. If you're looking for slow, double-framerate deinterlacing, look at MCBob or TempGaussMC.

Ghitulescu

29th May 2009, 12:26

Hi to all there, and sorry for my bad English

I use iuVCR for TV Cap's (aerial signal) and for output compression i use Huffyuv v2.1.1 codec (default settings) .

Now i try some captures with built-in "iuLab deinterlace" filter, because without this the result is very bad.

Capture format i set: 640x480, YUY2, 25.00 Frame rate ( for size adjusting )

Any advice for better quality ..?

For the final avi (edit/compression) i use VirtualDub, 2Pass.

My system: XP SP2, P4 2GHz, 1GB RAM, GeForce MX400 GPU.

Capture Card: Asus tv 7135

Regards,
Demetris

What's the purpose, the ultimate goal of your activities?
You need deinterlacing only for watching it on a PC. This way you don't even need to capture at NTSC resolutions ;)

But if you capture for TV, you don't need deinterlacing and actually a bad deinterlacing might degrade your video.

Better quality: well, use a good DVD recorder ;) most capture cards are jokes. You can always work the DVDs on your PC.

EasyRider_

31st May 2009, 13:29

zilog jones

2nd June 2009, 20:50

Since you are capturing PAL you should use a vertical resolution of 576 lines (e.g. 704x576 or 720x576), otherwise the interlaced fields will be blended together in a hideous mess.

EasyRider_

2nd June 2009, 22:08

Sure, finally i choose WinDVR 3 which save in:

[Real-time Best]
Format: MPEG-2

Audio:
Format: MPEG-1 Layer II
Sampling Rate: 44.1 kHz 16-bit Stereo
Bit Rate: 224 KBits/sec

Video:
Size: 720x576
Frame Rate: 25.00 frames/sec
Bit Rate: 7200 KBits/sec

Very high (crystal) video and audio quality :)

And i use MPEG Streamclip to edit/ encode the result ( very useful tool).

MPEG (TV cap 58MB)
http://g.imagehost.org/view/0626/Program_8_mpeg

MP4 (compressed 13MB)
http://g.imagehost.org/view/0633/Program_8_mp4

What you thing about..

Blue_MiSfit

3rd June 2009, 00:25

Well... MPEG Streamclip uses Apple's H.264 encoder I think... which is laughably bad compared to x264.

~MiSfit

EasyRider_

3rd June 2009, 00:50

Exactly..! is possible to make it better..? through MPEG Streamclip..

Ghitulescu

4th June 2009, 10:18

Inspector.Gadget, Thanks men. Very useful your help. :)

Ghitulescu you right, good idea to buy a DVD recorder finally..

But i use those files both for DVD, and share them with my friends through internet.

Is more easy (for my) to cap some clip or program and do quick edit / compress instead to record a DVD, copy to PC, and edit / compress.. i thing..

I am maybe "different", but my experience with hardware and software ultimatively convinced me that the hardware solution is the fastest one, sometimes even the best one.

Now, here's my working plan:

1. DV -> DVD
Copy DV raw footage on PC by firewire
Edit it in a good software (to avoid bad surprises like different colorspaces, hidden deinterlacing etc.)
Send it directly to DVD recorder (well, mine can act as slave, because its the "civil" version of a profi one) from that software. Or send it to DV tape, then from DV to DVD by firewire.
If it's only cutting (no effects etc.) I connect the camcorder (or JVC DVS1) to DVD-rec. then cut the VOBs on PC at UltraDMA speed.

Observations:
Since most home made movies do not have more than 1h, I set the DVD recorder to the highest level (the audio gets uncompressed, LPCM, that's 1:1 copy). If I'm doing the software way, with another good encoder, it would take me 4h (3 passes) with a similar quality (and I have to be careful and to check all settings twice).

2.VHS -> DVD.
If I don't need to edit the footage (just to cut) I'll connect my player through TBC and audio mixer to DVD recorder.
I'll do all the corrections in TBC and mixer - while the DVD-recorder would take care for the rest of the issues.
The Americans might have to check several items though (pedestal, colorspace), but PAL devices are simpler.
I use 352x576i (3.5h - plenty of space). 720x576i is a waste of space, unless the tape is really really good.

If I need to put transitions, effects, then I would use alternatively my JVC as a player since it has firewire output and a very good conversion chip inside, also TBC. Then I'll follow the indications under item 1. above.

3. DVD -> PC
Now, your video in on the PC, it's not encrypted, so you can use any software to produce an AVI or RM or WMV or the like.

---

Final observations:
My DVR-7000 (PAL), if correctly set, has a better real time encoder (1 pass) than CCE in 2 passes for the same bitrate. I never experienced blocking or color flattening with Pio, but with CCE.
Almost every consumer TV card is a joke. Firstly it might have broken or badly written drivers, then it's inside an EM storm that affect the video, thus in need for software cleaning. The best ones are the external ones, but they cost more tahn a decent DVD-recorder. And for God sake, at 1h recording time, they are all more or less the same.
All links are, if possible, digital, if not possible, then S-Video.

Tools:
Pio DVR-7000, JVC HR-DVS1, Pana AG7600, TBC, mixer. GOOD CABLES.

EasyRider_

4th June 2009, 11:27

Ghitulescu

4th June 2009, 12:15

Well.. i must agree about the hardware recording.

And the most of modern record devices have enough storage space, like 250GB or more also good transfer solutions.

I thing about this one.. Philips HDR3810 (http://www.p4c.philips.com/cgi-bin/dcbint/cpindex.pl?slg=ENG&ctn=HDR3810)

The Philips have their own-designed chips, PAL optimized, and not "PAL supported" as the Japanese chips.

But their optical pickups are prone to failure.

Ghitulescu

4th June 2009, 12:21

Sure, finally i choose WinDVR 3 which save in:

[Real-time Best]
Format: MPEG-2

Video:
Size: 720x576
Frame Rate: 25.00 frames/sec
Bit Rate: 7200 KBits/sec

Very high (crystal) video and audio quality :)

What you thing about..

At 7500 almost every MPEG-2 encoder has an easy life ;)

EasyRider_

4th June 2009, 13:56

The Philips have their own-designed chips, PAL optimized, and not "PAL supported" as the Japanese chips.

But their optical pickups are prone to failure.

hmm.. I did not know that..

what is a good firm for this job in your opinion..?

Ghitulescu

4th June 2009, 14:08

hmm.. I did not know that..

what is a good firm for this job in your opinion..?

I don't know for sure...
I own a Pio and a JVC. The Pio is by far the best, but was the 1999 model (and cost exactly the same ;)). In 1h mode they are about the same (Pio has a better analog filtering). In 4 hours, JVC is really bad (visible blocking).

I've heard that Panasonic are good, especially in low bitrates (LP).

Anyway, if you want one, get the maximum number you can afford (eg Pioneer 656 is better than 420, you got the idea).

EasyRider_

7th June 2009, 11:30

Pioneer is very good machines.. also Panasonic.

Thank you for your advice Ghitulescu. :)

Ghitulescu

8th June 2009, 12:18

Capture format i set: 640x480, YUY2, 25.00 Frame rate ( for size adjusting )

Any advice for better quality ..?

640x480 is the "computer video format" relative of NTSC. Mixing NTSC with PAL parameters (25fps) is not really a good idea unless you watch this solely on a PC. Greece is PAL, right?

And secondly, most PC cards do have a smaller "capture window" using then the scaling using drivers to yield the desired resolution. Many cards have a capture window of only 320x240 (the cheapes ones can do this only up to 15fps) -which is ok for cell-phones, ipods etc. and in the NTSC world, but not for archiving video of any source.

Darksoul71

12th June 2009, 22:06

@Ghitulescu:

And secondly, most PC cards do have a smaller "capture window" using then the scaling using drivers to yield the desired resolution. Many cards have a capture window of only 320x240 (the cheapes ones can do this only up to 15fps) -which is ok for cell-phones, ipods etc. and in the NTSC world, but not for archiving video of any source.

I can hardly agree with this....:rolleyes:

Most analogue capture cards I know (Terratec Cinergy 400 for example) capture PAL fine with full interlaced informations
up to 720x576. There is nothing scaled up. Also capturing up to normal 25 FPS (PAL) or 29.97 (NTSC) could be done years
ago even with the crappiest BT 8X8 chipset. Even my old mono Askey TV-card could do 768x576@25 FPS in Huffyuv with no drops.

I do not want to go into too much details but to me the "old" way of capturing at a very lossless codec, filter / deinterlace the movie then using good AVISynth scripts and encode them later with a good software encoder (HCEnc for example) gives way better results than every hardware encoder I´ve seen.

@EasyRider_:
I can not comment on iuvcr and it´s integrated de-interlacer too much but ffdshow might be worth a try. There you have a lot of options such as deinterlacing, cropping, resizing and denoising on the fly. Can be pretty useful. Similar to Mencoder under Linux.

Just my 2 cents,
D$

Ghitulescu

13th June 2009, 19:11

@Ghitulescu:

I can hardly agree with this....:rolleyes:

Most analogue capture cards I know (Terratec Cinergy 400 for example) capture PAL fine with full interlaced informations
up to 720x576. There is nothing scaled up. Also capturing up to normal 25 FPS (PAL) or 29.97 (NTSC) could be done years
ago even with the crappiest BT 8X8 chipset. Even my old mono Askey TV-card could do 768x576@25 FPS in Huffyuv with no drops.

I do not want to go into too much details but to me the "old" way of capturing at a very lossless codec, filter / deinterlace the movie then using good AVISynth scripts and encode them later with a good software encoder (HCEnc for example) gives way better results than every hardware encoder I´ve seen.

@EasyRider_:
I can not comment on iuvcr and it´s integrated de-interlacer too much but ffdshow might be worth a try. There you have a lot of options such as deinterlacing, cropping, resizing and denoising on the fly. Can be pretty useful. Similar to Mencoder under Linux.

Just my 2 cents,
D$

I agree I'm a little bit "rusty" in analogue capture via PC since I'm doing my captures exclusively in hardware since 2004. A good capture card at that time, DV500 (PCI+Breakbox), cost more than my Pio. At the time also the VDub filters were not really good (denoising in special), and the capture cards I've tested were extemely sensitive to timing errors.

Since then my way of capturing analog is to output the VHS from a S-VHS deck (AG-7600) through TBC and color corrector to Pio DVR7000 (twin brother version of Pro PVR9000). After calibration I have RT (1:1), whereas the PC way cost me (2004) some 4-8x more time. I don't have to bother with any issue, I calibrate the system in real time, hit Run (PLAY/REC ;)) and go for a bier. I use the PC only for authoring the DVD.

In Germany you cannot find so many internal cards, most of them being USB, which strangely seems to be the same model under different names. Which I'm positively sure cannot internally do FullPAL/NTSC but 320x240 or 640x480, since they use the same chips as WebCams. Terratec or similar have disappeared from shelves, only as "used" in eBay. People that like MP3 made companies rethink their market strategies :(