Spec for 2 systems - one for analogue AV capture, other for digital AV capture

[deity47]

Hello to the good people of doom9.org
I've been browsing the forums for what I hope is a simple answer, but could not find an answer! So please bare with me.

A friend has asked for a machine to use for capturing videos and converting them into DVDs.
However, initially he wants to capture some old analogue recordings from his camcorder with composite out onto his hard drive, then onto DVD. After this he wants to move onto to digital capture from a DV camcorder, and again burning them onto DVD. So ofcourse, in both cases he will need a DVD burner, that's the easy part!

Analogue Capture System
So first what sort of hardware is required for analogue capture - what are the most important parts. Am I right in saying that for analogue capture, all he needs is a good capture card, but the rest of his system can be average, as I was hoping he could just use his current system. His current system is:
AMD Duron 800Mhz
256mb RAM
30gb HD
ATI Radeon 9800SE AIW
Integrated sound
DVD-RW

What do you think of that lot for analogue capture? All suggestions welcome.

Digital Capture System
Am I right in saying that for digital capture from a DV camcorder, a much faster system is required than the above? Also is it correct that a capture card is not required, simply a firewire connection on the motherboard? Anyway I was thinking along the lines of:
Intel Pentium Northwood 3.0ghz
512mb RAM
Maxtor 200gb HD
ATI Radeon 9800SE AIW (From above should suffice?)
DVD-RW

Would this handle the capture and editing of DV camcorder - specifically will the 9800SE AIW suffice? Also perhaps you would recommend 1gb RAM or more hard disk space? Maybe is the above overkill!?

Please all advice much appreciated
I may be going about it all wrong!?

All the best :)

[jggimi]

Hello, and welcome to the forum.

This particular forum discusses analog capture, there is a DV forum (http://forum.doom9.org/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=59) specific to DV capture and conversion. See this announcement (http://forum.doom9.org/announcement.php?s=&forumid=10) for posting guidelines.

You are correct that a firewire (IEEE-1394) connection is used to capture DV. It is also possible to capture analog video through a DV camcorder; most DV camcorders can be used as A->D capture devices without the need for tape. Its not necessarily better than an onboard analog capture card, but it may be easier to manage, particularly with common audio sync issues.

Both you and your friend need to read the FAQ (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32575), in particular, Question 4. Your proposed "analog capture system" is woefully inadequate to capture analog video; aside from a probably underpowered CPU, there is insufficient disk space. You don't mention your OS, but an NT/2000/XP Windows platform will make it easier to manage capture files -- W98 and WME do not support NTFS file systems, and cannot have files larger than 4GB.

In addition, we have an analog Capture Guide (http://www.doom9.org/capture/start.html) which is highly recommended.

[deity47]

Originally posted by jggimi
Hello, and welcome to the forum. Thanks :)

Originally posted by jggimi
This particular forum discusses analog capture, there is a DV forum (http://forum.doom9.org/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=59) specific to DV capture and conversion. I did see it, but was unsure as how to pose this specific 'progressive' question. Now I look at it thats not too hard :p

Originally posted by jggimi
Both you and your friend need to read the FAQ (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32575), in particular, Question 4. Your proposed "analog capture system" is woefully inadequate to capture analog video; aside from a probably underpowered CPU, there is insufficient disk space. You don't mention your OS, but an NT/2000/XP Windows platform will make it easier to manage capture files -- W98 and WME do not support NTFS file systems, and cannot have files larger than 4GB. But I did read both the FAQ and the hardware guide! Its just that I got the idea it was quite old, for example *** About Windows XP: WindowsXP is a new version of windows aimed at the home/office market. it will support the NTFS file system and some more new system improvements. BUT it's stability speed are yet to be known (Note: As I forgot to mention, the system runs Windoes XP.) Furthermore, as I went through it, it did appear that the analogue system was more than satisfactory:

Minimum CPU: PIII 500Mhz.
Recommended CPU: Intel P III or AMD Athlon Thunder Bird - 800Mhz to 1Ghz. (tick)

Minimum Ram - 64 Mb.
Recommended Ram - 256 Mb.(tick)

Considering the above all I can say it - the bigger the better and 20G hard drive is the Minimum. (tick)

I'll probably repost from a different angle, but I would like to know a simple question: would the proposed "digital capture system" handle both analogue and digital capture sufficiently? If so I will try and persuade them to go straight to that.

Many thanks :)

[jggimi]

CPU requirements:

If your friend is capturing with the 9800SE AIW, the PC's CPU will be used to do all encoding of audio and video. Excess CPU consumption can have a significant impact, with impacts such as dropped frames or A/V sync issues. See page 49 of the All-In-Wonder 9800 Series Installation, Setup, and Users Guide.

Your friends choice of formats / codecs will have a significant impact on CPU requirements. HuffYUV and Linear PCM are recommended not only because they are lossless, but because they consume minimal CPU resources.

DV capture is nothing more than a physical copy, there is no encoding taking place.

Storage requirements:

Full frame uncompressed video requires just under 70 GB per hour. Its the same capacity whether 720x576/25 PAL, or 720x480/29.97 NTSC. That's when captured in YUY2 colorspace. If your friend decides to capture in RGB, this capacity requirement increases to just over 104 GB per hour.

HuffYUV compression will reduce that demand, possibly on the order of 2.5X - 3X.

DV is a lossy compressed video format, that requires 13 GB/hr.

----------------------------------------------------------

Obviously, there are tradeoffs that must be decided upon by your friend. There is no "best" answer. Higher quality video is possible when capturing to a lossless codec, and post-processed to final format after capture. DV offers lower CPU requirements, lower storage requirements, and a guarantee of A/V synchronization. But it does so with a lossy codec that may have colorspace issues depending on post-processing needs.

[edited for clarity]

[deity47]

Thanks very much for your help so far jggimi

So it appears as though analogue capture is more taxing than DV capture - thats odd but very interesting, I had always assumed the other way round. Okay so if I were to build a computer that could handle analogue, it should be able to cope with DV.

Thus, I was hoping you could guide me in the specifics of such a machine. From what I've read and what you have shown me, I estimate the following:

CPU: Intel Northwood 3.2ghz or AMD Athlon 64 3000+ Winchester (Socket 939) ? I'm sure Intel are typically better at AV tasks
Motherboard: Integrated firewire, not much more to it I guess?
Memory: 512mb DDR or 1gb DDR ?

Graphics Card: Anything such as ATI Radeon 9200 for example, or lower?
Capture Card: Really stuck there, just a decent value one would do?
Sound Card: Does it need a sound card if it has a capture card? Perhaps would onboard sound suffice?

Storage: Current 30gb for WindowsXP, plus 2x Maxtor 200G or 300G?
Optical Drive: Any DVD-RW will do I'm sure

Please if you could offer your guidance on the above, simply if each ones good enough, too good, or what you'd put in its place, that would be fantastic. Furthermore I may have missed some important parts out.
You've been much help so far, I just need to put together a spec and price for the friend.

All the best :)

[jggimi]

I capture both analog and DV with a 950Mhz Athlon T-bird. I shut down as many processes as possible. I configure Windows to minimize virtual memory I/O -- I set a fixed paging space at 2x RAM prior to capture, then reset once capture completes. The capture hard drive operates at 7200 rpm.

If I do analog capture in any codec other than HuffYUV or MJPEG, with PCM audio, I experience dropped frames. I capture in YUY2 -- that's what the A->D chips use natively -- but am unable to capture in RGB without dropped frames.

This is why I suggested that your friend's 800Mhz Duron is "likely underpowered." Will it work? Yes. But it will have similar restrictions, and may have less capability than mine.

For analog, HD sustained write speed is a factor -- not capacity alone. So do pay attention to RPMs. 4800 is likely not fast enough. My little capture PC keeps up with YUY2, but not with RGB. That might be due to the HD.

My capture card is an inexpensive BT878 based PCI card. Not because BT878 is "better" than any other A->D chipset, but because that's what the cheap card I'd bought was based on. I'd acquired it before learning anything about capture.

My firewire attachment is also an inexpensive PCI card. An integrated firewire would have been fine, but the motherboard doesn't have it.

Neither capture nor video processing are particularly memory intensive operations.

-----

Once the capture is complete, CPU capability comes into play for post-processing operations. The speed of the entire platform is a usability factor for non linear editing suites. But, it is the encoding of video into its final format where the speed of the CPU makes the biggest difference. Video encoding takes a tremendous amount of time -- if you read through threads throughout Doom9's forum, you will see people describe video encoding taking many hours -- sometimes, multiple days.

Yes, I encode on that little PC, but I'm willing to let the results take hours, or if necessary, days. Final formats may be VCD, SVCD, or MPEG-4.

In general, dual processor systems are not as effective for video encoding as they are with other general purpose applications. That is because encoding is such a serialized process.

-----

CPU and system cooling are critically important for video encoding, as the application stresses CPUs to a greater extent than other applications. It produces tremendous CPU heat. Opt for robust CPU chillers and system fans. Do not overclock.

[deity47]

I see, so its not the capture process that requires a powerful machine, but the post-processing and encoding.

CPU: Considering your specification, I'm willing to bet that my friend would get away with an AthlonXP 3200, which would work out a lot cheaper.
RAM: Similarly I'll go with 512mb DDR RAM (trying to keep costs down)
Storage: I'll be getting him some Maxtor 7200RPM jobbies.

Graphics Card: Considering I don't think this comes into play, I'll get him a cheap ATI Radeon 9200
Capture Card: Again I'll get him a simple cheap one, probably this: Leadtek WinFast PVR2000-MPEG2 TV/Decoder Card
Sound Card: Could you please confirm that sound card doesn''t matter?

If you agree with the above, I think I can safely put together a spec and price, and I'll finally get off your back! (until the next hurdle... :p )

All the best

[jcbiv]

Actually it depends on if the video capture card also captures the sound. Alot of vid cap devices pass the audio through the capture device into the sound card (in otherwords, you could just run the audio cables into the sound instead of the vidcap device if you wanted). And also if you are willing to fork out a little extra for a little better quality you might not even be able to hear. Personally, I have never capped analog sound on anything but my capture card and my worthless Sound Blaster Live. I think the vidcap card's cap sounds better then the SBlive, especially when played back using my new Terratec Space sound card which I replaced my Live with. Personally, I wouldnt use integrated audio to listen too, let alone record with.

[jggimi]

Good point to bring up, jcbiv. My analog capture card is one of those that doesn't capture sound. Because it has an on-board RF tuner, it came with a 6-inch patch cord to run from an audio-out on the capture card to a line-in on my soundcard. The card also has an audio-in which acts as an audio pass-through to the sound card, so that if I used the tuner, I could switch to composite or S-video without changing cables. I never capture from the tuner, so I don't use the patch cord.

A/V synch must be considered whenever two different devices are used to capture audio and video.

While on the subject of RF tuners....many PCI capture cards come with on-board tuners, as mine did. I don't use it, but those who do must consider the possibility of inside-the-PC interference. RFI can be caused by other PCI cards, hard drive motors, fans, or motherboard components including the PCI bus itself. Sometimes, swapping and moving the PCI cards around can mitigate such interference.

[deity47]

Thanks to both of you - I've been researching more into capture cards, and a good one looks like either Hauppauge WinTV PVR350 or PVR250; probably go with the PVR250, don't need FM in.

I was searching but couldnt find a definitive answer - do either of these cards cap audio or just loop it into sound card? If not, would a Sound Blaster Audidy 2 ZS be a good sound cap card?

Thanks again jggimi and jcbiv

[jcbiv]

Probrobly the only ways to know for sure would be either to shoot a mail off to someone at Leadtek or to buy it, plug it in but leave the audio cable unplugged from the sound card and do a cap. If there is sound in the cap after you playback the cap (but not while capping) then you have your answer.

Although better then the integrated sound, the Sound Blasters and Turtle Beaches are best suited for games IMHO. From what I understand they resample anything they record (this could just be the digital record, Im not sure). For around the same price or maybe a little more, I would look at the nice sound cards that sport VIA's Envy24HT chipsets. M-Audio, Terratec, and some others out there sell these cards.

[deity47]

I thought as much - so, how would this combo do:

Capture Card: Hauppage WinTV PVR250
Sound Card: M-Audio Revolution 7.1 PCI Sound Card

Will that lot be good enough? I was hoping you could offer your opinion on both the sound card and the capture card :D

Thanks again :)

[jcbiv]

Well, Ive been looking at the PVR250 specs and pictures and Im not really sure how it seems to work. I believe it does its own audio + video capture but Im not completely sure... heck, I cant even figure out where or even if it plugs into the audio card. Looks like a good card for the price. You might not even need the sound card. Make sure youve done your research and realize youll be using this to capture MPEG only most likely. Not that thats a bad thing but some people like to do uncompressed captures while others perfer to go directly to mpeg2.

The M-Audio looks like a nice sound card with the exception of no internal connectors for CD-ROMs, capture cards, etc. Personally, I would look at the AudioTrak Prodigy 7.1 if that might be a problem. This might be a problem if you like to listen to CDs with your CD-ROM or you get a capture card with an internal audio connector(such as the Leadtek PVR2000).

[deity47]

Thanks for pointing that out about the M-Audio - the AudioTrak looks perfect, but I am unable to find any in the UK! Perhaps you have a link handy?

What I can find is the Audiotrak Prodigy 7.1 LT which after looking into it appears to be a low profile version of the same card; here is the PDF manual (http://www.audiotrak.co.uk/support/manuals/prodigy71lt/Prodigy%20LT.pdf). However I am unsure and doubt that it has the internal input I desire, only a CD digital In.

If you cannot link to a Prodigy 7.1, and like me don't think the Prodigy 7.1 LT will do, could you recommend any other similar cards based on the VIA Envy24HT?

Thanks once more :)

[Sergei_Esenin]

The PVR-250 captures and encodes audio onboard, so the soundcard is irrelevent to capture quality. The PVR-150 is newer, cheaper, and provides equal or better quality using newer components, so you may want to consider that instead. Any soundcard, even cheap integrated audio or an old SB16, is fine if you use a PVR-150, 250, or 350, since they use onboard audio encoding.

Bear in mind that these cards will provide hardware-encoded MPEG-2 streams, which will be convenient and easy to burn to DVD. The downside is no access to raw, uncompressed video, which is desireable if you get into serious Avisynth filtering. Barring that, the PVR cards are excellent choices, perfect for anyone who's not going to process and filter before burning to DVD.

[deity47]

Originally posted by Sergei_Esenin
The PVR-250 captures and encodes audio onboard, so the soundcard is irrelevent to capture quality. The PVR-150 is newer, cheaper, and provides equal or better quality using newer components, so you may want to consider that instead. Any soundcard, even cheap integrated audio or an old SB16, is fine if you use a PVR-150, 250, or 350, since they use onboard audio encoding.
Thats great news sergei_esenin! Thank you
The PVR-150 looks excellent, and the fact that that it and all the WinTV PVR series encode audio is again fantastic.

Originally posted by Sergei_Esenin
Bear in mind that these cards will provide hardware-encoded MPEG-2 streams, which will be convenient and easy to burn to DVD. The downside is no access to raw, uncompressed video, which is desireable if you get into serious Avisynth filtering. Barring that, the PVR cards are excellent choices, perfect for anyone who's not going to process and filter before burning to DVD. That sounds perfect for my friend, they would only be using the included software packages, Avisynth is far beyond their capabilites :D
On a slighlty unrelated note, although for instance the PVR series hardware-encodes MPEG-2 streams, could it not still be used/forced to "software" encode raw, uncompressed video? Not that it matters for my friend, I'm simply curious.

Thanks again, you've all helped me beyond belief :)