Video calibration is like B.E.S.T (Biconditional Equalised Signal Tracking) in European and multi system Models. It doesn't matter if you turn it off after inserting the tape, it won't do anything after the tape has been sensed, It is like Bias in audio tapes, It senses the RF level and adjusts the heads coils current accordingly, it keeps the same parameters until the tape is ejected, So just keep it on all the time. R3 in the other hand should be set to on only if it improves the quality, It is an edge sharpening feature and often produces ringing, so keep it OFF unless it is needed.
@@khaos182 No, It should be always on, It can't worsen the quality, it only improves it or does nothing, most of the time there isn't much improvement that can be visually discerned, So being ON is not going to hurt anything.
So, should video calibration (BEST) be left on or not? Can you turn it on for a few sections so it senses the tape, and then turn it off? Would you get all the benefit from that feature?
@@videoediting7925 Leave it on all the time and let it do its work, Each tape formulation is calibrated once you insert a tape, Not all tapes created equal, that's why it works every time you insert a tape.
First of all, great video! I've been doing this for about 15 years now, and I still learned some new things. There are a few observations I had that you and your viewers may want to know. 1. I have a JVC HR-S9500U. The video stabilizer can be useful if the picture on the tape is very "jumpy". This happens on only a few tapes, but when it does it's good to be able to control it. The downside is that on my model(and I believe a few others) turning the stabilizer on, will turn the TBC off. You can only use one at a time. 2. I was going to point out that you didn't turn the Superimpose setting off(this will eliminate the display that says "PLAY" "STOP" "TRACKING" etc.) It may not be a feature on yours, but if it is I would turn it off for capture so that you don't have that on your capture if there is something at the very beginning of the tape. 3. I saw that when you went to restore you encoded the audio to 320kb/s AAC. If that's your preference I'm not trying to tell you you're wrong, but for me if we're spending this much effort to fix the video, we should at least leave the uncompressed PCM audio from the capture uncompressed. It doesn't make much of a size difference(probably about 100MB Vs. 1GB for like a 2 hour recording.
Thank you for these tips. When it comes to the sound setting in Hybrid, I’m still learning. There have been times where I got an error message that prevented me from exporting so I’ve been superstitious about it and if I doesn’t block me, I don’t mess with those audio settings!
@@videocaptureguide Ah, I feel that. I've always used Virtualdub with AVIsynth scripts for QTGMC work, so I'm not familiar with the quirks of Hybrid. I also use AMARec for capture since even from my JVC the audio goes out of sync with Virtualdub. I just recently got a ES-15, so I might have to try it again. Not sure if there's much of a difference though, I still capture in HuffYUV.
Great video! For the record, the difference between a line TBC and a frame TBC is that a frame TBC merely makes sure that individual frames come out exactly on time, that is exactly the right number of milliseconds apart. A line TBC on the other hand, stores all of the 262.5 lines in a field in memory and then send them out with the exact correct time in between them. If you look at the left side edge of a picture from a VHS machine, you will see that it forms a very wiggly line. This is due to the fact that the lines are not starting at the exact correct times and this is due to the fact that the tape stretches and causes the lines to vary in timing. When the lines do not start at the same time, they stay out of time throughout the entire picture and this creates a general fuzziness. When the lines all start at exactly the same time then they stay aligned with each other throughout the picture and the picture is much sharper.
Thanx for the video. I haven't done this for a while now but I used to play the VHS tape back thru an old mini DV camcorder via a Firewire card into the PC and then edit.
I did another video where I compared this method. In truth, there isn't any noticeable difference between the MiniDV method and the capture card method. You might still need an ES-10/15 passthrough for some wonky VHS tapes but MiniDV as capture device is acceptable in my opinion, even though some will poo-poo it because it is a lossy format. If I redo this video I will add a MiniDV camcorder workflow to the list of workflows.
If you want to go even further, watch this guy's excellent tutorial, specifically, how to apply auto color in an even better way that gives even better results: ua-cam.com/video/NLT-Ozou20w/v-deo.htmlsi=8jBIMKPgT6OBKxzQ&t=40 I didn't go into this because it's more advanced, but it's really not hard to do. I'm not an expert in Davinci and definately not a professional colorist, but I've seen some good tutorials and try to apply the basic fixes. Good luck!
Here I am watching, I don't even have VHS tape and or want to all of this. I find these old tech really fascinating, remember we used to have those strudy plastic buttons for everything? Now there's only touch here and there :d
Years ago I bought a new Panasonic VHS, it also has DVD player. It also has a cross recording/ transfer function built-in. It also has HDMI output and a built-in digital tuner. Very high quality players. I'm sure these can be had for almost nothing on eBay now. To do a transfer you just put a blank DVD in and push a couple buttons. You now have a perfect digital transfer. If you want to keep it really simple, on the cheap, with top quality.
Finally! An indepth "vhs to digital" video with a method that fills me with hope. I can't thank you enough for making this. Like many people, I had no idea how deep the rabbit hole goes when trying to digitise tape. I tried the cheap usb devices on amazon then progressed to the AV-to-HDMI method using OBS, but kept running into issues (distorted video, overly dark colors, audio-sync issues). I almost gave up when I learned how expensive TBC's are - but this video has helped everything to make more sense. If the video creator sees my comment I'd be extremely grateful if he could help with a couple of questions: 1. Is there a particular reason for recommending the Diamond VC500 over the host of other USB capture devices (e.g. the Elgato video capture)? I'd love to know if it has any properties that make it a superior choice in your testing. 2. I'm trying to digitise 8mm tape (standard Video8): Am I correct in thinking that I need to get a Sony Handycam which has an S-video OUT for your "DVD time base corrector" method to work? My current sony handycam only has red/yellow/white outputs - and I'm guessing if I plug RCA cables into a DVD player then use DVD player S-video out to the capture device, that I won't get the same benefits? Thanks again! Liked, subscribed & bookmarked - will be trying this method over the next few months if I can get the equipment - I'm in the UK but presumably same/similar equipment will be available.
Thanks for the comment. I made this video to provide the big picture overview because I was lost when I started reading the forums. To answer your questions. 1. At some point when I was reading the DigitalFAQ forums, I read (or maybe inferred) that the Diamond VC500 was an acceptable capture device. However, in reviewing the forum again, it seems that some versions of the VC500 have this weird issue where during a scene the contrast/brightness will suddenly change. It's not that way in the source video. So, there's a question mark here, but given that the VC500 is readily available at Amazon and it pretty inexpensive, I think it is a safe choice for an average person who wants to digitize and not go too deep down the rabbit hole. The VC500 is definitely better than the DVD recorder method. Regarding the Elgato, the consensus on DigitalFAQ is that it is not as good as the recommended choices. I don't know if it is any worse than the VC500. But it gets a lot of hate from the experts in part because it relatively expensive. But the experts acknowledge that the Elgato is much better than EasyCap (aka EasyCrap) and the other cheap no-name brands on Amazon. 2. All my old tapes were Video8 (8mm tape) so I could have bought a Video8 camcorder. The reason I bought a Hi8 camcorder was because (a) Hi8 camcorders can output via S-Video cable (b) it outputs left and right audio (c) the are newer model years than Video8 (typically) so it will fail further in the future, and (d) if I even have to transfer Hi8 tapes, I will be able to. Digital8 camcorders were the next step and could play Digital8 tapes, Hi8 tapes, and Video8 tapes. So, if you can find one of those at a good price, get it. Many (but not all) Sony Hi8 camcorders have a Line TBC. Unlike SVHS players where this feature was more rare, there are a lot of Sony Hi8 camcorders with this superpower. So, do you still need a Panasonic ES-10 or ES-15 in the workflow? Ugg. I am still testing that. I have captured Hi8 --> ES-15 --> ATI AIW 9600XT. And it looks good and audio/video sync is good. But the ES-15 will make the video look more washed out, so I've also capture Hi8 --> ATI AIW 9600XT. And I think I was able to get audio/video in sync. I would need to run this test again to see. Sorry I can't be more definitive. But if you so Hi8 --> ATI AIW 9600XT and the video is not jumpy and the audio/video is in sync at the end then you are good. You don't need an ES-15, at least for that tape. It sounds like you have a Video8 camcorder, currently, as it only has composite output (aka RCA, AKA yellow, white, red cables). I've wondered whether sending the chroma+luma over the SVideo wire into the ES-15 and then sending it out from the ES-15 to the capture device improves the image. I don't know the answer. I *think* the answer is that if the device splitting the chroma+luma is doing it well (ie, it has a good decomb filter) then it is making the video look better. I have to assume, however, that outputting from a Hi8 camcorder's SVideo port will be better. But with all these things, the question is will it be noticeable. I have concluded that the only person who will notice and care is you. No one will know how much time you spent thinking about and preserving the home movies. They will be happy to see them no matter what quality they are in.
I would always switch off the BEST tape measurement system for recordings because it obviously doesn't help with playback. I would switch off the TBC because JVC has installed various "good" (jump vertically 1 Line) TBCs, only a few of which can keep up with the Panasonic DMR-ES10 EG (PAL) TBC/Synchronizer chip (MN673744 as in the canopus ADVC-300), which causes about 3 frames of delay between picture and sound. EDIT I would turn it on if you can turn off "DigiPure" (artificial looking image). In NTSC countries it makes a lot of sense to use S-Video connections, as the NTSC color carrier reaches down to just over 2 MHz. In PAL countries it's not so bad because the Y signal only goes up to about 3.15 MHz, and the lower sideband of the color carrier can only reach down to 3.43 MHz. Unfortunately, my knowledge of English is not sufficient to understand the color problem that you have with Panasonic recorders. I didn't notice anything with PAL on my DMR-E55 EG. Result of the old (outdated) solution with PAL S-VHS tape: ua-cam.com/video/M5kYTCwYVy8/v-deo.html The Panasonic DMR-ES10 PAL is much better when the DMR-ES15 PAL: ua-cam.com/video/9_xue8-gGLM/v-deo.html😉The Diamond VC500 USB grabber is said to have the same chip (CX23103) as the Elgato grabber, which makes both grabbers unusable for PAL tapes since the chip can only output NTSC. My next solution should run with Panasonic NV-HS900 EG (PAL S-VHS recorder with K drive), S-Video, Pioneer DVR-560H (DVD/HDD combination recorder with Video adjusting, PAL) as TBC with 4:4:4 HDMI output to Blackmagic DeckLink Mini Recorder HD (PCIe 2.0 Card). In the ITU-R BT 601 (CCIR 601) standard (NTSC/PAL without color), the lower even lines come first (lower field first), followed by the higher odd lines. But not all programmers handle it correctly. You should record UNCOMPRESSED (72 GB/h). You should only compress after denoising at the earliest. "Obsolete Video" is convinced by HitPaw Video Enhancer, which can still change at the beginning of AI. OBS Studio cannot do interlaced Video and is therefore out. As a TV engineer from Hamburg, I unfortunately cannot correct all of Google Translate's errors.
@@videocaptureguide Many(or quite possibly all)Digital8 cameras that support Video8/Hi8 can also convert these tapes to a digital signal, to be transmitted over firewire just like Digital8 recordings. That option may not be the absolute best(compared to s-video output, TBC, quality capture card etc), but is probably likely to not be far off & easier/cheaper if you have a Digital8 camera already.
@@DoubleMonoLR I agree. 👍 I think that for many people who just want a simple solution, this would be an acceptable way to do it, especially if they already have this hardware and don't want to invest in more hardware.
@@DoubleMonoLR I wanted to try this method myself. From memory you need a firewire 400 to 800 adapter , then a firewire 800 to thunderbolt 2 adapter , then finally a thunderbolt 2 to thunderbolt 3 adapter. My understanding is not *all* digital8 cameras will work for this. I had to google and find lists of model numbers. Most of the online tutorials I've seen say it's only the apple cables which work well, and since they've stopped selling some of them, they are quite expensive now. I'm in the UK and I think I was looking at approx £150 just for the cables, then another £150+ for a digital8 camera off ebay. I'm reluctant to take a risk for my precious home memories on an ebay purchase which could theoretically eat my tapes. My current sony camera may only be component, but at least it works. But you're right , for people who alreay have the Digital8, this method might be okay. If you have a mac I did read you can just use quicktime and record using that with this method.
great video, really like the calm manner in which you explained everything. I've got a more basic setup (just a Dazzle USB adapter and a standard VHS player), but will be using VirtualDub too, and have been going round in circles on the same forums you showed, so this was very useful.
It would be very happy to get the RF capture devices. So far I get as far as the website that sells the components and I give up when I read the instructions on how to buy the cards. That doesn’t include the DIY stuff that needs to be done to combine them. That’s why I haven’t tried it yet. I’m pretty sure I can figure out the capture and post capture. But getting the hardware and connecting it is my main problem. I salute the people with the DIY skills and brains to get past those hurdles.
@@videocaptureguide I totally get it. I said the same thing to Harrypm on his channel. he replied with: "I do plan on making a video about a full hardware installation with adjusting a new impedance matched amplifier and without". Let's hope that comes out soon and does a better job shedding light on it than the wiki page, which is a mouthful.
I actually have a good TBC and SVHS. I don't have an AIW USB, but I have a 600 clone. I didn't buy a new PC from scratch but bought something that was high-end but still within Windows X right before the end of life and instilled an extra drive bay for the capture. I never learned how to enhance and haven't quite finished my project, so I'm super glad you included that.
Sounds like you have good hardware. The enhancement step is optional and there is a risk of overdoing it. After lots of testing, I now just do deinterlacing and very minor noise reduction.
YES!!!! I've been planning to restore some home videos for years, but all the capture devices I've tried (from Sony to Hauppauge) still had a lot of flagging, chroma smear, etc. My first "real" job was working in a video production/editing studio in the 90's, where I learned about NTSC standards and what editors look for in footage; virtually every problem I can think of are created with those devices. However, your walk-through will get me to a place I can finally get something usable and understand what's happening, PLUS your resources will be what I need to read and learn to improve my results. Thank you so much!!!
In the 1990s, my first editing system was an RCA Video8 camcorder, a VHS player, a home stereo system that I used to add music. I got my first video editing PC in March 1999. I never used the (pre-computer) video editing systems. I've seen some used ones on ebay and I'm tempted to try it out. Did you ever use those video editors at that first job?
@@videocaptureguide I didn't get to edit, but watched and learned so I could do better work on the off-line equipment. Much of my time was logging scene timecode numbers from a VHS copy so the editors had the numbers handy. Eventually I began using After Effects and Premier in the following decade, but watching a "real" editor at work is a learning experience. ;-)
Really appreciate all your work and synthesis here. I personally still swear by the Canopus ADVC110 (and my Panasonic 9600U), both bought by me new "back in the day" into the MacStudio and Final Cut Pro for capture with upscaling/deinterlacing and what-not handled by ffmpeg. No dropped frames, no audio sync trouble, and no need to build an XP machine. (Though I have done *that* to transfer 8mm film with early MovieStuff hardware, but that's another story...) Anyway, bravo sir.
Thank you. After making the video, I realized I should have mentioned DV transfer, which is a very popular method. In subsequent videos, I mentioned DV transfer when describing the various methods.
My tip for a capture device. A Sony DCR TRV 320 (or similar) camcorder. They will digitise analogue video fed into them and spit out .avi via FireWire. They will also play 8mm, Hi8 and digital 8 tapes. If you then get yourself a mini DV camcorder as well, you have most camcorder formats covered. Do NOT buy the later 400 series, they don't do pass-through and they don't play analogue tapes. And they have a dodgy image sensor that goes bad on all of them. Ask me how I know.
Problem with that is that it's all converted to MiniDV format which has a different color space. It's better than nothing, but you do lose a bit of color accuracy.
@@iVTECInside The way I used it was as a pass through device. There is not even a tape in the TRV 320 when capturing. You have a VCR output hooked to the composite input of the TRV and the TRV firewire output to a firewire input on your computer. You use a firewire 400 card installed inside the computer, not one of these little rickety USB adapters.
@@mdindestin I've done the same with my Sony MiniDV camcorder. It's not passthrough though. It's converting to NTSC DV, that's what its feeding to the PC. It definitely works very well in my experience. I'm fairly certain there is some sort of TBC functionality going on in the process. So better than straight to a cheap USB capture device on its own, but giving up a little vs an external TBC and capture device that maintain the original color space.
The VHS-Decode project sounds just like how I would have attempted to tackle the issue if I were to figure it out myself. Thanks for making me aware of it so I don't have to reinvent the wheel.
If you have 2 hours, you can get some good context on the LaserDisc project that gave birth to the VHS-Decode project. What I found interesting is that the guy behind the RF extraction of LaserDiscs calls the VHS-Decode project immature at this stage. The RetroRGB guy is mostly concerned with VHS tapes so he presses them for info. Sounds like you are a technical guy and so I think this interview will be very useful to you as you get into this. ua-cam.com/video/KueSbYs7yMU/v-deo.html
@@videocaptureguide This video is 9 month old, a lot of things have happened since then. Decoding of VHS mostly outperforms every conventional capure (e.g. with TBC and grabber card) and Video8/Hi8 is not yet perfect, but does not look worst than a conventional capture. One very nice thing about the VHS-Decode project is that after doing the initial RF capture, you basically have a digital copy of your tapes. This is one of the biggest advantages, as this eliminates the degradation of your tapes which means further loss of image quality. Just be sure to do the RF capture right in the first place, but this is rather simple as shown in the vhs-decode wiki. With that, you can decode this file in the future again, in case the current state of vhs-decode does not the quality you desire
@@OriksonDIY Good to know. Thanks. I really am interested in trying out VHS-Decode so that I can do a side-by-side comparison between ATI600 versus MiniDV versus VHS-Decode. I really do hope that VHS-Decode it gives better results and I understand that once I have the RF-captured file on my computer, the software will only get better over time so that the end result will look even better. My hesitation to jump in steps from the learning curve and cost of the Doomsday device, although I know there is a less expensive alternative.
@@videocaptureguideVHS-Decode has been crushing conventional capture market value for years at this point, the cross platform support and export pipeline are now pretty refined too so to the end user anyone can pull down an RF file decode and export it to video on any platform now, and with the development of the MIRSC we're aiming to tackle conventional capture too. Today we have, made to order amplifiers and Clockgen mod kits, so effectively anyone can deploy this now and have turnkey Video RF/HiFi RF and Linear all synchronised. And this is under 120 US dollars global price with CX Cards.
Been in the professional digitize business for 30+ years. TBC is really not necessary if you have good capture equipment. Pretty much any moniDV, Digital 8 camera and the digital players like the GVD800 GVHD700 ect will accept your composite or S video and spit out a 4:1:1 DV stream which is the same as DV and Digital 8 encided on the tape. Then firewire into the PC and capture with your favorite software. You end up with a 480i 25mbit stream which then you can either save as a .avi or export it in whatever format turns your crank. Another option which I have found to be very good is the stand alone recorder boxes from CA. Depending on the model it can turn out high bit rate .mp4 directly in either the native 480i or will up convert to 720p60 or 1080p60 and you can choose 4:3 or stretch to 16:9 if you don't want black bars. Depending on device it will accept composite, component, RGB, and even HDMI inputs. Since I deal regularly with betacam SP which is a component format this comes in handy as I can take the direct Y, R-Y and B-Y outputs directly and spit out a picture that is as good as I have seen. An old videonics MX1 mixer works great as a frame store TBC if needed but with the hardware I am using I have not needed it except with dealing with macrovision.
Hi @12voltvids. I'm a fan of your channel. Watched a lot of your videos. When I was entering the rabbit hole a few years ago, I must have watched your TBC demo video several times. I have been doing more tests for this channel to compare different options, and I think I am coming around to your way of viewing it. Leaving out the MiniDV camcorder option in my list was an oversight, as I think it is a good choice for most people. I appreciate the feedback. Also, what is your go-to workflow?
If customer wants. AVI I use the GV-HD700. If they want mp4 it goes straight into the CA in full quality mode 1080p60 set to 4:3 aspect. That gives an 8 gig per hour .mp4 files. Then I go direct to a USB stick for client. 9 out of 10 want a DVD copy as well for backup. I can do this in real time. Vhs or camera into the DVD recorder and the hdmi (upscale to 1080p) directly into capture box. I use a toshiba dvr7, it has firewire in. So I can use the hd700 to digitize to firewire and take that into toshiba and then to the ca capture box. I do high volume digitizing so not needing to use the computer is a bonus as I can be capturing video while doing other stuff on computer. I have been doing this for years including broadcast tapes betacam sp, sx and umatic for broadcast professionals. Needless to say they are pretty picky for quality and they have all been very happy.
You'd be in the minority suggesting a TBC is not necessary. Maybe you've just been lucky enough to deal with higher quality analog tapes (Betacam SP for sure) but I, and many others consider it an absolute necessity. Mini DV camcorders with AV inputs typically have one built in and don't even mention it.
I captured a VHS tape to my PC ages ago (2006) using an ordinary VHS VCR, composite output into an ATI All-In-Wonder Radeon 7500, and VirtualDub as the capture software, and it came out perfectly fine. There may have been some dropped frames, but nothing that caused any noticeable problems, and the audio didn't lose sync. Also, it had a perfectly stable image. It certainly didn't have even a hint of the problems that your "Regular VHS Player" example clip at 5:31 has. I still have the video on my PC.
If it worked well, then you're done. A regular VHS player (with no Line TBC and no S-Video port) can definitely be good enough. As things being equal, if someone is new to this, and wants to eek out every little tiny improvement, then I would still recommend an SVideo player. I guess there are two ways to look at it: (1) the VHS tape is so bad by today's standards that it's not worth worrying about; (2) the VHS tape is so bad by today's standards that you need to need to do everything possible to make it as good as possible. 🤷♀
@@videocaptureguide The point is: your video makes it seem like you'll inevitably get the unwatchable results like your "Regular VHS Player" example clip at 5:31 if you use a regular VHS VCR, which isn't the case at all. Something was drastically wrong with the setup (or the tape itself) of whoever made that transfer that you showed in your example clip. Using a VHS machine with no TBC will give you results that are just as stable as using an S-VHS machine with no TBC, because there's nothing about S-video (Y/C) that's inherently more stable than composite. You may get slightly improved picture quality with the S-video connection, which may or may not be noticeable, but that's the only potential advantage of S-video over composite. There's a Technology Connections video where he shows his analog tape capture method, and he just uses a cheap composite-to-HDMI converter from Amazon, along with an HDMI capture device. He never has stability problems using composite. If you haven't seen it it's called "The Best Easy Way to Capture Analog Video (it's a little weird)"
@@MaximRecoil Understood. If I made it seem like a regular VHS player produces unwatchable results, I apologize. That wasn't my intention. The tape I used was from the mid 1980s, recorded in SLP (EP), and is my worst tape. I use that tape to test to see how well equipment handles these types of errors. Many and hopefully most VHS tapes won't suffer those problems. For those with especially family videos that look like that, I want them to know there is a way to get good results. So, bottom line, yes, one can use a regular VHS player with an ES-15 and it will fix the tearing issues.
@@MaximRecoil Yes this exactly, many guides exaggerate the use of a regular VHS player producing unacceptable results which is just not true. If you use a normal VHS player with stabilization, be it a real TBC or the mentioned DVD recorders, you can also get excellent comparable results. Also you then can take advantage of the COMB filter which often does a better job separating the Y/C signal compared to the many simple capture cards. For regular VHS the difference of a good capture between composite or Y/C is not that huge, more important is the overall playback quality of the VCR. I have several JVC S-VHS players, also with TBC, but i often prefer using a normal (Panasonic) VCR with the mentioned DVD recorder because it gives me a better overall looking result.
Thing is, VHS isn't that bad by today's standards. UA-cam compression at 1080p may be much worse than a VHS in high motion scenes. A good capture method makes a real difference.
Disabliing the Video Preview during capture also helps with audio sync issues in my experience, The original VDub docs also recommended doing so since the preview window is actually taking up PCI bandwidth from the capture card. If that still applies to usb cap cards though I cant say.
I wish this video was made a few years ago. It's daunting to say the least, but going over the options, even when looking at DigitialFAQ was hard to piece together.
First of all, great video, great explanations, thank you very much! I have an option in the video capturer I bought to capture through a YPbPr cable and relatively I liked the result. So assuming I have all the options, is it better to capture via s-video, composite, or YPbPr cable? Thank you 🙏🏼
I don't know of any VCRs or camcorders that have Component output. So S-Video cable is the best option. In discussions about whether to convert S-Video signal to Component signal before capture, the advice is No.
I believe some VCR/DVD combo units also have somewhat of a frame TBC. I'm sure my Sony RDR-VX525 has a TBC, but one issue it has is that a small sliver on the left side of the s-video output is slightly darker for some reason. Maybe it's just my unit. I'm sure there are ways in software to compensate for horizontally wiggly video like a line TBC would fix, and a frame TBC really only helps prevent dropouts for capture devices that don't handle unstable video very well (e.g. surprisingly the AJA Kona LHe+.) So not all of the expensive equipment is necessary for a good capture.
The issue of frame TBC versus frame synchronizers hurts my brain. No matter how many times I read about it, I still get confused. I believe that the Panasonic ES-10 and ES-15 (and possibly the Sony you mention) have frame synchronizers that (maybe?) help keep audio and video in sync (sort of) but are not frame TBCs, per se. The Datavideo TBC-1000 has a frame synchronizer and a frame TBC, so that's why people associate these two features, even though they are different. But still can't explain in my own words how they are different. Here's an explanation, which I have re-read for the 15th time and am still confused. I guess I'm more of a visual learner and I cannot picture some of this stuff. www.studio1productions.com/Articles/TBC.htm
The best method I have found is an S-VHS player connected via S-Video to a stand alone Sony RDR-HXD DVD recorder which has a hardware upscaler and an HDMI out (The actual model number doesn't matter as we aren't using the internal HDD or tuner sections). The HDMI out is fed into a fairly cheap HDMI to USB capture device on my laptop. The hardware upscaler in the Sony does a far better job than any standalone device I have tried, probably because the Sony DVD Recorder was a very expensive device in it's time and the S-VHS player has a time base corrector and also does a good job of reducing noise on standard VHS.
Interesting. I don’t know that one. I did a quick search and found a discussion with a demo that says it indeed fixes some jitter issues, although not as much as an ES10 or ES15 might. But still an improvement. What do you use for HDMI to USB. I have tested an Elgato Camlink but I know there are more expensive options that might produce better results if going the HDMI to USB route. Here is the discussion about your Sony recorder: forum.videohelp.com/threads/401905-Sony-rdr-hxd870-dvd-recorder-passthrough
Any hardware upscalers are bad and I guess that old Sony just uses the primitivest alrorythm which is better than newer ones that trying to denoise and enhance too hard. Any way, it would be easy to exceed with software.
I bought an S-VHS camcorder for $1500 back in 1984. It was a lot of money for a young 20s something couple, but I wanted good quality. There always was, and always will be, confusion about this format. There is no benefit to running a normal VHS tape through a S-VHS machine. Garbage in, garbage out.
Hello congratulations on your channel I have never seen a channel on UA-cam as interesting as yours talking about to digiter VHS video tape,well THANK YOU could you to do a HIBRID tutorial whole All the Best 😍👍
I'm a bit of a old school videophile and have to agree with everything in the video. I do have to say however understand a working svhs player will cost you $250 to $300 on ebay. A tbc will cost you nearly a grand and an svhs player with tbc will cost you a grand and might only come up on ebay once per month. Be careful with professional decks too because some only play tapes recorded in sp speed.
Excellent video with the details that I was looking for. With that Jvc, is it possible to use the firewire port and if so, how would the quality be compared with this elegant setup? I have three cables needed to bring firewire to thunderbolt 3.
Thank you for this comment. When I bought this JVC SVHS player, I read that the MiniDV tape deck inside wasn't as good as a MiniDV camcorder, so I completely ignored it. After reading your comment, I realized that I had never asked myself that question! So, I just connected a firewire cable from the SVHS player's DV port, and output to a Windows 7 computer with my firewire card. I put a VHS tape in the JVC and pressed play. The signal was passed through the DV port and out to the firewire card. I will need to do tests to see how that DV passthrough compares to the MiniDV (or Digital8) passthrough that I reported on in another video on this channel. So the comparison will be: JVC HR-DVS3U -- DV out -- firewire cable -- firewire card JVC HR-DVS3U -- svideo out -- MiniDV camcorder svideo in -- DV out -- firewire card Cutting the Svideo cable from the workflow saves a step, which in theory is good. But is the DV contraption inside the SVHS player as good as the one in the Sony MiniDV camcorder? This will be a good test. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
@@videocaptureguide Thank you for the comments. The arrangement that you mentioned would be very interesting indeed for comparison. I have tried converting 8mm, hi 8mm tapes with Sony GV-D800 Digital8 player with firewire using a thunderbolt 2 adapter and a thunderbolt 3 adapter to MacBook Pro. In the iMovie, 640x480 is the max resolution allowed, so I've been trying to find a way to upscale the signal. I also get the same resolution limitation from my Sony MiniDV camcorder with firewire. I tried it on both a few year old MBP with thunderbolt 2 and a new MBP with thunderbolt 3, and I get the same limitation. I saw a review of RetroTINK 4k with TBC built in for games that can be used for video signals including SVHS, component, and composite. I am not sure if that would be a better arrangement with SVHS than trying to use the firewire setup. It seems that the legacy TBC devices are hard to find so was interested in your opinion. Thanks again, and I look forward to your next video!
The RetroTink is an excellent device for displaying video from old gaming consoles onto a modern television. Some people use the RetroTink to digitize analog video tapes. The results are acceptable, but you will likely get better results by (1) transferring your DV footage via firewire to your computer, and (2) using the software Hybrid to deinterlace and upscale your video. Experts state that the software deinterlacing and upscaling produce better results than the (RetroTink) hardware method. However, the hardware method is much easier for people who are not comfortable using computers or learning how to use the software (Hybrid). If the video footage was recorded on a Digital camcorder or MiniDV camcorder (like in your example), one should always use the firewire port to transfer it to one's computer. You will have a video file encoded with the DV codec. If the video footage was recorded on a Video8, Hi8, VHS, or SVHS device, one should use an SD capture device (eg, ATI600) via Svideo cable. Some believe, however, that using DV passthrough device (Digital8 or MiniDV camcorder, or Canopus ADVC-110) is equivalent to the SD method. There is a heated debate on this subject. I have done several videos comparing these two methods and will likely do more.
I received on VHS in VCD quality (288P) on .dat format. It has audio synchronization issues due to frame freezing, slow motion and fast motion in video. I am able to correct it manually by deleting the freezed frames and correction in slow/fast motion. Is it possible to correct the same in any automated way?
I don’t think there is any way to automate the correction of this video. Do you have the original VHS tape so that you could try to capture it again perhaps in a better VCR?
Thanks for this great video. Very comprehensive. I am using this as my go to guide to re-do some VHS/HI8 video captures/digitizing in the hopes of gaining improved quality. I have used OBS to get started, but see that VirtualDub 1.9.11 version is recommended. I also see that there is a VirtualDub2. Is there a reason not to use VirtualDub2? Since i am using a Windows 10 version, i am also going to use the Diamond VC500 capture as you recommended and not the ATI's (which i see seems to be more for Window's 98 machines). Curious if can still follow your workflow (including the Hybrid and Davinci Resolve for image / denoise enhancements with my set up. Apologies if i sound like a newbie.
The experts don't recommend VirtualDub2 for capture because of dropped frames or other weird issues. It is okay to use VirtualDub2 for the enhancement phase and there is a good video on YT explaining how to use AviSynth in VirtualDub2. But I find it easier to use Hybrid, which is a UI for AviSynth and Vapoursynth. And, yes, you can use your modern Windows computer for the enhancement stuff. What I do is capture on my Windows XP machine, then copy the AVI files to a WD Elements 1TB USB hard drive (the one that gets its power from the USB port) and then copy the files to my Windows 10 machine. Regarding the Diamond VC500, it is an okay choice. But I have read more recently from the user lollo that he uses and likes the I-O Data GV-USB2. It costs a bit more, but if I was remaking the video I would recommend this new one based entirely on what lollo said. It is available new at Amazon.
Love the tutorial! For me, I use USB Live-2 for capturing from my JVC S VHS (with Panasonic DMR-ES15) to AmarecTV, then using avs to do scripting (cleaning up image, de-interlacing etc.) for Avisynth and add to Vdub and finish from there, seems to be way better for me than doing it straight from Vdub as I have nothing but issues with it anyways.
I used AmarecTV at the start because was convinced by DigitalFAQ to use VirtualDub 1.9.11 because it showed when there was dropped frames, while AmarecTV doesn't say. Did you try to capture with vdub 1911 or vdub2? I know that vdub2 has issues for capture which is why the original is recommended.
@@videocaptureguide So I tried with both Vdub 1 and 2, maybe it's because it is wonky with Windows 11? My amarectv shows dropped frames. I think it depends on what version you have.
Hi. I made a short video of excellent VHS images captured with KDV, but I decided not to post because they are images of my daughter when little. I went looking for the KDV-8000 on the internet, and found one used to sell in the US (Washington), with S-VHS inputs. If you live in the US do not miss this opportunity.
Question, if the recorded video stored on a regular vhs tape is stored as a composite pal or ntsc signal what benefit does separating the signal into chroma and luma via svideo give you? The main benefit of using a svhs player is generally because they are higher quality players with a better quality deck and internals. The only thing I could think of is the fact that the comb filter circuit built into the svhs player is of higher quality than the composite destination you’d be connecting it to. Svideo allows you to bypass this. This is debatable though because given the age of these players unless they’ve had extensive servicing done with all electrolytic capacitors replaced it’s hard to know whether or not this circuitry is performing to spec. Personally I’ve done all my recording on my Loewe 5106H which uses a Panasonic k deck mechanism and output it to a Sony DVD recorder and was very happy with the results.
The question you raised is an excellent one. I have heard both sides with references to science and stuff I don't understand. I plan on testing the S-Video cable v. Composite cable in a future video. I suspect that, like most of these debates, the differences-if any-are minor. And we do the things we do because it makes us feel good.
@@videocaptureguide I might actually purchase a serviced and restored svhs player to test this theory as there is one listed in the local classifieds albeit it’s not particularly cheap. But I want to know the answer myself.
VHS stores luma and chroma separately on the tape. It’s not a composite format like laser disc. An Svideo VCR keeps them separate and when they are kept separate it prevents crosstalk between the chroma and luma which reduces noise. Noise doesn’t compress well so that leads to other issues especially if your capturing straight to a compressed codec. Svideo connection on a combo unit isn’t the same because the luma and chroma are composited together internally. I Can look at a the color2 function in Pmod and see a lot of difference between Svideo coming from my Pannasonic 1980p ag and my regular composite VCR when I stack horizontal. The composite signal is all over the place. TBCs need luma separated for timing and chroma separated for digital noise reduction anyways.
I can't tell you how thankful I am for your hard work and this video I've tried reading and understanding a lot of stuff on the digital faq website and have gotten lost, LOL. You've done an incredible job summarizing and making it understandable for layman's. I'm going to be conducting some tests and will post to UA-cam of the difference between a firewire DV converter, the ADVC110 which I already have, plus I'm planning to get an ATI all in wonder card to use with an old windows xp desktop I have lying aroun. I want to see if all this stuff from the digitalfaq website is really worth the time and old gear setup. Do you know of anyone who has compared the ATI all in wonder setup (digital faq recommendation) with different methods like canopus advc110?
I compare the ATI600 with a MiniDV-camcorder-as-passthrough here: ua-cam.com/video/SVXp7cjJT8Q/v-deo.html The MiniDV camcorder acts like an ADVC110, but I think the ADVC110 allows for some adjustment of brightness and contrast. This is important, because in the video I conclude that the ATI600 is better mostly because one is able to adjust the brightness and contrast (inside VirtualDub) before doing the capture. Whereas no such adjustment is possible with the MiniDV passthrough. That said, following a suggestion from @TechTVUSA, I was able to adjust in Premiere Pro the blown-out white from the MiniDV-passthrough, making it look like the ATI600. Unfortunately, I discovered that after publishing the video. As you may have read at DigitalFAQ, the DV devices compress color to 4:1:1, which is in theory worse. But I don't know if it is noticeable one way or the other. The major benefit of using a MiniDV camcorder in passthrough mode is that it has a great Line TBC and can fix flagging etc. better than an ATI600 or AIW9600XT. In fact, if the choice was between these two workflows, I think the latter is probably better, or at the very least comparable. 1. SVHS with no Line TBC and flaggy tape -- ES15 -- ATI600 2. SVHS with no Line TBC and flaggy tape -- MiniDV -- Firewire card Anyway, please share your videos here when they are done so we can all see what you undercover.
Great video! I’m surprised you don’t mention most consumer video mixers of the same era have a TBC built in and can be still scored for relatively cheap
Great point. When I was searching for a TBC, I looked into the Videonics MX1 video mixers and found many on FB Marketplace in other cities and tried to get someone to ship me one but it didn't work out. I eventually found a DVK-200 and was able to have that shipped to me. Lord Smurf at DigitalFAQ said this about the MX1: "It's not too different from the weak DataVideo DVK units, or SE mixers, though a decade older." Source: www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-restore/2251-tbc-time-base-9.html#post72331 There might be two drawbacks to the MX1 compared to the DVK: (1) MX1 get hot and need good airflow as this was something that was reported back in the 1990s, (2) MX1 is reported to affect the image quality. I haven't tested it so I can't confirm this.
You suggest that adding the Panasonic es 10 gives better stabilization than an svhs player WITH tbc, but you only put that combo in 2nd place. I have a Panasonic svhs with tbc: would I better off sticking with that, or adding an es 10? Cheers 😊
The Panasonic ES-10 and ES-15 have a stronger Line TBC than the JVC SVHS VCRs with Line TBC. However they make the video brighter and some detail is lost (clipped). So it better to use the Line TBC in the SVHS VCR if you are lucky enough to have one. If you don't have one of those VCRs, then the ES10/15 is what you need to use.
According to a discussion at DigitalFAQ.com, the Panasonic EZ series came after the ES series. And whatever magic was inside the ES-10 and ES-15 didn't make it into the EZ-28. Someone with an EZ-28 says "the Panasonic DMR-EZ28 has no effect on the pass through image." www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/3237-jvc-7600u-problem.html So, it's not comparable to the ES-10 or ES-15. The good news is that the ES-15 and ES-16 DVD recorders were fairly popular and I see one from sale in my local Facebook Marketplace about ever other month for about $50 to $100. And I even got lucky one day and found one at a thrift store for $15. So, unlike the very hard to find/expensive SVHS players with Line TBC, the Panasonic ES-10 and ES-15 are more common. By the way, for Canadian readers the ES-16 is the same as the ES-15, but marketed in Canada.
Hello, can you make a video on how to setup Windows XP for capturing with the ATI All In Wonder 9600 XT? With the drivers and stuff like that? Or is there a tutorial on the DigitalFAQ (if there is one, is there a link?) Thank you.
Good question. I recently re-installed Windows XP SP2. During the setup, Windows detected my ATI AIW 9600XT and installed the driver, which was 6.14.10.6462 and was dated 3/23/2004. This driver was more up to date than the one (6.14.10.6414) that was on the CD-ROM that came with the 9600XT. So, the good news is that if you use the SP2 edition of Windows XP, it should just work. Of course, if you want the ATI capture software (I don't) then you will have to install the CD-ROM files, but be sure to do a custom install and don't install the hardware drivers on the CD-ROM-just install the capture software. If you don't have the CD-ROM, you can download the the ISO file (ATI V01084) from DigitalFAQ. Thank goodness for the work of Lord Smurf at DigitalFAQ to provide these old files for people. Here is the link. www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/392-ati-wonder-hacks-2.html#post14940 P.S. For some reason, Windows XP (Integral Edition) didn't detect the 9600XT. And then when I instaled the drivers on the CD-ROM, the signal from 9600XT to my monitor stopped. I tried different things, but eventually I reformatted my HDD and installed Windows XP SP2 edition and that solved the problem.
@@mooct1The ATI AIW 9600XT is a two-in-one device. It does the video capture stuff. But it also happens to be a video card that outputs to a computer monitor. So, this is what I use to connect to my monitor. I suppose I could install a basic video card to handle the monitor stuff, but I let the ATI AIW 9600XT do that job, too. As far as I know, it has no impact on the performance of the capture side of things.
In theory that vhs+dvd combo should have the best connection between it's 2 parts (probably rgb, but surely not composite), it should record mpeg2 interlaced at the original resolution and with high bitrate so compression is a non-issue, than you can do whatever you want with it after you rip the stream to pc. Why is it considered to be bad. It's not better of course, but it is probably very similar to source which is the best way to get started. I don't want immediate upscaling, deinterlacing, etc. as those are happening digitally as well just not at such a quality as I'm able to do in postprocessing with tools like topaz video ai.
I think whatever benefit you get from the internal connection is offset by the low bitrate of the DVD recording. My understanding is that DVD recorders record to MPEG2 at the DVD-Video bitrate spec, which is a relatively low rate and makes home video style video look overly noisy and worse than the original tape. The quality of the capture would be better using an SD capture device (the ones that are able to capture as MPEG2) and capturing at a higher MPEG2 rate of, say, 15mbps to 20mbps. There are some Pioneer/Sony PVR/DVD recorders that have a high bitrate MPEG2 mode. Then you would need to get those files off the HDD at the high bitrate and onto your computer. www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/9898-dvd-recorder-advise.html#post62930
@@videocaptureguide from what I've seen, usually the highest quality is 1hr/disc which correlates with the max bitrate of 9.8mbps. That doesn't sound much but we are talking about 576i50, that doesn't need much. I know I cannot compare it to movies with static scenes as it's a home video but it handling interlaces lines separately is a big win imo.
Thanks for this. I used Lagarith originally because I had a problem installing HuffYUV. But then I figured it out. And now I just like saying it more than "Lagarith", which sounds like the name of the evil empire on every sci-fi show.
Something seems wrong... so I exported the video from Hybrid and it's 1440x1080 - it looks great. But after doing the color modification and exporting it from DaVinci Resolve it's reduced to the 940x720 with large black borders all around it? Why would we be reducing it to 940x720 at this step? From looking online it seems like there is a resolution mismatch even though I told DaVinci to adjust... is there another setting somewhere I missed in the video or the video didn't cover?
You missed a biggie in the VirtualDub setup section. I’m not sure about the AllInWonder, but with my Micomsoft card, If you go to Video/Capture filter, that’s where you tell the capture device what to do with interlaced frames. You want to make sure it’s set to Weave, meaning that it saves the interlaced fields as-is. You don’t want to Bob or Blend them at the capture stage. That’s also where you would turn on its 2d or 3d comb filters if it has them. edit to add: Interlace TFF and BFF vary from device to device. I have some of each, so you need to figure out which you have. Also, “posterize” is pronounced the same as “poster,” not like “pasta”.
That "Custom Properties" tab only appears if one is using the Microsoft DirectShow drivers. When using ATI cards, that tab does not appear and the video is captured by default interlaced. Later in Hybrid, I use QTGMC to deinterlace (top field first) and click BOB to end up with a 59.97 fps video.
@@videocaptureguide Exactly - you need to make sure that you capture the interlaced fields so you aren't stuck with a sub-par field-blended file that can't be deinterlaced or IVTC'd later on. Some devices default to that.
@@videocaptureguide You can also use Staxrip if you find the Hybrid interface confusing. StaxRip has many Avisynth filters and does a great job and easy to use.
I use a 2TB data drive. And I move content to an external drive after capture or when I am ready to work with it on my main modern Windows 10 computer.
@@fighterpilot12 Using the HuffYUK codec in VDub, I captured a video of 4 hours 30 minutes (270 minutes) at a file size of 106GB. So, about 400MB per minute of footage. So, that's about 83 hours of HuffYUV SD video can be stored on a 2TB hard drive, although the best practice would be to not capture more video once the hard drive gets too full.
I think Windows XP has a 2TB limit for HDD. So, I would recommend you use a 2TB data drive, and then buy a 2TB external drive to move those video files over. Keep in mind that Windows XP era motherboards are limited to USB2, which is slower that USB3. It might be worth adding an eSata card to the computer that adds an eSata port in the back. And then get a HDD enclosure that has eSata port and USB3 port. The idea is that you would transfer the files from the WindowsXP computer via eSata. And then transfer them to modern Windows computer via USB3. eSata speeds are comparable to USB3. I have not done this yet as I don't mind waiting however long it takes.
Hi there. Thanks for the video. Any suggestions for the following set up? JVC HR-DVS1U + I-O Data GV-USB2 + Windows 10, plus the software you mentioned. Is it enough? Thanks!
I have the DVS3U, we which I assume is essentially the same VCR. It has a line TBC and so is a great choice. The GV-USB2 gets a lot of love from many including the video restorer lollo, so another good choice. In my experience, even with these two items, you might still get dropped frames, which can lead to make the audio video go out of sync, at least on some tapes. I'm working on a new video where I compare number of dropped frames from 60 minutes playing the same VHS tape in different workflows. Spoiler: the DVK-200 and ES-15 give me the same (small) number of dropped frames. So I recommend you be on the lookout for the fairly inexpensive ES-10 or ES-15 and use it on VHS tapes with lots of problems.
I have not used these but from what I read at DigitalFAQ the MX-1 is supposed to be comparable to the DVK. However the MX-1 was known to get hot so it is important to use in a ventilated space.
I desperately need to convert some Hi8 cassette tapes to digital files, I do have a SVHS but need a way to convert them to digital without windows XP and without the colours being washed out or black crush, every time I convert the digital file looks worse than the source tape, I want them looking as close as possible, does anyone know what I should do?
I understand your current workflow to be: Samsung Hi8 camcorder --- Elgato USB capture device You didn't mention which sofware you are using to capture the video on your computer. Here are my initial thoughts: 1. Sony Hi8 camcorders all(?) have a Line TBC feature, which can fix all/most jitter and flagging from Video8 and Hi8 tapes recorded with any other camcorder. 2. I don't know if your Samsung Hi8 camcorder has a Line TBC. 3. However, if your tapes were recorded with that same Samsung camcorder, then that might be a good choice for playback as there is often a benefit in using the same camcorder to playback the tape, provided it was a good model to begin with. 4. While Elgato makes good products in general, their analog-to-digital capture device is just okay. Not the best. Not the worst. But it is more expensive than most, which makes its performance disappointing. 5. The following USB devices are generally believed to be provide better video capture: ATI TV Wonder 600 (no longer sold new), Hauppauge USB-Live2, I-O Data GV-USB2. There are many more analog-to-digital options such as using a MiniDV camcorder as a digitizer in passthrough mode, although this yields a lossy DV25 video file, which many experts believe is inferior to the lossless capture produced by the combination of one of of the good USB capture devices + VirtualDub capture software + HuffYUV lossless codec. 6. If your Hi8 camcorder has a Line TBC and if you are able to capture a hour of video without any problem in the audio-video synchronization, then I don't suggest you add a frame TBC to the workflow, as some have impact the color palette. For instance, the Panasonic ES10/ES15 makes the whites too white and you lose some of the detail. So, it is only recommended if it helps fix jitter/wavyness.
@@videocaptureguide First off thank you so much for helping me, I am using Elgato's software to capture the video, I have checked but am unsure if my camcorder has line TBC or not but I can tell you, I see next to no jittering so I assume it either does or it's not necessary anyway, I will however be capturing VHS after I'm done with the camcorder and they're extremely jittery and I don't currently have any TBC solution for them so will need one. My main issue I am trying to overcome with my Elgato is how washed out the footage looks, I found a solution online but the guy in the video got black crush from it, if I can get it not washed out looking whilst avoiding black crush I will be happy, I don't understand what a HuffYUV lossless codec is or anything about how to implement one, I am very much a lay person when it comes to this.
Other users have reported Elgato Video Capture produces a washed out video. Unfortunately, there may not be a good solution. Option 1: Buy a new capture device such as the Hauppauge USB-Live2, I-O Data GV-USB2. Option 2: Keep the Elgato, but use a different capture software. Specifically, VirtualDub, which is free and you can download from here: www.videohelp.com/software/Virtualdub. However, you will need to install the HuffYUV codec, and it will take some time to figure out all the options. I took me a while as I read through all the forum posts and guides. Option 3: Keep the Elgato, keep your washed out files, but then try to auto-fix the brightness/contrast/color using the free Davinci Resolve software. There are things to learn in that method, but might be worth a try. Because even with the best capture card, you may still want to improve/adjust the videos in Davinci Resolve anyway.
Years ago I had a vhs to dvd dubbing deck and I dubbed a vhs tape per the instructions and it looked awful. It was really washed out. Then I tried dubbing the VHS again from another ordinary deck with S-video out and left/right RCA jacks into the DVD recorder side of the original dubbing deck and it looked great so I would guess that the "internal dubbing settings" of the dubbing deck weren't calibrated properly for best results. Either that or the internal dubbing system was just junk.
That would be an interesting comparison video but I don’t have a side by side unit. I have a video on the channel where I compare SD capture (ATI AIW 9600XT) with a DVD recorder mpeg2 file. I will need to redo that test with better footage as the recording I used from the 1990s was a bit unsteady. I think for some people a DVD recorder is quick and easy and doable for their skill level or free time. Other methods produce a better result but I’d rather the tapes get digitized any which way instead of losing them in a flood or through tape degradation.
The signal on VHS tape is composite. The S-video cable is made for Y/C signal. There will not be improvement at all using S-video cable for a standard VHS tape. But the SVHS player is good because it has good comb filter.
I'm been wondering about this and will do a side-by-side test shortly to see if there is any noticeable difference between S-Video and Composite if the source tape was recorded on a regular VHS player.
@@videocaptureguide VHS has composite signal on the tape anyway. Only VHS has chroma and luma separated in Y/C. If you notice a difference it would be because of the comb filter or other kind of internal features.
@@debranchelowtone I went down the rabbit hole and found discussions about this. And differences of opinion. In your view, it can't hurt to use an SVideo cable? In other words, even if it doesn't make the video look better, it won't make it look worse?
This is THE most informative and best best presented video I've yet seen on this topic. Just one thing, though: you don't mention SCART. How do you rate SCART, ie SCART to S-Video? Is it better or worse than S-Video to S-Video, for instance? Very many thanks & keep up the excellent work.
Thanks for your kind words. Regarding SCART, I have no firsthand knowledge. However, I read at the forums that SCART video signal is equivalent to composite. So the best practice is to use S-Video.
The junkie in me wants to watch the render progress bars ticking all the way til complete, especially on knowing I just restored some mementos for myself or somebody else and shit gonna look good for years
I have not tested the Elgato capture device. However the experts at DigitalFAQ considering it to be an okay but not great option. It is comparable they say to the Diamond VC500. But the Elgato is more expensive. Both are better than the EasyCap, which produces unacceptable quality results they say. Unfortunately the EasyCap appears prominently at Amazon and, so, sells a lot of units. The expert user Lollo says he uses the I-O Data GV-USB2 and said it is better than the old ATI 600. The GV-USB2 is available at Amazon. If I didn’t already have an ATI 9600XT and ATI600, I would probably buy the I-O Data GV-USB2. I would not buy the Elgato.
@@videocaptureguide sounds great , But Elgato is support lossy format. thats why we need to have card support lossless to have better picture. I really would like to make another video about lossy and lossless and what is the exact differences
@@AhmedStudio-k3v I misspoke in the video. I have the ATI All-In-Wonder 9600XT (not 9800XT). It is a capture card that connects to the AGP port on the motherboard. Modern motherboards don't have AGP ports. I had to buy an ASRock 4CoreDual-SATA2, which I bough new/never used in a box from someone on Facebook Marketplace. I added a CPU (Core 2 Duo E7500) and the rest of the items need for a computer.
I think the Elgato USB Video Capture device saves captured video with H.264 compression. While this is an acceptable compression as a final distribution video file, it is not good if you plan on enhancing your video in Hybrid, Topaz Video AI, or some other software. The H.264 codec is lossy, which means it does very clever things to keep the video file size as low as possible. But that makes further enhancements less good than they would have been. I don't know if you can use VirtualDub to capture video from the Elgato and select the preferred compression (HuffYUV or Lagarith).
Hmm...I've screwed something up along the way! My video is exporting inside a black box, like it's both letterboxed AND pillarboxed. The original file coming from Hybrid is 1440x1080 and 4:3, and I set the export to be the same size as a custom setting...and it comes out looking like something shot through a pinhole camera! Where did I go wrong? :P
I feel you pain. The settings for Crop, Resize, Letterbox, Input PAR, and Output PAR all interact with each other and it can get confusing. Can you share a screenshot of your settings screen and place the link to, say, Imgur here so we can check out your settings.
@@videocaptureguide I decided to ask ChatGPT for the heck of it, and actually got the steps to follow there. So, I guess I figured it out...also saved the steps for future reference!
Macs have fewer options for SD analog capture. For instance many go with the much maligned Elgato as there isn't much choice. An alternative is a MiniDV camcorder in passthrough mode or the ADVC-110. TechTVUSA has videos on that method. You will need to find some adapters to get FireWire into modern Mac. These are reasons why many recommend buying a pre-owned Windows computer and buying a capture device like the GV-USB which is available new. Good luck.
I'm not a expert in Hybrid and I'm not sure if you are asking about cropping or PAR or something else. You can ask at the Hybrid forum as Selur answers. forum.selur.net/
Started on another project, and now for some reason there is no "cut start/cut end" option...what gives? I suppose I could trim it before or afterward in some other program, but I'd prefer to do it all at once.
That’s odd. In Hybrid settings go to Config->Internals->Cut Support and make sure it is turned on. Or restart Hybrid. Or restart computer. Or download the latest version of Hybrid and try that fresh install instead. Let us know what happens as I’m sure others will have the same issue in the future.
Some VHS VCRs are not bad including Sharp models. Tapes aren’t getting any younger so might as well digitize them with what you have and if you ever get better equipment you can redo the most special tapes.
I have a Sony DVD recorder and a VCR. I also have a Panasonic ES-10 DVD which of course, I use as a pass-through. The DVD recorder acts as a TBC. The only thing my setup is lacking is a VCR with an S-Video output. If I connect an S-Video cable to the DVD player, would that be about as good as having a VCR with an S-Video output, or would buying a VCR with an S-Video output be the best method?
I'm trying to understand your workflow. Is it this? Or something else? Before replying I want to make sure I understand. VHS VCR > Composite cable > ES10 > S-Video cable > Sony DVD recorder > record to a DVD Video disc
@@videocaptureguide I don't have a VCR with the S-Cable output jack. I connect the VCR to the ES-10, and then to the Sony DVD recorder. I just want to know, since the ES-10 has an S-Video output jack, and the Sony DVD recorder has an S-Video input jack, if connecting them would provide any enhancement to the finished product. I assume no, since the VCR has no S-Video output jack. It is the source. It is going on composite video capturing. I know S-Video is way better quality than composite.
@@coolcatrick3454 is you final output a DVD disc on the Sony? If so, why not use the ES10 recorder to create the DVD? That said, the best practice is to use a good capture card on a computer. Regarding the composite to svideo question, this doesn't appear to be a settled issue. Here's a thread that discusses it. Some say it may help, for some tapes. Not a satisfying answer, I know. You will have to test out both methods and look at the final video and then drive yourself crazy trying to figure out which is best. www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-workflows/10785-convert-composite-svhs.html
Windows OS's will probably be sold by Microsoft, try to call the sales department. They want people to buy the new OS. It should be cheap, maybe a disc or download.
Some or the hardware mention (ATI 600, etc.) needs software drivers to work. And those drivers are only available on older operating systems. A programmer who knows what they are doing could create new drivers for Windows 10, but that hasn't happened. Regarding HDMI, there is a method for capturing video that way. The RetroTink device converts composite or S-Video to digital, and then outputs it via HDMI. It is mostly used by gamers who want to connect old gaming consoles to HDMI tvs, but if you add an HDMI-to-USB device in the workflow, you can then capture the video on your modern computer using OBS software. The latest RetroTink 5 is not bad, from what I see. But it is not reportedly as good as with an SD capture device or MiniDV camcorder in passthrough mode.
You talk about how every VHS video had the bad image. I've had over 10 VHS videos, all very good. Now I still have 1 VHS and 5 S-VHS, all operational. I have been conversion of tape for about 15 years, and I've tried about 4 converters to do this, until I found the definitive converter. I come to show the way I capture VHS and S-VHS video tapes. First, a good S-VHS video. I use the S-VHS output of the video to connect to the International KDV-8000 capture device that performs image upscale up to 1080p. I connect the HDMI output from the capture device to the HDMI input of the EzRecorder 130 external game recorder, which records in FullHD. I use a high performance flash drive on the USB port of the game recorder. I run the capture and then take the USB stick to the computer. The result is the best possible. Follow statement link of a capture. ua-cam.com/video/m_4Pq24viT4/v-deo.html
Thanks for sharing. The video looks very nice. The source was an S-VHS tape in an S-VHS player, so that helps produce a good final result, no matter what the capture device used. I have not used the KDV-8000. I'm glad it works well for you. I would love to be able to see the KDV-8000 compared to a different HDMI upscale device, such as the RetroTink5, the ATI 600 (for SD capture) or a MiniDV camcorder (for DV transfer).
@@videocaptureguide Hi. Really the source was a S-VHS tape reproduced by a video S-VHS, but it would be even better if the conversion were from a professional studio movie. And it has no good result with only S-VHS tape. The tapes I recorded in family since the 1980s were all recorded in VHS, and the result of the capture was excellent. I'll see if I post any VHS capture and show to you. I have 4 other converters and I guarantee that the result with the KDV-8000 with S-VHS input is much higher than everyone else. KDV converts making UPSCALE TO 1080P, maintains aspect ratio and leaves the converted image completely clean, and has HDMI output. The result is not FullHD, but often better than a DVD (SD) or even DV (720p). I don't know the converters you mentioned, but for the price, they certainly don't do what the KDV-8000 does. KDV processing is Master Piece in conversion. Another good part of the conversion I make is that I don't use a computer. I use game recorder with HDMI input. If you look on the internet, there is a store that still has new KDV-8000 stock, but it has no S-VHS input, but video composite. I bought another new one, the ad said the equipment had S-VHS entry, but it didn't. I left in the box.
The Betamax VCRs were the competitors of the VHS VCRs. I think the video capture process is identical since the Betamax VCRs have the same video and audio outputs as the VHS VCRs. VHS video quality was 320 x 486, while Betamax was 333 x 486. So it was slightly better. But it is a trivial difference given what came next.
In my opinion, you can mess with software like Hybrid all you want, but it's not terribly helpful when upscaling. I get better results using TOPAZ Video AI for upscaling. On another note, NEVER delete your original (native) 720 x 480 captured video files. There will be more AI algorithms arriving in the future that will be even better when upscaling your original video than what we've seen up to now. So, your native standard definition files are like having "digital negatives." When you want to re-purpose the file in the future, using newer and better tools, you'll be able to work from the original capture files.
You mean technology barrels forward heedless of useful traits and the hardware most suited to doing the job, making it impossible to extremely difficult.
Much(or most) of the best capture equipment was made in the XP era, so is naturally the most compatible. XP can do everything needed for that, a newer OS makes zero difference to capture quality. That's assuming it works at all with your device.
@@DoubleMonoLR I would maybe push forward to Windows Vista since it has built in DVD recording and that sort of thing, but even then I tend to live in a nostalgic world. Really posting to the Internet, simply requires two machines. One to capture and the other to render.
![Wolfram Physics Project: Working Session Wednesday, Apr. 29, 2020 [Finding Black Hole Structures]](/img/n.gif)
Video calibration is like B.E.S.T (Biconditional Equalised Signal Tracking) in European and multi system Models. It doesn't matter if you turn it off after inserting the tape, it won't do anything after the tape has been sensed, It is like Bias in audio tapes, It senses the RF level and adjusts the heads coils current accordingly, it keeps the same parameters until the tape is ejected, So just keep it on all the time.
R3 in the other hand should be set to on only if it improves the quality, It is an edge sharpening feature and often produces ringing, so keep it OFF unless it is needed.
Thanks for the feedback. Appreciate it.
Hello! You use B.E.S.T mode? I always switch to OFF...
@@khaos182 No, It should be always on, It can't worsen the quality, it only improves it or does nothing, most of the time there isn't much improvement that can be visually discerned, So being ON is not going to hurt anything.
So, should video calibration (BEST) be left on or not? Can you turn it on for a few sections so it senses the tape, and then turn it off? Would you get all the benefit from that feature?
@@videoediting7925 Leave it on all the time and let it do its work, Each tape formulation is calibrated once you insert a tape, Not all tapes created equal, that's why it works every time you insert a tape.
First of all, great video! I've been doing this for about 15 years now, and I still learned some new things. There are a few observations I had that you and your viewers may want to know.
1. I have a JVC HR-S9500U. The video stabilizer can be useful if the picture on the tape is very "jumpy". This happens on only a few tapes, but when it does it's good to be able to control it. The downside is that on my model(and I believe a few others) turning the stabilizer on, will turn the TBC off. You can only use one at a time.
2. I was going to point out that you didn't turn the Superimpose setting off(this will eliminate the display that says "PLAY" "STOP" "TRACKING" etc.) It may not be a feature on yours, but if it is I would turn it off for capture so that you don't have that on your capture if there is something at the very beginning of the tape.
3. I saw that when you went to restore you encoded the audio to 320kb/s AAC. If that's your preference I'm not trying to tell you you're wrong, but for me if we're spending this much effort to fix the video, we should at least leave the uncompressed PCM audio from the capture uncompressed. It doesn't make much of a size difference(probably about 100MB Vs. 1GB for like a 2 hour recording.
Thank you for these tips. When it comes to the sound setting in Hybrid, I’m still learning. There have been times where I got an error message that prevented me from exporting so I’ve been superstitious about it and if I doesn’t block me, I don’t mess with those audio settings!
@@videocaptureguide Ah, I feel that. I've always used Virtualdub with AVIsynth scripts for QTGMC work, so I'm not familiar with the quirks of Hybrid. I also use AMARec for capture since even from my JVC the audio goes out of sync with Virtualdub. I just recently got a ES-15, so I might have to try it again. Not sure if there's much of a difference though, I still capture in HuffYUV.
The best tutorial for capturing VHS I've seen so far. Thanks
Great video! For the record, the difference between a line TBC and a frame TBC is that a frame TBC merely makes sure that individual frames come out exactly on time, that is exactly the right number of milliseconds apart. A line TBC on the other hand, stores all of the 262.5 lines in a field in memory and then send them out with the exact correct time in between them. If you look at the left side edge of a picture from a VHS machine, you will see that it forms a very wiggly line. This is due to the fact that the lines are not starting at the exact correct times and this is due to the fact that the tape stretches and causes the lines to vary in timing. When the lines do not start at the same time, they stay out of time throughout the entire picture and this creates a general fuzziness. When the lines all start at exactly the same time then they stay aligned with each other throughout the picture and the picture is much sharper.
Thank you for this. You have inspired the next video.
@@videocaptureguide I'll be watching for it!
Thanx for the video. I haven't done this for a while now but I used to play the VHS tape back thru an old mini DV camcorder via a Firewire card into the PC and then edit.
This is my way since you get a tbc in the camcorder.
I did another video where I compared this method. In truth, there isn't any noticeable difference between the MiniDV method and the capture card method. You might still need an ES-10/15 passthrough for some wonky VHS tapes but MiniDV as capture device is acceptable in my opinion, even though some will poo-poo it because it is a lossy format. If I redo this video I will add a MiniDV camcorder workflow to the list of workflows.
I use DaVinci resolve too but after these few years with it. I didn’t know about the auto colour balance feature until this video. Nice one!
If you want to go even further, watch this guy's excellent tutorial, specifically, how to apply auto color in an even better way that gives even better results: ua-cam.com/video/NLT-Ozou20w/v-deo.htmlsi=8jBIMKPgT6OBKxzQ&t=40
I didn't go into this because it's more advanced, but it's really not hard to do. I'm not an expert in Davinci and definately not a professional colorist, but I've seen some good tutorials and try to apply the basic fixes. Good luck!
Here I am watching, I don't even have VHS tape and or want to all of this. I find these old tech really fascinating, remember we used to have those strudy plastic buttons for everything? Now there's only touch here and there :d
The quality of everything is pretty much gone downhill sadly.
Years ago I bought a new Panasonic VHS, it also has DVD player. It also has a cross recording/ transfer function built-in.
It also has HDMI output and a built-in digital tuner.
Very high quality players. I'm sure these can be had for almost nothing on eBay now.
To do a transfer you just put a blank DVD in and push a couple buttons. You now have a perfect digital transfer.
If you want to keep it really simple, on the cheap, with top quality.
Finally! An indepth "vhs to digital" video with a method that fills me with hope. I can't thank you enough for making this.
Like many people, I had no idea how deep the rabbit hole goes when trying to digitise tape. I tried the cheap usb devices on amazon then progressed to the AV-to-HDMI method using OBS, but kept running into issues (distorted video, overly dark colors, audio-sync issues). I almost gave up when I learned how expensive TBC's are - but this video has helped everything to make more sense.
If the video creator sees my comment I'd be extremely grateful if he could help with a couple of questions:
1. Is there a particular reason for recommending the Diamond VC500 over the host of other USB capture devices (e.g. the Elgato video capture)? I'd love to know if it has any properties that make it a superior choice in your testing.
2. I'm trying to digitise 8mm tape (standard Video8): Am I correct in thinking that I need to get a Sony Handycam which has an S-video OUT for your "DVD time base corrector" method to work? My current sony handycam only has red/yellow/white outputs - and I'm guessing if I plug RCA cables into a DVD player then use DVD player S-video out to the capture device, that I won't get the same benefits?
Thanks again! Liked, subscribed & bookmarked - will be trying this method over the next few months if I can get the equipment - I'm in the UK but presumably same/similar equipment will be available.
Thanks for the comment. I made this video to provide the big picture overview because I was lost when I started reading the forums. To answer your questions.
1. At some point when I was reading the DigitalFAQ forums, I read (or maybe inferred) that the Diamond VC500 was an acceptable capture device. However, in reviewing the forum again, it seems that some versions of the VC500 have this weird issue where during a scene the contrast/brightness will suddenly change. It's not that way in the source video. So, there's a question mark here, but given that the VC500 is readily available at Amazon and it pretty inexpensive, I think it is a safe choice for an average person who wants to digitize and not go too deep down the rabbit hole. The VC500 is definitely better than the DVD recorder method. Regarding the Elgato, the consensus on DigitalFAQ is that it is not as good as the recommended choices. I don't know if it is any worse than the VC500. But it gets a lot of hate from the experts in part because it relatively expensive. But the experts acknowledge that the Elgato is much better than EasyCap (aka EasyCrap) and the other cheap no-name brands on Amazon.
2. All my old tapes were Video8 (8mm tape) so I could have bought a Video8 camcorder. The reason I bought a Hi8 camcorder was because (a) Hi8 camcorders can output via S-Video cable (b) it outputs left and right audio (c) the are newer model years than Video8 (typically) so it will fail further in the future, and (d) if I even have to transfer Hi8 tapes, I will be able to. Digital8 camcorders were the next step and could play Digital8 tapes, Hi8 tapes, and Video8 tapes. So, if you can find one of those at a good price, get it.
Many (but not all) Sony Hi8 camcorders have a Line TBC. Unlike SVHS players where this feature was more rare, there are a lot of Sony Hi8 camcorders with this superpower. So, do you still need a Panasonic ES-10 or ES-15 in the workflow? Ugg. I am still testing that. I have captured Hi8 --> ES-15 --> ATI AIW 9600XT. And it looks good and audio/video sync is good. But the ES-15 will make the video look more washed out, so I've also capture Hi8 --> ATI AIW 9600XT. And I think I was able to get audio/video in sync. I would need to run this test again to see. Sorry I can't be more definitive. But if you so Hi8 --> ATI AIW 9600XT and the video is not jumpy and the audio/video is in sync at the end then you are good. You don't need an ES-15, at least for that tape.
It sounds like you have a Video8 camcorder, currently, as it only has composite output (aka RCA, AKA yellow, white, red cables). I've wondered whether sending the chroma+luma over the SVideo wire into the ES-15 and then sending it out from the ES-15 to the capture device improves the image. I don't know the answer. I *think* the answer is that if the device splitting the chroma+luma is doing it well (ie, it has a good decomb filter) then it is making the video look better. I have to assume, however, that outputting from a Hi8 camcorder's SVideo port will be better. But with all these things, the question is will it be noticeable.
I have concluded that the only person who will notice and care is you. No one will know how much time you spent thinking about and preserving the home movies. They will be happy to see them no matter what quality they are in.
I would always switch off the BEST tape measurement system for recordings because it obviously doesn't help with playback. I would switch off the TBC because JVC has installed various "good" (jump vertically 1 Line) TBCs, only a few of which can keep up with the Panasonic DMR-ES10 EG (PAL) TBC/Synchronizer chip (MN673744 as in the canopus ADVC-300), which causes about 3 frames of delay between picture and sound. EDIT I would turn it on if you can turn off "DigiPure" (artificial looking image). In NTSC countries it makes a lot of sense to use S-Video connections, as the NTSC color carrier reaches down to just over 2 MHz. In PAL countries it's not so bad because the Y signal only goes up to about 3.15 MHz, and the lower sideband of the color carrier can only reach down to 3.43 MHz. Unfortunately, my knowledge of English is not sufficient to understand the color problem that you have with Panasonic recorders. I didn't notice anything with PAL on my DMR-E55 EG. Result of the old (outdated) solution with PAL S-VHS tape: ua-cam.com/video/M5kYTCwYVy8/v-deo.html The Panasonic DMR-ES10 PAL is much better when the DMR-ES15 PAL: ua-cam.com/video/9_xue8-gGLM/v-deo.html😉The Diamond VC500 USB grabber is said to have the same chip (CX23103) as the Elgato grabber, which makes both grabbers unusable for PAL tapes since the chip can only output NTSC. My next solution should run with Panasonic NV-HS900 EG (PAL S-VHS recorder with K drive), S-Video, Pioneer DVR-560H (DVD/HDD combination recorder with Video adjusting, PAL) as TBC with 4:4:4 HDMI output to Blackmagic DeckLink Mini Recorder HD (PCIe 2.0 Card). In the ITU-R BT 601 (CCIR 601) standard (NTSC/PAL without color), the lower even lines come first (lower field first), followed by the higher odd lines. But not all programmers handle it correctly. You should record UNCOMPRESSED (72 GB/h). You should only compress after denoising at the earliest. "Obsolete Video" is convinced by HitPaw Video Enhancer, which can still change at the beginning of AI. OBS Studio cannot do interlaced Video and is therefore out. As a TV engineer from Hamburg, I unfortunately cannot correct all of Google Translate's errors.
@@videocaptureguide Many(or quite possibly all)Digital8 cameras that support Video8/Hi8 can also convert these tapes to a digital signal, to be transmitted over firewire just like Digital8 recordings. That option may not be the absolute best(compared to s-video output, TBC, quality capture card etc), but is probably likely to not be far off & easier/cheaper if you have a Digital8 camera already.
@@DoubleMonoLR I agree. 👍 I think that for many people who just want a simple solution, this would be an acceptable way to do it, especially if they already have this hardware and don't want to invest in more hardware.
@@DoubleMonoLR I wanted to try this method myself. From memory you need a firewire 400 to 800 adapter , then a firewire 800 to thunderbolt 2 adapter , then finally a thunderbolt 2 to thunderbolt 3 adapter.
My understanding is not *all* digital8 cameras will work for this. I had to google and find lists of model numbers.
Most of the online tutorials I've seen say it's only the apple cables which work well, and since they've stopped selling some of them, they are quite expensive now. I'm in the UK and I think I was looking at approx £150 just for the cables, then another £150+ for a digital8 camera off ebay. I'm reluctant to take a risk for my precious home memories on an ebay purchase which could theoretically eat my tapes. My current sony camera may only be component, but at least it works. But you're right , for people who alreay have the Digital8, this method might be okay. If you have a mac I did read you can just use quicktime and record using that with this method.
THIS! Finally, a video that gives me OPTIONS! Something that the channel Technology Connections kind of left us hanging on.
VHS-decode is the best
I might very well be. And if I get the equipment, I will gladly do many comparison video.
great video, really like the calm manner in which you explained everything. I've got a more basic setup (just a Dazzle USB adapter and a standard VHS player), but will be using VirtualDub too, and have been going round in circles on the same forums you showed, so this was very useful.
u need to do a video on the VHS decode method. not a lot of videos out there and ur way of explaining things is very helpful.
It would be very happy to get the RF capture devices. So far I get as far as the website that sells the components and I give up when I read the instructions on how to buy the cards. That doesn’t include the DIY stuff that needs to be done to combine them. That’s why I haven’t tried it yet. I’m pretty sure I can figure out the capture and post capture. But getting the hardware and connecting it is my main problem. I salute the people with the DIY skills and brains to get past those hurdles.
@@videocaptureguide I totally get it. I said the same thing to Harrypm on his channel. he replied with:
"I do plan on making a video about a full hardware installation with adjusting a new impedance matched amplifier and without".
Let's hope that comes out soon and does a better job shedding light on it than the wiki page, which is a mouthful.
I actually have a good TBC and SVHS. I don't have an AIW USB, but I have a 600 clone. I didn't buy a new PC from scratch but bought something that was high-end but still within Windows X right before the end of life and instilled an extra drive bay for the capture. I never learned how to enhance and haven't quite finished my project, so I'm super glad you included that.
Sounds like you have good hardware. The enhancement step is optional and there is a risk of overdoing it. After lots of testing, I now just do deinterlacing and very minor noise reduction.
YES!!!! I've been planning to restore some home videos for years, but all the capture devices I've tried (from Sony to Hauppauge) still had a lot of flagging, chroma smear, etc. My first "real" job was working in a video production/editing studio in the 90's, where I learned about NTSC standards and what editors look for in footage; virtually every problem I can think of are created with those devices. However, your walk-through will get me to a place I can finally get something usable and understand what's happening, PLUS your resources will be what I need to read and learn to improve my results. Thank you so much!!!
In the 1990s, my first editing system was an RCA Video8 camcorder, a VHS player, a home stereo system that I used to add music. I got my first video editing PC in March 1999. I never used the (pre-computer) video editing systems. I've seen some used ones on ebay and I'm tempted to try it out. Did you ever use those video editors at that first job?
@@videocaptureguide I didn't get to edit, but watched and learned so I could do better work on the off-line equipment. Much of my time was logging scene timecode numbers from a VHS copy so the editors had the numbers handy. Eventually I began using After Effects and Premier in the following decade, but watching a "real" editor at work is a learning experience. ;-)
Really appreciate all your work and synthesis here. I personally still swear by the Canopus ADVC110 (and my Panasonic 9600U), both bought by me new "back in the day" into the MacStudio and Final Cut Pro for capture with upscaling/deinterlacing and what-not handled by ffmpeg. No dropped frames, no audio sync trouble, and no need to build an XP machine. (Though I have done *that* to transfer 8mm film with early MovieStuff hardware, but that's another story...) Anyway, bravo sir.
Thank you. After making the video, I realized I should have mentioned DV transfer, which is a very popular method. In subsequent videos, I mentioned DV transfer when describing the various methods.
My tip for a capture device. A Sony DCR TRV 320 (or similar) camcorder.
They will digitise analogue video fed into them and spit out .avi via FireWire.
They will also play 8mm, Hi8 and digital 8 tapes.
If you then get yourself a mini DV camcorder as well, you have most camcorder formats covered.
Do NOT buy the later 400 series, they don't do pass-through and they don't play analogue tapes. And they have a dodgy image sensor that goes bad on all of them. Ask me how I know.
Problem with that is that it's all converted to MiniDV format which has a different color space. It's better than nothing, but you do lose a bit of color accuracy.
@@iVTECInside The way I used it was as a pass through device. There is not even a tape in the TRV 320 when capturing. You have a VCR output hooked to the composite input of the TRV and the TRV firewire output to a firewire input on your computer.
You use a firewire 400 card installed inside the computer, not one of these little rickety USB adapters.
@@mdindestin I've done the same with my Sony MiniDV camcorder. It's not passthrough though. It's converting to NTSC DV, that's what its feeding to the PC. It definitely works very well in my experience. I'm fairly certain there is some sort of TBC functionality going on in the process. So better than straight to a cheap USB capture device on its own, but giving up a little vs an external TBC and capture device that maintain the original color space.
The VHS-Decode project sounds just like how I would have attempted to tackle the issue if I were to figure it out myself. Thanks for making me aware of it so I don't have to reinvent the wheel.
If you have 2 hours, you can get some good context on the LaserDisc project that gave birth to the VHS-Decode project. What I found interesting is that the guy behind the RF extraction of LaserDiscs calls the VHS-Decode project immature at this stage. The RetroRGB guy is mostly concerned with VHS tapes so he presses them for info. Sounds like you are a technical guy and so I think this interview will be very useful to you as you get into this.
ua-cam.com/video/KueSbYs7yMU/v-deo.html
@@videocaptureguide This video is 9 month old, a lot of things have happened since then. Decoding of VHS mostly outperforms every conventional capure (e.g. with TBC and grabber card) and Video8/Hi8 is not yet perfect, but does not look worst than a conventional capture. One very nice thing about the VHS-Decode project is that after doing the initial RF capture, you basically have a digital copy of your tapes. This is one of the biggest advantages, as this eliminates the degradation of your tapes which means further loss of image quality. Just be sure to do the RF capture right in the first place, but this is rather simple as shown in the vhs-decode wiki. With that, you can decode this file in the future again, in case the current state of vhs-decode does not the quality you desire
@@OriksonDIY Good to know. Thanks. I really am interested in trying out VHS-Decode so that I can do a side-by-side comparison between ATI600 versus MiniDV versus VHS-Decode. I really do hope that VHS-Decode it gives better results and I understand that once I have the RF-captured file on my computer, the software will only get better over time so that the end result will look even better. My hesitation to jump in steps from the learning curve and cost of the Doomsday device, although I know there is a less expensive alternative.
@@videocaptureguideVHS-Decode has been crushing conventional capture market value for years at this point, the cross platform support and export pipeline are now pretty refined too so to the end user anyone can pull down an RF file decode and export it to video on any platform now, and with the development of the MIRSC we're aiming to tackle conventional capture too.
Today we have, made to order amplifiers and Clockgen mod kits, so effectively anyone can deploy this now and have turnkey Video RF/HiFi RF and Linear all synchronised.
And this is under 120 US dollars global price with CX Cards.
Been in the professional digitize business for 30+ years. TBC is really not necessary if you have good capture equipment. Pretty much any moniDV, Digital 8 camera and the digital players like the GVD800 GVHD700 ect will accept your composite or S video and spit out a 4:1:1 DV stream which is the same as DV and Digital 8 encided on the tape. Then firewire into the PC and capture with your favorite software. You end up with a 480i 25mbit stream which then you can either save as a .avi or export it in whatever format turns your crank. Another option which I have found to be very good is the stand alone recorder boxes from CA. Depending on the model it can turn out high bit rate .mp4 directly in either the native 480i or will up convert to 720p60 or 1080p60 and you can choose 4:3 or stretch to 16:9 if you don't want black bars. Depending on device it will accept composite, component, RGB, and even HDMI inputs. Since I deal regularly with betacam SP which is a component format this comes in handy as I can take the direct Y, R-Y and B-Y outputs directly and spit out a picture that is as good as I have seen.
An old videonics MX1 mixer works great as a frame store TBC if needed but with the hardware I am using I have not needed it except with dealing with macrovision.
Hi @12voltvids. I'm a fan of your channel. Watched a lot of your videos. When I was entering the rabbit hole a few years ago, I must have watched your TBC demo video several times. I have been doing more tests for this channel to compare different options, and I think I am coming around to your way of viewing it. Leaving out the MiniDV camcorder option in my list was an oversight, as I think it is a good choice for most people. I appreciate the feedback. Also, what is your go-to workflow?
If customer wants. AVI I use the GV-HD700. If they want mp4 it goes straight into the CA in full quality mode 1080p60 set to 4:3 aspect. That gives an 8 gig per hour .mp4 files. Then I go direct to a USB stick for client. 9 out of 10 want a DVD copy as well for backup. I can do this in real time. Vhs or camera into the DVD recorder and the hdmi (upscale to 1080p) directly into capture box. I use a toshiba dvr7, it has firewire in. So I can use the hd700 to digitize to firewire and take that into toshiba and then to the ca capture box. I do high volume digitizing so not needing to use the computer is a bonus as I can be capturing video while doing other stuff on computer. I have been doing this for years including broadcast tapes betacam sp, sx and umatic for broadcast professionals. Needless to say they are pretty picky for quality and they have all been very happy.
You'd be in the minority suggesting a TBC is not necessary. Maybe you've just been lucky enough to deal with higher quality analog tapes (Betacam SP for sure) but I, and many others consider it an absolute necessity. Mini DV camcorders with AV inputs typically have one built in and don't even mention it.
if I may ask, which stand alone recorder boxes are you talking about ? I cant find a company called CA...
For long term storage do you archive only the final version or also the HuffYUV version?
I captured a VHS tape to my PC ages ago (2006) using an ordinary VHS VCR, composite output into an ATI All-In-Wonder Radeon 7500, and VirtualDub as the capture software, and it came out perfectly fine. There may have been some dropped frames, but nothing that caused any noticeable problems, and the audio didn't lose sync. Also, it had a perfectly stable image. It certainly didn't have even a hint of the problems that your "Regular VHS Player" example clip at 5:31 has. I still have the video on my PC.
If it worked well, then you're done. A regular VHS player (with no Line TBC and no S-Video port) can definitely be good enough. As things being equal, if someone is new to this, and wants to eek out every little tiny improvement, then I would still recommend an SVideo player. I guess there are two ways to look at it: (1) the VHS tape is so bad by today's standards that it's not worth worrying about; (2) the VHS tape is so bad by today's standards that you need to need to do everything possible to make it as good as possible. 🤷♀
@@videocaptureguide The point is: your video makes it seem like you'll inevitably get the unwatchable results like your "Regular VHS Player" example clip at 5:31 if you use a regular VHS VCR, which isn't the case at all. Something was drastically wrong with the setup (or the tape itself) of whoever made that transfer that you showed in your example clip.
Using a VHS machine with no TBC will give you results that are just as stable as using an S-VHS machine with no TBC, because there's nothing about S-video (Y/C) that's inherently more stable than composite. You may get slightly improved picture quality with the S-video connection, which may or may not be noticeable, but that's the only potential advantage of S-video over composite.
There's a Technology Connections video where he shows his analog tape capture method, and he just uses a cheap composite-to-HDMI converter from Amazon, along with an HDMI capture device. He never has stability problems using composite. If you haven't seen it it's called "The Best Easy Way to Capture Analog Video (it's a little weird)"
@@MaximRecoil Understood. If I made it seem like a regular VHS player produces unwatchable results, I apologize. That wasn't my intention. The tape I used was from the mid 1980s, recorded in SLP (EP), and is my worst tape. I use that tape to test to see how well equipment handles these types of errors. Many and hopefully most VHS tapes won't suffer those problems. For those with especially family videos that look like that, I want them to know there is a way to get good results. So, bottom line, yes, one can use a regular VHS player with an ES-15 and it will fix the tearing issues.
@@MaximRecoil Yes this exactly, many guides exaggerate the use of a regular VHS player producing unacceptable results which is just not true.
If you use a normal VHS player with stabilization, be it a real TBC or the mentioned DVD recorders, you can also get excellent comparable results.
Also you then can take advantage of the COMB filter which often does a better job separating the Y/C signal compared to the many simple capture cards.
For regular VHS the difference of a good capture between composite or Y/C is not that huge, more important is the overall playback quality of the VCR.
I have several JVC S-VHS players, also with TBC, but i often prefer using a normal (Panasonic) VCR with the mentioned DVD recorder because it gives me a better overall looking result.
Thing is, VHS isn't that bad by today's standards. UA-cam compression at 1080p may be much worse than a VHS in high motion scenes.
A good capture method makes a real difference.
Disabliing the Video Preview during capture also helps with audio sync issues in my experience, The original VDub docs also recommended doing so since the preview window is actually taking up PCI bandwidth from the capture card. If that still applies to usb cap cards though I cant say.
I wish this video was made a few years ago. It's daunting to say the least, but going over the options, even when looking at DigitialFAQ was hard to piece together.
First of all, great video, great explanations, thank you very much! I have an option in the video capturer I bought to capture through a YPbPr cable and relatively I liked the result. So assuming I have all the options, is it better to capture via s-video, composite, or YPbPr cable? Thank you 🙏🏼
I don't know of any VCRs or camcorders that have Component output. So S-Video cable is the best option. In discussions about whether to convert S-Video signal to Component signal before capture, the advice is No.
I believe some VCR/DVD combo units also have somewhat of a frame TBC. I'm sure my Sony RDR-VX525 has a TBC, but one issue it has is that a small sliver on the left side of the s-video output is slightly darker for some reason. Maybe it's just my unit.
I'm sure there are ways in software to compensate for horizontally wiggly video like a line TBC would fix, and a frame TBC really only helps prevent dropouts for capture devices that don't handle unstable video very well (e.g. surprisingly the AJA Kona LHe+.) So not all of the expensive equipment is necessary for a good capture.
The issue of frame TBC versus frame synchronizers hurts my brain. No matter how many times I read about it, I still get confused. I believe that the Panasonic ES-10 and ES-15 (and possibly the Sony you mention) have frame synchronizers that (maybe?) help keep audio and video in sync (sort of) but are not frame TBCs, per se. The Datavideo TBC-1000 has a frame synchronizer and a frame TBC, so that's why people associate these two features, even though they are different. But still can't explain in my own words how they are different.
Here's an explanation, which I have re-read for the 15th time and am still confused. I guess I'm more of a visual learner and I cannot picture some of this stuff.
www.studio1productions.com/Articles/TBC.htm
The best method I have found is an S-VHS player connected via S-Video to a stand alone Sony RDR-HXD DVD recorder which has a hardware upscaler and an HDMI out (The actual model number doesn't matter as we aren't using the internal HDD or tuner sections). The HDMI out is fed into a fairly cheap HDMI to USB capture device on my laptop. The hardware upscaler in the Sony does a far better job than any standalone device I have tried, probably because the Sony DVD Recorder was a very expensive device in it's time and the S-VHS player has a time base corrector and also does a good job of reducing noise on standard VHS.
Interesting. I don’t know that one. I did a quick search and found a discussion with a demo that says it indeed fixes some jitter issues, although not as much as an ES10 or ES15 might. But still an improvement. What do you use for HDMI to USB. I have tested an Elgato Camlink but I know there are more expensive options that might produce better results if going the HDMI to USB route.
Here is the discussion about your Sony recorder:
forum.videohelp.com/threads/401905-Sony-rdr-hxd870-dvd-recorder-passthrough
Any hardware upscalers are bad and I guess that old Sony just uses the primitivest alrorythm which is better than newer ones that trying to denoise and enhance too hard. Any way, it would be easy to exceed with software.
I bought an S-VHS camcorder for $1500 back in 1984. It was a lot of money for a young 20s something couple, but I wanted good quality. There always was, and always will be, confusion about this format. There is no benefit to running a normal VHS tape through a S-VHS machine. Garbage in, garbage out.
Hello congratulations on your channel I have never seen a channel on UA-cam as interesting as yours talking about to digiter VHS video tape,well THANK YOU
could you to do a HIBRID tutorial whole
All the Best 😍👍
I'm a bit of a old school videophile and have to agree with everything in the video. I do have to say however understand a working svhs player will cost you $250 to $300 on ebay. A tbc will cost you nearly a grand and an svhs player with tbc will cost you a grand and might only come up on ebay once per month. Be careful with professional decks too because some only play tapes recorded in sp speed.
Excellent video with the details that I was looking for. With that Jvc, is it possible to use the firewire port and if so, how would the quality be compared with this elegant setup? I have three cables needed to bring firewire to thunderbolt 3.
Thank you for this comment. When I bought this JVC SVHS player, I read that the MiniDV tape deck inside wasn't as good as a MiniDV camcorder, so I completely ignored it. After reading your comment, I realized that I had never asked myself that question! So, I just connected a firewire cable from the SVHS player's DV port, and output to a Windows 7 computer with my firewire card. I put a VHS tape in the JVC and pressed play. The signal was passed through the DV port and out to the firewire card. I will need to do tests to see how that DV passthrough compares to the MiniDV (or Digital8) passthrough that I reported on in another video on this channel. So the comparison will be:
JVC HR-DVS3U -- DV out -- firewire cable -- firewire card
JVC HR-DVS3U -- svideo out -- MiniDV camcorder svideo in -- DV out -- firewire card
Cutting the Svideo cable from the workflow saves a step, which in theory is good. But is the DV contraption inside the SVHS player as good as the one in the Sony MiniDV camcorder? This will be a good test. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
@@videocaptureguide Thank you for the comments. The arrangement that you mentioned would be very interesting indeed for comparison. I have tried converting 8mm, hi 8mm tapes with Sony GV-D800 Digital8 player with firewire using a thunderbolt 2 adapter and a thunderbolt 3 adapter to MacBook Pro.
In the iMovie, 640x480 is the max resolution allowed, so I've been trying to find a way to upscale the signal. I also get the same resolution limitation from my Sony MiniDV camcorder with firewire. I tried it on both a few year old MBP with thunderbolt 2 and a new MBP with thunderbolt 3, and I get the same limitation.
I saw a review of RetroTINK 4k with TBC built in for games that can be used for video signals including SVHS, component, and composite. I am not sure if that would be a better arrangement with SVHS than trying to use the firewire setup. It seems that the legacy TBC devices are hard to find so was interested in your opinion. Thanks again, and I look forward to your next video!
The RetroTink is an excellent device for displaying video from old gaming consoles onto a modern television. Some people use the RetroTink to digitize analog video tapes.
The results are acceptable, but you will likely get better results by (1) transferring your DV footage via firewire to your computer, and (2) using the software Hybrid to deinterlace and upscale your video. Experts state that the software deinterlacing and upscaling produce better results than the (RetroTink) hardware method. However, the hardware method is much easier for people who are not comfortable using computers or learning how to use the software (Hybrid).
If the video footage was recorded on a Digital camcorder or MiniDV camcorder (like in your example), one should always use the firewire port to transfer it to one's computer. You will have a video file encoded with the DV codec.
If the video footage was recorded on a Video8, Hi8, VHS, or SVHS device, one should use an SD capture device (eg, ATI600) via Svideo cable. Some believe, however, that using DV passthrough device (Digital8 or MiniDV camcorder, or Canopus ADVC-110) is equivalent to the SD method. There is a heated debate on this subject. I have done several videos comparing these two methods and will likely do more.
I received on VHS in VCD quality (288P) on .dat format. It has audio synchronization issues due to frame freezing, slow motion and fast motion in video. I am able to correct it manually by deleting the freezed frames and correction in slow/fast motion. Is it possible to correct the same in any automated way?
I don’t think there is any way to automate the correction of this video. Do you have the original VHS tape so that you could try to capture it again perhaps in a better VCR?
Thanks for this great video. Very comprehensive. I am using this as my go to guide to re-do some VHS/HI8 video captures/digitizing in the hopes of gaining improved quality. I have used OBS to get started, but see that VirtualDub 1.9.11 version is recommended. I also see that there is a VirtualDub2. Is there a reason not to use VirtualDub2? Since i am using a Windows 10 version, i am also going to use the Diamond VC500 capture as you recommended and not the ATI's (which i see seems to be more for Window's 98 machines). Curious if can still follow your workflow (including the Hybrid and Davinci Resolve for image / denoise enhancements with my set up. Apologies if i sound like a newbie.
The experts don't recommend VirtualDub2 for capture because of dropped frames or other weird issues. It is okay to use VirtualDub2 for the enhancement phase and there is a good video on YT explaining how to use AviSynth in VirtualDub2. But I find it easier to use Hybrid, which is a UI for AviSynth and Vapoursynth. And, yes, you can use your modern Windows computer for the enhancement stuff. What I do is capture on my Windows XP machine, then copy the AVI files to a WD Elements 1TB USB hard drive (the one that gets its power from the USB port) and then copy the files to my Windows 10 machine.
Regarding the Diamond VC500, it is an okay choice. But I have read more recently from the user lollo that he uses and likes the I-O Data GV-USB2. It costs a bit more, but if I was remaking the video I would recommend this new one based entirely on what lollo said. It is available new at Amazon.
@@videocaptureguide Thank you so much! Good luck with this channel. Ur explanations and visuals are very helpful.
Love the tutorial! For me, I use USB Live-2 for capturing from my JVC S VHS (with Panasonic DMR-ES15) to AmarecTV, then using avs to do scripting (cleaning up image, de-interlacing etc.) for Avisynth and add to Vdub and finish from there, seems to be way better for me than doing it straight from Vdub as I have nothing but issues with it anyways.
I used AmarecTV at the start because was convinced by DigitalFAQ to use VirtualDub 1.9.11 because it showed when there was dropped frames, while AmarecTV doesn't say. Did you try to capture with vdub 1911 or vdub2? I know that vdub2 has issues for capture which is why the original is recommended.
@@videocaptureguide So I tried with both Vdub 1 and 2, maybe it's because it is wonky with Windows 11? My amarectv shows dropped frames. I think it depends on what version you have.
Hi. I made a short video of excellent VHS images captured with KDV, but I decided not to post because they are images of my daughter when little. I went looking for the KDV-8000 on the internet, and found one used to sell in the US (Washington), with S-VHS inputs. If you live in the US do not miss this opportunity.
ALWAYS press play on the VCR and let it run for a few seconds BEFORE you start recording in VideoDub. Very important!
the diamond vc500 has an issue with wobbly edges that other capture cards dont have i would recommend the i-o data gv-usb2 or a dazzle dvc100
Awesome!! Thank you!!
Since you are upscaling past standard definition I think you are supposed to change your color matrix to bt 709 on the pro res tab in hybrid.
Oh boy. You just opened another rabbit hole for me to go down. There goes my weekend...
Question, if the recorded video stored on a regular vhs tape is stored as a composite pal or ntsc signal what benefit does separating the signal into chroma and luma via svideo give you?
The main benefit of using a svhs player is generally because they are higher quality players with a better quality deck and internals.
The only thing I could think of is the fact that the comb filter circuit built into the svhs player is of higher quality than the composite destination you’d be connecting it to. Svideo allows you to bypass this. This is debatable though because given the age of these players unless they’ve had extensive servicing done with all electrolytic capacitors replaced it’s hard to know whether or not this circuitry is performing to spec.
Personally I’ve done all my recording on my Loewe 5106H which uses a Panasonic k deck mechanism and output it to a Sony DVD recorder and was very happy with the results.
The question you raised is an excellent one. I have heard both sides with references to science and stuff I don't understand. I plan on testing the S-Video cable v. Composite cable in a future video. I suspect that, like most of these debates, the differences-if any-are minor. And we do the things we do because it makes us feel good.
@@videocaptureguide I might actually purchase a serviced and restored svhs player to test this theory as there is one listed in the local classifieds albeit it’s not particularly cheap. But I want to know the answer myself.
VHS stores luma and chroma separately on the tape. It’s not a composite format like laser disc. An Svideo VCR keeps them separate and when they are kept separate it prevents crosstalk between the chroma and luma which reduces noise. Noise doesn’t compress well so that leads to other issues especially if your capturing straight to a compressed codec. Svideo connection on a combo unit isn’t the same because the luma and chroma are composited together internally. I Can look at a the color2 function in Pmod and see a lot of difference between Svideo coming from my Pannasonic 1980p ag and my regular composite VCR when I stack horizontal. The composite signal is all over the place. TBCs need luma separated for timing and chroma separated for digital noise reduction anyways.
I can't tell you how thankful I am for your hard work and this video I've tried reading and understanding a lot of stuff on the digital faq website and have gotten lost, LOL. You've done an incredible job summarizing and making it understandable for layman's.
I'm going to be conducting some tests and will post to UA-cam of the difference between a firewire DV converter, the ADVC110 which I already have, plus I'm planning to get an ATI all in wonder card to use with an old windows xp desktop I have lying aroun. I want to see if all this stuff from the digitalfaq website is really worth the time and old gear setup.
Do you know of anyone who has compared the ATI all in wonder setup (digital faq recommendation) with different methods like canopus advc110?
I compare the ATI600 with a MiniDV-camcorder-as-passthrough here: ua-cam.com/video/SVXp7cjJT8Q/v-deo.html
The MiniDV camcorder acts like an ADVC110, but I think the ADVC110 allows for some adjustment of brightness and contrast. This is important, because in the video I conclude that the ATI600 is better mostly because one is able to adjust the brightness and contrast (inside VirtualDub) before doing the capture. Whereas no such adjustment is possible with the MiniDV passthrough. That said, following a suggestion from @TechTVUSA, I was able to adjust in Premiere Pro the blown-out white from the MiniDV-passthrough, making it look like the ATI600. Unfortunately, I discovered that after publishing the video.
As you may have read at DigitalFAQ, the DV devices compress color to 4:1:1, which is in theory worse. But I don't know if it is noticeable one way or the other. The major benefit of using a MiniDV camcorder in passthrough mode is that it has a great Line TBC and can fix flagging etc. better than an ATI600 or AIW9600XT. In fact, if the choice was between these two workflows, I think the latter is probably better, or at the very least comparable.
1. SVHS with no Line TBC and flaggy tape -- ES15 -- ATI600
2. SVHS with no Line TBC and flaggy tape -- MiniDV -- Firewire card
Anyway, please share your videos here when they are done so we can all see what you undercover.
Great video! I’m surprised you don’t mention most consumer video mixers of the same era have a TBC built in and can be still scored for relatively cheap
Great point. When I was searching for a TBC, I looked into the Videonics MX1 video mixers and found many on FB Marketplace in other cities and tried to get someone to ship me one but it didn't work out. I eventually found a DVK-200 and was able to have that shipped to me.
Lord Smurf at DigitalFAQ said this about the MX1: "It's not too different from the weak DataVideo DVK units, or SE mixers, though a decade older."
Source: www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-restore/2251-tbc-time-base-9.html#post72331
There might be two drawbacks to the MX1 compared to the DVK: (1) MX1 get hot and need good airflow as this was something that was reported back in the 1990s, (2) MX1 is reported to affect the image quality. I haven't tested it so I can't confirm this.
You suggest that adding the Panasonic es 10 gives better stabilization than an svhs player WITH tbc, but you only put that combo in 2nd place.
I have a Panasonic svhs with tbc: would I better off sticking with that, or adding an es 10?
Cheers 😊
The Panasonic ES-10 and ES-15 have a stronger Line TBC than the JVC SVHS VCRs with Line TBC. However they make the video brighter and some detail is lost (clipped). So it better to use the Line TBC in the SVHS VCR if you are lucky enough to have one. If you don't have one of those VCRs, then the ES10/15 is what you need to use.
@@videocaptureguideOnce again, thanks for the mega speedy response 😊
Excellent vid with helpful info. I have a Panasonic DMR-EZ28; will that work well or should I seek out an ES 10/ES 15?
According to a discussion at DigitalFAQ.com, the Panasonic EZ series came after the ES series. And whatever magic was inside the ES-10 and ES-15 didn't make it into the EZ-28. Someone with an EZ-28 says "the Panasonic DMR-EZ28 has no effect on the pass through image."
www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/3237-jvc-7600u-problem.html
So, it's not comparable to the ES-10 or ES-15. The good news is that the ES-15 and ES-16 DVD recorders were fairly popular and I see one from sale in my local Facebook Marketplace about ever other month for about $50 to $100. And I even got lucky one day and found one at a thrift store for $15. So, unlike the very hard to find/expensive SVHS players with Line TBC, the Panasonic ES-10 and ES-15 are more common. By the way, for Canadian readers the ES-16 is the same as the ES-15, but marketed in Canada.
Hello, can you make a video on how to setup Windows XP for capturing with the ATI All In Wonder 9600 XT? With the drivers and stuff like that? Or is there a tutorial on the DigitalFAQ (if there is one, is there a link?) Thank you.
Good question. I recently re-installed Windows XP SP2. During the setup, Windows detected my ATI AIW 9600XT and installed the driver, which was 6.14.10.6462 and was dated 3/23/2004. This driver was more up to date than the one (6.14.10.6414) that was on the CD-ROM that came with the 9600XT. So, the good news is that if you use the SP2 edition of Windows XP, it should just work. Of course, if you want the ATI capture software (I don't) then you will have to install the CD-ROM files, but be sure to do a custom install and don't install the hardware drivers on the CD-ROM-just install the capture software.
If you don't have the CD-ROM, you can download the the ISO file (ATI V01084) from DigitalFAQ. Thank goodness for the work of Lord Smurf at DigitalFAQ to provide these old files for people. Here is the link.
www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/392-ati-wonder-hacks-2.html#post14940
P.S. For some reason, Windows XP (Integral Edition) didn't detect the 9600XT. And then when I instaled the drivers on the CD-ROM, the signal from 9600XT to my monitor stopped. I tried different things, but eventually I reformatted my HDD and installed Windows XP SP2 edition and that solved the problem.
@@videocaptureguide Thank you a lot for the detailed response, for outputting to the monitor, do I use the ATI AIW or from the motherboard?
@@mooct1The ATI AIW 9600XT is a two-in-one device. It does the video capture stuff. But it also happens to be a video card that outputs to a computer monitor. So, this is what I use to connect to my monitor. I suppose I could install a basic video card to handle the monitor stuff, but I let the ATI AIW 9600XT do that job, too. As far as I know, it has no impact on the performance of the capture side of things.
In theory that vhs+dvd combo should have the best connection between it's 2 parts (probably rgb, but surely not composite), it should record mpeg2 interlaced at the original resolution and with high bitrate so compression is a non-issue, than you can do whatever you want with it after you rip the stream to pc. Why is it considered to be bad. It's not better of course, but it is probably very similar to source which is the best way to get started. I don't want immediate upscaling, deinterlacing, etc. as those are happening digitally as well just not at such a quality as I'm able to do in postprocessing with tools like topaz video ai.
I think whatever benefit you get from the internal connection is offset by the low bitrate of the DVD recording.
My understanding is that DVD recorders record to MPEG2 at the DVD-Video bitrate spec, which is a relatively low rate and makes home video style video look overly noisy and worse than the original tape. The quality of the capture would be better using an SD capture device (the ones that are able to capture as MPEG2) and capturing at a higher MPEG2 rate of, say, 15mbps to 20mbps.
There are some Pioneer/Sony PVR/DVD recorders that have a high bitrate MPEG2 mode. Then you would need to get those files off the HDD at the high bitrate and onto your computer.
www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/9898-dvd-recorder-advise.html#post62930
@@videocaptureguide from what I've seen, usually the highest quality is 1hr/disc which correlates with the max bitrate of 9.8mbps. That doesn't sound much but we are talking about 576i50, that doesn't need much. I know I cannot compare it to movies with static scenes as it's a home video but it handling interlaces lines separately is a big win imo.
in HuffYUV vs Lagarith -- lagarith is less CPU intensive for encoding and still does a good job at the amount of compression.
Thanks for this. I used Lagarith originally because I had a problem installing HuffYUV. But then I figured it out. And now I just like saying it more than "Lagarith", which sounds like the name of the evil empire on every sci-fi show.
Something seems wrong... so I exported the video from Hybrid and it's 1440x1080 - it looks great. But after doing the color modification and exporting it from DaVinci Resolve it's reduced to the 940x720 with large black borders all around it? Why would we be reducing it to 940x720 at this step? From looking online it seems like there is a resolution mismatch even though I told DaVinci to adjust... is there another setting somewhere I missed in the video or the video didn't cover?
File--Project Settings
Timeline Resolution: Custom
For 1440 x 1080 processing
Save
In Deliver, make sure Export Video shows the same resolution.
You missed a biggie in the VirtualDub setup section. I’m not sure about the AllInWonder, but with my Micomsoft card, If you go to Video/Capture filter, that’s where you tell the capture device what to do with interlaced frames. You want to make sure it’s set to Weave, meaning that it saves the interlaced fields as-is. You don’t want to Bob or Blend them at the capture stage. That’s also where you would turn on its 2d or 3d comb filters if it has them.
edit to add: Interlace TFF and BFF vary from device to device. I have some of each, so you need to figure out which you have.
Also, “posterize” is pronounced the same as “poster,” not like “pasta”.
That "Custom Properties" tab only appears if one is using the Microsoft DirectShow drivers. When using ATI cards, that tab does not appear and the video is captured by default interlaced.
Later in Hybrid, I use QTGMC to deinterlace (top field first) and click BOB to end up with a 59.97 fps video.
@@videocaptureguide Exactly - you need to make sure that you capture the interlaced fields so you aren't stuck with a sub-par field-blended file that can't be deinterlaced or IVTC'd later on. Some devices default to that.
@@videocaptureguide You can also use Staxrip if you find the Hybrid interface confusing. StaxRip has many Avisynth filters and does a great job and easy to use.
What's a good size secondary hard drive to work with in a Windows XP machine, especially if you have a couple dozen family VHS tapes to transfer?
I use a 2TB data drive. And I move content to an external drive after capture or when I am ready to work with it on my main modern Windows 10 computer.
@@videocaptureguide Cool. Asked differently, what are the file sizes you get for each VHS tape? On average? Min/max?
@@fighterpilot12 Using the HuffYUK codec in VDub, I captured a video of 4 hours 30 minutes (270 minutes) at a file size of 106GB. So, about 400MB per minute of footage.
So, that's about 83 hours of HuffYUV SD video can be stored on a 2TB hard drive, although the best practice would be to not capture more video once the hard drive gets too full.
@@videocaptureguide OK, might opt for an 8TB then...
I think Windows XP has a 2TB limit for HDD. So, I would recommend you use a 2TB data drive, and then buy a 2TB external drive to move those video files over. Keep in mind that Windows XP era motherboards are limited to USB2, which is slower that USB3. It might be worth adding an eSata card to the computer that adds an eSata port in the back. And then get a HDD enclosure that has eSata port and USB3 port. The idea is that you would transfer the files from the WindowsXP computer via eSata. And then transfer them to modern Windows computer via USB3. eSata speeds are comparable to USB3. I have not done this yet as I don't mind waiting however long it takes.
Hi there. Thanks for the video. Any suggestions for the following set up? JVC HR-DVS1U + I-O Data GV-USB2 + Windows 10, plus the software you mentioned. Is it enough? Thanks!
I have the DVS3U, we which I assume is essentially the same VCR. It has a line TBC and so is a great choice. The GV-USB2 gets a lot of love from many including the video restorer lollo, so another good choice. In my experience, even with these two items, you might still get dropped frames, which can lead to make the audio video go out of sync, at least on some tapes. I'm working on a new video where I compare number of dropped frames from 60 minutes playing the same VHS tape in different workflows. Spoiler: the DVK-200 and ES-15 give me the same (small) number of dropped frames. So I recommend you be on the lookout for the fairly inexpensive ES-10 or ES-15 and use it on VHS tapes with lots of problems.
@@videocaptureguide thanks for the prompt reply!
How well does a video mixer like the Videonics MX-1 (which I still own) or Sima SFX-9/10 work as a TBC?
I have not used these but from what I read at DigitalFAQ the MX-1 is supposed to be comparable to the DVK. However the MX-1 was known to get hot so it is important to use in a ventilated space.
I desperately need to convert some Hi8 cassette tapes to digital files, I do have a SVHS but need a way to convert them to digital without windows XP and without the colours being washed out or black crush, every time I convert the digital file looks worse than the source tape, I want them looking as close as possible, does anyone know what I should do?
I assume you have a Sony Hi8 camcorder to play back your tapes. What capture device have you tried?
@@videocaptureguide Well it's technically Samsung but yes I have the camcorder, I tried elgato video capture.
I understand your current workflow to be:
Samsung Hi8 camcorder --- Elgato USB capture device
You didn't mention which sofware you are using to capture the video on your computer.
Here are my initial thoughts:
1. Sony Hi8 camcorders all(?) have a Line TBC feature, which can fix all/most jitter and flagging from Video8 and Hi8 tapes recorded with any other camcorder.
2. I don't know if your Samsung Hi8 camcorder has a Line TBC.
3. However, if your tapes were recorded with that same Samsung camcorder, then that might be a good choice for playback as there is often a benefit in using the same camcorder to playback the tape, provided it was a good model to begin with.
4. While Elgato makes good products in general, their analog-to-digital capture device is just okay. Not the best. Not the worst. But it is more expensive than most, which makes its performance disappointing.
5. The following USB devices are generally believed to be provide better video capture: ATI TV Wonder 600 (no longer sold new), Hauppauge USB-Live2, I-O Data GV-USB2. There are many more analog-to-digital options such as using a MiniDV camcorder as a digitizer in passthrough mode, although this yields a lossy DV25 video file, which many experts believe is inferior to the lossless capture produced by the combination of one of of the good USB capture devices + VirtualDub capture software + HuffYUV lossless codec.
6. If your Hi8 camcorder has a Line TBC and if you are able to capture a hour of video without any problem in the audio-video synchronization, then I don't suggest you add a frame TBC to the workflow, as some have impact the color palette. For instance, the Panasonic ES10/ES15 makes the whites too white and you lose some of the detail. So, it is only recommended if it helps fix jitter/wavyness.
@@videocaptureguide First off thank you so much for helping me, I am using Elgato's software to capture the video, I have checked but am unsure if my camcorder has line TBC or not but I can tell you, I see next to no jittering so I assume it either does or it's not necessary anyway, I will however be capturing VHS after I'm done with the camcorder and they're extremely jittery and I don't currently have any TBC solution for them so will need one.
My main issue I am trying to overcome with my Elgato is how washed out the footage looks, I found a solution online but the guy in the video got black crush from it, if I can get it not washed out looking whilst avoiding black crush I will be happy, I don't understand what a HuffYUV lossless codec is or anything about how to implement one, I am very much a lay person when it comes to this.
Other users have reported Elgato Video Capture produces a washed out video. Unfortunately, there may not be a good solution.
Option 1: Buy a new capture device such as the Hauppauge USB-Live2, I-O Data GV-USB2.
Option 2: Keep the Elgato, but use a different capture software. Specifically, VirtualDub, which is free and you can download from here: www.videohelp.com/software/Virtualdub. However, you will need to install the HuffYUV codec, and it will take some time to figure out all the options. I took me a while as I read through all the forum posts and guides.
Option 3: Keep the Elgato, keep your washed out files, but then try to auto-fix the brightness/contrast/color using the free Davinci Resolve software. There are things to learn in that method, but might be worth a try. Because even with the best capture card, you may still want to improve/adjust the videos in Davinci Resolve anyway.
Years ago I had a vhs to dvd dubbing deck and I dubbed a vhs tape per the instructions and it looked awful. It was really washed out. Then I tried dubbing the VHS again from another ordinary deck with S-video out and left/right RCA jacks into the DVD recorder side of the original dubbing deck and it looked great so I would guess that the "internal dubbing settings" of the dubbing deck weren't calibrated properly for best results. Either that or the internal dubbing system was just junk.
That would be an interesting comparison video but I don’t have a side by side unit. I have a video on the channel where I compare SD capture (ATI AIW 9600XT) with a DVD recorder mpeg2 file. I will need to redo that test with better footage as the recording I used from the 1990s was a bit unsteady.
I think for some people a DVD recorder is quick and easy and doable for their skill level or free time. Other methods produce a better result but I’d rather the tapes get digitized any which way instead of losing them in a flood or through tape degradation.
@@videocaptureguide did you post that? I would be interested
The signal on VHS tape is composite. The S-video cable is made for Y/C signal. There will not be improvement at all using S-video cable for a standard VHS tape. But the SVHS player is good because it has good comb filter.
I'm been wondering about this and will do a side-by-side test shortly to see if there is any noticeable difference between S-Video and Composite if the source tape was recorded on a regular VHS player.
@@videocaptureguide VHS has composite signal on the tape anyway. Only VHS has chroma and luma separated in Y/C. If you notice a difference it would be because of the comb filter or other kind of internal features.
So you recommend using and SVHS player and output via SVideo cable because that will make it slightly better?
@@videocaptureguide RCA cable would be enough. But SVHS player is recomended.
S-video cable only for SVHS tapes.
@@debranchelowtone I went down the rabbit hole and found discussions about this. And differences of opinion. In your view, it can't hurt to use an SVideo cable? In other words, even if it doesn't make the video look better, it won't make it look worse?
This is THE most informative and best best presented video I've yet seen on this topic.
Just one thing, though: you don't mention SCART. How do you rate SCART, ie SCART to S-Video? Is it better or worse than S-Video to S-Video, for instance?
Very many thanks & keep up the excellent work.
Thanks for your kind words. Regarding SCART, I have no firsthand knowledge. However, I read at the forums that SCART video signal is equivalent to composite. So the best practice is to use S-Video.
@@videocaptureguidemega thanks for the speedy response 😊
@@videocaptureguide SCART can vehicles RGB, Y/C and Composite
The junkie in me wants to watch the render progress bars ticking all the way til complete, especially on knowing I just restored some mementos for myself or somebody else and shit gonna look good for years
My Question is ( does this method better than USB capture like Elgato ) ? or does this card better than blackmagic card?
I have not tested the Elgato capture device. However the experts at DigitalFAQ considering it to be an okay but not great option. It is comparable they say to the Diamond VC500. But the Elgato is more expensive. Both are better than the EasyCap, which produces unacceptable quality results they say. Unfortunately the EasyCap appears prominently at Amazon and, so, sells a lot of units.
The expert user Lollo says he uses the I-O Data GV-USB2 and said it is better than the old ATI 600. The GV-USB2 is available at Amazon. If I didn’t already have an ATI 9600XT and ATI600, I would probably buy the I-O Data GV-USB2. I would not buy the Elgato.
@@videocaptureguide sounds great , But Elgato is support lossy format. thats why we need to have card support lossless to have better picture. I really would like to make another video about lossy and lossless and what is the exact differences
@@videocaptureguide I would like to ask , is ATI AIW All in wonder 9800 pro 128 AGP video card has same function with u ?
@@AhmedStudio-k3v I misspoke in the video. I have the ATI All-In-Wonder 9600XT (not 9800XT). It is a capture card that connects to the AGP port on the motherboard. Modern motherboards don't have AGP ports. I had to buy an ASRock 4CoreDual-SATA2, which I bough new/never used in a box from someone on Facebook Marketplace. I added a CPU (Core 2 Duo E7500) and the rest of the items need for a computer.
I think the Elgato USB Video Capture device saves captured video with H.264 compression. While this is an acceptable compression as a final distribution video file, it is not good if you plan on enhancing your video in Hybrid, Topaz Video AI, or some other software. The H.264 codec is lossy, which means it does very clever things to keep the video file size as low as possible. But that makes further enhancements less good than they would have been. I don't know if you can use VirtualDub to capture video from the Elgato and select the preferred compression (HuffYUV or Lagarith).
Hmm...I've screwed something up along the way! My video is exporting inside a black box, like it's both letterboxed AND pillarboxed. The original file coming from Hybrid is 1440x1080 and 4:3, and I set the export to be the same size as a custom setting...and it comes out looking like something shot through a pinhole camera! Where did I go wrong? :P
I feel you pain. The settings for Crop, Resize, Letterbox, Input PAR, and Output PAR all interact with each other and it can get confusing. Can you share a screenshot of your settings screen and place the link to, say, Imgur here so we can check out your settings.
@@videocaptureguide I decided to ask ChatGPT for the heck of it, and actually got the steps to follow there. So, I guess I figured it out...also saved the steps for future reference!
What capture card would you recommend if one has a Mac?
Macs have fewer options for SD analog capture. For instance many go with the much maligned Elgato as there isn't much choice. An alternative is a MiniDV camcorder in passthrough mode or the ADVC-110. TechTVUSA has videos on that method. You will need to find some adapters to get FireWire into modern Mac. These are reasons why many recommend buying a pre-owned Windows computer and buying a capture device like the GV-USB which is available new. Good luck.
Could you possible tell me what the settings in Hybrid for Pal would be please?
I'm not a expert in Hybrid and I'm not sure if you are asking about cropping or PAR or something else. You can ask at the Hybrid forum as Selur answers. forum.selur.net/
Started on another project, and now for some reason there is no "cut start/cut end" option...what gives? I suppose I could trim it before or afterward in some other program, but I'd prefer to do it all at once.
That’s odd. In Hybrid settings go to Config->Internals->Cut Support and make sure it is turned on. Or restart Hybrid. Or restart computer. Or download the latest version of Hybrid and try that fresh install instead. Let us know what happens as I’m sure others will have the same issue in the future.
@@videocaptureguide Yeah, that (cut support) brought it back. T'anks!
i sadly cant get a super vhs player yet but i do have 2 vcrs and a crt tv with one built in
Some VHS VCRs are not bad including Sharp models. Tapes aren’t getting any younger so might as well digitize them with what you have and if you ever get better equipment you can redo the most special tapes.
I have a Sony DVD recorder and a VCR. I also have a Panasonic ES-10 DVD which of course, I use as a pass-through. The DVD recorder acts as a TBC. The only thing my setup is lacking is a VCR with an S-Video output. If I connect an S-Video cable to the DVD player, would that be about as good as having a VCR with an S-Video output, or would buying a VCR with an S-Video output be the best method?
I'm trying to understand your workflow. Is it this? Or something else? Before replying I want to make sure I understand.
VHS VCR > Composite cable > ES10 > S-Video cable > Sony DVD recorder > record to a DVD Video disc
@@videocaptureguide I don't have a VCR with the S-Cable output jack. I connect the VCR to the ES-10, and then to the Sony DVD recorder. I just want to know, since the ES-10 has an S-Video output jack, and the Sony DVD recorder has an S-Video input jack, if connecting them would provide any enhancement to the finished product. I assume no, since the VCR has no S-Video output jack. It is the source. It is going on composite video capturing. I know S-Video is way better quality than composite.
@@coolcatrick3454 is you final output a DVD disc on the Sony? If so, why not use the ES10 recorder to create the DVD? That said, the best practice is to use a good capture card on a computer.
Regarding the composite to svideo question, this doesn't appear to be a settled issue. Here's a thread that discusses it. Some say it may help, for some tapes. Not a satisfying answer, I know. You will have to test out both methods and look at the final video and then drive yourself crazy trying to figure out which is best.
www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-workflows/10785-convert-composite-svhs.html
Windows OS's will probably be sold by Microsoft, try to call the sales department. They want people to buy the new OS. It should be cheap, maybe a disc or download.
💪
Why isnt there the possibility to get this on windows 10 instead of xp? Why cant i get a new capture machine. Isnt it better? Like an hdmi one
Some or the hardware mention (ATI 600, etc.) needs software drivers to work. And those drivers are only available on older operating systems. A programmer who knows what they are doing could create new drivers for Windows 10, but that hasn't happened.
Regarding HDMI, there is a method for capturing video that way. The RetroTink device converts composite or S-Video to digital, and then outputs it via HDMI. It is mostly used by gamers who want to connect old gaming consoles to HDMI tvs, but if you add an HDMI-to-USB device in the workflow, you can then capture the video on your modern computer using OBS software. The latest RetroTink 5 is not bad, from what I see. But it is not reportedly as good as with an SD capture device or MiniDV camcorder in passthrough mode.
Look above in the comments for @Maups2. I'm on Win 11 with a GV-USB2, AmarecTV and an ES-15. Works well.
You talk about how every VHS video had the bad image. I've had over 10 VHS videos, all very good. Now I still have 1 VHS and 5 S-VHS, all operational. I have been conversion of tape for about 15 years, and I've tried about 4 converters to do this, until I found the definitive converter.
I come to show the way I capture VHS and S-VHS video tapes. First, a good S-VHS video. I use the S-VHS output of the video to connect to the International KDV-8000 capture device that performs image upscale up to 1080p. I connect the HDMI output from the capture device to the HDMI input of the EzRecorder 130 external game recorder, which records in FullHD. I use a high performance flash drive on the USB port of the game recorder. I run the capture and then take the USB stick to the computer. The result is the best possible.
Follow statement link of a capture.
ua-cam.com/video/m_4Pq24viT4/v-deo.html
Thanks for sharing. The video looks very nice. The source was an S-VHS tape in an S-VHS player, so that helps produce a good final result, no matter what the capture device used. I have not used the KDV-8000. I'm glad it works well for you. I would love to be able to see the KDV-8000 compared to a different HDMI upscale device, such as the RetroTink5, the ATI 600 (for SD capture) or a MiniDV camcorder (for DV transfer).
@@videocaptureguide Hi. Really the source was a S-VHS tape reproduced by a video S-VHS, but it would be even better if the conversion were from a professional studio movie. And it has no good result with only S-VHS tape. The tapes I recorded in family since the 1980s were all recorded in VHS, and the result of the capture was excellent. I'll see if I post any VHS capture and show to you. I have 4 other converters and I guarantee that the result with the KDV-8000 with S-VHS input is much higher than everyone else. KDV converts making UPSCALE TO 1080P, maintains aspect ratio and leaves the converted image completely clean, and has HDMI output. The result is not FullHD, but often better than a DVD (SD) or even DV (720p). I don't know the converters you mentioned, but for the price, they certainly don't do what the KDV-8000 does. KDV processing is Master Piece in conversion. Another good part of the conversion I make is that I don't use a computer. I use game recorder with HDMI input. If you look on the internet, there is a store that still has new KDV-8000 stock, but it has no S-VHS input, but video composite. I bought another new one, the ad said the equipment had S-VHS entry, but it didn't. I left in the box.
Can someone make a Betamax tutorial?
The Betamax VCRs were the competitors of the VHS VCRs. I think the video capture process is identical since the Betamax VCRs have the same video and audio outputs as the VHS VCRs.
VHS video quality was 320 x 486, while Betamax was 333 x 486. So it was slightly better. But it is a trivial difference given what came next.
@@videocaptureguide i know and if I get a Betamax vcr and a cassette then I will make a tutorial on it.
@@videocaptureguide because that’s analog video format. you know that analog shut down in 2009 right?
In my opinion, you can mess with software like Hybrid all you want, but it's not terribly helpful when upscaling. I get better results using TOPAZ Video AI for upscaling.
On another note, NEVER delete your original (native) 720 x 480 captured video files. There will be more AI algorithms arriving in the future that will be even better when upscaling your original video than what we've seen up to now. So, your native standard definition files are like having "digital negatives." When you want to re-purpose the file in the future, using newer and better tools, you'll be able to work from the original capture files.
LOL WINDOWS XP? GRANDPA!! TECHNOLOGY MOVES AHEAD.
You mean technology barrels forward heedless of useful traits and the hardware most suited to doing the job, making it impossible to extremely difficult.
Much(or most) of the best capture equipment was made in the XP era, so is naturally the most compatible. XP can do everything needed for that, a newer OS makes zero difference to capture quality. That's assuming it works at all with your device.
@@DoubleMonoLR I would maybe push forward to Windows Vista since it has built in DVD recording and that sort of thing, but even then I tend to live in a nostalgic world. Really posting to the Internet, simply requires two machines. One to capture and the other to render.
Though, since you can get handbrake for windows, XP and run it on a dual or quad core I guess it’s not too bad
Janeway at @5.35 in St Elsewhere 😊