Trouble conv. VHS to DVD

roy wood · Post by **roy wood** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:35 pm

Does that make sense.

It makes perfect sense Today Yesterday and the Day before.

I just seem to have been asking the wrong question for your answer.

I shall follow Black Labradors advice and 'Try it and See'.

ebone · Post by **ebone** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:13 am

Roy, I understand what you're asking and I asked the same question and was somewhat confused by the answers.

It's VERY CLEAR that higher bit rate = higher potential quality but what you/we are asking is if (for example) VHS rendered at 8000 bit rate would look any better than VHS rendered at 4000 bit rate. Or when you say "good quality VHS" at 4000 bit rate do you mean "good quality" as in acceptable quality or "good quality" as in as good as the original?

I think the answers are confusing because of the wording and because the answers to these questions are somewhat subjective with some believing one way-therefore interpreting good quality as acceptable quality and some believing the other way-therfore interpreting it to mean as good as the original.

I was confused on this still and just decided to drop it and do my own testing similar to Black Lab's method. I didn't want to sound like a pest or come across as sarcastic to anyone here because they're so helpful.

I decided to start at the top -8000 and work my way down but didn't get anywhere because my 8000 doesn't even look as good as the original as I've explained.

For what it's worth, I did test quite a bit last night on my DV captures. I compared (using media player classic and windows media player) DV MP2 renders-comparing the original DV to MP2 with LPCM andMP2 with Dolby at 2 different settings and one other audio setting(can't remember).

On my PC with headphones on they were virtually the same visually as well as sound. I couldn't tell a difference in visuals but the audio was very slightly crisper in DV vs. the higher quality Dolby. There was maybe a small dropoff even more to the lower Dolby. But these were all so slight that you would never be able to tell if they were in different rooms.

I didn't test on DVD/surround system however.

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:25 am

OK let me try to explain it again in a different way.

Point 1.
You are often told that 8000 = Best Quality DVD - the sort of quality you might expect if you bought a Hollywood DVD from the shops.

To get more onto the disc you reduce the quality and are told that 4000 - VHS quality. In other words you went to the shops and bought the film on a VHS tape.

Point 2.
You make your own video. You have shot something with your camcorder.
You create a DVD using 8000 and get the best possible quality like a shop bought DVD.

However.... you now want to put more onto the DVD and so you reduced the quality to 4000. You now get a DVD that equates to VHS Quality.

Point 3.
You decide you want to transfer your VHS collection to DVD.
You use 8000. - Here you get the best possible quality. It will not be any better than the original video - you cannot put detail in that wasn't there in the first place. However you will not lose any quality either.
What went in is what came out.

However one of your VHS tapes is too big to fit onto the DVD disc at 8000 and so you reduce it to 4000. Now you lose some quality.
It is no longer as good as the original VHS tape was.

Does this now make sense?

heinz-oz · Post by **heinz-oz** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 4:04 am

I would like to add my two cents worth as well. My experience has shown this:

capture VHS analog to mpeg2 (DVD), anything above 4500 kbps increases the file size for no tangible gain and increases the load on the CPU for conversion (if you don't use a hardware encoder). The visual quality stays the same at anything higher than that (maybe different with hardware encoded footage)

Capture VHS analog through a digital converter to DV-AVI and, after editing, render this to mpeg2 (DVD) the same is not quite true. The mpeg2 looked better to me at higher bit rates but not by much. Anything over 5500 to 6000 kbps is a waste of disk space. If you have it however, why not waste it

capturing DV-AVI from a digital camcorder and rendering to DVD compliant mpeg2, go for as high a bit rate as the duration of your video allows.

ebone · Post by **ebone** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 4:05 am

Yes, that is a lot more clear.

I now understand that a DVD render will look like a full quality VHS @ 4000 but a VHS render @ 4000 will not look like a full quality VHS. 8000 = full quality compared to the SOURCE, not the 'standard'. Whereas 4000 will be lesser than the quality of the source, regardless of type of source.

Thanks for being patient with us noobs.

edit: I typed this reply before Heinz's reply popped up. But he's basically saying the same thing.

dmz · Post by **dmz** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:14 am

Good topic everyone. It appears that, as Heinz says, anything above 4500 is a waste of space. I wonder if anyone knows about the bitrate standards for DVD hard disk recorders? I first "record" my vhs onto the hard drive of my dvd recorder. It has recording options like HQ and EP etc. Does anyone know the corresponding bit rates? I then burn from the hard drive to dvd and then I import the dvd into VS10+. Im trying to work out the bit rate that the dvd recorder uses.
I used to connect my VHS player through my video card and capture direct. Ive found the dvd recorder method way more reliable so far.

maddrummer3301 · Post by **maddrummer3301** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:16 am

roy wood · Post by **roy wood** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:27 am

Heinz wrote

VHS analog to mpeg2 (DVD), anything above 4500 kbps increases the file size for no tangible gain and increases the load on the CPU

Therefore 4500kbps is the Optimum for VHS. (for my purposes)

Equally then there will be an Optimum setting for 8mm and Hi8.

(a) VHS Optimum = 4500kbps Thanks Heinz

(b) 8mm Optimum = ?

(c) Hi8 Optimum = ?

If someone can fill in the answers to b and c I shall be very gratefull.

heinz-oz · Post by **heinz-oz** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:59 am

I have never worked with 8mm or high8. This is easily answered by yourself though. Just render out a small project at 4500 and again at 6000 kbps. See if you can distinguish visible differences. If the 6000 is visibly better, do another one at 7000 and so on, until you do not see a diff. By the same token, if 6000 doesn't look better, do one at 5000. You should easily discern the optimal settings for yourself.

Having said that though, IMHO, both these systems, correct me if I'm wrong, are just another flavour of analog video like VHS, just different media.

roy wood · Post by **roy wood** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:25 pm

Heinz wrote

render out a small project at 4500 and again at 6000 kbps. See if you can distinguish visible differences. If the 6000 is visibly better, do another one at 7000 and so on

Hi Heinz I have tried that method but some people have a more Phtographic Memory for detail than others unless it's very obvious I usually need to have two images side by side to do that accurately. Similar to the 'Before and After' screens in the Video Filters.

...both these systems, correct me if I'm wrong, are just another flavour of analog video like VHS, just different media.

8mm is slightly better resolution than VHS whereas Hi8 is very much better closer to DV qoality.

Black Lab · Post by **Black Lab** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:04 pm

Capture VHS analog through a digital converter to DV-AVI and, after editing, render this to mpeg2 (DVD) the same is not quite true. The mpeg2 looked better to me at higher bit rates but not by much. Anything over 5500 to 6000 kbps is a waste of disk space. If you have it however, why not waste it.

I agree with Heinz. Unable to do passthru, I have connected my VCR to my digital camcorder and copied a vhs tape to dv tape, then transferred via firewire to my pc. I think the resulting quality is a little better than the vhs.

ebone · Post by **ebone** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:22 pm

Maddrummer wrote:
" haven't seen you post what the VHS tapes MODE was used to record in?
Were they recorded in the SP (Standard Play) mode?"

I didn't post that because they're all different. I have some old VHS, some old VHS-C, Some friend's high 8,etc.etc.

"S-Video cable for Ntsc yields slightly better color etc then composite transfer of the video."

Ha. That's what I figured. I went to BestBuy to buy a new VCR specifically so I could output thru S-Video (my digital 8 cam that I'm using to capture has S-Video input.) Again confusing because you basically have to get a VCR/DVD combo and some of the VCRs say "SVideo only for DVD portion." The others didn't say either way. I started wondering if they all were like that. I asked the best Buy people and they would "guess" and then send me to another person who supposedly knew more. That person would come up, look at the back of VCR/DVD combos and also guess. The "top" guy look confused and went around to a few of the players and then looked at me-with stoned faced assurance-and said that VCRs can't output thru S-Video. Best Buy is famous for telling you anything to get you out of their faces and I knew this guy was full of it but I figured his guess may be right.

I've always had much better color on everything (DVD,Games,etc.) when using Svideo over composite. If they have Svideo VCRs then I'm sure it would be better.

EDIT: Since posting this, I've learned that SuperVHS does have Svideo out. I have looked for SVHS players locally but couldn't find any. There are plenty online but wanted to buy locally so I could take back if it was no better. I may have to just order one online to try.

"Many VHS tape players have an EDIT mode in the setup menu. That sharpens the picture a little for dubbing to another device. Normally it's off and you only set it on for dubbing out, worth a try."

Hmm, couldn't find anything like that. There were a few 'edit' features (it's a dual vcr GoVideo that I'm using) but I think they're all for VCR to VCR.

"Suggestion, you can buy a dvd recorder, then edit the mpeg2 files in VideoStudio if need be by using the dvd import feature(s)."

I will do this only as a last resort-for several reasons. From my quick readings, I get the impression that a GOOD DVD recorder needs to be at least $250-$300. I have bought many toys this year-HD cam, video game systems, and I am considering building a new dual core cpu soon (especially for rendering) so I'm trying to keep from going broke.

Secondly, from my readings on this forum, it seems that the more "pure" way is to edit DV prior to compressing (DVD/mp2) so I want to stay with that workflow if I can.

"100 VHS tapes to transfer? That's work."

Well, I said 50 but it could be 100 by the time I'm done.

It's not a rush project and something that I actually enjoy doing (editing/copying and learning to edit). I will leave this VCR next to my computer for months I'm sure and just capture here and there. Even if I did 5-7 a week that would be fine.

That's why I'm so anal about getting these settings right. I don't want to lay down 3 months worth of work and realize that I screwed up!

Everyone seems to disagree somewhat on the settings but most agree on one thing; test different settings and see which works the best for your equipment. That's what I'm going to have to do for each different standard- VHS/Hi8/VHS-C/DV/HDV.

ebone · Post by **ebone** » Wed Dec 13, 2006 4:33 am

Update concerning my analog captured quality*

I ordered a Super VHS player (JVC) from circuit city online. They don't have any in store but if I'm not mistaken I can take it back for a full refund (in-store) just the same as if I bought it in-store.

I tested it and it is much better. I used the S-video out of the VCR into the digital camera for coversion and pass thru. I captured a 3 min DV and then rendered it to mpg 8000 CBR. I then burnt a DVD and played it at the same time as the original tape playing on the OLD VCR. I toggled back and forth and compared.

The DVD looked sharper and less grainy than the source on the old VCR. The DVD made me realize how oversaturated the colors are on the old VCR. It made everyones faces really red and dark.

Now, of course the captured and rendered DVD can't be better than the source. It only looks better than what I was previously viewing because the old VCR is connected to the TV thru RCA whereas the DVD was captured from S-Video-giving a cleaner capture of the source. If I hooked up the new VCR to the TV via S-Video then it would look at least as good as my DVD. I'm not going to bother however because it looks great and I can't imagine it getting much better no matter what I do.