Video Editing Business

steveandbelinda · Post by **steveandbelinda** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 8:38 pm

I am wanting to possibly start a video editing business, where people can come to me with pictures or video of wedding, family etc, and have me put them on DVD. My question is, if I need to transfer from say, VHS to the computer to edit, what equipment am I going to need. I know that of course I will need a VHS player/recorder, and a converter from analog to digital. Should I have the availability of maybe recording from the computer onto VHS? What specs am I going to need on the VHS (stereo, 4 head, stereo inputs as well as outputs)? And what specs on the a/d converter ( bi-directional, etc)? a/d &d/a? I was told by someone who does alot of editing to buy a Canopus converter. But there are so many versions.

thecoalman · Post by **thecoalman** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 8:44 pm

Here's a start, it's a little on the high end though. It will give you an idea what your getting into if you want to do it profesionally though. This list is quite extensive but for the most part is still not based on what a real professional would be using.

http://www.digitalfaq.com/newbiesguide.htm

Add to that about 2 or 3 years experience and you should be all set.

THoff · Post by **THoff** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 10:12 pm

The Canopus ADVC-300 is an excellent bidirectional A/D converter, I own one. It does an excellent job taking analog signals and converting them to DV format, or going the other way. Of all of the consumer/prosumer video capture devices (from Canopus or other manufacturers), it is the only one that is intended to deal with marginal source material, something you will definitely encounter when trying to preserve old VHS tapes.

Unfortunately, the ADVC-300 (and all the other Canopus devices) has one weakness -- it outputs DV. That means that in order to get one hour of VHS video into your PC, you wind up capturing for one hour, and then converting it to MPEG2. Sure, there are ways to transcode DV on-the-fly to MPEG2, but the resulting video quality isn't as good as a separate conversion. So for one hour of video, you tie up a computer for an hour, plus however long it takes to transcode (usually longer than the capture step). All this takes a very fast CPU and oodles of disk space, and quite a bit of babysitting during the workflow -- you could easily become a victim of your own success.

DVDDoug · Post by **DVDDoug** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 1:09 am

steveandbelinda wrote:...to transfer from say, VHS to the computer...

For digital video, you don't need any special hardware. The digital camera plugs into the computer's FireWire or USB-2 port.

For analog video, you need a capture device. There are capture cards (PC boards) that plug into a PCI slot inside your computer, and there are external boxes that connect between the analog video source and the computer's FireWire or USB port. Also, some DV cameras have analog inputs, and can be used as a capture device (connected between a VHS player and the computer's FireWire / USB-2 port).

Here are some links for consumer-level capture devices.
ATI
Pinnacle
Hauppauge

For VHS, you don't need a super-quality "converter" (IMHO). VHS isn't that good anyway. However, this doesn't mean that quality isn't important. The limitations of VHS are different from the limitations of MPEG, so the result is always of lower quality than the VHS original. This is especially noticable if you use a low bitrate to squeeze over 2 hours of video onto a single-layer DVD.

For professional work, you might need an NTSC (or PAL) monitor... I suppose a calibrated one... and an NTSC video card. Computer video is different from NTSC, so you can't see the true colors on a VGA/SVGA monitor... or so I've read.

My "gut feeling" about the marketplace:

There is a market for VHS to DVD conversion. From a quick Internet search, prices start at about $10 USD per tape.

People are willing to pay for some editing of their wedding videos, but usually this is included with the fee paid to the photographer / videographer.

I suspect this is the key to the business model. If someone is willing to pay, they will pay for the full "production". The client supplies the "event", or concept, and maybe a script... maybe some "talent" and a location. You supply the cameras, lights, microphones... and maybe some "talent" and a "studio". When you're done, you deliver some DVDs (or a DLT master).

Editing is very time consuming. You probably won't find many clients who are willing to pay for the time... or sit with you as you edit to their taste. I've spent more than a weekend capturing a VHS tape, editing the video (and audio), authoring a DVD, and generating packaging & labeling artwork. That's fine as a hobby, but I wouldn't pay anyone to do it... even at minimum wage!

At best, I can copy a 90 minute VHS to DVD in about 3 or 4 hours. That includes about 2 - 2 1/2 hours of sitting-around time, during capture, rendering, and burning. That leaves about an hour of "billable time" for trimming the video (but no real editing), adding some DVD chapters (but no menu), and copying the packaging artwork.

THoff · Post by **THoff** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 2:58 am

DVDDoug wrote:<snip>
For professional work, you might need an NTSC (or PAL) monitor... I suppose a calibrated one... and an NTSC video card. Computer video is different from NTSC, so you can't see the true colors on a VGA/SVGA monitor... or so I've read.
</snip>

You can even get a relatively inexpensive (< US$400) NTSC reference monitor with both analog (composite and S-Video) and DV in AND out. If you configure UVS to output the preview to a DV device, you'll be able to see the results of your editing without the need for a video card with Video-Out. If you are going to get a reference monitor anyway, you might as well get this one.

LINK

thecoalman · Post by **thecoalman** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 4:11 am

Just add a little about the ADVC line. The ADVC's best features is 0 a/v sync issues, 0 dropped frames and ease of use. There's really no options except for setting it for your neck of the woods, you plug it in and hit the record button. It does produce DV-AVI only, this can be considered either detriment because you have to reencode or a superior way of doing it because DV-AVI is great for editing.

One note about the ADVC line, they are essentially all the same.The basic differences for 4 of them: The 50 and 55 are identical in their abilities except one is interanl the other external. The 110 is the new version of the 100 which adds a 6 pin firewire port so you don't need a external power supply and can send analog video out back to VHS. The 300 contains a line TBC which is functional but your better off saving your cash and getting a real TBC such as the DataVideo 1000.

What's a TBC? Probably your single best friend in the analog world.

http://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopi ... 72#1115672

Really want to go crazy? Hail the King..... http://www.canopus.us/us/products/dvsto ... eybenefits

THoff · Post by **THoff** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 4:45 am

The DVStorm2 is an excellent editing solution, but only if you have good source material. It doesn't have the 2D and 3D filters of the ADVC-300, and isn't suitable for capturing poor or damaged VHS video.

I would also argue that having a TBC built into the capture device (as in the ADVC-300) is superior to having a standalone DataVideo 1000.

The ADVC-300's filters can be controlled in realtime over the FireWire bus even while an application is capturing from the unit, and maybe more importantly, once video gets into the ADVC-300, it is digital, and doesn't get converted back to analog, only to be converted again by the actual capture device. Color space conversions, overscan compensation, and analog signal noise / leakage are eliminated. You can still use the ADVC-300 as a standalone inline TBC, controlling it with the buttons on the unit, and inputting and outputting analog. Last but not least, the ADVC-300 can be instructed to ignore the Macrovision subsignal.

THoff · Post by **THoff** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 4:47 am

The DVStorm2 is an excellent editing solution, but only if you have good source material. It doesn't have the 2D and 3D filters of the ADVC-300, and isn't suitable for capturing poor or damaged VHS video.

I would also argue that having a TBC built into the capture device (as in the ADVC-300) is superior to having a standalone DataVideo 1000.

The ADVC-300's filters can be controlled in realtime over the FireWire bus even while an application is capturing from the unit, and maybe more importantly, once video gets into the ADVC-300, it is digital, and doesn't get converted back to analog, only to be converted again by the actual capture device. Color space conversions, overscan compensation, and analog signal noise / leakage are eliminated. You can still use the ADVC-300 as a standalone inline TBC, controlling it with the buttons on the unit, and inputting and outputting analog. Last but not least, the ADVC-300 can be instructed to ignore the Macrovision subsignal.

thecoalman · Post by **thecoalman** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 5:35 am

THoff wrote:
I would also argue that having a TBC built into the capture device (as in the ADVC-300) is superior to having a standalone DataVideo 1000.

I leave it to someone more qualified than me.... the Datavideo is a full Frame TBC.
---------------------

Line TBC's digitally sample, store and correct the sync pulse timing for one, or two, or four, or sixteen (you get the idea) scan lines at a time.

A TBC that corrects 262.5 lines (NTSC) at a time is a full field TBC (like what is built in the Panasonic AG-1970/1980 VCR's).

TBC's that correct 525 scan lines (NTSC) at a time are full frame TBC's. In fact, some full frame TBC's actually buffer up to four full frames at a time. Full frame TBC's are generally more robust and effective than line TBC's, plus have the added benefit of completely eliminating all copy protection signals from videotape.

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

Last but not least, the ADVC-300 can be instructed to ignore the Macrovision subsignal.

One note on that, the 100 and other earlier models were also able to do this via the input button "hack". It's my understanding that this no longer works with the newer models such as the one I have the 110. I've never tested it though to see if it was actually no longer possible. No need too...

maddrummer3301 · Post by **maddrummer3301** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 5:59 am

Hi,

>I am wanting to possibly start a video editing business

I would purchase a "TURN KEY SYSTEM".
You will find them advertised in video editing magazines.

What is a "TurnKey System"?
A TurnKey System is complete computer system setup for video
editing INCLUDING all the software necessary for dvd production.
The system comes "Complete". The system is already setup and tested
by the distributor to work.
The system is "Guaranteed" to work. Providing you don't install additional
programs etc not approved by the company. The system comes with
everything necessary(books) along with technical support.

TurnKey systems are available running windows and Macintosh.
For reliability I would suggest the Macintosh running OS10 or higher.

Hope this helps,

MD

THoff · Post by **THoff** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 6:15 am

The ADVC-300's TBC is a full-frame TBC, it buffers three frames AFAIK. That's the only way it can apply 3D filters. I think you misread what I wrote -- I said the ADVC-300 can be used as a standalone inline TBC, not that it is a line TBC. You can connect an analog source to the ADVC-300, and have it output to another device that expects analog input, all without having a computer to control it.

The ADVC-50/55/100/110 don't have alot of bells and whistles when it comes to setting options (besides dip switches on the bottom), but the ADVC-300 is a different beast. You have two banks of dip switches on the bottom to set basic operating parameters, but you also have the Picture Controller program to let you configure the audio and 2D/3D video filters. Changes take effect immediately even while a program such as UVS captures from the device, and are stored in non-volatile memory in the ADVC-300. It is also possible to make adjustments using buttons on the top of the unit, but Picture Controller is much superior.

The ADVC-110 still supports Macrovision elimination from what I've read, using the same activation method. The ADVC-300 has not always had this feature, it was only added in the most recent firmware -- that was a nice surprise for me after deciding its other features were more important than Macrovision elimination.

thecoalman · Post by **thecoalman** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:37 am

THoff wrote:The ADVC-300's TBC is a full-frame TBC, it buffers three frames AFAIK. .

I'm almost positive that it doesn't work the same way as a full frame TBC. If you read the canopus specs....

> Digital 3D frame synchronizer – Stores incoming signals into a frame buffer to supply a stable, synchronized signal to the DV encoder chip
> Digital Line Time Base Corrector (LTBC) – Detects images with strong horizontal
jitter and employs powerful correction methods to repair the jitter

which sounds kind of vague to me as to what it does except for the LTBC which corrects horizontal jitter. I know a guy that knows much more about it and I'll ask him about the specific differences but he's been known to rant and rave about Canopus's misrepresentation about how their product works.

THoff · Post by **THoff** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 6:44 pm

I think Canopus' description is incorrect and that the ADVC-300 has a full-frame TBC. As I said earlier, it has 3D filters that look for video noise such as snow, which is a function it can only perform by buffering at least one complete previous frame -- just having the last few scan lines of the current frame would be insufficient.

I seem to recall reading in a post from a tech in the Canopus forums that the ADVC-300 buffers three frames, regardless of whether the 3D filters are enabled or not. Output of audio and video is also delayed by three frames.

thecoalman · Post by **thecoalman** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:25 pm

Yes but to do that would require onboard memeory which to the best of my knowledge the ADVC does not have. Anyhow regardless of what the case is I asked this question over at videohelp back in Jan. to hopefully get a better clarification but really didn't get a satisfactory response. Hopefully I will this time... http://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=250528

THoff · Post by **THoff** » Wed Apr 06, 2005 8:09 pm

I think you're being influenced by your experience with the ADVC-110. The ADVC-300 is a completely different unit with different internals, including a fan that is required to cool the added electronics.

I may do a little surgery on my ADVC-300 and open it up when I get home, and post a picture...

Quote from the ADVC-300 manual:

3D Y/C separation
In this method, Y/C signals are separated
based on the time relationship
of dots displayed at the same spot. This
method enables you to obtain the
highest quality of image among the
available methods today. In this
method, still pictures, which have
strong relationship in the time axis, are
processed using the time axis, and motion
pictures, which have weak relationship
in the time axis, are processed
using the relationship with the scanning
lines above and below (2 dimensions.).
This method requires a digital
frame buffer and motion detection
mechanism.

Digital 3D Noise Reduction
In a conventional method, noise is reduced
by lowering the frequency characteristics
for the entire picture (blurring)
in one or two-dimensions. This method
has a problem in affecting other parts
not containing noise. The digital 3D
noise reduction feature employed by
ADVC-300, however, removes noise
after detecting noise using the characteristic
of noise (noise has little relation
to others in the time axis), the advert
effect to the image is kept minimal.
* Because of the construction, it is not a
universal solution for all noises.

Both features are present in the ADVC-300.