Capturing Question

[sportswizdan]

Hi...

I know that when I capture my digital tapes from my digital camera via firewire to my PC...I capture to DV-AVI format and lower field first. Also when I capture my Hi-8 analog tapes thru my digital camera- Video Studio8 still recognizes this as a digital signal so I still capture as mentioned above. My question is this...
I have some old analog VHS tapes to convert to DVD. My computer has a card built inside with "S" video and "composite jacks. Do I connect my VHS recorder this way or see if i can use my camcorder as a bridge between the recorder and my pc. Also do I still capture to DV-AVI files even though its an analog signal? I want the best possible picture and I know that VHS doesnt have much resolution. Any help here would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Dan

[Trevor Andrew]

For the best quality capture through your Cam-Corder as you did from your Hi 8 setup

Capture to Dv-Avi.
Edit your video
create video file Mpeg2 for burning
or
Dv-Avi to transfer back to your camcorders Mini Dv tape.
(assuming you have DV-In)

[video_flux]

Yes! Capture through the camcorder, I've used several different capture cards and the best quality was through the camcorder.

[video_flux]

Yes! Capture through the camcorder, I've used several different capture cards and the best quality was through the camcorder.

[GeorgeK]

Hi,

I have a different story to tell, in that my WinFast XP TV2000 capture card appears to produce better quality MPEG2 (captured with UVS), than does taking the video into the analogue input of my JVC camera where I would then have to transfer the DV to the computer and rendering it as DVD quality MPEG2 and then creating a DVD. I have explained why I think this is so in the Post "Tape-to-DVD conversion - file too big!", please read my comments in this post.

However the consensus above is to use the Camera's A/D conversion. I would expect that you camera's A/D conversion would be superior to most Capture cards?

[MikeGunter]

I have a different story to tell, in that my WinFast XP TV2000 capture card appears to produce better quality MPEG2 (captured with UVS), than does taking the video into the analogue input of my JVC camera where I would then have to transfer the DV to the computer and rendering it as DVD quality MPEG2 and then creating a DVD.

Hi George,

I'll find and read your response.

The science suggests that DV in (zeros and ones) from firewire, edited and processed in the computer then converted to MPEG2 for DVD is superior to any other technique.

If you get better results - good on you.

Mike

[GeorgeW]

I think it depends on the original video type/source, and the target playback format/device.

There could be instances where upconverting to DV, and then downconverting for final playback might be worse than just capturing original video to the target playback attributes.

[MikeGunter]

I think it depends on the original video type/source, and the target playback format/device.

There could be instances where upconverting to DV, and then downconverting for final playback might be worse than just capturing original video to the target playback attributes.

Hi,

I'm not sure I understand you (or maybe you don't understand me).

If the original source is DV, then no. DV is, even considering some color space issues, is the best *compression* for NTSC/PAL for digital video editing. Any analog input will, by its nature, lose one generation of quality during input to the computer, and analog input (for this level of Non Linear Editors (NLEs) is highly compressed.

Upsampling to DV from any analog source will have a host of problems, and shouldn't be done unless an effect is desired.

MPEG2 is the digital CODEC standard for DVD content, and VS9 can edit in that format as well as MPEG1, but I'd never recommend it to anyone as an editing in either CODEC unless other considerations took precedence - editing in MPEG1 for conserving disc space for multiple users in a class, for example.

MPEG1 and MPEG2, with some exceptions, are delivery formats. MPEG2 in a transport stream with a different quantanization is being used for HDV, but the stream is different.

Bottom line is simply this: use the best (least compressed) CODEC to edit, and deliver in the best CODEC (best for compression) for the job.

Mike

[GeorgeW]

If your source is DV, then I would agree. But that is why I specifically said it depends on your source video.

My reply was considering the person you replied to, and their conclusion that it's not always best to use the analog-to-dv conversion process (this is the upsampling based on their source video).

Not everyone has DV25 video source, and so you need to keep that in mind when making "generalized" statements that assume the video source is DV25.