Re: NTSC-->DV-->MPEG ?


"codecpage" <removethis.codecpage@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:d0ham15vjld1et17nj3uq9l6e7kgi8dbn7@xxxxxxxxxx
> On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 14:34:00 -0600, "Ken Maltby"
> <kmaltby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
>>"codecpage" <removethis.codecpage@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>news:9p5am198654n3kfs9mi95jvi465giajsqj@xxxxxxxxxx
>>> On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 18:41:56 -0400, "Robert Morein"
>>> <nowhere@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I convert from VHS to DVD by the use of a hardware transcoder to DV, and
>>>>a
>>>>software mpeg compressor.
>>>>This puts one superflous codec, DV, in the mddle.
>>>>Has anyone noticed any degradation from this approach?
>>>>
>>> It's the best you could do. Any degradation with this would be
>>> practically invisible. Capturing directly to MPEG2, both in software
>>> or hardware, is still inferior.
>>> Codecpage
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.codecpage.com
>>
>> Ok, let's say, for the sake of argument, that you have this
>>VHS quality video captured with absolutely no "degradation"
>>what so ever. But it is in DV. Now with this DV you can
>>perform some editing that is not yet available in the MPEG
>>format; but other than that what can you do with it? Do you
>>view your 26GB 2hr video files of VHS quality video on
>>your HD TVs? What is the benefit?
>>
>> You will have to convert/encode/(or as PT insists transcode)
>>this DV into a useable format, most likely DVD compliant
>>MPEG. Now you will say: But then I can use an overnight
>>multi-pass encoding with filters and everything, creating a
>>"higher quality" MPEG. You will insist that these results are
>>vastly superior to any real-time single pass encoding. I say
>>POPPY***!!! It's no problem to set a bit rate in any
>>good real-time encoder that will allow the capture of all the
>>quality available from VHS.
>>
>> So unless you have some extensive processing to do to
>>your VHS video, such that each frame will be effected,
>>and you don't mind tying up your computer for many hours
>>per hour of video; capturing directly to DVD compliant
>>MPEG is a better choice.
>>
>>Luck;
>> Ken
>>
> OK, so what amount of crap are you willing to accept ?
> Any of those real time soft MPEG capturers cheat with lots of things
> that dump quality in favor of speed. Some even drop frames without any
> notice or reduce effective resolution. They are very far from anything
> you could really call 'quality'.

Actually, I use an old hardware MPEG encoder (Broadcom's
Kfir-II, BCM7040) and my post wasn't specific to software
capture to MPEG. I would suggest that the OP would be better
off replacing that hardware DV encoder with a good hardware
MPEG encoder. That said; there have been some who claim
good results for their software MPEG captures of consumer
level video (normal TV, VHS, LD, ect...).

To further define a more practical approach for VHS tapes,
I use a DVD Recorder with a built-in TBC and NR circuitry.
Using a DVD RW disk, I can bring the results to my PC for
any further processing and/or proper authoring to DVD+R.
This puts the time consuming real-time capture "off-line", so
that neither I nor my computer are tied up. It only takes about
a half hour to author a DVD with neat menus & all, that way.


> VHS is already bad, yes, but do we have to add more to it ?

There is no additional "bad" involved, in fact the signal
processing applied before the encoding can correct some of
the VHS "bad". If you are referring to the compressed MPEG
video vs. the less compressed DV, that is beside the point, unless
you are watching 26GB movies. It's what you have in the end,
which will be DVD compliant MPEG, whether it's ever been DV
or not.

> CCE can encode almost real time but not capture. Yet it is written
> entirely in assembler, i.e. it's the fastest possible and even then
> and even with a 3 Gig CPU the additional load of capturing would make
> it impossible to do without dropped frames (actually, they are
> offering a pro soulution that rquires 2 such CPUs).

You neglect to mention that the "pro solution" is for HDV.
Actually CCE can transcode at better than real-time. What is
this "additional load of capturing", all the encoder needs are a
video and an audio stream. That is provided by whatever
capture hardware/vivo/video card is connected to the source.
There is far more "load" involved when your DV is being
encoded off the timeline of your favorite NLE.

> So if bitrate isn't crucial, why not capture in DV (these DV hard
> encoders also have several goodies to stabilize frames etc.) and then
> encode to MPEG in almost real time ?
> Yes, I would usually add some filters to eliminate that noise and
> flickering of VHS, but that's not mandatory.
> Cheers
> Codecpage
>
>
> http://www.codecpage.com


.

Quantcast