Search:

Thank you for posting that link. :)


I have to disagree.

This is actually a live-action version of a very old animation style, what is now known as "motion comics". Look at something like the 1960s Captain America cartoons. It was lots of still, with simple small moving areas. Then look at modern motion comics, and many of those are also from Marvel.

This was also a method used to create Doctor Who recons (reconstructions) using the telesnaps, and earlier CG rendering tools in 90s-10s. I have to wonder if anybody is redoing recons with AI now (though it would be lengthy and costly to do), or they've all decided to wait on animation versions (which I lean toward myself).

Now, you may not like the style (fine, fair, no argument from me), but it is a very known and appreciated one. ;)

Also:
Glass, optical resolve, is a primary limiter in cameras,

AMD has never run cooler, still doesn't.

Intel GPUs are still behind AMD and Nvidia, in terms of graphics output.

For faster editing, I switched to Mac M2 Pro. But I still restore and encode on an older Windows system. The bottleneck is always me or the software, not the hardware. Sometimes "faster" isn't really faster.

To be more accurate they do no "record", the TVs just dump the already digital stream from DVB-S or DVB-T broadcast. There is no A/D converter on board to perform the OP's required operation.[/QUOTE]

Yes, DVB is a vastly different beast. Digital data, unencrypted/OTA, dumped TS.

I've not followed DVB specs in about 15 years now. Is there even anything new here?

And bugs will never be fixed, the software is discontinued.

I think you misunderstand the term "rip".

"Ripping" is extracting container-less or non-standard formatted digital data, into a standardized format that can be manipulated on a computer. Yes, that also means that a DV tape is technically "ripped" (not captured), and an analog VHS tape is "captured" (not ripped).

Re-encoding, burning new copies -- that's the manipulation.

DVD-Video is UDF, which is not standard formatting to computers

When you "rip" that disc to an image (ISO), you can also manipulate it to remove unwanted aspects, including re-flagging.

I actually like the style of these "AI" generated videos.

I wish I knew how it was done. (The main piece is runwayml.com, but there's a learning curve, and it's really not that cheap when you're learning and making money-wasting mistakes.)

He is. I'd like to know what version his Win10 is at.[/QUOTE]
I'll remember to get that info for you this month. :)

Yep. Your email provider uses csi cloudmark as spam protection and it has blocked my server. I have requested that they remove it.
[/QUOTE]

FYI Baldrick, Microsoft (Outlook, Hotmail, etc) is getting f'ing ridiculous lately too. Not a bounce, just a blackhole. SOBs.

I've got Rev 1.0 as well.[/QUOTE]
They said that's the best version with good chip inside.
[/QUOTE]
That is not what the "Rev." refers to on these units. The same "Rev." can have changes. In fact, I've never seen a unit that wasn't "Rev. 1.0", but there are definitely visible differences over time, to say nothing of the firmwares.

I'm honestly not even sure that "Rev." actually means revisions with these units. It should (standard abbreviation jargon), but we're assuming.

Serial numbers, revisions, etc -- those often do not mean what laymen end users think those do. It's for internal use, not your use. The meanings are not universal.

I remember your username. :)
Not much else though.

Didn't you also haunt Convopit with Cap?

It probably doesn't work right. Just return it.


That is an Easycap, aka an Easycrap.


Return it.


Buy a quality capture card, not more Chinese USB junk.

No.
A TV is a display, not a recording device.

Then why would you accept such a project?


Compressed quality, no TBCs. Yikes. Not pretty.

Posts like this are revealing.

Yes, 99%+ correct, that's what you need to do.


Nothing is "stripped" on a capture. At most, anti-copy can be ignored. But again, the Dazzle is unreliable in this area. Therefore it is bad advice to claim it has this feature. That sort of half advice is what makes people waste money.

[/QUOTE]
Do you want a hug? You seem to be arrogant[/QUOTE]
That comment makes no sense.

ConsumerDV is a banned/former VH member, and a video newbie, that tends to create videos that mix fact and myth. He's a C-grade student trying to be the teacher.

No, it cannot. It trips all most anti-copy.


No, it blows values away, both augmenting tints, and excess over/underexposure. It's a POS, comparable to Easycaps. If you want crappy captures, buy a Dazzle. If you want better, there are many.

Like certain other cards, the most damning aspect of the Dazzles is that the cards are highly variable in quality from unit to unit. Cards can range from barely-acceptable mediocre, to wholly unacceptable. This is yet another long-lived card, with production changes, and is obviously affected by both chips and firmwares.

Dazzles cards are not Pinnacle or Avid designs. Pinnacle bought out Dazzle in the early/mid 2000s, and the cards have never changed in that time. Dazzles is low-end POS now, and low-end POS then. Avid bought Pinnacle in the mid/late 2000s. These were cheap consumer fodder cards, easy to make money from the low-knowledge "VHS is supposed to look bad" crowd. That is why the cards were kept in production -- not due to quality.

In the 2000s, VH members widely knew Dazzle cards were crap, and were often referred to as "Razzles" or "razzle Dazzles" by members. Sadly, it didn't have the same negative connotation as "Easycrap" (Easycap) and "Elcrapo" (Elgato). The negative quality of these cards have been forgotten by the newer and/or younger capture generation (who are now getting suckered by lots of USB junk).

The quality of Dazzle cards is only slightly better than Easycap cards.
In other words, lousy.

I know this thread is "done" now, and the OP troll is now gone. But people still read old posts, so this needs to be added here:


No, no, there are still forensic media labs in the U.S. I actually worked with several in the 2000s. I didn't do any direct work on active cases, but I did some consulting for technique, sometimes using closed case (and FOIA accessible) footage that they gave to me. I also worked with some PIs, and some local LEOs. At one point, I'd considered moving to forensic media, as I had an entry opportunity, but then my health tanked, and that was that. Now, in the 2020s, they'd send it to a private licensed lab, using proper chain of custody. It's really only the local/state/federal labs that moved on.


Yes, but only within the law, chain of custody, licensing, etc. It's not that simple to handle evidence, or it could be thrown out of court. The only gray area is non-evidentiary PI work, as those are generally "work product" to conduct investigations, and never used as courtroom evidence. Maybe some independent security contractors. I actually turned down a lot of this sort of work in the 2000s, lots of shady and sleazy SOBs in that "wannabe the po-po" field.


LOL! No, never. And whomever made that mistake would be fired, probably blackballed from others practices/depts. Even an intern should know better.

How do you guarantee it?

How do you know what I have captured in my life?
[/QUOTE]
Hmm... I was an adult in the 1990s. People used to copy their tapes using a second VCR or point a video camera at their TV screen but I don't think that counts as capturing. There was a consumer editing device and software for computers available then that cost thousands of dollars by itself ...not to mention thousands more for additional equipment (not counting the computer). Tapes were used to store the output.

So, now I'm curious... Exactly what method did you use to capture VHS in 1994?[/QUOTE]

Yep. :cool:

I guarantee you didn't capture anything in 1994. :rolleyes:


320x480 isn't a legal resolution.


Correct.

What hardware?

Come again?

All 4 edges of the TV are never seen. Sometimes you get 0, 1, 2, 3 screen edges.

Beyond the edge of the TV screen was crushed to 0 black.

- 480p widescreen camera was used, so VHS-ish at best, low resolution, often blurry
- all handheld shot, thus erratic movements on all three X-Y-Z axis
- the movement created lots of image frame blending
- some CMOS "jello vision"
- sometimes camera re-focus

Image if you took a video of a TV screen, not dead-on and square.

Like this (simulated image):



You're unsteady, shaking, so it's never the same skew frame to frame.

This can be extracted frame by frame, run some sort of auto distortion photo software (like OCR does). Then heavy deshake to smooth it out. But can that very manual process of extract + deskew be simplified in Avisynth (or otherwise)? Essentially use a video software workflow, not a photo software workflow.

Alwyn, I tried running it on the full 720x480 clip.

themaster1, that did the trick. :)

I have several KNLmeansCL scripts in my toolbox, forgot about that one It took forever, about 4.5 hours for 6 minutes of footage. I probably could have lowered some of the values, for better speed, but I needed to get off the computer for a while anyway. Let it crunch!

@all, appreciate it.

However, I'm still curious why john's script won't load.

Alwyn, thanks for trying. This task is probably beyond what NeatVideo can do.

__________________

john, I get this on your script



line 3 is

I need the rainbows removed. I'm not liking what I'm doing, it still has rainbow bits.

What are your ideas here?

That is always such a ridiculous argument.

I didn't sell anything for almost 20 years, and I suggested most of the same gear then*. The entire reason that I began to refurb gear for others -- and yes, sell it, for money, oh no, how evil and icky! capture card cooties! -- was because I saw how much of the gear we needed (recommended S-VHS VCRs with line TBC, recommended frame TBCs, recommended capture cards) was falling into disrepair. I never thought I'd be doing it 8 years later.

* We're time locked, nothing new really exists for SD videotape conversion. Even the "new" GV-USB2 is not new whatsoever, just re-releasing the same stale overall designs from a decade or more ago. Some external production run changes, which I noticed after acquiring several copies, as have others. When I have time, I'll see if it's also internal. Internal is always likely, due to how the semiconductor industry operates, how quickly things obsolesce.

There was a lot of R&D involved with the entire process of refurb'ing gear. Spouting off mere model numbers is misleading. Almost everything has production variations, undocumented versioning, something you only realize after seeing dozen of "the same" (NOT THE SAME!) cards/TBCs/VCRs. I actually still find new versions of gear on a fairly regular basis. I've seen items with up to 6 different versions, each operating slightly different, sometimes in a bad way. In general, production changes are bad, it's substitution for discontinued components. None of this should surprise in-the-know tech users. For example, Linus Tech Tips has commented on this issue for years, rarely in a good way.

I take the mystery out of capture for others, the new users to our community. They get known quality gear (no hunting, no guessing, no buying random eBay crap from shady/idiot sellers), and can they start using it immediately. I also do my best to help them, they're not just left to their own devices, as is often the case when some random person online...

Even being on the same wafer isn't necessarily conjoined in function. On a hardware R&D project some years ago, I saw this behavior for the first time, and I had a real "WTF" moment, because I had also wrongly assumed sync was shared. It's not. Separate clocks. The spec sheet diagram for this chip is no different.

I still remember the days when VH members mostly agreed that Conexant chips were garbage for capture cards. This place has strayed far in recent past years, and not in a good way.

If anything, single chips scream "cheap".
I know that my integrated Intel graphics performs worse than dedicated graphic cards. But I admit it. I don't make excuses on why it's still best. I needed quieter/cooler, so I gladly compromised on my graphics output. I don't play video games, and I state it freely. But audio/video capture is a vastly different story.

I'm consistent. I don't know why some people twist themselves into pretzels to make their choices seem "best" in all regards. You probably wanted a cheap card, and you got it -- but there are reason it's cheap (and not overly desired). That's fine, it's definitely performative for the sub-$100 price, "the best of the bottom".

My problem is when hardware/software has glaring issues ignored by those who tout it. That in itself is weird to me -- unless you're a large stockholder and/or owner of the company (which is still potentially unethical, but at least that situation makes sense). I like my ball teams, but I'm not going to defend their rapey salaries. Do I want them to win? Yep! Do I think everything about them is best? Hell no.

Those motors fail a lot on certain models.

This is because it was created to stream video games from analog capture cards. And in Japan, likely with specific Japanese capture cards in mind (like the GV-USB2).

Streaming/broadcast prioritizes continuity over accuracy, and reporting is generally not the same. It's extremely common for broadcast reporting to only reflect unexpected stream drops/inserts, not small expected/allowed drops/inserts. Why? Because the metadata is also part of the broadcast, and it would hog bandwidth to be so needlessly verbose.

OBS is very similar, but from digital streaming source. Or webcams -- and FYI, OBS treats all capture cards like webcams, much like modern Windows 8/10/11 OS, aka why the post-7 OS suck for capturing.

USB capture cards are still separate chips, with separate clock, even if on the same PCB. The bridge (usually eMPIA) hides this from you, but it's there.

Again, I don't have a problem attempting AmaRecTV, if VirtualDub 1.9 and 1.10/FM/2, with proper adjusted timing settings, fail you. But the "it doesn't drop frames" is not a magical mechanism, nor an issue of "it's just better". There are reasons that it does what it does, and acts as it acts.

Yes.

Just be careful who/where you buy from. Not eBay. Most eBay sellers package like crap, and it will arrived destroyed. Careful packing needed for international shipping. A few users have some here.

Re-read the above:



No.

I don't think so. Most expect 220~240.

You literally state "false", then describe why it's definitely NOT false.

While TBCs are needed in workflows, capture cards should still have some % of resiliency, as TBC and Y/C cannot 100% correct/solve everything always. When the card essentially craps itself at any sign of danger, it's a weak card, and not suggested, as you will run into issues eventually. After all, isn't that why you moved from Live2 to GV-USB2?

No, the JVC decks are better for a single "the best" unit. The AG-1980P has specific strengths that make it desired for certain EP, VHS-C, and linear audio needs. It has weaknesses compared to the JVC too. It's not all better. One of those weaknesses is with build quality, and repair ability. Deter provides a community service here.

Live2 is a very inferior card to the ATI, especially in a budget workflow.

Yes you do. I know this for fact, because you've gotten several from me. I remember you had to reject one of my decks fixed by "the other guy" because it was just that fubar.

There is no "Kodak services". This is simply LegacyBox, out of Chattanooga TN.