Question about converting VHS to DVD

Discussion in 'ATI Video Cards' started by medgirl, Jul 22, 2006.

  1. medgirl

    medgirl Guest

    I want to convert some old VHS tapes to DVD on my laptop, which has an ATI
    Mobility Radeon X1400 256 MB video card. Can I do this just with this video
    card alone or will I need something else for analog video capture?
     
    medgirl, Jul 22, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. I think you are going to need a capture device.

    The best capture device is a Sony digital camcorder with "pass-through"
    A-to-D conversion (most of the "Digital-8" camcorders have this, some
    other formats or brands may have it also). In this configuration, you
    feed in analog video and audio from a VHS player to the camcorder (as if
    you were going to record a copy of it on a tape, using the camcorder as
    a digital VCR). But instead the camcorder makes the incoming analog VHS
    signal available as digital video from it's "Firewire" (i.Link, IEEE
    1394) port to the computer, where you capture it to the hard drive using
    video editing software (Movie Maker 2 that comes with Windows XP can do
    the capture on the PC). You will need a LOT of disk space, this is
    uncompressed AVI (which is what you want for editing). It takes up
    almost 15 gigabytes per hour of video.

    There are also USB and Firewire stand-alone devices to do this type of
    capture.

    See if you can find a VHS VCR that has digital time base correction.
    Some of the high-end JVC S-VHS models have it, JVC's name for it is
    "Digipure". If you are converting a large archive of family videos that
    have important sentimental value, it may be worth buying a VCR and
    capture device (or even camcorder) to do the conversion.


    medgirl wrote:

    > I want to convert some old VHS tapes to DVD on my laptop, which has an ATI
    > Mobility Radeon X1400 256 MB video card. Can I do this just with this video
    > card alone or will I need something else for analog video capture?
    >
    >
     
    Barry Watzman, Jul 22, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. medgirl

    medgirl Guest

    "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I think you are going to need a capture device.
    >
    > The best capture device is a Sony digital camcorder with "pass-through"
    > A-to-D conversion (most of the "Digital-8" camcorders have this, some
    > other formats or brands may have it also). In this configuration, you
    > feed in analog video and audio from a VHS player to the camcorder (as if
    > you were going to record a copy of it on a tape, using the camcorder as a
    > digital VCR). But instead the camcorder makes the incoming analog VHS
    > signal available as digital video from it's "Firewire" (i.Link, IEEE 1394)
    > port to the computer, where you capture it to the hard drive using video
    > editing software (Movie Maker 2 that comes with Windows XP can do the
    > capture on the PC). You will need a LOT of disk space, this is
    > uncompressed AVI (which is what you want for editing). It takes up almost
    > 15 gigabytes per hour of video.
    >
    > There are also USB and Firewire stand-alone devices to do this type of
    > capture.
    >
    > See if you can find a VHS VCR that has digital time base correction. Some
    > of the high-end JVC S-VHS models have it, JVC's name for it is "Digipure".
    > If you are converting a large archive of family videos that have important
    > sentimental value, it may be worth buying a VCR and capture device (or
    > even camcorder) to do the conversion.


    Thanks for the explanation - that makes sense. I'm wondering if it might
    be a better idea just to get a standalone DVD recorder. It seems that many
    of them bill themselves as being able to copy VHS tapes to DVD. That might
    be easier, and not much more expensive, than getting a new camcorder or some
    other capture device.
     
    medgirl, Jul 22, 2006
    #3
  4. medgirl

    Ken Maltby Guest

    "medgirl" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I think you are going to need a capture device.
    >>
    >> The best capture device is a Sony digital camcorder with "pass-through"
    >> A-to-D conversion (most of the "Digital-8" camcorders have this, some
    >> other formats or brands may have it also). In this configuration, you
    >> feed in analog video and audio from a VHS player to the camcorder (as if
    >> you were going to record a copy of it on a tape, using the camcorder as a
    >> digital VCR). But instead the camcorder makes the incoming analog VHS
    >> signal available as digital video from it's "Firewire" (i.Link, IEEE
    >> 1394) port to the computer, where you capture it to the hard drive using
    >> video editing software (Movie Maker 2 that comes with Windows XP can do
    >> the capture on the PC). You will need a LOT of disk space, this is
    >> uncompressed AVI (which is what you want for editing). It takes up
    >> almost 15 gigabytes per hour of video.
    >>
    >> There are also USB and Firewire stand-alone devices to do this type of
    >> capture.
    >>
    >> See if you can find a VHS VCR that has digital time base correction. Some
    >> of the high-end JVC S-VHS models have it, JVC's name for it is
    >> "Digipure". If you are converting a large archive of family videos that
    >> have important sentimental value, it may be worth buying a VCR and
    >> capture device (or even camcorder) to do the conversion.

    >
    > Thanks for the explanation - that makes sense. I'm wondering if it might
    > be a better idea just to get a standalone DVD recorder. It seems that
    > many of them bill themselves as being able to copy VHS tapes to DVD. That
    > might be easier, and not much more expensive, than getting a new camcorder
    > or some other capture device.


    Mr. Watzman's initial suggestion is a good approach if
    extensive editing or video processing (image stabilization,
    correction for color format changes, ect..) is required.
    This is normally only the case if you have a camcorder and
    are going to be making complex home movies.

    If your VHS tapes contain material that has already been
    professionally edited, like TV shows or movies you have
    taped, then it is much more practical to use a DVD Recorder.
    If you also have a DVDRW drive in your computer you can
    use an DVD-/+RW disk and bring that to your computer for
    any processing you wish like removing commercials and then
    authoring a new DVD with a good menu. A good frame
    accurate cut & join editor like www.VideoReDo.com is
    a must for such work.

    There are even MPEG editing programs if you wanted to
    make a relatively simple ( but still quite good) "home movie".
    ( Titling and Transitions as well as simple composting on a
    timeline, for instance.) Check out the Ulead and Womble
    products.

    (You can do very complex editing in MPEG also but that
    requires relatively expensive software, designed for
    professional use.)

    Luck;
    Ken
     
    Ken Maltby, Jul 22, 2006
    #4
  5. The answer to that (using a stand-alone DVD recorder) depends on exactly
    what you want to do. If you will be happy with a very, very [VERY]
    "plain jane" copy of your video on a DVD, then a stand-alone recorder
    will be the easiest way to do it. It can copy your video to a DVD if
    that is [literally] all that you want.

    However, if you want to do any editing of the contents, with chapters
    and menus, then you really need to do the editing on a computer and burn
    the resulting video file to a DVD. The problem with stand alone DVD
    burners is that they don't give you any significant ability to edit or
    to create a DVD layout with they types of chapters and menus that you
    can create on a PC.


    medgirl wrote:

    > "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>I think you are going to need a capture device.
    >>
    >>The best capture device is a Sony digital camcorder with "pass-through"
    >>A-to-D conversion (most of the "Digital-8" camcorders have this, some
    >>other formats or brands may have it also). In this configuration, you
    >>feed in analog video and audio from a VHS player to the camcorder (as if
    >>you were going to record a copy of it on a tape, using the camcorder as a
    >>digital VCR). But instead the camcorder makes the incoming analog VHS
    >>signal available as digital video from it's "Firewire" (i.Link, IEEE 1394)
    >>port to the computer, where you capture it to the hard drive using video
    >>editing software (Movie Maker 2 that comes with Windows XP can do the
    >>capture on the PC). You will need a LOT of disk space, this is
    >>uncompressed AVI (which is what you want for editing). It takes up almost
    >>15 gigabytes per hour of video.
    >>
    >>There are also USB and Firewire stand-alone devices to do this type of
    >>capture.
    >>
    >>See if you can find a VHS VCR that has digital time base correction. Some
    >>of the high-end JVC S-VHS models have it, JVC's name for it is "Digipure".
    >>If you are converting a large archive of family videos that have important
    >>sentimental value, it may be worth buying a VCR and capture device (or
    >>even camcorder) to do the conversion.

    >
    >
    > Thanks for the explanation - that makes sense. I'm wondering if it might
    > be a better idea just to get a standalone DVD recorder. It seems that many
    > of them bill themselves as being able to copy VHS tapes to DVD. That might
    > be easier, and not much more expensive, than getting a new camcorder or some
    > other capture device.
    >
    >
     
    Barry Watzman, Jul 22, 2006
    #5
  6. It's very difficult to Edit video after it's been converted from
    uncompressed AVI to MPEG, and even if you do it (convert it back), there
    is a quality loss. Again, the best way to go depends largely on how
    much time and effort you want to expend, and also on what you want to
    do, but if any significant editing is planned, it's best to keep the
    video in uncompressed format until the editing is complete and only then
    encode it to MPEG. MPEG (and DiVX, aka MPEG4) is a "lossy compression"
    technology and conversions back and forth will result in a quality loss
    (similar to what happens when you convert an audio file back and forth
    between a .WAV file and an .MP3 file).


    Ken Maltby wrote:

    > "medgirl" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>"Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>
    >>>I think you are going to need a capture device.
    >>>
    >>>The best capture device is a Sony digital camcorder with "pass-through"
    >>>A-to-D conversion (most of the "Digital-8" camcorders have this, some
    >>>other formats or brands may have it also). In this configuration, you
    >>>feed in analog video and audio from a VHS player to the camcorder (as if
    >>>you were going to record a copy of it on a tape, using the camcorder as a
    >>>digital VCR). But instead the camcorder makes the incoming analog VHS
    >>>signal available as digital video from it's "Firewire" (i.Link, IEEE
    >>>1394) port to the computer, where you capture it to the hard drive using
    >>>video editing software (Movie Maker 2 that comes with Windows XP can do
    >>>the capture on the PC). You will need a LOT of disk space, this is
    >>>uncompressed AVI (which is what you want for editing). It takes up
    >>>almost 15 gigabytes per hour of video.
    >>>
    >>>There are also USB and Firewire stand-alone devices to do this type of
    >>>capture.
    >>>
    >>>See if you can find a VHS VCR that has digital time base correction. Some
    >>>of the high-end JVC S-VHS models have it, JVC's name for it is
    >>>"Digipure". If you are converting a large archive of family videos that
    >>>have important sentimental value, it may be worth buying a VCR and
    >>>capture device (or even camcorder) to do the conversion.

    >>
    >>Thanks for the explanation - that makes sense. I'm wondering if it might
    >>be a better idea just to get a standalone DVD recorder. It seems that
    >>many of them bill themselves as being able to copy VHS tapes to DVD. That
    >>might be easier, and not much more expensive, than getting a new camcorder
    >>or some other capture device.

    >
    >
    > Mr. Watzman's initial suggestion is a good approach if
    > extensive editing or video processing (image stabilization,
    > correction for color format changes, ect..) is required.
    > This is normally only the case if you have a camcorder and
    > are going to be making complex home movies.
    >
    > If your VHS tapes contain material that has already been
    > professionally edited, like TV shows or movies you have
    > taped, then it is much more practical to use a DVD Recorder.
    > If you also have a DVDRW drive in your computer you can
    > use an DVD-/+RW disk and bring that to your computer for
    > any processing you wish like removing commercials and then
    > authoring a new DVD with a good menu. A good frame
    > accurate cut & join editor like www.VideoReDo.com is
    > a must for such work.
    >
    > There are even MPEG editing programs if you wanted to
    > make a relatively simple ( but still quite good) "home movie".
    > ( Titling and Transitions as well as simple composting on a
    > timeline, for instance.) Check out the Ulead and Womble
    > products.
    >
    > (You can do very complex editing in MPEG also but that
    > requires relatively expensive software, designed for
    > professional use.)
    >
    > Luck;
    > Ken
    >
    >
     
    Barry Watzman, Jul 22, 2006
    #6
  7. medgirl

    Ken Maltby Guest

    "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The answer to that (using a stand-alone DVD recorder) depends on exactly
    > what you want to do. If you will be happy with a very, very [VERY] "plain
    > jane" copy of your video on a DVD, then a stand-alone recorder will be the
    > easiest way to do it. It can copy your video to a DVD if that is
    > [literally] all that you want.
    >
    > However, if you want to do any editing of the contents, with chapters and
    > menus, then you really need to do the editing on a computer and burn the
    > resulting video file to a DVD. The problem with stand alone DVD burners
    > is that they don't give you any significant ability to edit or to create a
    > DVD layout with they types of chapters and menus that you can create on a
    > PC.
    >


    True, and it is easy to use a RW disk and bring the DVD
    compliant video and audio to your PC for a quick authoring.
    No lengthy encoding of DV-AVI required. A new DVD
    with commercials edited out and chapters and menu(s), all
    within 20-40 min.
    /Ken
     
    Ken Maltby, Jul 23, 2006
    #7
  8. medgirl

    Ken Maltby Guest

    "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > It's very difficult to Edit video after it's been converted from
    > uncompressed AVI to MPEG, and even if you do it (convert it back), there
    > is a quality loss. Again, the best way to go depends largely on how much
    > time and effort you want to expend, and also on what you want to do, but
    > if any significant editing is planned, it's best to keep the video in
    > uncompressed format until the editing is complete and only then encode it
    > to MPEG. MPEG (and DiVX, aka MPEG4) is a "lossy compression" technology
    > and conversions back and forth will result in a quality loss (similar to
    > what happens when you convert an audio file back and forth between a .WAV
    > file and an .MP3 file).
    >


    There's no reason to go back and forth.

    It's not so hard to edit MPEG anymore. Check out the following:

    Adobe Premiere
    Adobe Premiere Pro (with $400 plugin)
    Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0 (with $60 plugin)
    Avid Xpress Pro
    Avid Liquid 7
    Canopus Edius
    Cyberlink Power Director
    Magix Movie Edit Pro
    Mainconcept EVE v2
    Mainconcept Main Actor v5
    Pinnacle Studio Plus v10
    Sony Vegas 6
    Sony Vegas Movie Studio + DVD
    Ulead MediaStudio Pro 8
    Ulead VideoStudio 10 Plus.

    Just visit the sites and check out the features available.

    Luck;
    Ken
     
    Ken Maltby, Jul 23, 2006
    #8
  9. You can't get the same kind of precision editing MPEG that you can get
    editing the uncompressed video in most of the consumer programs.

    MPEG consists of occasional "master frames" (the entire frame) followed
    by only change information for a number of subsequent frames, then
    another "master frame". When you edit MPEGs with most consumer editing
    software, you have to do your cuts and transitions on master frames, and
    they can be kind of far apart (not in terms of "clock time", but in
    terms of frames, and where you really want the cuts).

    Some programs can take the master frames and the transition information
    and create new master frames exactly where you want them, but I think
    that's the exception for most of the low-end programs. Some of the
    programs in your list are way above consumer price ranges, up above $500
    and in a few cases $1,000 or more, while most consumers need to use
    software in the "popular" price range (call it $100 or less).

    Ken Maltby wrote:

    > "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>It's very difficult to Edit video after it's been converted from
    >>uncompressed AVI to MPEG, and even if you do it (convert it back), there
    >>is a quality loss. Again, the best way to go depends largely on how much
    >>time and effort you want to expend, and also on what you want to do, but
    >>if any significant editing is planned, it's best to keep the video in
    >>uncompressed format until the editing is complete and only then encode it
    >>to MPEG. MPEG (and DiVX, aka MPEG4) is a "lossy compression" technology
    >>and conversions back and forth will result in a quality loss (similar to
    >>what happens when you convert an audio file back and forth between a .WAV
    >>file and an .MP3 file).
    >>

    >
    >
    > There's no reason to go back and forth.
    >
    > It's not so hard to edit MPEG anymore. Check out the following:
    >
    > Adobe Premiere
    > Adobe Premiere Pro (with $400 plugin)
    > Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0 (with $60 plugin)
    > Avid Xpress Pro
    > Avid Liquid 7
    > Canopus Edius
    > Cyberlink Power Director
    > Magix Movie Edit Pro
    > Mainconcept EVE v2
    > Mainconcept Main Actor v5
    > Pinnacle Studio Plus v10
    > Sony Vegas 6
    > Sony Vegas Movie Studio + DVD
    > Ulead MediaStudio Pro 8
    > Ulead VideoStudio 10 Plus.
    >
    > Just visit the sites and check out the features available.
    >
    > Luck;
    > Ken
    >
    >
    >
     
    Barry Watzman, Jul 23, 2006
    #9
  10. medgirl

    Ken Maltby Guest

    "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > You can't get the same kind of precision editing MPEG that you can get
    > editing the uncompressed video in most of the consumer programs.
    >

    Wrong, there are a number of frame accurate editing programs,
    those on the list ( Which you would have seen if you were to go
    to the software publisher's web site and check out the features
    listed.) plus www.VideoReDo.com [The best cut and join editor]
    and www.womble.com [The cheapest basic editor with titling and
    transitions]


    > MPEG consists of occasional "master frames" (the entire frame) followed by
    > only change information for a number of subsequent frames, then another
    > "master frame". When you edit MPEGs with most consumer editing software,
    > you have to do your cuts and transitions on master frames, and they can be
    > kind of far apart (not in terms of "clock time", but in terms of frames,
    > and where you really want the cuts).
    >

    Most often "I-frames" are 1/2 sec apart or 15 frames at 30FPS.
    With all the frame accurate editors available, now a days, it's
    hardly an issue. You are operating from outdated information.

    > Some programs can take the master frames and the transition information
    > and create new master frames exactly where you want them, but I think
    > that's the exception for most of the low-end programs. Some of the
    > programs in your list are way above consumer price ranges, up above $500
    > and in a few cases $1,000 or more, while most consumers need to use
    > software in the "popular" price range (call it $100 or less).
    >


    You are implying that there are a great deal more DV-AVI
    editors that list under $100? VideoReDo is still $50 I think.
    I don't remember what Womble MPEG Wizard is going for
    now, it is probably a little more than $100, though.

    The ones from the list that I would consider in the consumer
    price range are:

    Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0 ($100) +
    ($60 for MainConcept plugin)
    Cyberlink Power Director 5 Premium ($90)
    Magix Movie Edit Pro 11 ($50)
    Mainconcept EVE v2 ($70)
    Mainconcept Main Actor v5 ($200)
    Pinnacle Studio Plus v10.5 Titanium edition ($70)
    Sony Vegas Movie Studio + DVD Platinum ($130)
    Ulead VideoStudio 10 Plus. ($100)

    ( These are all prices buying from their web site, you can
    usually find them for much less at other vendors.)
    Most have free demo downloads.
    Luck;
    Ken
     
    Ken Maltby, Jul 23, 2006
    #10
  11. medgirl

    William Guest

    I've done quite allot of this type of conversion.

    The only thing I would throw into the conversation so far -- be sure your
    family, viewing audience, whatever, have multi-format players.

    Pick a format, be it DVD-R, or DVD+R, and be sure your friends have players
    that can play that format. 3/4 of my extended family did not have DVD-R
    playback capability when I sent them copies of family movies. Until they
    went out and bought new multi-format dvd players the stuff was no good.
    (You can get them for around $30.00 now days.) Know your audience!

    PS:

    I've got VHS tapes recorded in the 80's, copied from 3/4" cassettes I made
    in the 70's. Some stuff looks pretty bad, so some stuff transfers not so
    good. (Some I borrowed the sales department $40,000 plumbacon (spl?) camera
    and made some movies on tape with it) Image stabilization is handy, noise
    reduction is nice, if you can get your hands on some equipment.

    Gee-- what an industrial VHS player can do for $600.00 today could not be
    done for a $20,000 player less than 20 years ago. A frame store used to take
    7 inches of rack space. Now it is 2 or 3 chips, or software in a computer.
    Farojuia image processing rocks.

    William


    "medgirl" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I want to convert some old VHS tapes to DVD on my laptop, which has an ATI
    > Mobility Radeon X1400 256 MB video card. Can I do this just with this
    > video
    > card alone or will I need something else for analog video capture?
    >
     
    William, Jul 24, 2006
    #11
  12. Forget the need for $600 industrial players. JVC has consumer models
    with digital frame buffers, time base correctors and noise reduction
    that can be had in the $100 to $250 range on E-Bay. Various models in
    the HR-S7000U to HR-S9900U model range. The feature is called
    "digipure", the better models have a 4 megabyte frame buffer (the lower
    end models have a 2MB buffer) and they produce the best VHS playback
    I've ever seen.

    William wrote:

    > I've done quite allot of this type of conversion.
    >
    > The only thing I would throw into the conversation so far -- be sure your
    > family, viewing audience, whatever, have multi-format players.
    >
    > Pick a format, be it DVD-R, or DVD+R, and be sure your friends have players
    > that can play that format. 3/4 of my extended family did not have DVD-R
    > playback capability when I sent them copies of family movies. Until they
    > went out and bought new multi-format dvd players the stuff was no good.
    > (You can get them for around $30.00 now days.) Know your audience!
    >
    > PS:
    >
    > I've got VHS tapes recorded in the 80's, copied from 3/4" cassettes I made
    > in the 70's. Some stuff looks pretty bad, so some stuff transfers not so
    > good. (Some I borrowed the sales department $40,000 plumbacon (spl?) camera
    > and made some movies on tape with it) Image stabilization is handy, noise
    > reduction is nice, if you can get your hands on some equipment.
    >
    > Gee-- what an industrial VHS player can do for $600.00 today could not be
    > done for a $20,000 player less than 20 years ago. A frame store used to take
    > 7 inches of rack space. Now it is 2 or 3 chips, or software in a computer.
    > Farojuia image processing rocks.
    >
    > William
    >
    >
    > "medgirl" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>I want to convert some old VHS tapes to DVD on my laptop, which has an ATI
    >>Mobility Radeon X1400 256 MB video card. Can I do this just with this
    >>video
    >>card alone or will I need something else for analog video capture?
    >>

    >
    >
    >
     
    Barry Watzman, Jul 24, 2006
    #12
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. mr6strings

    Converting VHS to DVD

    mr6strings, Jun 26, 2003, in forum: ATI Video Cards
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    620
  2. mr6strings

    Converting VHS to DVD

    mr6strings, Jun 26, 2003, in forum: ATI Video Cards
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    513
    mr6strings
    Jun 26, 2003
  3. CarlosWA

    VHS to DVD Archival copy and viewing copy

    CarlosWA, Jul 12, 2003, in forum: ATI Video Cards
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    433
    CarlosWA
    Jul 12, 2003
  4. mr6strings

    Question: Converting VHS to DVD

    mr6strings, Jul 13, 2003, in forum: ATI Video Cards
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    439
    Shannon Clint Cartee
    Jul 15, 2003
  5. Vance McNeil

    VHS to DVD

    Vance McNeil, Aug 11, 2003, in forum: ATI Video Cards
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    354
    Vance McNeil
    Aug 23, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page