On this issue, there are already several answers. However, I find no adequate explanation. I would be very helpful if I know I would like old VHS-C tapes with the best possible quality digitizing. Suffice it a VHS adapter for playing in a VCR to be used and the output signal via scart into a HDD recorder yourself? Which One-and outputs should be here with the devices to be used (quality)? Or should I use an analog-digital converter used to watch the videos directly to the PC to copy? How important is the quality of the VHS recorder (image output quality)? The Canopus ADVC-300 is due to its diverse inputs and outputs and TBC inflation of Canopus Converter. Is this really necessary and can be synonymous TBC after digitization with a cheaper device s.PC software-done? Which method is the verlustfreiste or is there more?
Thanks in advance
Antwort von Quadruplex:
"David Feller" wrote:
Suffice it a VHS adapter for playing in a VCR to be used and the output signal via scart into a HDD recorder yourself?
You mean a DVD recorder with hard disc?
"David Feller" wrote:
Which One-and outputs should be here with the devices to be used (quality)?
If you have an S-VHS recorder searched, S-video, but otherwise there is only composite.
"David Feller" wrote:
Or should I use an analog-digital converter used to watch the videos directly to the PC to copy?
If you are with a DVD recorder is working, you're on MPEG-2 set. That's enough, if you only have the tapes to a DVD disc like. Do you want the movie even with all the harassment s.PC edit is an AD converter better. But then really Canopus and none of these USB-game parts. Alternative: use a DV camcorder with analog input.
"David Feller" wrote:
How important is the quality of the VHS recorder (image output quality)?
Between a good and bad VHS recorder do you see differences of course, given the modest total of VHS-quality saw the differences but in the frame. Even with the best model are you doing out of the old stuff no studio production.
"David Feller" wrote:
Which method is the verlustfreiste or is there more?
Loss as a loss-free is not free :-) By definition is synonymous with the transfer of Canopus part or a DV camcorder lossy. In practice, however, it's the best way and more than sufficient. Theoretically, even better quality, there's just more expensive with studio technology, the DVD would be really exaggerated.
Antwort von Markus:
Hi David,
the playback device has a large influence on what comes out s.Ende. Sun has a SVHS-VHS recorder to a device the advantage that not only a composite, but synonymous a Y / C connector is provided to enable the video s.den A / D converter or the HDD-/DVD- Recorder pass. This must be brightness and color not only in a (composite) signal together and split again by the recipient will be. With good recordings, the difference is evident in poor tend not to.
Additionally provides a clean drive, less noise (brightness and color) as a dirty. With older equipment worth a cleaning often clearly visible extent. Too old and the recorder abgenudelt should however not be.
Since VHS-C tapes with most camcorders have been recorded and these in turn had smaller head drums, is a degree s.zusätzlichem jitter likely. On the other hand, helps TBC, either in playback or recorder is installed in the transformer or input HDD-/DVD-Recorder in its service performance.
Antwort von David Feller:
Thanks for the detailed answers. Should the implementation of the analog signals of the VHS recorder in digiatale of a well-known DVD-/HDD-Rekorders not better, than that of a camcorder with AnalogIN or the HDD recorder by the forced coding has been unsuccessful? What is this with DV camcorders from? Are DVD-HDD combo devices (possibly better signal processing, due to internal division of brightness and color, etc.) a useful alternative to the implementation? Basically yes, it is only on the quality of the A / D conversion s.and on the format of the output video.
Antwort von Markus:
"David Feller" wrote:
Should the implementation of the analog signals of the VHS recorder in digiatale of a well-known DVD-/HDD-Rekorders not better, than that of a camcorder with AnalogIN ...?
The DV camcorder delivers a DV stream, a HDD-/DVD-Recorder a ready-compressed MPEG2 / AC3 format. In order to compare the qualities, you have to in case of a DV camcorder then a DVD-authoring, in order of the same conditions assumed.
If the final product should be a DVD and nothing (or very little) to be cut, then the HDD-/DVD-Recorder a viable option with good quality. A well-known device, for example of Panasonic or Pioneer, it should happen naturally. The expected better MPEG2 converter than any Noname-cheap parts from the DIY store.
"David Feller" wrote:
Are DVD-HDD combo devices (possibly better signal processing, due to internal division of brightness and color, etc.) a useful alternative to the implementation?
I myself have no such VHS-/HDD-/DVD-Recorder, but the last one interested here in the forum of such a combi recorder had bought was very happy with it.
"David Feller" wrote:
Basically yes, it is only on the quality of the A / D conversion s.and on the format of the output video.
The format used in the analog-digital conversion is produced, has a great influence on the eventual availability. If you have a video editing aspire, forget the DVD recorder and turn your DV camcorder with DV-IN, or an A / D converters. The DV format would be best suited for postprocessing and every video editing program can handle it - quite different from a DVD as the source format.
