or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Transferring Hi8 quality question
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Transferring Hi8 quality question

post #1 of 18
Thread Starter 
Which (if any) will give a better picture quality?

1) Recording Hi8 tapes to a recorder (using S-video cable) with a hard drive(Panny DMR-EH75), burning a DVD from the recorder, then copying onto the computer.

2) Getting some type of analog to digital device to transfer direct from the camera to the computer?

Thank you
post #2 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidwilp View Post

Which (if any) will give a better picture quality?

1) Recording Hi8 tapes to a recorder (using S-video cable) with a hard drive(Panny DMR-EH75), burning a DVD from the recorder, then copying onto the computer.

2) Getting some type of analog to digital device to transfer direct from the camera to the computer?

Thank you

I converted most of my hi8 video years ago to a Pioneer DVD recorder that has time base correction. Recorded at the highest bit rate and pcm audio. Then copied from the disc to my PC. At the time there wasn't any cheap hardware encoders or capture devices that were any good. That was back in 2001. But even today these videos look great on a big screen. I used the svideo connection when capturing.
post #3 of 18
Thread Starter 
Thanks. I was wondering if I captured right from the camera to the computer (via some sort of analog to digital box) or bought an old camera that played hi8 & digital 8 and captured via firewire, if the quality would be better.

I am not sure what the settings were on my recorder when I did this. I just recorded to my panny recorder and then burned a DVD.
post #4 of 18
Option 2 for sure. DVDs are highly compressed, avoid doing that. But the best way to do it is pick up a used Digital 8 camcorder with firewire. It has a built-in time base corrector (TBC) and digital noise reduction (DNR), and it will convert your analog tapes to a DV signal. Then you can just capture on your computer using firewire. The money you spend on a used camcorder, you will save by not having to buy an analog capture card.
post #5 of 18
Thread Starter 
Thanks Chevy. Now what if I have VHS tapes to do too. Financially does it make sense to still get a digital8 camera and something else for the VHS?
post #6 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidwilp View Post

Thanks Chevy. Now what if I have VHS tapes to do too. Financially does it make sense to still get a digital8 camera and something else for the VHS?

I used the Digital 8 camcorder for converting AV in to DV out for my VHS tapes (though I didn't have many of those). It worked great, but make sure the Digital 8 camcorder you get has AV-DV to conversion.
post #7 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidwilp View Post

Thanks Chevy. Now what if I have VHS tapes to do too. Financially does it make sense to still get a digital8 camera and something else for the VHS?

Some Digital8 video cameras have something called Analog Pass Thru. This allows you to plug the output from a VHS deck into the camera.
post #8 of 18
Thread Starter 
Thanks guys, I'll have to start checking ebay and other places for a camera with the AV-DV conversion along with Analog Pass Thru. I appreciate the advice.

Until then I will start with my minidv tapes for which I still have my Sony TRV38
post #9 of 18
Problem with DV uncompressed is its size. Today big hard drives are cheap. Back in 2001 it wasn't practical so mpeg2 at high bit rates on a DVD were fine. I wouldn't put more than 1 hour on a single sided DVD. You can't see the difference especially with hi8 video that isn't great to begin with. Plus today those recordings look better than the hi8 tapes because now there is more color bleed on the tapes than there was back in 2001. Hi bit rate mpeg2 isn't bad IMO. Use constant bit rate so its easier to cut edit without re-encoding. That you don't want to do. But today you have more options and storage space is a lot cheaper. Make sure you apply time base correction for smooth captures.
post #10 of 18
Thread Starter 
Thank you Ronomy, Chevypower and sabatical for participating and giving me valuable information to consider. I appreciate you for that.

I can't believe out of all the people on here no one else participated or had anything else to share.
post #11 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronomy View Post

Problem with DV uncompressed is its size. Today big hard drives are cheap. Back in 2001 it wasn't practical so mpeg2 at high bit rates on a DVD were fine. I wouldn't put more than 1 hour on a single sided DVD. You can't see the difference especially with hi8 video that isn't great to begin with. Plus today those recordings look better than the hi8 tapes because now there is more color bleed on the tapes than there was back in 2001. Hi bit rate mpeg2 isn't bad IMO. Use constant bit rate so its easier to cut edit without re-encoding. That you don't want to do. But today you have more options and storage space is a lot cheaper. Make sure you apply time base correction for smooth captures.

Dead right there is no difference in the quality of hi8/to svhs so its lower quality than dvd,so recording strait to a dvd recorder loses no quality,i was fortunate having a sony GV-D300E dv recorder to put all my analogue material on dv tape.
post #12 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by flintyplus View Post

Dead right there is no difference in the quality of hi8/to svhs so its lower quality than dvd,so recording strait to a dvd recorder loses no quality.

There is one major problem going from an analog source (Video8, Hi8, VHS) straight to DVD. Have you ever watched such videos on a Plasma or LCD screen? You'll notice that at the bottom of the frame (and sometimes on the other edges) is head switching noise. On a CRT screen this noise is usually masked due to overscan but is visible on LCD/Plasma.

I always mask this noise with a black border. If you do this after it's been encoded to DVD then you will be re-encoding the video twice which results in a loss of picture quality. It's much better to do this editing when the video is in the DV format and then once you're happy with the final result you can encode to DVD.
post #13 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabatical View Post

There is one major problem going from an analog source (Video8, Hi8, VHS) straight to DVD. Have you ever watched such videos on a Plasma or LCD screen? You'll notice that at the bottom of the frame (and sometimes on the other edges) is head switching noise. On a CRT screen this noise is usually masked due to overscan but is visible on LCD/Plasma.

I always mask this noise with a black border. If you do this after it's been encoded to DVD then you will be re-encoding the video twice which results in a loss of picture quality. It's much better to do this editing when the video is in the DV format and then once you're happy with the final result you can encode to DVD.

As i said all my many hours of analogue were recorded to mini dv tape and dvds then taken from the tapes,BUT i have recorded some analogue onto dvd as well recently,i never get the problems you describe on my plasma or newer lcd tv,i do live in a pal region that may be the reason.
post #14 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by flintyplus View Post

Dead right there is no difference in the quality of hi8/to svhs so its lower quality than dvd,so recording strait to a dvd recorder loses no quality,i was fortunate having a sony GV-D300E dv recorder to put all my analogue material on dv tape.

I disagree with that. There may not be a loss in pixel count, but the high compression does start to show (not saying everybody can notice it 100% of the time, but there is a loss). Much better to encode straight to a DV file.
post #15 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chevypower View Post

I disagree with that. There may not be a loss in pixel count, but the high compression does start to show (not saying everybody can notice it 100% of the time, but there is a loss). Much better to encode straight to a DV file.

Well i disagree with you,i am far from a DVD lover and only ever make them for family now but DVD is higher resolution than analogue,yesterday i copied some SVHS to DVD again just to test and there is no loss,there is no way i would go to the hassle of encoding to DV if i did not have a mini dv recorder and a HV30 still which i used for all origional transfers,for the odd analogue tape now i would go the simple analogue to DVD rought.
post #16 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by flintyplus View Post

Well i disagree with you

And you are welcome to do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flintyplus View Post

DVD is higher resolution than analogue

No kidding, I actually said that in my post!
I have already encoded all my Video-8 and Hi-8 tapes, and do not regret using DV files. Much better for editing with too, no compression artifacts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flintyplus View Post

there is no loss (with DVD?)

You are way wrong on that one!

I won't keep arguing with you on this, if you're happy with the way you did it, that's all that matters.
post #17 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chevypower View Post

And you are welcome to do that.

No kidding, I actually said that in my post!
I have already encoded all my Video-8 and Hi-8 tapes, and do not regret using DV files. Much better for editing with too, no compression artifacts.
You are way wrong on that one!

I won't keep arguing with you on this, if you're happy with the way you did it, that's all that matters.

If you are using constant bitrate highest bitrate mpeg2 that fits on a DVD its enough for HI8 that doesn't do much more than 410 lines anyway and the colors are nothing compared to DV. Sure converting 480 line DV your losing color info but with HI8 recording to DVD is good enough IMO.
post #18 of 18
But i am only going by what my eyes show me compairing my analogue copies to mini dv and analogue to dvd,never worth war over.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Camcorders
AVS › AVS Forum › Other Areas of Interest › Camcorders › Transferring Hi8 quality question