Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (
More info?)
In article <20040512151855.18981.00001182@mb-m13.aol.com>,
etvideo1@aol.com (ETVIDEO1) writes:
> I don't use a camcorder. I use a Sony GV-D 800 deck. I get one hour on a tape
> which easily holds one side of the disc. I see no loss of quality.
>
It all depends upon your quality desires and needs.
I suggest careful comparison. My own criteria is based upon almost
total reduction of noise without loss of detail (which entails 3D
comb filtering and both careful 3D and 2D noise reduction) OR
full reproduction of the LD signal, including the smallest noise nits.
The 'noise' like artifacts in LD and the composite decoding artifacts
can actually contain video detail -- but can/will easily be lost during
DV25 encoding.
The reason for the either/or (full reproduction, or full quality noise
reduction) is for either having a totally cleaned
up master (that provides as close to full DVD capability as possible)
or maintain all of the signal for future processing. This is why I
have the combo of the really good ADVC300 (it is far beyond common
DV25 conversions) or the D9 decks (4:2:2) -- almost capable of recording
composite on the Y channel alone. The encode/decode process for the
DV50 format seems to maintain most of the composite signal integrity
thereby allowing for optimum future processing. (When trying to do
composite on the Y channel alone, there is color, but significantly distorted.
This wide bandwidth of the 4:2:2 channels allows for the composite
encode/decode cycle to maintain most of the detail. DV25 cannot
do that unless you do noise reduction beforehand, there is just not
enough 'room' in the signal for the noise like detail.) Noise is
also troublesome for MPEG2, so might as well do the noise reduction
BEFORE the DV25 encoding.
Before my ADVC300, I had used a combination of a professional TBC
(DPS290) which would fully correct the timing from the LD player.
(LD players are 'stable', but not really broadcast stable, and
some of my video equipment doesn't like nonstandard timing.) Then,
I use a 3D comb from a DVHS deck for Y/C seperation. That 3D comb
is better than the comb in other decks in my repetoire, and when
I need even more NR, I selectively enable the NR on the TBC.
(Transitions of ON/OFF for the TBC NR are seamless.) Then, I recorded
the resulting signal onto 4:2:2 DV50. The resulting signal was
significantly cleaner than the original LD, with all detail maintained,
and problems like 'large area' chroma (big areas of red) were almost
fully cleaned up -- not as good as the ADVC300.
With the ADVC300 (with proper settings), my results when recording
onto DV25 when using that A/D converter were BETTER than my complicated
setup. When producing DVDs from the DV25 signal, the resulting quality
(when using the NR in the purchased version of TMPGENC) has been
incredible!!! (The large red areas in the Bananarama videos appear
as rock stable as one might expect from BetaSP -- not perfect, but
more perfect than otherwise attainable.)
In my own experiments, I can produce superficially good image quality
with my DV25 deck or various other wierd combos of devices without
3D comb filters, but when doing a serious comparison of quality, it
is very clear that DV25 just doesn't like the noise associated with
LD and the decoding artifacts from composite video (or OTA video.) This
tends to produce a suboptimal picture that superficially removes some
of the noise, but then creating other 'artifacts' (which produce less
apparent detail.) I am NOT claiming that the picture quality isn't
probably better than SVHS, but you can do ALOT better yet if the
right equipment is used.
It just might be possible that your deck has a 3D comb and noise reduction
builtin. Given that possibility, then the image quality might be
the 'DVD' but a little softer that I have been able to achieve. (Again,
even large red areas are stable.)
John
.
/videoexpert.home.att.net/artic3/256dvcr.htm
Facebook
Twitter