Just got the ATI All-In-One 7500 and... (1 Viewer)

[JasenP]

Dan,
ULead Video Studio is actually a very nice piece of software. You can capture,edit, add transitions, titles, etc...
I would suggest just playing around a bit and see what combination of settings produces satisfactory results for your needs. Try capturing 640 X 480 AVI or MPEG-1 and produce a test disk.
VirtualDub can be found at http://www.VirtualDub.org
Have Fun!!!!!!!!

 

[Ken Chan]

As I mentioned earlier, you can try capturing directly in VCD format. The card will do real-time compression, which is a lot more convenient, and take less disk space as opposed to capturing a separate set of larger AVIs that need to be converted.
As for the quality, have you ever seen a VCD? You might want to buy a professionally encoded VCD (should be pretty cheap) to get an idea. I had refined my process so the results were pretty good, but nonetheless they pale in comparison to DVD. More noticeable on a big screen. SVCD might be a good compromise (although the bitrate always struck me as being too low for the frame size).
Oh, I think you'd have to call that thing a "pod" not a "dongle" A dongle cable is short, if it has one at all, and has a single pass-through connector.
//Ken

 

[Dan M~]

Ken and Jasen-

I played with a bit of video last night, converted from AVI to MPEG everything seems to work. My current intent is to backup my family VHS tapes, using the highest resolution that makes sense, archiving to CD's. Once the tapes are backed up, I'll burn some lower quality (if required) VCD/SVCD's for relatives. Some simple questions:

What is the actual/effective resolution of VHS, 352x240?

If I save at 640X480 is that overkill for archiving VHS material? [Can you make a silk purse from a sows ear?]

Should I "deinterlace" when I save the video?

When I burn a VCD for sharing purposes, will VHS look any better on a SVCD (480X480) vs. a VCD (352X240)?

Thanks again for your time...

 

[Ken Chan]

The oft-cited resolution for VHS is 240 TVL (TV Lines, or often just "lines", which is a vague term), which is horizontal resolution. VHS records both fields. After you do the math on the horizontal (multiply by 4/3), you end up with 320x480. (I guess at this point, there's also the Kell factor, but we probably don't want to go there.)

640x480 is definitely overkill, but it makes the images the right aspect ratio when played on the computer.

There's no reason to deinterlace when archiving; keep them in their original format. Both SVCD and DVD are interlaced.

SVCD will definitely look better than VCD. It has both fields, giving you twice the resolution veritically, and more horizontal resolution. It uses variable bit rate MPEG-2 instead of constant bit rate MPEG-1. The only problem is that while VCD support in set-top players is fairly common, SVCD support is not.

//Ken

 

[Dave Poehlman]

My current intent is to backup my family VHS tapes, using the highest resolution that makes sense, archiving to CD's.

I am looking to do the same thing. However, I have my el-cheapo ATI All-In-Wonder VE card. Going from analog 8mm video tape to SVCD or VCD. I've experimented with a couple of captures and the video looked great on my PC, however at playback I saw a lot of artifacts ("blocking" I would describe it). I am using Nero 5 to burn them.. but found that I would need to buy the SVCD codec if I want to go for the additional resolution. :frowning: I'm trying to get this accomplished with minimal $ invested. (the card only cost me $40)
Anyway, keep us posted with your results, Dan.