Mein Kampf (with a side of grits)
Jake W.K.
have struggled with on this topic, and no doubt you've heard most of
this before ad nauseum. But I feel, nonetheless, to put on record my
current state of affairs and frustrations.
I've amassed a fairly large private video collection over the years.
Approximately 14,000 videotapes on VHS (NTSC & PAL), over 1,500
LaserDiscs, and several hundred DVDs. A lot of the VHS is very rare,
older films never released on home video. So I would obviously like
to preserve as many of the critical titles on DVD, if I can do so in
an acceptable and efficient manner that doesn't bring me to take to
the streets with a loaded weapon..
By layman standards, I'm extremely proficient with video equipment and
have done a fair amount of editing with Adobe Premiere, mainly for
streaming video and smaller format computer viewing. But I'm finding
this task of making VHS-to-DVD conversions increasingly frustrating.
I'm running an Athlon 2300+ processor on an L7VTA Mainboard
motherboard with 768 MB of DDRAM. I've got 80 GB and 60 GB harddrives
(about to add a 120 GB), and I'm burning with a Sony DRU 500-A. I've
got a CD-R drive also...and they are all routed through four IDE
buses.
So far I've captured variously with a Dazzle DVC100 directly to mpeg
and have experimented with capturing AVI through an Osprey 100 capture
card I already had on an earlier computer....using both the Osprey
VidCap 32 and VirtualDub with the huffyuv. I just ordered a Canopus
ADVC-100, which presumably will be superior to either, though I'd like
to enlightened if this is not the case. I'm reasonably well-fixed
financially, and money is not a big issue, within reason. It's simply
a matter of pulling together what will actually get the job done and
done well, to a standard I can live with.
I'd prefer to edit in Premiere on larger avi files before converting
to mpeg2, because I'm familiar with the program, find most others
somewhat sophomoric, and I've been led to understand that this would
produce higher quality results. On the other hand, the latest version
of Adobe Premiere (with the LSC Mpeg plug-in) which I just upgraded
from my earlier version, has got me stumped so far on how to unlink
the video from the audio, so I can cut out sections of picture only or
substitute different audio....which was the default situation with my
earlier version of Premiere. As of now, it only allows me to cut both
video and audio together, instead of having them unlocked and with
independent control of each element. (I've also acquired ULead, so
I'm preparing to come up to speed on that.)
At this point my head is spinning without any good results in my
tests. I've had video and audio out of sync when rendered from the
Dazzle software, though it captured and rendered in its default
settings....and I've filled up an 80 gig harddrive with an hour and
fifteen minute AVI capture because apparently I captured it
uncompressed and don't know which is the best/proper AVI compression
to use for my ultimate editing and rendering to mpeg/DVD needs. I'm
not sure if the Temporal Cleaner and Smart Smoother filters come into
play (or should even be used) at the point of capture or at the point
of rendering. Nor am I even clear as yet as to whether DVD-R, DVD+R,
or DVD-RW is going to give me the most compatibility with other
people's players...or where I indicate that in the burn process.
About the time I think I've read someone indicate the answer, I read
something contradictory.
But, the greatest agony is that all of the rendered mpegs I've created
(even from the uncompressed AVI), with DVD burning in mind, have
produced videos which are decidedly inferior to my simply watching
them on their original VHS copies (albeit unstable over the long
haul).
Is there something obvious I'm doing wrong here or some expeditious
solution so I can actually start burning DVDs instead of wrestling
with software and hardware? Are my quality expectations unrealistic?
I simply want a DVD image and audio that is at least on par with the
VHS or LD it is mastered from, but with the stability of the digital
video formats. Is that so wrong?
I humbly beseech you and bow to those about me with superior intellect
and experience in such matters....retreating into shadow again to
listen earnestly with hat in hand.
Abiento,
Jake
nappy
What is a good MPEG encoder?
"Jake W.K." <ja...@gimmejam.com> wrote in message
news:SXhCPm6Xz=f8oP1UMme...@4ax.com...
Jake W.K.
wrote:
>your post is too long. What is the simple form of your question? Is it..
>What is a good MPEG encoder?
Actually, there are a number of questions raised in the post....that
being only one of them. Furthermore, I didn't know there was a limit
on the length of posts, nor did I know you were the moderator of this
group. Are you?
(No offense meant; just asking.)
Jake
B Walker
> I'm sure it's been nothing thus far in contrast to what many of you
<SNIP>
> older films never released on home video. So I would obviously like
> to preserve as many of the critical titles on DVD, if I can do so in
> an acceptable and efficient manner that doesn't bring me to take to
> the streets with a loaded weapon..
<SNIP>
Here's how I've been doing it:
1 - Using Sony Digital 8 Video camera, DV passthrough to Firewire. Play
VHS tape patching into cameria via s-video and capture via firewire.
2 - Edit using Premier, and output via Canopus Procoder to seperate
video and audio files.
3 - Ulead DVD workshop, add the files (and replace audio with
uncompressed .WAV files output by Canopus).
4 - Create DVD with Ulead using custom settings (LPCM audio for better
compatability).
This has been working with a minimum of fuss. I'm probably going to try
letting DVD Workshop to the encoding to MPEG1 and skip the Canopus step
(not sure how the Mainconcept codec compares).
BG
I thought your question was refreshingly intelligent and covered many of the
problems I have.
'Nappy' (how appropriate) is either jealous, because you have good quality
kit and can buy what you need, or, is jealous because he cannot put that
mean words together, or perhaps a combination of both.
"Jake W.K." <ja...@gimmejam.com> wrote in message
news:Z4lCPuNvYWIfy3...@4ax.com...
---
This footnote confirms that this email message has been checked
and certified Virus Free by AVG Anti-Virus
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 27/01/2003
nappy
"BG" <s...@clara.co.uk> wrote in message
news:v45dddr...@corp.supernews.com...
> Well said
>
> I thought your question was refreshingly intelligent and covered many of
the
> problems I have.
>
> 'Nappy' (how appropriate) is either jealous, because you have good quality
> kit and can buy what you need, or, is jealous because he cannot put that
> mean words together, or perhaps a combination of both.
Yes.. In my facility with FCP, AVID, New MACS, 20 PCs and tons of audio of
gear I certainly am jealous of his Dazzle. How did you catch that? Only the
very clever and astute readers would be able to ascertain that..
I just thought that without all the history he could ask questions and get
answers .. as he finally did above.
Wish I had a Dazzle. Dang..
" can't put mean words together? " There are many here that would differ
with you. ;|
drwho
On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 09:41:23 -0600, Jake W.K. <ja...@gimmejam.com> wrote:
>I'm sure it's been nothing thus far in contrast to what many of you
>have struggled with on this topic, and no doubt you've heard most of
>this before ad nauseum. But I feel, nonetheless, to put on record my
>current state of affairs and frustrations.
Thank goodness, most of us have put our lives on hold while waiting patiently for the
opportunity to assist you.
>
>I've amassed a fairly large private video collection over the years.
>Approximately 14,000 videotapes on VHS (NTSC & PAL), over 1,500
>LaserDiscs, and several hundred DVDs. A lot of the VHS is very rare,
>older films never released on home video. So I would obviously like
>to preserve as many of the critical titles on DVD, if I can do so in
>an acceptable and efficient manner that doesn't bring me to take to
>the streets with a loaded weapon..
Crisp satire - wonderful.
>
>By layman standards, I'm extremely proficient with video equipment and
>have done a fair amount of editing with Adobe Premiere, mainly for
>streaming video and smaller format computer viewing. But I'm finding
>this task of making VHS-to-DVD conversions increasingly frustrating.
i.e. the shortcoming is not yours - after all you're extremely proficient - but those
that make available the resources have endeavoured specifically to make the task difficult
for you, and for you in particular. What an unusual conceit?
>
>I'm running an Athlon 2300+ processor on an L7VTA Mainboard
>motherboard with 768 MB of DDRAM. I've got 80 GB and 60 GB harddrives
>(about to add a 120 GB), and I'm burning with a Sony DRU 500-A. I've
>got a CD-R drive also...and they are all routed through four IDE
>buses.
>
>So far I've captured variously with a Dazzle DVC100 directly to mpeg
>and have experimented with capturing AVI through an Osprey 100 capture
>card I already had on an earlier computer....using both the Osprey
>VidCap 32 and VirtualDub with the huffyuv. I just ordered a Canopus
>ADVC-100, which presumably will be superior to either, though I'd like
>to enlightened if this is not the case. I'm reasonably well-fixed
>financially, and money is not a big issue, within reason.
are you an envymonger or just an arsehole?
> It's simply
>a matter of pulling together what will actually get the job done and
>done well, to a standard I can live with.
We all quake at the prospect of your dissatisfaction.
for pity's sake!
> is that all of the rendered mpegs I've created
>(even from the uncompressed AVI), with DVD burning in mind, have
>produced videos which are decidedly inferior to my simply watching
>them on their original VHS copies (albeit unstable over the long
>haul).
>
>Is there something obvious I'm doing wrong here or some expeditious
>solution so I can actually start burning DVDs instead of wrestling
>with software and hardware? Are my quality expectations unrealistic?
>
>I simply want a DVD image and audio that is at least on par with the
>VHS or LD it is mastered from, but with the stability of the digital
>video formats. Is that so wrong?
Wrong? Right? It's definitely not an ethical issue.
>
>I humbly beseech you and bow to those about me with superior intellect
>and experience in such matters....retreating into shadow again to
>listen earnestly with hat in hand.
>
>Abiento,
>Jake
You're a pompous ass and I hope you get what you deserve. Sadly the enthusiasm, nay
desperation of many on this group to air their views will probably conspire to deliver far
more than you deserve.
Jake W.K.
wrote:
>
>"BG" <s...@clara.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:v45dddr...@corp.supernews.com...
>> Well said
>>
>> I thought your question was refreshingly intelligent and covered many of
>the
>> problems I have.
>>
>> 'Nappy' (how appropriate) is either jealous, because you have good quality
>> kit and can buy what you need, or, is jealous because he cannot put that
>> mean words together, or perhaps a combination of both.
>
>
>Yes.. In my facility with FCP, AVID, New MACS, 20 PCs and tons of audio of
>gear I certainly am jealous of his Dazzle. How did you catch that? Only the
>very clever and astute readers would be able to ascertain that..
>
>I just thought that without all the history he could ask questions and get
>answers .. as he finally did above.
>
>Wish I had a Dazzle. Dang..
>
>" can't put mean words together? " There are many here that would differ
>with you. ;|
Yes, but you never did answer the question. Are you the moderator of
this group and is there a limit on the length of posts....and
according to whom?
Or would you like me to break that down into three, short,
easy-to-understand questions for you?
Jake
(And I obviously don't plan on relying upon Dazzle, as I stated. So
you're grasping at straws. I've just been experimenting with what's
at hand until I can put what I really want in place. I live in a
rural outpost and have to wait for many things to be shipped to me.
Oh, and since we're whipping em out and putting em on the table...how
large is your private video collection?)
Jake W.K.
>
>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 09:41:23 -0600, Jake W.K. <ja...@gimmejam.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm sure it's been nothing thus far in contrast to what many of you
>>have struggled with on this topic, and no doubt you've heard most of
>>this before ad nauseum. But I feel, nonetheless, to put on record my
>>current state of affairs and frustrations.
>
>Thank goodness, most of us have put our lives on hold while waiting patiently for the
>opportunity to assist you.
>>
>>I've amassed a fairly large private video collection over the years.
>>Approximately 14,000 videotapes on VHS (NTSC & PAL), over 1,500
>>LaserDiscs, and several hundred DVDs. A lot of the VHS is very rare,
>>older films never released on home video. So I would obviously like
>>to preserve as many of the critical titles on DVD, if I can do so in
>>an acceptable and efficient manner that doesn't bring me to take to
>>the streets with a loaded weapon..
>
>Crisp satire - wonderful.
>
Brilliant retort. Such biting and delirious sarcasm.
No. Really.
Nothing else to offer, eh?
>
>>
>>By layman standards, I'm extremely proficient with video equipment and
>>have done a fair amount of editing with Adobe Premiere, mainly for
>>streaming video and smaller format computer viewing. But I'm finding
>>this task of making VHS-to-DVD conversions increasingly frustrating.
>
>i.e. the shortcoming is not yours - after all you're extremely proficient - but those
>that make available the resources have endeavoured specifically to make the task difficult
>for you, and for you in particular. What an unusual conceit?
No....that's your projection, not the reality. I'm simply stating
that I have proficiency in some areas of this but not in others, most
notably the transfer process to DVD. I'm absolutely candid about
that. What part of it don't you understand?
>>
>>I'm running an Athlon 2300+ processor on an L7VTA Mainboard
>>motherboard with 768 MB of DDRAM. I've got 80 GB and 60 GB harddrives
>>(about to add a 120 GB), and I'm burning with a Sony DRU 500-A. I've
>>got a CD-R drive also...and they are all routed through four IDE
>>buses.
>>
>>So far I've captured variously with a Dazzle DVC100 directly to mpeg
>>and have experimented with capturing AVI through an Osprey 100 capture
>>card I already had on an earlier computer....using both the Osprey
>>VidCap 32 and VirtualDub with the huffyuv. I just ordered a Canopus
>>ADVC-100, which presumably will be superior to either, though I'd like
>>to enlightened if this is not the case. I'm reasonably well-fixed
>>financially, and money is not a big issue, within reason.
>
>are you an envymonger or just an arsehole?
No....I didn't know there was any reason for envy in all that. I
simply feel that in a computer-related ng it is important for people
to know what gear you are working with so they can evaluate where the
problem may lie. As a matter of fact, it is common policy in such
groups. What part of that do you not understand?
>
>
>> It's simply
>>a matter of pulling together what will actually get the job done and
>>done well, to a standard I can live with.
>
>We all quake at the prospect of your dissatisfaction.
Speaking of arseholes, how long have you been spouting from yours
whilst under the acidic delusion that someone who seeks a small
modicum of satisfaction is actually craving dissatisfaction? What
kind of rickety Armchair Freud 101 are you schooled in?
I want nothing more than to achieve reasonable, satisfactory results
and move on to bigger and better fish, so to speak...as has repeatedly
been the case with other such objectives in this life (in my
experience anyway; perhaps not yours).
Are you so incapable of having a little fun with all this? Try not to
tork one of your bowels while you overreact....
>
>> is that all of the rendered mpegs I've created
>>(even from the uncompressed AVI), with DVD burning in mind, have
>>produced videos which are decidedly inferior to my simply watching
>>them on their original VHS copies (albeit unstable over the long
>>haul).
>>
>>Is there something obvious I'm doing wrong here or some expeditious
>>solution so I can actually start burning DVDs instead of wrestling
>>with software and hardware? Are my quality expectations unrealistic?
>>
>>I simply want a DVD image and audio that is at least on par with the
>>VHS or LD it is mastered from, but with the stability of the digital
>>video formats. Is that so wrong?
>
>Wrong? Right? It's definitely not an ethical issue.
It's definitely not an issue you're addressing from an ethical or a
technical standpoint or any standpoint except that of your own inbred
hostility. Got anything of concrete value to offer? Have you always
been this touchy and prone to prick-like behaviour? (Note the "u" for
your benefit.)
It really does bespeak some sort of raging inferiority complex
festering beneath the surface of all that banal indignation you offer
up.
>>
>>I humbly beseech you and bow to those about me with superior intellect
>>and experience in such matters....retreating into shadow again to
>>listen earnestly with hat in hand.
>>
>>Abiento,
>>Jake
>
>You're a pompous ass and I hope you get what you deserve. Sadly the enthusiasm, nay
>desperation of many on this group to air their views will probably conspire to deliver far
>more than you deserve.
Ah, thank you for your heartfelt and pithy analysis. The fact that I
was simply trying to describe my own dilemma, address the specific
issues that still elude me, whilst doing so in a lighthearted manner
with no malice or cynical intent is obviously lost upon you....or your
simply incapable of addressing the issues rather than making an attack
another's personal character without personal provocation.
Give us a little more tongue next time....
Jake
sanpablo
>Well said
>
>I thought your question was refreshingly intelligent and covered many of the
>problems I have.
>
I agree, you have asked many of the same questions I have.
I have a PCTV Pro capture card which I realize is probably not good
enough to get the quality that you mention. I am leaning towards
picking up the Matrox RT.X10. Do you think the Osprey is a better
card? How much is it?
thanks
Rake
the input quality. I would
promote the Canopus if the video input is noisy, since Dazzle products have
no noise reduction/filtering components.
I transfered my tape and LD collection and find the result very good.
"Jake W.K." <ja...@gimmejam.com> wrote in message
news:SXhCPm6Xz=f8oP1UMme...@4ax.com...
nappy
> Yes, but you never did answer the question. Are you the moderator of
> this group and is there a limit on the length of posts....and
> according to whom?
I sure did. In your other post. Read it.
You cross posted to groups I don't subscribe to.. That's why you didn't see
it.
Brent Geery
wrote:
> So far I've captured variously with a Dazzle DVC100 directly to mpeg
> and have experimented with capturing AVI through an Osprey 100 capture
> card I already had on an earlier computer....using both the Osprey
> VidCap 32 and VirtualDub with the huffyuv. I just ordered a Canopus
> ADVC-100, which presumably will be superior to either, though I'd like
> to enlightened if this is not the case. I'm reasonably well-fixed
> financially, and money is not a big issue, within reason. It's simply
> a matter of pulling together what will actually get the job done and
> done well, to a standard I can live with.
As you are already comfortable with using HuffYUV, and off-line MPEG
encoding, I don't see what the ADVC-100 DV transcoder has to offer
you! It's quality is not better then the current (second generation)
of TV tuner/capture cards (it just uses the same phillips chip, found
in current TV tuner cards,) with the disadvantage of adding an extra
layer of compression artifacts, not to mention the cost. I'd suggest
a $70-$100 TV tuner/capture card using the new CX23880 or CX23883
chipsets, capture with VirtualVCR, using huffYUV compression, clean up
the video with AVISynth filters, then edit in the editor or your
choice, then encode to mpeg-2 with CCE SP. You will not get better
quality. If your video material is really poor (card dropping frames
because of it,) also pick up a $270 TBC-1000 time base corrector.
--
BRENT - The Usenet typo king. :)
Fast Times At Ridgemont High Info http://www.FastTimesAtRidgemontHigh.org
Voted #87 - American Film Institute's Top 100 Funniest American Films
drwho
>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 20:07:37 +0000, drwho <dr...@wo.rk> wrote:
>
>>
>>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 09:41:23 -0600, Jake W.K. <ja...@gimmejam.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I'm sure it's been nothing thus far in contrast to what many of you
>>>have struggled with on this topic, and no doubt you've heard most of
>>>this before ad nauseum. But I feel, nonetheless, to put on record my
>>>current state of affairs and frustrations.
>>
>>Thank goodness, most of us have put our lives on hold while waiting patiently for the
>>opportunity to assist you.
>>>
>>>I've amassed a fairly large private video collection over the years.
>>>Approximately 14,000 videotapes on VHS (NTSC & PAL), over 1,500
>>>LaserDiscs, and several hundred DVDs. A lot of the VHS is very rare,
>>>older films never released on home video. So I would obviously like
>>>to preserve as many of the critical titles on DVD, if I can do so in
>>>an acceptable and efficient manner that doesn't bring me to take to
>>>the streets with a loaded weapon..
>>
>>Crisp satire - wonderful.
>>
>
>Brilliant retort. Such biting and delirious sarcasm.
Alas, your post was a rude interruption to a delirium I was so close to achieving.
>
>No. Really.
>
>Nothing else to offer, eh?
This is decidedly your show. Your bloated post signaled an unchallengeable jockeying for
centre stage.
>
>>
>>>
>>>By layman standards, I'm extremely proficient with video equipment and
>>>have done a fair amount of editing with Adobe Premiere, mainly for
>>>streaming video and smaller format computer viewing. But I'm finding
>>>this task of making VHS-to-DVD conversions increasingly frustrating.
>>
>>i.e. the shortcoming is not yours - after all you're extremely proficient - but those
>>that make available the resources have endeavoured specifically to make the task difficult
>>for you, and for you in particular. What an unusual conceit?
>
>No....that's your projection, not the reality. I'm simply stating
>that I have proficiency in some areas of this but not in others, most
>notably the transfer process to DVD. I'm absolutely candid about
>that. What part of it don't you understand?
The best answer to your question would be the null part (in the boolean sense). What part
of that don't you understand? (Do you see the problem with this form of questioning?)
>
>>>
>>>I'm running an Athlon 2300+ processor on an L7VTA Mainboard
>>>motherboard with 768 MB of DDRAM. I've got 80 GB and 60 GB harddrives
>>>(about to add a 120 GB), and I'm burning with a Sony DRU 500-A. I've
>>>got a CD-R drive also...and they are all routed through four IDE
>>>buses.
>>>
>>>So far I've captured variously with a Dazzle DVC100 directly to mpeg
>>>and have experimented with capturing AVI through an Osprey 100 capture
>>>card I already had on an earlier computer....using both the Osprey
>>>VidCap 32 and VirtualDub with the huffyuv. I just ordered a Canopus
>>>ADVC-100, which presumably will be superior to either, though I'd like
>>>to enlightened if this is not the case. I'm reasonably well-fixed
>>>financially, and money is not a big issue, within reason.
>>
>>are you an envymonger or just an arsehole?
>
>No....I didn't know there was any reason for envy in all that. I
>simply feel that in a computer-related ng it is important for people
>to know what gear you are working with so they can evaluate where the
>problem may lie. As a matter of fact, it is common policy in such
>groups. What part of that do you not understand?
See above.
>
>>
>>
>>> It's simply
>>>a matter of pulling together what will actually get the job done and
>>>done well, to a standard I can live with.
>>
>>We all quake at the prospect of your dissatisfaction.
>
>Speaking of arseholes, how long have you been spouting from yours
>whilst under the acidic delusion that someone who seeks a small
>modicum of satisfaction is actually craving dissatisfaction?
You've read something I've not written.
> What
>kind of rickety Armchair Freud 101 are you schooled in?
I don't subscribe to Freud's thinking.
Ok, you've got me there - I'm unfamiliar with bowel torking.
>
>>
>>> is that all of the rendered mpegs I've created
>>>(even from the uncompressed AVI), with DVD burning in mind, have
>>>produced videos which are decidedly inferior to my simply watching
>>>them on their original VHS copies (albeit unstable over the long
>>>haul).
>>>
>>>Is there something obvious I'm doing wrong here or some expeditious
>>>solution so I can actually start burning DVDs instead of wrestling
>>>with software and hardware? Are my quality expectations unrealistic?
>>>
>>>I simply want a DVD image and audio that is at least on par with the
>>>VHS or LD it is mastered from, but with the stability of the digital
>>>video formats. Is that so wrong?
>>
>>Wrong? Right? It's definitely not an ethical issue.
>
>It's definitely not an issue you're addressing from an ethical or a
>technical standpoint or any standpoint except that of your own inbred
>hostility. Got anything of concrete value to offer? Have you always
>been this touchy and prone to prick-like behaviour? (Note the "u" for
>your benefit.)
It's just for fun and to imbue my life with a little color. (Note the absence of the "u"
- it's for you).
>
>It really does bespeak some sort of raging inferiority complex
>festering beneath the surface of all that banal indignation you offer
>up.
>
Bespeak? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>>>
>>>I humbly beseech you and bow to those about me with superior intellect
>>>and experience in such matters....retreating into shadow again to
>>>listen earnestly with hat in hand.
>>>
>>>Abiento,
>>>Jake
>>
>>You're a pompous ass and I hope you get what you deserve. Sadly the enthusiasm, nay
>>desperation of many on this group to air their views will probably conspire to deliver far
>>more than you deserve.
>
>Ah, thank you for your heartfelt and pithy analysis. The fact that I
>was simply trying to describe my own dilemma, address the specific
>issues that still elude me, whilst doing so in a lighthearted manner
>with no malice or cynical intent is obviously lost upon you....or your
>simply incapable of addressing the issues rather than making an attack
>another's personal character without personal provocation.
>
>Give us a little more tongue next time....
I can do that for you now................t-k-t-k-t-k-t-k-t-k-t-k....(repeat ad nauseum)
>
>
>Jake
Jake W.K.
wrote:
>
>"Jake W.K." <ja...@gimmejam.com> wrote in message
>news:9dFCPiz8dga=TOWQouP0...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 19:39:56 GMT, "nappy" <jos...@sbcglobal.net>
>> wrote:
>
>> Yes, but you never did answer the question. Are you the moderator of
>> this group and is there a limit on the length of posts....and
>> according to whom?
>
>I sure did. In your other post. Read it.
>
> You cross posted to groups I don't subscribe to.. That's why you didn't see
>it.
>
I appreciated your responses to the actual issues in the other
post...I truly did. But, in fact, you did not ever answer the
questions I posed above.
Jake
Jake W.K.
>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 15:47:32 -0600, Jake W.K. <ja...@gimmejam.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 20:07:37 +0000, drwho <dr...@wo.rk> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 09:41:23 -0600, Jake W.K. <ja...@gimmejam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I'm sure it's been nothing thus far in contrast to what many of you
>>>>have struggled with on this topic, and no doubt you've heard most of
>>>>this before ad nauseum. But I feel, nonetheless, to put on record my
>>>>current state of affairs and frustrations.
>>>
>>>Thank goodness, most of us have put our lives on hold while waiting patiently for the
>>>opportunity to assist you.
>>>>
>>>>I've amassed a fairly large private video collection over the years.
>>>>Approximately 14,000 videotapes on VHS (NTSC & PAL), over 1,500
>>>>LaserDiscs, and several hundred DVDs. A lot of the VHS is very rare,
>>>>older films never released on home video. So I would obviously like
>>>>to preserve as many of the critical titles on DVD, if I can do so in
>>>>an acceptable and efficient manner that doesn't bring me to take to
>>>>the streets with a loaded weapon..
>>>
>>>Crisp satire - wonderful.
>>>
>>
>>Brilliant retort. Such biting and delirious sarcasm.
>
>
>Alas, your post was a rude interruption to a delirium I was so close to achieving.
Well feel free to slip back into your befuddled haze. You shan't be
missed.
>
>>
>>No. Really.
>>
>>Nothing else to offer, eh?
>
>This is decidedly your show. Your bloated post signaled an unchallengeable jockeying for
>centre stage.
To your everdiminishing ego, perhaps. Sad that you should be so
threatened by someone simply describing their current predicament at
length. Thankfully, several other, more self-secure individuals feel
differently and actually addressed specifics.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>By layman standards, I'm extremely proficient with video equipment and
>>>>have done a fair amount of editing with Adobe Premiere, mainly for
>>>>streaming video and smaller format computer viewing. But I'm finding
>>>>this task of making VHS-to-DVD conversions increasingly frustrating.
>>>
>>>i.e. the shortcoming is not yours - after all you're extremely proficient - but those
>>>that make available the resources have endeavoured specifically to make the task difficult
>>>for you, and for you in particular. What an unusual conceit?
>>
>>No....that's your projection, not the reality. I'm simply stating
>>that I have proficiency in some areas of this but not in others, most
>>notably the transfer process to DVD. I'm absolutely candid about
>>that. What part of it don't you understand?
>
>The best answer to your question would be the null part (in the boolean sense). What part
>of that don't you understand? (Do you see the problem with this form of questioning?)
I see the problem is in questioning you at all....since you rebound to
nothing but trollish smoke and mirrors, unwilling or unable to
actually contribute anything resembling experience or acumen about the
technical problems posed.
>>
>>>>
>>>>I'm running an Athlon 2300+ processor on an L7VTA Mainboard
>>>>motherboard with 768 MB of DDRAM. I've got 80 GB and 60 GB harddrives
>>>>(about to add a 120 GB), and I'm burning with a Sony DRU 500-A. I've
>>>>got a CD-R drive also...and they are all routed through four IDE
>>>>buses.
>>>>
>>>>So far I've captured variously with a Dazzle DVC100 directly to mpeg
>>>>and have experimented with capturing AVI through an Osprey 100 capture
>>>>card I already had on an earlier computer....using both the Osprey
>>>>VidCap 32 and VirtualDub with the huffyuv. I just ordered a Canopus
>>>>ADVC-100, which presumably will be superior to either, though I'd like
>>>>to enlightened if this is not the case. I'm reasonably well-fixed
>>>>financially, and money is not a big issue, within reason.
>>>
>>>are you an envymonger or just an arsehole?
>>
>>No....I didn't know there was any reason for envy in all that. I
>>simply feel that in a computer-related ng it is important for people
>>to know what gear you are working with so they can evaluate where the
>>problem may lie. As a matter of fact, it is common policy in such
>>groups. What part of that do you not understand?
>
>See above.
It is indeed common policy in such groups to state what hardware and
software is being used. And that is a fact. Your "See above" is just
another of your non-responses from a psyche that evidently feels less
than zero.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> It's simply
>>>>a matter of pulling together what will actually get the job done and
>>>>done well, to a standard I can live with.
>>>
>>>We all quake at the prospect of your dissatisfaction.
>>
>>Speaking of arseholes, how long have you been spouting from yours
>>whilst under the acidic delusion that someone who seeks a small
>>modicum of satisfaction is actually craving dissatisfaction?
>
>You've read something I've not written.
Hmmm.....pot. kettle. black.
>
>> What
>>kind of rickety Armchair Freud 101 are you schooled in?
>
>I don't subscribe to Freud's thinking.
Evidently, you don't subscribe much to any sort of thinking at all.
But it's amusing to see what a literalist you are, since you actually
addressed that as if it were a sincere observation without one iota of
humor or irony filtering your response.
But not unfamiliar with your own overreactions, eh? Thanks for the
clarification.
>>
>>>
>>>> is that all of the rendered mpegs I've created
>>>>(even from the uncompressed AVI), with DVD burning in mind, have
>>>>produced videos which are decidedly inferior to my simply watching
>>>>them on their original VHS copies (albeit unstable over the long
>>>>haul).
>>>>
>>>>Is there something obvious I'm doing wrong here or some expeditious
>>>>solution so I can actually start burning DVDs instead of wrestling
>>>>with software and hardware? Are my quality expectations unrealistic?
>>>>
>>>>I simply want a DVD image and audio that is at least on par with the
>>>>VHS or LD it is mastered from, but with the stability of the digital
>>>>video formats. Is that so wrong?
>>>
>>>Wrong? Right? It's definitely not an ethical issue.
>>
>>It's definitely not an issue you're addressing from an ethical or a
>>technical standpoint or any standpoint except that of your own inbred
>>hostility. Got anything of concrete value to offer? Have you always
>>been this touchy and prone to prick-like behaviour? (Note the "u" for
>>your benefit.)
>
>It's just for fun and to imbue my life with a little color. (Note the absence of the "u"
>- it's for you).
Which is all I was doing in the first place, whilst stating my
technical quandaries. Sorry if you are deluded enough to think you're
the only one entitled to such flights of fancy...
>
>>
>>It really does bespeak some sort of raging inferiority complex
>>festering beneath the surface of all that banal indignation you offer
>>up.
>>
>Bespeak? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Me thinks he doth BWAHAHA too much....
>>>>
>>>>I humbly beseech you and bow to those about me with superior intellect
>>>>and experience in such matters....retreating into shadow again to
>>>>listen earnestly with hat in hand.
>>>>
>>>>Abiento,
>>>>Jake
>>>
>>>You're a pompous ass and I hope you get what you deserve. Sadly the enthusiasm, nay
>>>desperation of many on this group to air their views will probably conspire to deliver far
>>>more than you deserve.
>>
>>Ah, thank you for your heartfelt and pithy analysis. The fact that I
>>was simply trying to describe my own dilemma, address the specific
>>issues that still elude me, whilst doing so in a lighthearted manner
>>with no malice or cynical intent is obviously lost upon you....or your
>>simply incapable of addressing the issues rather than making an attack
>>another's personal character without personal provocation.
>>
>>Give us a little more tongue next time....
>
>I can do that for you now................t-k-t-k-t-k-t-k-t-k-t-k....(repeat ad nauseum)
>>
Cut that out. You're tongueing the wrong end....
Jake
drwho
>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 23:16:20 +0000, drwho <dr...@wo.rk> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 15:47:32 -0600, Jake W.K. <ja...@gimmejam.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 20:07:37 +0000, drwho <dr...@wo.rk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 09:41:23 -0600, Jake W.K. <ja...@gimmejam.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I'm sure it's been nothing thus far in contrast to what many of you
>>>>>have struggled with on this topic, and no doubt you've heard most of
>>>>>this before ad nauseum. But I feel, nonetheless, to put on record my
>>>>>current state of affairs and frustrations.
>>>>
>>>>Thank goodness, most of us have put our lives on hold while waiting patiently for the
>>>>opportunity to assist you.
>>>>>
>>>>>I've amassed a fairly large private video collection over the years.
>>>>>Approximately 14,000 videotapes on VHS (NTSC & PAL), over 1,500
>>>>>LaserDiscs, and several hundred DVDs. A lot of the VHS is very rare,
>>>>>older films never released on home video. So I would obviously like
>>>>>to preserve as many of the critical titles on DVD, if I can do so in
>>>>>an acceptable and efficient manner that doesn't bring me to take to
>>>>>the streets with a loaded weapon..
>>>>
>>>>Crisp satire - wonderful.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Brilliant retort. Such biting and delirious sarcasm.
>>
>>
>>Alas, your post was a rude interruption to a delirium I was so close to achieving.
>
>Well feel free to slip back into your befuddled haze. You shan't be
>missed.
Your continued responses belie that.
>>
>>>
>>>No. Really.
>>>
>>>Nothing else to offer, eh?
>>
>>This is decidedly your show. Your bloated post signaled an unchallengeable jockeying for
>>centre stage.
>
>To your everdiminishing ego, perhaps. Sad that you should be so
>threatened by someone simply describing their current predicament at
>length. Thankfully, several other, more self-secure individuals feel
>differently and actually addressed specifics.
I know, I'm wretched.
Indeed in the negative range of numbers - but very large (You know how that feels).
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> It's simply
>>>>>a matter of pulling together what will actually get the job done and
>>>>>done well, to a standard I can live with.
>>>>
>>>>We all quake at the prospect of your dissatisfaction.
>>>
>>>Speaking of arseholes, how long have you been spouting from yours
>>>whilst under the acidic delusion that someone who seeks a small
>>>modicum of satisfaction is actually craving dissatisfaction?
>>
>>You've read something I've not written.
>
>Hmmm.....pot. kettle. black.
The threadbare usenet cliches are the best, aren't they?
>
>>
>>> What
>>>kind of rickety Armchair Freud 101 are you schooled in?
>>
>>I don't subscribe to Freud's thinking.
>
>Evidently, you don't subscribe much to any sort of thinking at all.
>But it's amusing to see what a literalist you are, since you actually
>addressed that as if it were a sincere observation without one iota of
>humor or irony filtering your response.
It's true, but your posts don't demand any thinking - forgive me my Byronic irony.
Humour? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Seriously, what is torking? It sounds fun.
>
> Thanks for the
>clarification.
Yes, I can see how muddy things are for you.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> is that all of the rendered mpegs I've created
>>>>>(even from the uncompressed AVI), with DVD burning in mind, have
>>>>>produced videos which are decidedly inferior to my simply watching
>>>>>them on their original VHS copies (albeit unstable over the long
>>>>>haul).
>>>>>
>>>>>Is there something obvious I'm doing wrong here or some expeditious
>>>>>solution so I can actually start burning DVDs instead of wrestling
>>>>>with software and hardware? Are my quality expectations unrealistic?
>>>>>
>>>>>I simply want a DVD image and audio that is at least on par with the
>>>>>VHS or LD it is mastered from, but with the stability of the digital
>>>>>video formats. Is that so wrong?
>>>>
>>>>Wrong? Right? It's definitely not an ethical issue.
>>>
>>>It's definitely not an issue you're addressing from an ethical or a
>>>technical standpoint or any standpoint except that of your own inbred
>>>hostility. Got anything of concrete value to offer? Have you always
>>>been this touchy and prone to prick-like behaviour? (Note the "u" for
>>>your benefit.)
>>
>>It's just for fun and to imbue my life with a little color. (Note the absence of the "u"
>>- it's for you).
>
>Which is all I was doing in the first place, whilst stating my
>technical quandaries.
Poor misunderstood you.
> Sorry if you are deluded enough to think you're
>the only one entitled to such flights of fancy...
No you're clearly subject to such flights.
>
>>
>>>
>>>It really does bespeak some sort of raging inferiority complex
>>>festering beneath the surface of all that banal indignation you offer
>>>up.
>>>
>>Bespeak? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>
>Me thinks he doth BWAHAHA too much....
Oh I don't know...
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>
>>>>>
>>>>>I humbly beseech you and bow to those about me with superior intellect
>>>>>and experience in such matters....retreating into shadow again to
>>>>>listen earnestly with hat in hand.
>>>>>
>>>>>Abiento,
>>>>>Jake
>>>>
>>>>You're a pompous ass and I hope you get what you deserve. Sadly the enthusiasm, nay
>>>>desperation of many on this group to air their views will probably conspire to deliver far
>>>>more than you deserve.
>>>
>>>Ah, thank you for your heartfelt and pithy analysis. The fact that I
>>>was simply trying to describe my own dilemma, address the specific
>>>issues that still elude me, whilst doing so in a lighthearted manner
>>>with no malice or cynical intent is obviously lost upon you....or your
>>>simply incapable of addressing the issues rather than making an attack
>>>another's personal character without personal provocation.
>>>
>>>Give us a little more tongue next time....
>>
>>I can do that for you now................t-k-t-k-t-k-t-k-t-k-t-k....(repeat ad nauseum)
>>>
>
>
>Cut that out. You're tongueing the wrong end....
It's a single tongue flute exercise (do you know one end from the other?). Ask nicely and
I'll demonstrate the double.
>
>
>Jake
How enjoyable - I was at a loose end this evening.
nappy
get a twitch over it. i won;t bother to respond to your questions again....news:lexCPl9l7ZJOII...@4ax.com...
BG
Nappy is jealous of your equipment. A video equivalent of penis envy and
compensated for by trying to control everything. Where does Nappy get off
deciding how long a post should be?
"nappy" <jos...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:K0E0a.633$qx6.62...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
BG
Ignore the moron 'drwho'. Think about it. Anyone who picks a name such 'Dr
Who' must be really sad. Probably is a Trekkie too!
"Brent Geery" <fast...@mochamail.com> wrote in message
news:qhm54vcpb6rbnfsbq...@4ax.com...
nappy
drwho
>Ignore the moron 'drwho'. Think about it.
I think he has a problem thinking.
>Anyone who picks a name such 'Dr
>Who' must be really sad.
Never enjoyed the program and found 'The Doctor' to be it bit on the pompous side - not
unlike many here. Actually my dog chose the name for me.
> Probably is a Trekkie too!
If only the central characters (the original, Shatner etc.) had kept their weight down, I
could have been a Trekkie.
Jake W.K.
wrote:
>why should i? it is an unmoderated group...... your post was long... don't
>get a twitch over it. i won;t bother to respond to your questions again....
Hey, nappy....I really did mean what I said in the first place about
"no offense meant" when I asked the question about you being the
moderator and whether there was a limit to the length of posts. But I
never got an answer, that's all. I just wanted to know some
information for future reference. I did appreciate your responses to
my specific questions and hope you will hold forth in the future when
you see fit.
I truly didn't know if you were the moderator. I truly didn't know if
there was a limit to posts. That's all.
Jake
Jake W.K.
Brent, I really appreciate your down-to-earth input on all this...but
I must say that I find it very frustrating and time-consuming to
determine some of the most basic operations and how to execute them on
VirtualDub and VirtualVCR since I can find so little in the way of an
online manual or basic instructions.
Just starting a rendering, knowing which is the proper command, etc.
Some of the things that, no doubt, seem second nature to you and those
familiar with the programs are not so easy for some of us to first
figure out. Any suggestions on where I can find more basic
instructions on the operations of these programs? All the help and
faq information seems to already presume a certain level of
proficiency about basic actions and commands and/or where to find
them.
Jake
Brent Geery
wrote:
Use whatever editor you fell comfortable using. I just pointed out
VDub, because it's free, and fast. VDub it only a linear editor,
unlike something like Premiere (or AVISynth) but it does all the
editing I need (mostly, just cutting out commercial segments, and
trimming the beginning and end of shows.)
VirtualVCR has (almost) full instruction online, and is an excellent
capture application. Email me if you need help with it.
Also, I'm currently working on a A-to-Z analog capture-to-DVD guide,
but it's going to take at least a month or more.
Jake W.K.
Sounds great. Looking forward to it.
But, if I use Premiere with the mpeg2 plug-in, I'm concerned about
being able to utilize the filters you speak of in the rendering
process. What say you?
Jake
Brent Geery
wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Feb 2003 12:25:49 -0800, Brent Geery
Two ways I can think of:
1. Save a temp AVI after VDub filtering, then load that into Premiere.
2. Frameserve the video from VDub, to Premiere.
And the third, would be to use another encoder, that's a stand-alone.
Pete D
Bit of advice, if you feed the trolls they just keep on coming back at you
(Don't answer the idiots).
Sounds like with that many tapes to save to DVD an awful lot of them could
simply be encoded straight to DVD using a stand alone DVD recorder, they are
quite affordable these days.
Cheers.
--
Pete D
Buz & Pyro Video Editing
www.users.bigpond.com/peterd56
Reply by removing the dead dog from my address.
Larry S. Horwitz
"Pete D" <peterd56...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:yy31a.43187$jM5.1...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
Brendan Pratt
> why should i? it is an unmoderated group...... your post was long...
> don't get a twitch over it. i won;t bother to respond to your
> questions again....
It was long, but so was your posts.
You seem to be getting all bent out of joint over his very descriptive
post.
--
A: Top posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
drwho
>Jake,
>
>Bit of advice, if you feed the trolls they just keep on coming back at you
>(Don't answer the idiots).
He's clearly empiricist enough to have established that for himself you intellectual
midget.
Brent Geery
<peterd56...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> Sounds like with that many tapes to save to DVD an awful lot of them could
> simply be encoded straight to DVD using a stand alone DVD recorder, they are
> quite affordable these days.
But the quality is crap, compared to doing it right. But, some don;t
seem to mind it.
Pete D
several lifetimes.
Lets say he does one each day that will take 41 (yes forty one) years to
complete. Best he gets started.
Cheers.
Pete D
nappy
"Brendan Pratt" <bpratt...@overflow.net.au> wrote in message
news:Xns931CC42802E5Abp...@130.133.1.4...
> "nappy" <jos...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>
> > why should i? it is an unmoderated group...... your post was long...
> > don't get a twitch over it. i won;t bother to respond to your
> > questions again....
>
> It was long, but so was your posts.
>
> You seem to be getting all bent out of joint over his very descriptive
> post.
no at all.. read it.. not bent out of anything.
BTW.. its "so _were_ your posts. " Even though you were wrong about the
length of my posts.
Brent Geery
In cases like this, spending the money on the fastest duel-CPU system
will greatly help. Prioritize, and start with the most important
stuff first.
If I was trying to maximize speed, I'd capture to PC, forgo most of
slower filtering, and frameserve the video directly to CCE SP,
encoding CBR at max DVD bitrate. Forgo menus, and use 4X DVD
recordable blanks. With a duel Athlon XP 2600+, 1 hour will take
about 2:30-2:30 total, from starting the capture, to disk burned, and
will be much higher quality than a stand-alone. That will get the
same 41 year job down to a more reasonable number.
Even with a stand-alone player, it's going to take over half a decade
to transfer that much material. If going the stand-alone route,
better make it 4-5 recorders, to get the job done in a little over a
year (at 16 hours a day.) Then, sell the crappy things on e-Bay, and
get half the money back.
Larry S. Horwitz
encoders, and the quality is not at all "crap" but rather the same quality
you see with most commercial DVDs, given the right source material. The
menus are very limited, if that was what you were referring to........
"Brent Geery" <fast...@mochamail.com> wrote in message
news:hqqa4vccfnrehhq26...@4ax.com...
Brent Geery
<LSHo...@adelphia.net> wrote:
> "Brent Geery" <fast...@mochamail.com> wrote in message
> news:hqqa4vccfnrehhq26...@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 8 Feb 2003 20:02:06 +1100, "Pete D"
> > <peterd56...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Sounds like with that many tapes to save to DVD an awful lot of them
> could
> > > simply be encoded straight to DVD using a stand alone DVD recorder, they
> are
> > > quite affordable these days.
> >
> > But the quality is crap, compared to doing it right. But, some don;t
> > seem to mind it.
>
> I beg to differ. The current set-top recorders have excellent hardware mpeg2
> encoders, and the quality is not at all "crap" but rather the same quality
> you see with most commercial DVDs, given the right source material. The
> menus are very limited, if that was what you were referring to........
I've seen the results, and an unimpressed. But we all have our own
tolerance level, and quality expectations. Until they are using
hardware encoders that can match CCE SP, I'll pass. :)
--
BRENT - The Usenet typo king. :)
Defender of analog video capture, in a DV artifact filled world.
Larry S. Horwitz
and then go back and do the encoding in the subsequent passes are, indeed,
superior to the set-top recorders which merely keep a few lines of video or
perhaps a few frames, but not nearly enough to allow a predictive VBR, so I
would agree that hardware encoders of the type sold in consumer recorders
will probably not reach the quality of CCE or other fine encoders running
multiple pass encoding. Then again they encode in real-time, and make
excellent disks from the typical source materials we are talking about. And
they work well with the typical source materials like VHS tape, consumer
camcorders, TV broadcasts, etc.
What kind of quality would you expect the original person who posted would
get from his VHS tape collection, anyway?? I suspect you could do an
infinite number of VBR passes and still get the same results with CCE as you
would with a $500 set-top DVD recorder !!
Larry
"Brent Geery" <fast...@mochamail.com> wrote in message
news:ucfb4vkrj2t731mul...@4ax.com...
Brent Geery
<LSHo...@adelphia.net> wrote:
> Multi-pass algorithms which parse the video and find high data rate bursts
> and then go back and do the encoding in the subsequent passes are, indeed,
> superior to the set-top recorders which merely keep a few lines of video or
> perhaps a few frames, but not nearly enough to allow a predictive VBR, so I
> would agree that hardware encoders of the type sold in consumer recorders
> will probably not reach the quality of CCE or other fine encoders running
> multiple pass encoding. Then again they encode in real-time, and make
> excellent disks from the typical source materials we are talking about. And
> they work well with the typical source materials like VHS tape, consumer
> camcorders, TV broadcasts, etc.
>
> What kind of quality would you expect the original person who posted would
> get from his VHS tape collection, anyway?? I suspect you could do an
> infinite number of VBR passes and still get the same results with CCE as you
> would with a $500 set-top DVD recorder !!
Not great, with either solution. :) But that would be before I
applied noise reduction, color enchantment, ect., that can't be done
on the stand-alone. After processing, the CCE results will be much
nicer to view, and will encode to the same quantization level, in half
the bitrate. ;) But, if I have 10 hours of material I want to record
a day, only a stand-alone can keep up with that rate of production
(for now, at least.)
--
BRENT - The Usenet typo king. :)
Fast Times At Ridgemont High Info http://www.FastTimesAtRidgemontHigh.org
BG
compare with the interesting and articulate posts from Jake WK and others.
BEFORE you reply, try thinking for a while and see if YOU can reply with
something interesting, relevant, helpful, accurate and articulate.
I am sure you believe that your replies are witty, pithy and incisive. No
they are just plain stupid!
"nappy" <jos...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:aye1a.2568$jI....@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
Abrasha
>
SNIP
>
Why don't you just answer his questions, instead of starting a pissing contest?
We could all learn from it.
His post was very clear and well worded. His questions were to the point.
Clearly the benificiary of a well rounded education.
Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com