Dazzle Video Capture

[Filomeno Robles]

Giveyour video new life with Dazzle DVD Recorder HD video capture card! Capture clips from multiple sources with the high-quality video capture device. Then turn them into creative movies you can enjoy on DVD, the web and popular devices.

Once you've captured your video, get creative with Pinnacle Studio for Dazzle. This powerful video-editor includes all the tools, titles and transitions you need to create movies that your family and friends will love.

Many people have plenty of old VHS tapes sitting around they would like to convert to digital files. The Dazzle DVD recorder makes that possible. It can also be used to capture video from other analog sources for easy preservation or uploading to a number of sources.

There are many reasons to want to capture analog footage and transform it into digital files. The first is to rescue old VHS tapes. Old tapes wear down over time and important memories and rare recordings can be lost. These devices can capture video footage from old VHS tapes and convert them into digital files or burn them directly onto a DVD. Many Dazzle capture cards can record directly from cameras and camcorders as well.

Another use is to capture gaming footage from certain consoles for the purposes of YouTube videos, Twitch.tv streams, and more. Consoles that do not have an HDMI input such as the Nintendo GameCube and PlayStation 2 need a video converter to capture gameplay footage.

Yes, it comes with the video editing software called Pinnacle Studio for Dazzle. This editing software allows you to add titles, a menu, transitions, and to cut and trim your motion picture to only the parts you want to keep. This allows you to edit out commercials, redundant sections, or simply parts you don't like. Because it takes audio directly from the device, you will not have to worry about wind noise or other background sound ruining the audio.

This device features a simple design that has an AV input to plug into analog electronics and a USB 2.0 output for connecting to a computer. It can record from electronics such as VHS players, gaming consoles, Hi8 and V8 cameras, laserdisc players, and more. It can also record from any source with a composite RCA or S-Video output.

It can burn to discs of multiple varieties, including DVD-R, DVD RW, DVD+R, and DVD+RW. It is compatible with exporting to Windows PCs, Apple iPad and iPhone, Android phones, the Xbox, and the Sony PlayStation. Output file formats include QuickTime video, .avi, Flash, DivX Plus HD, and more. It can also export directly to Facebook and YouTube.

The Dazzle is a family of external video capture devices that allow people to record video from analog composite video sources (DVD player, VCR, etc.) over USB (originally parallel).[1] Most models are also capable of recording analog stereo audio.

There are two different ways one can connect components to the Dazzle. One way is to connect a VCR or video game console directly into the unit with RCA composite cables or with an S-video cable. Another way is to use three composite splitters to split the AV signal, sending one into the Dazzle, and another to a TV. This method is popular for recording from video game consoles, since it provides a real time feed into a TV (used as a preview monitor) while simultaneously capturing the footage.

The first Dazzle recorder to support USB was the Digital Video Creator (DVC) 50 and 80 models, first released in March 2001.[8][9] The DVC 80 was capable of recording both video and audio via RCA and S-video, while the more inexpensive DVC 50 was capable of recording only video.[10] Owing to their USB 1.1-spec connector, these Dazzle video recorders captured video at much lower resolutions than contemporary offerings which used FireWire, although they were still capable of capturing video at a stable 30 fps.[11][8]

In October 2003, Pinnacle Systems acquired the rights to manufacture and market Dazzle hardware from SCM Microsystems.[12] Pinnacle was in turn acquired by Avid Technology in 2005.[13] The Dazzle was then sold under both the Avid and Pinnacle names across various products.[14][15] In the late 2000s, Avid updated the Dazzle line to support USB 2.0, allowing it to capture at native NTSC video resolutions.[14]

I've been trying to use my Dazzle DVC 100 with Ubuntu 21.04 but I can't seem to get it to works. It does work since I've used it with Windows 10 before, but it doesn't show up as a device in /dev/video*, and v4l2 doesn't recognize it. The confusing thing is, lsusb lists it as

I made a new scene, then under sources I added a Video Capture device (V4L2) and set the device to Pinnacle Dazzel DVC 90/100/101/This allowed me to see the video.Next I added an Audio capture Device(ALSA) and selected DVC100 USB Audio to get the sound. Then you will see the audio level bars. You can then click the cog and pick advanced options to enable monitoring of the sound output if desired.

When I look at the output file with the file explorer the file remains at 44 bytes and never grows. After the entire movie completes it is still only 44 bytes. I tried opening the capture device itself for input to play a movie and that works fine. If I click the red record button while doing that it does record - but it makes some kind of huge file that used up the remaining space I have available on my small 160gb drive.

I then ran vlc -v > vlclog.txt with the hopes that all debugging info would go to a file I could look at. I let it run - it always said the output was 44 bytes. I stopped it after 5 minutes or so by pressing the stop button on VLC, then exited VLC. The log file is empty. The following showed on the terminal:

In the capture screen go to Advanced Options and force height and width to the resolution of the input and then Okay, then click on Show more options in the Capture screen, in the Edit Options add; :fps=29.97 or :fps=29

Recent research has shown that observers learn to detect types of static camouflage at different rates [33]. Learning effects have not previously been investigated in the context of moving stimuli, but if there are differences in learning rates between different patterns when targets are in motion, this may suggest that there are qualitatively or quantitatively different perceptual or cognitive processes involved in the capture process for different stimuli, and thus may help to explain the differences between pattern types.

Previous experiments in this area have often allowed participants to make capture attempts at their own pace [17],[18],[21]. For example, in several previous capture studies [17],[21], targets were presented for a fixed period of time (e.g. one minute) and participants were instructed to try to catch the target as many times as possible in that interval. In the current study, targets were only present on screen for a brief period in each trial, and therefore participants needed to make fast responses to have a chance of capturing the target. This design was chosen to allow us to standardise how participants had to approach the task, and may also correspond to natural situations where animals are only visible for short periods of time; e.g. if they are moving between two different patches of occluding vegetation. We then investigated whether there were differences in capture attempt times for different target types, and how this might relate to the detectability of targets and how confident subjects felt in their judgements, as confidence judgements and reaction times are thought to be inversely related [35]-[37]

Due to the repeated measures design of the experiment, results were analysed using linear mixed models (LMMs) or generalised linear mixed models (GLMMs) [38],[39] using the lme4 package (version 1.1-7) and the lmerTest package (version 2.0-6) in R (version 3.1-0) [40], using target type, background type, trial number and position group (whether the capture attempt was ahead of or behind the midline of the target, as defined by its direction of travel; this factor was included as it greatly improved the model fit, as many more capture attempts were made behind the centre of the target, creating a bimodal distribution) as fixed factors as appropriate. The initial model also contained all possible first order interactions with target type. Subject was included as a random intercept and the specific background exemplar was also included as a random slope. Models were simplified based on their AIC weights and log likelihood to produce a best fit model [38],[39]. Analysis was run for each experiment using a hit/miss dependent variable (binomial error structure), and also for a reaction time measure (log normal error structure). We calculated the overall main effects of the models using the Anova function from the car package (version 2.0-20) and then analysed the effects of individual pattern types using planned contrast comparisons [41]. The high contrast striped target was taken as the reference against which all other targets were compared.

The fact that the striped target was relatively difficult to capture is in agreement with several other recent studies [17],[21]. However, success rates for the striped target did not significantly differ from the grey targets. Previous studies have also shown that when stationary, striped patterning is much easier to find than uniform grey patterning in a detection task [21]. Other studies have also found that low contrast targets are similarly effective in preventing capture [17], and that animals prefer to use low contrast patterning when in motion [20]. This suggest that all other things being equal, the uniform luminance matched grey patterning may be effective in preventing capture, as well as having some benefit in preventing detection.

We found that the white target was easier for participants to catch than the striped target, in agreement with some recent studies [17],[21], and subjects also made the fastest responses to these targets, suggesting they were confident about making accurate capture attempts [35]-[37]. Capture attempts were also made relatively quickly to the striped targets, which could suggest that there was a dissociation between perception and action in this task; perceptually participants felt confident about their judgements, but were actually relatively inaccurate in their actions. The speed of response and the confidence felt by subjects could reflect the detectability of the targets, as striped targets have been shown to be easy to detect when stationary [21].

3a8082e126