Is Miro DC10 the same as Pinnacle Studio 8-AV DC-10+?
acton
this the same as the DC-10+ card that comes with Pinnacle Studio 8-AV?
Is Miro a brand name of Pinnacle?
thx.
Markus Zingg
Yes and no
Miro did the DC1 and DC10 before they were aquired by Pinnacle. The
DC10 also works with the Studio Software, so if you have studio you
can use the DC10 although it's an older board. The Studio 8-AV comes
with a DC10+ which is basically the same thing as the DC10 but is
using somewhat more modern but partially also cheaper chipsets. In
other words, the DC10 is having some advanteages over the DC10+ in
some areas and vice versa. You can't take note of that though cause
this is all hidden by the driver (which is the same for the two) which
does not use any of those special features.
HTH
Markus
acton
news:mrmskvgep0uc8s59b...@4ax.com:
Markus - thx for the reply. Will I get better analog video capture from
the DC-10+ (using Studio 8 ... which I think I have to use with the DC-10
+) or from a BT/Conexant 878-based capture card (like Pinnacle PCTV or
Hauppauge WinTV GO) using VirtualDub and perhaps Huffyuv codec?
I have a WinXP Home system, 120G hard disk, 2.4G P4. Will use Windows
Movie Maker ver2 for editing.
Video capture and editing will be of analog camcorder home video. Output
will be back to VHS tape and also making SVCDs.
thx!
cassy
>Markus - thx for the reply. Will I get better analog video capture from
>the DC-10+ (using Studio 8 ... which I think I have to use with the DC-10
>+) or from a BT/Conexant 878-based capture card (like Pinnacle PCTV or
>Hauppauge WinTV GO) using VirtualDub and perhaps Huffyuv codec?
I use the DC10+ to capture in Studio 7 (Markus please release AVI_IO
for XP soon!) and edit/resize in VirtualDub and am happy with the
results when making VCDs/SVCDs. I plan to make DVDs (just bought a
burner but no software) as soon as I get a decent dvd authoring
software.
I tried a BT878 card once and experienced a lot of video interference
noise in my captures so I went back to my DC10+ which was very very
clear (no interference at all).
>I have a WinXP Home system, 120G hard disk, 2.4G P4. Will use Windows
>Movie Maker ver2 for editing.
>
>Video capture and editing will be of analog camcorder home video. Output
>will be back to VHS tape and also making SVCDs.
I never used the DC10+ analog output but I hear the DC10+'s analog
output is better than using any video card's TV Out which shrinks the
picture (creates black border around video) and sometimes alters the
color and creates jaggies (a sign of low resolution). But this is all
hearsay so I can't vouch for it. :)
Markus Zingg
>the DC-10+ (using Studio 8 ... which I think I have to use with the DC-10
>+) or from a BT/Conexant 878-based capture card (like Pinnacle PCTV or
>Hauppauge WinTV GO) using VirtualDub and perhaps Huffyuv codec?
Well, this is a question that was controversary discussed in the past
her quite a few times. Personally I think that you get better results
with the DC10+ especially with scenes where there is very much or very
few light. The board uses a videodecoder from Philips which is really
good. The difference is however really fine and limitted to the
situation mentioned. The BT connexant familly of chips is having other
advantages like the ability to scale the picture to any size in
hardware. While some of the DC30+ boards (not all) would have this
capbaility also, the driver doees not support it.
>I have a WinXP Home system, 120G hard disk, 2.4G P4. Will use Windows
>Movie Maker ver2 for editing.
>
>Video capture and editing will be of analog camcorder home video. Output
>will be back to VHS tape and also making SVCDs.
Now this last statement of yours actually was the most important one
to make this decission. You will be out of luck with outputing analog
video by using most BT based boards. Outputing high quality video
through video ports is one of the strenghts of the DC10+. Most other
boards these days either can't output video at all or then are based
on DV video. That's another (imho also "ok" aproach) but - different.
So if you want to output video to VHS, then take a DC10+ based
solution. Hmmm, after thinking a while about it, there is also another
option. The Matrox G450 e-TV. Problem is that this board is IMHO no
longer manufactured. Another DC10+ related warning. If you intend to
use the DC10+ with non Pinnalce software, you must use W9x or else you
will have lot's of trouble.
Markus
acton
below.
Markus Zingg <m.z...@nct.ch> wrote in
news:dn4ukv4pj2se5dsr9...@4ax.com:
>>Markus - thx for the reply. Will I get better analog video capture
>>from the DC-10+ (using Studio 8 ... which I think I have to use with
>>the DC-10 +) or from a BT/Conexant 878-based capture card (like
>>Pinnacle PCTV or Hauppauge WinTV GO) using VirtualDub and perhaps
>>Huffyuv codec?
>
> Well, this is a question that was controversary discussed in the past
> her quite a few times. Personally I think that you get better results
> with the DC10+ especially with scenes where there is very much or very
> few light. The board uses a videodecoder from Philips which is really
> good. The difference is however really fine and limitted to the
> situation mentioned. The BT connexant familly of chips is having other
> advantages like the ability to scale the picture to any size in
> hardware. While some of the DC30+ boards (not all) would have this
> capbaility also, the driver doees not support it.
>
What about the MJPEG format of the DC10+? I believe this is done in
hardware and is the only capture option ... correct?
Is the MJPEG format easy to work with and does it result in good
quality?
Is it a standard "AVI" file?
The real important question is "can I import captured files into Windows
Movie Maker or am I forced to use Studio 8 for editing"? I've read
troubling comments about Studio 8 and don't want to risk using it ....
Movie Maker runs trouble-free on my XP system and does everything I want
to do with editing for the moment.
Also - based on your comment below, I guess I am I forced to use Studio
8 to capture from the DC10+ (rather than non-Pinnacle software). But can
I then use other software to edit and encode the captured material into
SVCDs (for instance, using Movie Maker for editing [saving as DV-AVI
file], using TMPGEnc for SVCD preparation [using SVCD template] and then
using VCDEasy/Nero for burning)?
>>I have a WinXP Home system, 120G hard disk, 2.4G P4. Will use Windows
>>Movie Maker ver2 for editing.
>>
>>Video capture and editing will be of analog camcorder home video.
>>Output will be back to VHS tape and also making SVCDs.
>
> Now this last statement of yours actually was the most important one
> to make this decission. You will be out of luck with outputing analog
> video by using most BT based boards. Outputing high quality video
> through video ports is one of the strenghts of the DC10+. Most other
> boards these days either can't output video at all or then are based
> on DV video. That's another (imho also "ok" aproach) but - different.
But what about outputting from my graphics card, not a BT-based capture
card? I have an nVidia GeForce4 MX440E with composite and S-Video TV
output ports. Can I use these ports to output back to a VHS VCR?
> So if you want to output video to VHS, then take a DC10+ based
> solution.
This is good information about DC10+ video output. How is the "output"
accomplished? Is this done with Pinnacle software?
The important question is "can I output the results of my Movie Maker
editing to the DC10+? (Movie Maker will produce a final movie in WMV
format or I can save the movie as DV-AVI file.)
> Hmmm, after thinking a while about it, there is also another
> option. The Matrox G450 e-TV. Problem is that this board is IMHO no
> longer manufactured. Another DC10+ related warning. If you intend to
> use the DC10+ with non Pinnalce software, you must use W9x or else you
> will have lot's of trouble.
Will there be WinXP support in the future?
>
> Markus
>
acton
cassy <ca...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:s03ukvcsk45r1jo7c...@4ax.com:
> On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 03:14:09 GMT, acton <noe...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>Markus - thx for the reply. Will I get better analog video capture
>>from the DC-10+ (using Studio 8 ... which I think I have to use with
>>the DC-10 +) or from a BT/Conexant 878-based capture card (like
>>Pinnacle PCTV or Hauppauge WinTV GO) using VirtualDub and perhaps
>>Huffyuv codec?
>
> I use the DC10+ to capture in Studio 7 (Markus please release AVI_IO
> for XP soon!) and edit/resize in VirtualDub and am happy with the
> results when making VCDs/SVCDs. I plan to make DVDs (just bought a
> burner but no software) as soon as I get a decent dvd authoring
> software.
I'm sorry ... I don't understand what "edit/resize in VirtualDub" means.
I don't understand why you need VirtualDub. What does it do? Can you
help me understand?
Other questions:
So ... do you capture with Pinnacle software, then process with other? I
want to edit in Movie Maker .... is this possible?
Do I have to load the entire Pinnacle Studio 8 software just to do
capture or is there a small "capture" application that I can load (since
I don't plan to use Studio 8 for editing)?
I've read lots of troubling posts about crashing problems with Studio 8
so I am worried about installing it.
What is the file format of the captured DC10+ file? I've read that it
has MJPEG codec. Is the MJPEG compression "readable" by Movie Maker and
other software?
>
> I tried a BT878 card once and experienced a lot of video interference
> noise in my captures so I went back to my DC10+ which was very very
> clear (no interference at all).
This is good information. I assume these experiences were from the same
computer so the noise evironment was the same?
>
>>I have a WinXP Home system, 120G hard disk, 2.4G P4. Will use Windows
>>Movie Maker ver2 for editing.
>>
>>Video capture and editing will be of analog camcorder home video.
>>Output will be back to VHS tape and also making SVCDs.
>
> I never used the DC10+ analog output but I hear the DC10+'s analog
> output is better than using any video card's TV Out which shrinks the
> picture (creates black border around video) and sometimes alters the
> color and creates jaggies (a sign of low resolution). But this is all
> hearsay so I can't vouch for it. :)
Since you haven't used this feature, I doubt if you can answer ... but
here goes anyway -
How is the "outputting" done? What I mean is ... let's say I've captured
some video, edited it in Movie Maker, saved it as a DV-AVI [I know it
will be big] and now want to record to VHS tape on a standard VCR. How
is this done with the DC10+? Do I have to launch Studio, import my movie
and then use some sort of "record out" feature in Pinnacle to do this?
Or can I just "play" the DV-AVI file to the analog output port on the
DC10+ with some small application?
Thx in advance for any help!
Susan
For what it is worth, Markus gave you some good information, but my
experience suggests you are going about this in the wrong way. The
DC10 and 10Plus cards were excellent cards in their day. They were
crippled with terrible drivers and software from Pinnacle, but that is
another story.
At this point, you are trying to make a horseless carriage work in the
modern world. Capturing is the most critical aspect of computer
related video editing. I suggest you seriously consider getting rid
of the DC10 card and putting a couple hundred dollars into a converter
box or card (anything except the Pinnacle Studio Deluxe card which is
fundamentally flawed) to convert your analog video into DV25 which is
by far the easiest, most stable form to have your video in for desktop
editing. (For more money you can get a cheap camcorder to do the same
thing.) After you finish your editing you can use your converter
box/card/camcorder to send your video back to tape, or you can convert
your edited DV25 video into other formats such as MPG for DVDs, etc.
Now, many people will try to convince you that you can really get
"almost" as good quality by staying in the video dark ages, but many
people will also tell you that a nice Stanley Steamer is "almost" as
good transportation as a new auto. It just isn't so.
Hope this helps,
Susan
acton
but I'm not ready to spend money on a digital camcorder (which I think
would be the easiest way to go .... i.e. analog pass-through) or an
external converter box.
What motivated me to try this in the first place was the fact that I
already seem to have just about everything I need to capture and edit
some home video. I have a Hauppauge WinTV GO card in one computer and a
Pinnacle PCTV card in another. They were installed to "watch" TV on the
computer and now I've discovered I can plug my analog camcorder into the
RCA composite-in connector. Viola .... instant (and free!) analog
capture!
For editing, since I'm running WinXP Home, I already have - and plan to
use - Windows Movie Maker (which runs trouble-free and does just about
everything a novice needs to do).
So .... with a few pieces of shareware/freeware software (TMPGEnc,
VCDEasy, etc) it looks like I can do what I want. But, even though this
is just for "hobby" purposes only .... I don't want to be embarassed by
the results.
The real problem I still need to solve is getting my "masterpieces" back
onto VHS tape. I plan to burn some SVCDs (which is why I have TMPGEnc &
VCDEasy in the mix) but the real goal is to send the tapes to the
grandparents .... who wouldn't know what to do with the SVCDs.
Since I've been told the TV-out signal from my nVidia GeForce graphics
card (which has both RCA composite video out and S-Video Out) won't look
good on VHS tape (something about interlacing, overscanning, and other
things I don't understand), the DC10+ caught my eye because it is
supposed to have a "proper" NTSC interlaced video output signal.
I found Pinnacle Studio8-AV on sale for $49 so I bought it. It says it's
compatible with WinXP and comes with Studio Version 8 software and the
DC10+ analog capture/output card. I haven't opened the box yet because
I'm not sure I want to keep it. Even though the DC10+ card seems to be
what I need for NTSC analog video output, there have been so many horror
stories posted about Pinnacle, I'm afraid to even load it. Some of the
posters said they even had to reload WinXP because the Pinnacle software
screwed up their systems so bad.
This statement from Markus scares me - " If you intend to
use the DC10+ with non Pinnalce software, you must use W9x or else you
will have lot's of trouble."
Because I plan to use Movie Maker as my editing package, I don't need to
install Studio8. BUT ... it seems like the only way to capture from the
DC10+ is to use the Pinnacle software. Since I haven't opened the box
yet I don't know if that means Studio 8 .... which I DO NOT WANT TO LOAD
... or just some small Pinnacle capture application.
Plus, I still need some way to "output" my final video back to VHS tape
via the DC10+. Again, I don't know if I need Studio8 or some small
"output" application.
My WinXP systems are stable and running just fine right now. I do not
want to "destabilize" them just to accommodate Pinnacle software. But I
do want to capture, edit and record back to tape some nice videos of the
kids' sporting activities!
thx!
Susan <nos...@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:sh3vkvkrj8nv34k89...@4ax.com:
DK
news:Xns93E691A...@204.127.199.17...
> Susan - thanks for your input. I don't disagree with your recommendation
> but I'm not ready to spend money on a digital camcorder (which I think
> would be the easiest way to go .... i.e. analog pass-through) or an
> external converter box.
You may want to look into some of the Canopus cards - There's a Raptor on
Ebay that ends in about 45 minutes (it's 12:30 pacific) for under $100 right
now. The Raptor has S-video in, and the Canopus stuff seems to work well...
Markus Zingg
>What about the MJPEG format of the DC10+? I believe this is done in
>hardware and is the only capture option ... correct?
>
>Is the MJPEG format easy to work with and does it result in good
>quality?
Yes, at datarates > 3MB/sec the quality is very good. Btw, MJPEG and
DV are farily similar with regard to the "loss" of compression etc. DV
is fixed at 3.5MB/sec but with the DC10+ you can go up to 6 MB/sec.
That said provided you have a high quality analog video source you can
end up with better quality than what you would get from a DV
camcorder.
>Is it a standard "AVI" file?
Yes, avi alows to use different so called "codecs" that encode the
video into whatever format needed.
>The real important question is "can I import captured files into Windows
>Movie Maker or am I forced to use Studio 8 for editing"? I've read
>troubling comments about Studio 8 and don't want to risk using it ....
>Movie Maker runs trouble-free on my XP system and does everything I want
>to do with editing for the moment.
You most likely will be restricted to Studio for capture and output.
Editing should be fine. Due to the restrictive driver of the DCxx
under W2k and up I'm not sure if I really can recommend the board then
to you. Under W9x I would say yes. For these platforms you may want to
look at something different.
>Also - based on your comment below, I guess I am I forced to use Studio
>8 to capture from the DC10+ (rather than non-Pinnacle software). But can
>I then use other software to edit and encode the captured material into
>SVCDs (for instance, using Movie Maker for editing [saving as DV-AVI
>file], using TMPGEnc for SVCD preparation [using SVCD template] and then
>using VCDEasy/Nero for burning)?
This should work fine cause there is a MJPEG filter built into
DirectShow. It's not the same as the one Studio installes, but it
might be difficult due to the merit values to make other software use
the Pinnacle filter.
>>>I have a WinXP Home system, 120G hard disk, 2.4G P4. Will use Windows
>>>Movie Maker ver2 for editing.
>>>
>>>Video capture and editing will be of analog camcorder home video.
>>>Output will be back to VHS tape and also making SVCDs.
>>
>> Now this last statement of yours actually was the most important one
>> to make this decission. You will be out of luck with outputing analog
>> video by using most BT based boards. Outputing high quality video
>> through video ports is one of the strenghts of the DC10+. Most other
>> boards these days either can't output video at all or then are based
>> on DV video. That's another (imho also "ok" aproach) but - different.
>
>But what about outputting from my graphics card, not a BT-based capture
>card? I have an nVidia GeForce4 MX440E with composite and S-Video TV
>output ports. Can I use these ports to output back to a VHS VCR?
You can, but the quality will be awfull cause the video format matches
the one of the screen whereas "real" video output ports render the
video with the native resoultion of the given TV format (i.e NTSC or
whatever).
>> So if you want to output video to VHS, then take a DC10+ based
>> solution.
>
>This is good information about DC10+ video output. How is the "output"
>accomplished? Is this done with Pinnacle software?
Yes, but depending on the operating system you can use other softwae.
As mentioned above this does not hold true for W2k and up. So there
it's Studio.
>The important question is "can I output the results of my Movie Maker
>editing to the DC10+? (Movie Maker will produce a final movie in WMV
>format or I can save the movie as DV-AVI file.)
No, the video output is always restricted to the format the board
hardware supports. So you must edit a MJPEG video with Movie Maker. I
don't know the product to judge wether this is possible there or not.
>> Hmmm, after thinking a while about it, there is also another
>> option. The Matrox G450 e-TV. Problem is that this board is IMHO no
>> longer manufactured. Another DC10+ related warning. If you intend to
>> use the DC10+ with non Pinnalce software, you must use W9x or else you
>> will have lot's of trouble.
>
>Will there be WinXP support in the future?
Not sure to what product this question is targeted.
The matrox board comes with WDM drivers and DirectShow AND Video for
Windows support under all platforms. Especially the latter is a good
thing when it comes to interoperability. However, there are too many
boards out there that I would know all details about all of them.
The DC10+ is also coming with WDM and DirectShow support so that
should be fine also. I'm also reading about the problems with Studio.
I don't use it myself so I can't comment much on this either.
Markus
Markus Zingg
>
>For what it is worth, Markus gave you some good information, but my
>experience suggests you are going about this in the wrong way. The
>DC10 and 10Plus cards were excellent cards in their day. They were
>crippled with terrible drivers and software from Pinnacle, but that is
>another story.
>
>At this point, you are trying to make a horseless carriage work in the
>modern world. Capturing is the most critical aspect of computer
>related video editing. I suggest you seriously consider getting rid
>of the DC10 card and putting a couple hundred dollars into a converter
>box or card (anything except the Pinnacle Studio Deluxe card which is
>fundamentally flawed) to convert your analog video into DV25 which is
>by far the easiest, most stable form to have your video in for desktop
>editing. (For more money you can get a cheap camcorder to do the same
>thing.) After you finish your editing you can use your converter
>box/card/camcorder to send your video back to tape, or you can convert
>your edited DV25 video into other formats such as MPG for DVDs, etc.
>
>Now, many people will try to convince you that you can really get
>"almost" as good quality by staying in the video dark ages, but many
>people will also tell you that a nice Stanley Steamer is "almost" as
>good transportation as a new auto. It just isn't so.
>
>Hope this helps,
>
>Susan
Susan,
In practice - and that's what conuts - you are right. However there
are some aspects that I like to put into consideration.
- Provided a REALLY GOOD PROFESSIONAL analog video soruce is here, the
quality of a DC10+ capture willl contain "more" picture information
than what you can achive with DV due to the fixed datarate of DV
video. Again, in practize such sources are not available to regular
users hence you are right with your comment.
- The fact that DV video is trouble free is not really related to the
format itself. It's just the only format that seems to be tested @ MS.
DirectShow is having some nasty bugs (mostly related to a/v synch) and
they are ignored by MS for years now. Due to the interleaving of audio
into the video frames of DV video this does not show up in DirectShow.
Apart from this DV video is not more or less troublesome than say
MJPEG. There are just some more marketing related reasons that favour
DV over other formats like i.e.
- The fact that there are standard OHCI drivers developped from MS
making creating a DV board something an undergraduate electronics
studend can do in his sparetime.
- That the documentation to develop capture and render filters for
other formats in DirectShow is somewhrere beteween lousy and non
existant leading to high costs/low motivation of board manufacturers
to try out something different.
- Don't forget that there is no difference between digital and analog
video in a scenario where analog video is captured right after
shooting. All in all the DV camcorder does the same thing internaly
whereas in an analog scenario this steps happens at capture time.
So again, while your coments form a pretty good advice as a practical
advice to someone seeking help, it's probably not ok to title other
formats/methods as dating back to "video dark ages". No offense
intened though.
Markus
cassy
>I'm sorry ... I don't understand what "edit/resize in VirtualDub" means.
>I don't understand why you need VirtualDub. What does it do? Can you
>help me understand?
I capture my video by using Pinnacle Studio 7.
VirtualDub is a freeware linear editor. The benefits of VirtualDub
are:
(1) Free Linear editor
(2) Good for noise reduction, color correction, deinterlacing.
(3) Many free 3rd party filters with new ones being constantly
developed.
(4) Can frameserve to other apps like MPEG encoders so you don't have
to save to an intermediate files (saves HD space) or lose quality from
saving intermediate files.
The reason I resize in VirtualDub is because you need to capture at a
higher resolution to make good quality VCD/SVCD. I capture at 640x480,
edit (noise reduction mainly), and finally resize down to 352x240 or
480x480 right before encoding to a VCD/SVCD compliant MPEG.
VirtualDub is not meant for complex editting or rearranging scenes or
for titling or adding fade effects. Use Studio 7 or 8 for more complex
editting or titling.
>Other questions:
>
>So ... do you capture with Pinnacle software, then process with other? I
>want to edit in Movie Maker .... is this possible?
Yes. The DC10+ captures to an AVI file using MJPEG compression.
VirtualDub has internal MJPEG codecs. Studio can obviously handle
MJPEG. For Movie Maker, you might need to install an external MJPEG
codec (PicVideo or Morgan). I think there a freeware MJPEG being
developed (at sourceforge?).
>Do I have to load the entire Pinnacle Studio 8 software just to do
>capture or is there a small "capture" application that I can load (since
>I don't plan to use Studio 8 for editing)?
Yes, you have to install the whole thing since that is the only way to
install DC10+'s drivers (I know it's a pain but Pinnacle won't release
separate XP drivers for the DC10+ and people have been begging for
years). Also, Pinnacle Studio is created to be a all-in-one
application (drivers, capturing to AVI, editting, encoding to final
MPEG format).
>I've read lots of troubling posts about crashing problems with Studio 8
>so I am worried about installing it.
Well, for capturing, Studio is pretty stable (as long as all codecs,
drivers directx, newest video card drivers are installed properly).
For some people, it's the editting part that may cause stability
problems in Studio 8 according to Studio 8 users (I use the older
Studio 7 and haven't noticed any glaring stabilty problems). If you
are worried about editting stability, you can use another editor like
Ulead or VegasVideo or Premiere or MovieMaker.
Personally, I haven't done much editting with Studio so I can't vouch
for other's negative opinion regarding Studio 8's editting (besides, I
use Studio 7).
>What is the file format of the captured DC10+ file? I've read that it
>has MJPEG codec. Is the MJPEG compression "readable" by Movie Maker and
>other software?
Yes, but you *might* need to download a 3rd party MJPEG codec (see
above).
>> I tried a BT878 card once and experienced a lot of video interference
>> noise in my captures so I went back to my DC10+ which was very very
>> clear (no interference at all).
>
>This is good information. I assume these experiences were from the same
>computer so the noise evironment was the same?
Yes. I plugined in the BT878 card (using the latest drivers) and used
it for a few weeks and the video captures just didn't look good (very
noisy even using thick Composite cables and I was not using the tuner
at all). I even bought a S-Video cable to capture from my dvd player
but I still saw unnecessary noise. Then, I yanked out the BT878 and
popped in the DC10+ and wow, all the clarity came back.
>Since you haven't used this feature, I doubt if you can answer ... but
>here goes anyway -
>
>How is the "outputting" done? What I mean is ... let's say I've captured
>some video, edited it in Movie Maker, saved it as a DV-AVI [I know it
>will be big] and now want to record to VHS tape on a standard VCR. How
>is this done with the DC10+? Do I have to launch Studio, import my movie
>and then use some sort of "record out" feature in Pinnacle to do this?
Ok, I just tried Studio 7's Outputing to VCR (Called Make Tape) and it
worked perfectly and very quick. This should be the same process for
Studio 8:
(1) I captured a clip in Studio,
(2) Clicked on Edit and dragged the clip to the timeline.
(3) Clicked Make Movie.
(4) Clicked on Create button.
(5) Then Pressed Play button.
The process took just a few seconds. I was very impressed and glad
your call for help made me try this DC10+ function (even though I
probably won't use it much as I prefer making VCDs/SVCDs due to faster
replication and cheaper mailing purposes).
Result:
The DC10+ outputed the signal to my nearby TV using composite cables
(you can use S-Video too). The quality (sharpness and clarity) looked
exactly the same as the source (the brightness was slightly darker
than the source but can easily be adjusted in Studio brightness
settings).
The Output to Tape is very easy to use and maintains original source
quality. But you have to stick with MJPEG as the AVI compression codec
(don't use Huffy or DV). If you do use another codec (Huffy or DV),
when you press Create, it will take a while (I think it has to play
the whole movie length) to render the AVI file before you can output
to tape. So for time saving purposes, stick with MJPEG since it will
allow immediate output to tape (no need to render it).
*There was an experimental 3rd party application that let you open any
AVI (huffy, divx, etc) and output it to tape for the DC10+. I found
the link somewhere but lost it. I'll post it when I find it.
>Or can I just "play" the DV-AVI file to the analog output port on the
>DC10+ with some small application?
>
>Thx in advance for any help!
Again, I will try to find the experimental 3rd party app. It was
created for the DC30+ card but some people claim it worked for the
DC10+ as well.
cassy
>This statement from Markus scares me - " If you intend to
>use the DC10+ with non Pinnalce software, you must use W9x or else you
>will have lot's of trouble."
I think Markus means you should buy his AVI_IO capture app and use it
under Win9X because AVI_IO is currently only supported under Win9X.
:)
Just joking Markus. But, please release AVI_IO for XP. Don't quit on
us.
I've been using DC10+ under Windows 98 and Windows XP. There are more
software options that work with Windows 98 but with XP you get pretty
much unrestricted AVI file sizes. After getting used to XP, I haven't
had and lingering problems using the DC10+. And for analog backups,
DC10+ is the best bang for the buck especially in terms of video
quality.
>Because I plan to use Movie Maker as my editing package, I don't need to
>install Studio8. BUT ... it seems like the only way to capture from the
>DC10+ is to use the Pinnacle software. Since I haven't opened the box
>yet I don't know if that means Studio 8 .... which I DO NOT WANT TO LOAD
>... or just some small Pinnacle capture application.
For Capturing Apps:
Pinnacle offers AM Cap with Studio 7 which is a small capture app but
it didn't work well for me. I don't know if it's included in Studio 8
but you can find it free online at some websites.
Also, you can use Windvd Recorder and capture to realtime MPEG format
and DIVX. It does however requires a fast processor or else it drops
frames, unless, you capture at 320x240.
Some people got VirtualVCR (very small, free and compact XP compatible
capture app) to work with DC10+. I got it to work once with DC10+ but
not lately after installing countless other devices and software
(unrelated to DC10+).
Also, there's nothing wrong with sticking with Studio for capturing
and using Movie Maker for editting. I installed Studio just for
capturing purposes and don't really mind installing an editor just for
capturing purposes. In fact, Studio's interface is extremely intuitive
and always receives praise from the magazines for it's interface.
>Plus, I still need some way to "output" my final video back to VHS tape
>via the DC10+. Again, I don't know if I need Studio8 or some small
>"output" application.
>
>My WinXP systems are stable and running just fine right now. I do not
>want to "destabilize" them just to accommodate Pinnacle software. But I
>do want to capture, edit and record back to tape some nice videos of the
>kids' sporting activities!
Well, it always pays (timewise) to backup your stable system with
Norton's Ghost--creates perfect image of your harddrive. This is
necessary for anyone who edits video using any capture card and using
any capture/editting software.
Also, there's not really any capture card or software that is
considered stable for everyone's computer system. You will always find
disgruntled users for any card (or any computer hardware device or
software product). Sometimes, you just have to take a chance and if it
doesn't work out (after asking for help), move on to something else.
This is especially true for people who first get into video capturing.
Besides, you can always Ebay your card if it doesn't work for you. You
should be able to recoup most if not all of the cost for your DC10+
and Studio 8. Many people are willing to buy the DC10+. I might even
pick up an extra DC10+, before the Movie Industry outlaws and puts
software locks on all capture cards that can circumvent Macrovision
copyprotection (which is starting to happen if you look at the latest
capture devices and the next version of Windows OS).
cassy
>Susan - thanks for your input. I don't disagree with your recommendation
>but I'm not ready to spend money on a digital camcorder (which I think
>would be the easiest way to go .... i.e. analog pass-through) or an
>external converter box.
I used to be curious about trying the analog-to-DV-bridge option but I
tried recompressing my AVIs under DV codecs and compared it to
recompressing it under MJPEG. The results were not close.
DV codecs produced much more visible macroblocks in fast moving, noisy
scenes. That is probably due to DV's low bitrate limit.
With MJPEG using the highest bitrate, I didn't notice blocks in my AVI
file. Of course, higher bitrates means bigger file sizes but I find
macroblocks in DV unacceptable.
Also, the price factor at $220+ was bad for the budget. Plus, you you
need a firewire port (or compatible firewire card at additional cost).
I think the main reason people praise the analog to DV bridge devices
is because they don't cause incompatibility problems on most people's
systems (kinda like a last resort for the damned). However, they don't
necessarily produce the best quality video (in terms of macroblocks
and color fidelity--some say these DV bridges produce faded colors).
cassy
wrote:
>Apart from this DV video is not more or less troublesome than say
>MJPEG. There are just some more marketing related reasons that favour
>DV over other formats like i.e.
I agree that DV is a lot of hype. DV tends to produce more macroblocks
than the higher bitrate MJPEG. I can see this even without going frame
by frame.
Maybe they should create a next generation DV codec that can permit
higher bitrates and adjustable bitrates. As for now, I'm sticking
with MJPEG and Huffy.
Markus Zingg
>under Win9X because AVI_IO is currently only supported under Win9X.
>:)
>
>Just joking Markus. But, please release AVI_IO for XP. Don't quit on
>us.
No worries about the joke, but still, under W9x, the DC10+ drivers
come with a Video for Widnows interface that can be used with ANY
video editing software where as the DirectShow interface is much more
restrictive. I.e. you can use Premiere to capture with the DC10+ under
W9x, but you can't do the same thing with the DS drivers. That's what
I refered to.
I don't intend to "quit" here :) It's just that my current (well,
meanwhile ongoing for quite a while) workload still does not leave
much time for AVI_IO left over. I meanwhile completed support for
OpenDML 1.02 but will have to integrate this module into AVI_IO and
I'm now working on the DirectShow part. Again, I can't give any
reasonable estimation of a release date or such cause the factors that
define the time I can spend on AVI_IO are out of my control -
unfortunately.
Markus
JoJo
> I use the DC10+ to capture in Studio 7 (Markus please release AVI_IO
> for XP soon!) and edit/resize in VirtualDub and am happy with the
> results when making VCDs/SVCDs. I plan to make DVDs (just bought a
> burner but no software) as soon as I get a decent dvd authoring
> software.
For me at this moment there are two choices.
TMPGenc DVD Author. Very good. Very Easy to use.
And DVD-lab. Very flexibel in menu-design. More difficult to learn.
--
Johan
http://jojo.havank.com of http://jojo.nb.nu
Over Videobewerking en DVD authoring.
Reactie op usenetpostjes svp in de groep.
Samuel Paik
> I agree that DV is a lot of hype. DV tends to produce more macroblocks
> than the higher bitrate MJPEG.
For many people, the question is how they compare at the SAME bitrate.
> Maybe they should create a next generation DV codec that can permit
> higher bitrates and adjustable bitrates. As for now, I'm sticking
> with MJPEG and Huffy.
DV50, DV at 50 mbits/sec, exists in some pro gear.
Sam
Jeffery S. Jones
>On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 23:19:24 +0200, Markus Zingg <m.z...@nct.ch>
>wrote:
>
>>Apart from this DV video is not more or less troublesome than say
>>MJPEG. There are just some more marketing related reasons that favour
>>DV over other formats like i.e.
>
>I agree that DV is a lot of hype. DV tends to produce more macroblocks
>than the higher bitrate MJPEG. I can see this even without going frame
>by frame.
DV works on tape. No MJPEG codec does that, especially at the DV
bitrate. MJPEG's advantage comes not from the format, but from the
option to use a higher bitrate. Anyone who's worked with recording to
tape knows that you cannot increase the bitrate on a given tape
format.
DV is far better supported across devices and codecs than MJPEG.
Much depends on what you want to do with your video. If you plan to
record in DV and output to DV or DVD, then DV is a perfect codec to
use. You can't get higher data rates off DV tape, and the interfacing
issues are basically nonexistent.
>Maybe they should create a next generation DV codec that can permit
>higher bitrates and adjustable bitrates. As for now, I'm sticking
>with MJPEG and Huffy.
DV50 exists, 4:2:2 and 50 megabits/second. Only pro gear uses it
though. There are apps which can use DV50 codecs, and it does make a
difference if you can use them. No variable bit rate is likely --
tape data streams are rather rigid, and interchange requires that all
devices using it conform to a single standard.
MJPEG and Huffy are ideal for high bit rate analog captures. If you
have high resolution analog source and wish to capture with maximum
quality, that is what you want to use (or some other high bit rate,
low loss or lossless codec).
--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>
GMAN
If you got both for $49 then by all means hell yes use it. I still use my ol'
DC10+ and studio 7 along with a Analog to DV converter and i find many
advantages and disadvantages to both.
But yes the DC10+ works beautifully in a modern PC , mine being as follows
Asus P4P800 Deluxe MB
P4 2.4c 800mhz bus (Overclocked to 3.1 ghz at 1ghz bus speed)
1 gig DDR400 800mhz memory
400 gb HD space
ATI Radeon 7200 AIW card
SB live 5.1
GMAN
>On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 19:16:39 GMT, acton <noe...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>Susan - thanks for your input. I don't disagree with your recommendation
>>but I'm not ready to spend money on a digital camcorder (which I think
>>would be the easiest way to go .... i.e. analog pass-through) or an
>>external converter box.
>
>I used to be curious about trying the analog-to-DV-bridge option but I
>tried recompressing my AVIs under DV codecs and compared it to
>recompressing it under MJPEG. The results were not close.
>
>DV codecs produced much more visible macroblocks in fast moving, noisy
>scenes. That is probably due to DV's low bitrate limit.
>
But you are viewing those DV encoded files on a non interlaced pc screen .
They will look excellent on a tv screen when output
>With MJPEG using the highest bitrate, I didn't notice blocks in my AVI
>file. Of course, higher bitrates means bigger file sizes but I find
>macroblocks in DV unacceptable.
>
Its all because you were recrompressing an already compressed file
>Also, the price factor at $220+ was bad for the budget. Plus, you you
>need a firewire port (or compatible firewire card at additional cost).
>
Most new pcs have the port, or you can buy any OHCI compatible card, many are
only $15 or so.
>I think the main reason people praise the analog to DV bridge devices
>is because they don't cause incompatibility problems on most people's
>systems (kinda like a last resort for the damned). However, they don't
>necessarily produce the best quality video (in terms of macroblocks
>and color fidelity--some say these DV bridges produce faded colors).
Once again, if viewed on pc screen, not on tv
cassy
>cassy <ca...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I agree that DV is a lot of hype. DV tends to produce more macroblocks
>> than the higher bitrate MJPEG.
>
>For many people, the question is how they compare at the SAME bitrate.
Actually, I was referring to the current upper bitrate limits of
Analog to DV bridges (which some claim to be the perfect home capture
solution) which are in fact limited by the DV codec which has a much
lower bitrate than MJPEG. I prefer much higher bitrate than the DV
codec can offer when capping from old tapes, especially since I can
see glaring macroblocks after encoding the same AVI clip to DV versus
reencoding to MJPEG. High bitrate capturing is especialy important
for dvd authoring of old, nondigital source material (VHS/beta tapes).
While comparing MJPEG at a lower bitrate that is comparable to DV's
max/only bitrate is good for academic discussions on codec and bitrate
efficiency, for practical reasons MJPEG is simply more suitable for
home video capturing. MJPEG provides more adequate bitrate upper range
than the current consumer DV codec. Huffy is even more preferable but
MJPEG is quite adequate for my purposes (capturing tapes to AVI
without visible macroblocks during playback).
In this respect, Analog to DV bridges are hampered by the DV codec's
low bitrate limitation and may not be the perfect solution people tout
it to be, primarily since very visible macroblocks can be introduced
by DV codec's bitrate insufficiency. And macroblocks destroy valuable
video detail that cannot be restored.
>> Maybe they should create a next generation DV codec that can permit
>> higher bitrates and adjustable bitrates. As for now, I'm sticking
>> with MJPEG and Huffy.
>
>DV50, DV at 50 mbits/sec, exists in some pro gear.
Interesting. Is DV50's bitrate adjustable/specifiable? Or is it set at
50 mbits/s? How long does it take to transfer a typical Pro DV50 tape
recording to HD using firewire/firewire2 port? Or does it need a
special connection?
acton
see below.
thanks again!
cassy <ca...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:44vvkvsuii6us2gqi...@4ax.com:
> On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 13:35:34 GMT, acton <noe...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm sorry ... I don't understand what "edit/resize in VirtualDub"
>>means. I don't understand why you need VirtualDub. What does it do?
>>Can you help me understand?
>
> I capture my video by using Pinnacle Studio 7.
>
> VirtualDub is a freeware linear editor. The benefits of VirtualDub
> are:
> (1) Free Linear editor
> (2) Good for noise reduction, color correction, deinterlacing.
What is deinterlacing?
Do I need to do it for outputting back to VHS tape?
What about for creating SVCDs?
> (3) Many free 3rd party filters with new ones being constantly
> developed.
> (4) Can frameserve to other apps like MPEG encoders so you don't have
> to save to an intermediate files (saves HD space) or lose quality from
> saving intermediate files.
So where do I find instructions on how to set up the "frameserver"?
>
> The reason I resize in VirtualDub is because you need to capture at a
> higher resolution to make good quality VCD/SVCD. I capture at 640x480,
> edit (noise reduction mainly), and finally resize down to 352x240 or
> 480x480 right before encoding to a VCD/SVCD compliant MPEG.
Is video resolution related to aspect ratio?
For instance, since SVCD is intended for playback on standard TV sets
(which has a 4:3 aspect ratio), why does it have a "square" resolution
(i.e. 480x480) instead of a 4:3 resolution (i.e. 640x480)?
>
> VirtualDub is not meant for complex editting or rearranging scenes or
> for titling or adding fade effects. Use Studio 7 or 8 for more complex
> editting or titling.
>
>>Other questions:
>>
>>So ... do you capture with Pinnacle software, then process with other?
>>I want to edit in Movie Maker .... is this possible?
>
> Yes. The DC10+ captures to an AVI file using MJPEG compression.
> VirtualDub has internal MJPEG codecs. Studio can obviously handle
> MJPEG. For Movie Maker, you might need to install an external MJPEG
> codec (PicVideo or Morgan). I think there a freeware MJPEG being
> developed (at sourceforge?).
If I need to install the PicVideo codec, I've read that the free version
adds a watermark. Does it do this for both compression and
decompression? Since the DC10+ board will use its hardware MJPEG codec
for capture (i.e. compression), I assume I only need the PicVideo to
"decompress". Correct?
If so, will PicVideo add the watermark during this "decompression-only"
step?
>
>>Do I have to load the entire Pinnacle Studio 8 software just to do
>>capture or is there a small "capture" application that I can load
>>(since I don't plan to use Studio 8 for editing)?
>
> Yes, you have to install the whole thing since that is the only way to
> install DC10+'s drivers (I know it's a pain but Pinnacle won't release
> separate XP drivers for the DC10+ and people have been begging for
> years). Also, Pinnacle Studio is created to be a all-in-one
> application (drivers, capturing to AVI, editting, encoding to final
> MPEG format).
>
>>I've read lots of troubling posts about crashing problems with Studio
>>8 so I am worried about installing it.
>
> Well, for capturing, Studio is pretty stable (as long as all codecs,
> drivers directx, newest video card drivers are installed properly).
How can I tell if all the codecs I need are installed ... and installed
correctly?
Is there a command-line program or some freeware app to tell me which
codecs are installed on my computer? I'm running WinXP Home.
>
> For some people, it's the editting part that may cause stability
> problems in Studio 8 according to Studio 8 users (I use the older
> Studio 7 and haven't noticed any glaring stabilty problems). If you
> are worried about editting stability, you can use another editor like
> Ulead or VegasVideo or Premiere or MovieMaker.
>
> Personally, I haven't done much editting with Studio so I can't vouch
> for other's negative opinion regarding Studio 8's editting (besides, I
> use Studio 7).
>
>>What is the file format of the captured DC10+ file? I've read that it
>>has MJPEG codec. Is the MJPEG compression "readable" by Movie Maker
>>and other software?
>
> Yes, but you *might* need to download a 3rd party MJPEG codec (see
> above).
>
>>> I tried a BT878 card once and experienced a lot of video
>>> interference noise in my captures so I went back to my DC10+ which
>>> was very very clear (no interference at all).
>>
>>This is good information. I assume these experiences were from the
>>same computer so the noise evironment was the same?
>
> Yes. I plugined in the BT878 card (using the latest drivers) and used
> it for a few weeks and the video captures just didn't look good (very
> noisy even using thick Composite cables and I was not using the tuner
> at all). I even bought a S-Video cable to capture from my dvd player
> but I still saw unnecessary noise. Then, I yanked out the BT878 and
> popped in the DC10+ and wow, all the clarity came back.
This is a strong point in favor of installing and using the DC10+ for
capture. Since I already have the Pinnacle PCTV (BT878-based PCI card)
installed in my computer (for watching TV), can I plug the DC10+ into
the same computer without removing the PCTV card?
Wow ... cool .... again this is a strong reason to consider using the
DC10+ .... thanks for trying it out.
>
> The Output to Tape is very easy to use and maintains original source
> quality. But you have to stick with MJPEG as the AVI compression codec
> (don't use Huffy or DV). If you do use another codec (Huffy or DV),
> when you press Create, it will take a while (I think it has to play
> the whole movie length) to render the AVI file before you can output
> to tape. So for time saving purposes, stick with MJPEG since it will
> allow immediate output to tape (no need to render it).
Good advice ... but remember, I want to use Movie Maker as my scene
editor. I'm not sure Movie Maker can save my movie as an MJPEG AVI file
(the only "uncompressed" option I see in MM is DV-AVI). If I save it as
DV-AVI, can I still "output" that to tape through Studio/DC10+
combination?
Will I lose quality by saving in the intermediate DV-AVI format?
>
> *There was an experimental 3rd party application that let you open any
> AVI (huffy, divx, etc) and output it to tape for the DC10+. I found
> the link somewhere but lost it. I'll post it when I find it.
That would be cool. Please post it if you can find it!
>
>>Or can I just "play" the DV-AVI file to the analog output port on the
>>DC10+ with some small application?
>>
>>Thx in advance for any help!
>
> Again, I will try to find the experimental 3rd party app. It was
> created for the DC30+ card but some people claim it worked for the
> DC10+ as well.
Thanks again for all your help!
cassy
wrote:
>For me at this moment there are two choices.
>TMPGenc DVD Author. Very good. Very Easy to use.
>And DVD-lab. Very flexibel in menu-design. More difficult to learn.
Thanks for the tip. I just DL-ed both and trying them out right this
moment
Jeffery S. Jones
>On 30 Aug 2003 05:28:01 -0700, s...@paiks.org (Samuel Paik) wrote:
>
>>cassy <ca...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> I agree that DV is a lot of hype. DV tends to produce more macroblocks
>>> than the higher bitrate MJPEG.
>>
>>For many people, the question is how they compare at the SAME bitrate.
>
>Actually, I was referring to the current upper bitrate limits of
>Analog to DV bridges (which some claim to be the perfect home capture
>solution) which are in fact limited by the DV codec which has a much
>lower bitrate than MJPEG. I prefer much higher bitrate than the DV
>codec can offer when capping from old tapes, especially since I can
>see glaring macroblocks after encoding the same AVI clip to DV versus
>reencoding to MJPEG. High bitrate capturing is especialy important
>for dvd authoring of old, nondigital source material (VHS/beta tapes).
It is a matter of the analog source quality combined with the
efficiency of the DV encoder. Plus of course, the limitations of the
final output product, and the tolerance for digital artifacting by the
viewer.
People used to DVDs and digital TV signals tend to be more tolerant
of DV artifacts. The bit rate of DV is way above that of digital TV
or DVDs. Most people watch their edited output on VHS tape or DVD,
either of which has less potential detail than DV.
>While comparing MJPEG at a lower bitrate that is comparable to DV's
>max/only bitrate is good for academic discussions on codec and bitrate
>efficiency, for practical reasons MJPEG is simply more suitable for
>home video capturing. MJPEG provides more adequate bitrate upper range
>than the current consumer DV codec. Huffy is even more preferable but
>MJPEG is quite adequate for my purposes (capturing tapes to AVI
>without visible macroblocks during playback).
>
>In this respect, Analog to DV bridges are hampered by the DV codec's
>low bitrate limitation and may not be the perfect solution people tout
>it to be, primarily since very visible macroblocks can be introduced
>by DV codec's bitrate insufficiency. And macroblocks destroy valuable
>video detail that cannot be restored.
But from most consumer tape sources, the video quality being
retained is noise rather than useful detail. Filtering out the noise
should eliminate the blockiness, and is best done prior to capture if
possible.
>>> Maybe they should create a next generation DV codec that can permit
>>> higher bitrates and adjustable bitrates. As for now, I'm sticking
>>> with MJPEG and Huffy.
>>
>>DV50, DV at 50 mbits/sec, exists in some pro gear.
>
>Interesting. Is DV50's bitrate adjustable/specifiable? Or is it set at
>50 mbits/s? How long does it take to transfer a typical Pro DV50 tape
>recording to HD using firewire/firewire2 port? Or does it need a
>special connection?
DV50 is fixed bit rate, same as DV (which is actually defined as
DV25). Transfer rate for DV tape is always real time via firewire,
because of the limitations of the tape transport (no consumer or even
low end pro unit can play tapes at anything but the original recorded
speed).
DV50 picks up a 2nd advantage besides bit rate -- it uses more bits
to encode color data than DV25 does. But it is the bit rate which is
the primary advantage.
It isn't likely to get used in consumer gear anytime soon. Most
people find DV25, as used in digital camcorders for home use,
sufficiently good, and the cost of DV50 is too high (double data rate
means half recording time, or double size tape cartridges for the same
time, neither of which fits into consumer desires).
What analog to DV bridges do is offer the simplest, trouble-free way
to capture video. Many apps support easy DV capture via firewire, and
the ports often come on the computer. DV camcorders often have analog
input, offering a camcorder owner a way to capture analog without
additional equipment. DV capture also avoids a lot of tweaking issues
regarding data rates, audio and video levels, color correction, and so
forth -- it is just hook up and capture.
Higher bit rate capture is preferrable if you want maximum quality,
have very good analog sources, and your target output is also high
quality -- better than VHS, and ideally, better than VHS sources.
Pro studios using analog gear rather than digital -- most studio
cameras are still analog -- will use high bit rate analog capture,
something like high bit rate MJPEG or some lossless codec (usually
proprietary to their capture gear).
Amateurs with time to play around and good equipment can do the same.
I do think that for analog capture from old VHS or Beta tapes, having
a good TBC with noise filtering features is a very big help. Best to
eliminated unwanted video detail prior to capturing, than to use high
data rates to collect the noise, then filter it later. Unless you
want to retain the noise?
The DV codec does a good job on low noise video sources. Also, if
you want to capture from Video8/Hi8, Digital8 camcorders which can
play those tapes gives you the easiest and usually best quality
captures from them (the D8 camcorder's TBC and playback stabilization
gives a better analog output than most Hi8 playback, thus best input
for DV).