HELP: First attempt at DV capture - corrupt signal

0 views
Skip to first unread message

H Bergeron

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 9:34:58 AM8/25/04
to
Hi, I'm a newbie. I've just installed my firewire card and had my
first go at DV capture from my Canon MV700i

It worked - sort of. But there are "glitches" on the captured footage:
bursts of noise on the audio and flashing squares of colour on the
screen. Neither of these is in evidence when I view the tape on the
camera.

I get the same problem whether I capture with Ulead Videostudio 7 or
Pinnacle 9, so it would seem to be a hardware problem.

But the thing is, the problem is more severe on some parts of the
original tape than others (it's especially bad at the start), and the
patterns/noises crop up predictably, e.g. 4 secs from the start of the
tape there is a big blip followed by a persistent trail of
random-looking squares down the centre of the picture - repeatably for
several attempts at capture.

So the hardware outside the camera (cable, firewire card, PC) isn't
just producing random corruption; something about what the camera is
reading from the tape is at least contributing.

Any ideas?

John Russell

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 9:52:31 AM8/25/04
to

"H Bergeron" <nos...@thank.you> wrote in message
news:4s1pi09kgrjjdb9j9...@4ax.com...

Try just capturing the CCD output direct without using the tape mechanism.
If that has problems then it isn't the tape.


H Bergeron

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 10:01:37 AM8/25/04
to

Thanks, just tried that and haven't been able to replicate the
problem. So it would appear the tape is implicated. I'm off out to buy
a more expensive tape.

But why would the corruption not be visible/audible when played back
on the camera itself?

Jukka Aho

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 10:29:18 AM8/25/04
to
H Bergeron wrote:

> But why would the corruption not be visible/audible when
> played back on the camera itself?

Better error correction / concealment inside the camcorder
than in the DV codec implementation on your PC?

For example, if the camcorder detects errors in the DV stream,
it is technically possible to try and conceal them by repeating
the picture (or parts of it) from a previous, known-good frame.
Maybe the PC DV codec does not this but the codec inside the
camcorder does?

(Just a guess, I have not encountered anything similar.)

--
znark

Tony Morgan

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 10:37:34 AM8/25/04
to
In message <4s1pi09kgrjjdb9j9...@4ax.com>, H Bergeron
<nos...@thank.you> writes

Sounds like a PC memory problem to me. How much memory has your PC got,
and are you running any other programs while running your video editor
to capture?
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info

H Bergeron

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 12:30:39 PM8/25/04
to

Thanks for the response.

I used End it All to shut down other programs.

I have 512 Mb of memory. PC has an AMD Athlon 2200 MHz

>http://www.camcord.info

Been there, very helpful, thank you! I haven't yet followed the advice
there about sorting the interrupt priorities of PCI devices. Don't
know if it'll help my problem but definitely looks worth doing.

OTOH I'm still mystified that the problem is linked to particular
places on the tape (going away completely for capture of what the
camera is shooting that moment, rather than tape playback) and yet the
camera can play back a seemingly error-free signal to its own screen
or to analogue TV input.

Jukka Aho has posted about codecs, which is leading me well out of my
depths. Is there any way of testing his theory, and if it's right, is
the problem curable?

Many thanks for your help already and in anticipation for any more you
can offer!

Cheers.

H Bergeron

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 12:31:36 PM8/25/04
to
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:29:18 +0300, "Jukka Aho" <jukk...@iki.fi>
wrote:

Thanks for the response!

Is there any way I can test this theory, or correct the problem if the
theory is correct?

Tony Morgan

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 2:21:16 PM8/25/04
to
In message <ipepi0lobdbrr2pv6...@4ax.com>, H Bergeron
<nos...@thank.you> writes
Snipped....

>Many thanks for your help already and in anticipation for any more you
>can offer!

Since we seem to have exhausted most other things, how about the USB
card power pull-down? Try disconnecting any non-essential USB devices.

Power drain on the USB card can pull down the voltage to the other PCI
cards - most don't care but the fire-wire card does.
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.rhylonline.com

Matej Artac

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 5:30:56 PM8/25/04
to
"Tony Morgan" <tonym...@xtreme.pipex.net> wrote in message
news:8HZn9gAc...@zen54488.dircon.co.uk...

It's odd that H Begeron reports no artifacts when he captures live video,
i.e. not from the tape. He also says the artifacts seem to be
tape-position-dependent. Do you think it is the control signal somehow
messing up the picture?

It may be a good idea to test the DV capture on another machine, like at
friend's. This should really be a good diagnose whether the problem is on
the cam side or on the computer side. Further, and this may be a bit of a
wild idea, if the problem is driver-related, maybe he could try how it works
in Linux - there are downloadable .iso files that make a bootable CD with
the necessary drivers and software for DV capture.

Matej


mrlipring

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 6:08:34 PM8/25/04
to

"Tony Morgan" <tonym...@xtreme.pipex.net> wrote in message
news:JgFa0$AuQKL...@zen54488.dircon.co.uk...

> In message <4s1pi09kgrjjdb9j9...@4ax.com>, H Bergeron
>
> Sounds like a PC memory problem to me. How much memory has your PC got,
> and are you running any other programs while running your video editor
> to capture?
> --
> Tony Morgan
> http://www.camcord.info

sounds like you're just saying random things to me. It's nothing to do with
the memory. Did you read the entire thread? it consistently happens with
that tape, but not with straight-from-the-ccd capturing.


mrlipring

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 6:09:22 PM8/25/04
to

"Tony Morgan" <tonym...@xtreme.pipex.net> wrote in message
news:8HZn9gAc...@zen54488.dircon.co.uk...

you're just making it up! You're pulling stuff outta your ass again. Jesus,
you're incredible!


mrlipring

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 6:15:01 PM8/25/04
to

"H Bergeron" <nos...@thank.you> wrote in message
news:ipepi0lobdbrr2pv6...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:37:34 +0100, Tony Morgan
>
> Many thanks for your help already and in anticipation for any more you
> can offer!
>
> Cheers.

ok, we seem to be sure it's a problem with the tape, or your camera's
tape-reading/decoding process, yes?

the problem happens with capturing from the tape, but not straight from the
ccd.

Is it possible for you to experiment further?

Can you:

try a different tape? record onto a new tape, and try and capture the
footage. Does it give the same errors?

try capturing with a different camera? try the same tape (and other tapes if
you like) with (a) different camera(s), to see whether it's possible a
camera problem, or a tape problem.

Try re-recording over the apparently affected portion of tape, to see if
it's a problem with the tape itself, rather than the data recorded on it?

I must admit that i don't know enough about the process of recording to a
tape or reading from a tape to be able to say why it's happening, but at
least this way we could ascertain *what* is happening.


H Bergeron

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 6:40:41 PM8/25/04
to

Thanks, will try that when I next get a chance to tinker - might be
the weekend now.

Will report back if I make any progress.

H Bergeron

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 6:45:27 PM8/25/04
to
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:30:56 +0200, "Matej Artac"
<matej.art...@guest.arnes.si> wrote:

>"Tony Morgan" <tonym...@xtreme.pipex.net> wrote in message
>news:8HZn9gAc...@zen54488.dircon.co.uk...
>> In message <ipepi0lobdbrr2pv6...@4ax.com>, H Bergeron
>> <nos...@thank.you> writes
>> Snipped....
>>
>> >Many thanks for your help already and in anticipation for any more you
>> >can offer!
>>
>> Since we seem to have exhausted most other things, how about the USB
>> card power pull-down? Try disconnecting any non-essential USB devices.
>>
>> Power drain on the USB card can pull down the voltage to the other PCI
>> cards - most don't care but the fire-wire card does.
>
>It's odd that H Begeron reports no artifacts when he captures live video,
>i.e. not from the tape. He also says the artifacts seem to be
>tape-position-dependent.

Done a few more trials. The "artifacts" are not utterly predictable to
the frame, but their frequency and type do appear to depend on tape
position. I am still unable to replicate on live video.

>Do you think it is the control signal somehow
>messing up the picture?
>
>It may be a good idea to test the DV capture on another machine, like at
>friend's. This should really be a good diagnose whether the problem is on
>the cam side or on the computer side. Further, and this may be a bit of a
>wild idea, if the problem is driver-related, maybe he could try how it works
>in Linux - there are downloadable .iso files that make a bootable CD with
>the necessary drivers and software for DV capture.
>
>Matej

Ideas gratefully noted. Will be a few days before I get the chance to
try on another PC. Will report back here if I find any answers.

Many many thanks for the input.

H Bergeron

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 6:49:53 PM8/25/04
to
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:15:01 +0100, "mrlipring"
<mrlipring@@@@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"H Bergeron" <nos...@thank.you> wrote in message
>news:ipepi0lobdbrr2pv6...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:37:34 +0100, Tony Morgan
>>
>> Many thanks for your help already and in anticipation for any more you
>> can offer!
>>
>> Cheers.
>
>ok, we seem to be sure it's a problem with the tape, or your camera's
>tape-reading/decoding process, yes?
>
>the problem happens with capturing from the tape, but not straight from the
>ccd.
>
>Is it possible for you to experiment further?
>
>Can you:
>
>try a different tape? record onto a new tape, and try and capture the
>footage. Does it give the same errors?

Bought a slightly higher quality tape (Sony Premium) and tried again.
Got the same glitches, perhaps with lower frequency.

>try capturing with a different camera? try the same tape (and other tapes if
>you like) with (a) different camera(s), to see whether it's possible a
>camera problem, or a tape problem.

Good idea, I'll see if I can borrow another camera.

>Try re-recording over the apparently affected portion of tape, to see if
>it's a problem with the tape itself, rather than the data recorded on it?

Don't really want to lose that recording unless I can confirm it's
irretrievably corrupt, but I can see this is a sensible idea!

>I must admit that i don't know enough about the process of recording to a
>tape or reading from a tape to be able to say why it's happening, but at
>least this way we could ascertain *what* is happening.
>

Many many thanks for the input. I will report back here with my
results (if any).

Jukka Aho

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 7:12:25 PM8/25/04
to
H Bergeron wrote:

>> try capturing with a different camera? try the same tape (and
>> other tapes if you like) with (a) different camera(s), to see
>> whether it's possible a camera problem, or a tape problem.

> Good idea, I'll see if I can borrow another camera.

You might also want to try playing back the offending tapes
in your camera, but connected to some other computer (with a
known-good Firewire setup.)

--
znark

mrlipring

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 7:28:50 PM8/25/04
to
"H Bergeron" <nos...@thank.you> wrote in message
news:9l5qi05a9rl3tfssr...@4ax.com...

>
> Bought a slightly higher quality tape (Sony Premium) and tried again.
> Got the same glitches, perhaps with lower frequency.

Have you tried recording in sp and lp to see if it makes any difference?

mrlipring

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 8:04:11 PM8/25/04
to

"Jukka Aho" <jukk...@iki.fi> wrote in message
news:cgj6cb$d$1...@plaza.suomi.net...

I think that the fact that it only happens with tapes, several tapes at
that, and is reliably repeatable, rules out the pc. If we just record what
the camera's currently seeing, everything works fine, and takes all pc
issues (especially those of memory...) out of the equation.

Actually though, what DV codecs does the op have installed?


G Hardy

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 9:14:07 PM8/25/04
to
> Power drain on the USB card can pull down the voltage to the other PCI
> cards - most don't care but the fire-wire card does.

Even if this were the case (I've never heard that, although I've no other
reason to doubt what you've said) there is no power used by DV capture via
firewire. This is apparent because the camera uses a four-pin connector
(whether or not you use four pins or six at the computer end) the two
missing pins being the power supply.


G Hardy

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 9:14:52 PM8/25/04
to
>
> Have you tried recording in sp and lp to see if it makes any difference?
>

LOL - beat me to it.

Was the original recording made on a different camcorder using LP?


G Hardy

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 9:16:35 PM8/25/04
to
> > Sounds like a PC memory problem to me.
>
> sounds like you're just saying random things to me.

However misguided the advice, don't knock it. He's trying to help. If the
reasoning is flawed, explain why, rather than just laying into him.


mrlipring

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 9:23:14 PM8/25/04
to

"G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:TRaXc.218$h53...@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...

He does this every time though. No matter whether he knows what he's talking
about, no matter whether he's read the thread properly or not, he answers
and offers "advice". It's not advice. Not good advice at least, he's almost
always wrong from what i've seen. I don't doubt he knows "stuff", he just
talks about stuff he knows nothing about far too much.

Giving someone bad advice is worse than sitting back and letting the more
knowledgeable step in.


G Hardy

unread,
Aug 25, 2004, 10:45:44 PM8/25/04
to
> Giving someone bad advice is worse than sitting back and letting the more
> knowledgeable step in.
>

I agree entirely - but the OP has no way of knowing (if he knew the answer,
he would not have asked the question). If a response is wrong, you do not
give your opinion any credence unless you justify it.

And, believe it or not, once person posting an incorrect opinion holds more
weight than the half dozen people saying nothing more than how wrong that
opinion is.


Tony Morgan

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 2:38:08 AM8/26/04
to
In message <zPaXc.216$h53...@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net>, G Hardy
<nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com> writes

>Even if this were the case (I've never heard that, although I've no
>other reason to doubt what you've said) there is no power used by DV
>capture via firewire.

True, but the firewire card will not work correctly without the correct
power supply. Load on the PCI bus by the USB card can pull down the
voltage available (up to 200mA for each USB device). And the PCI bus is
decoupled by RC filters - which imposes a voltage drop depending on
current drawn.

You might have noticed that some (better) USB PCI cards have a four-pin
power connector on-board. This allows a direct power feed from the PSU
harness to the board.

In the past (here) a number of people have solved this very problem by
using an external powered USB bridge - which is something that the OP
could try.

John Russell

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 3:53:46 AM8/26/04
to

"Jukka Aho" <jukk...@iki.fi> wrote in message
news:cgi7nm$ksp$1...@plaza.suomi.net...

But wouldn't a camera equipped with good drop out correction use that to fix
the DV out, not just the displayed LCD image?


:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 4:41:24 AM8/26/04
to

"G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:TRaXc.218$h53...@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...

[ re Mr Morgan ]

You're new around here, aren't you....


G Hardy

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 7:14:17 AM8/26/04
to
> [ re Mr Morgan ]
> > > > Sounds like a PC memory problem to me.
> > >
> > > sounds like you're just saying random things to me.
> >
> > However misguided the advice, don't knock it. He's trying to help. If
the
> > reasoning is flawed, explain why, rather than just laying into him.
> >
>
> You're new around here, aren't you....
>

No - I'm a regular lurker, and know well how everyone reacts when Tony gets
it wrong, and how he gets defensive when he's harangued for it. Whenever I
do "decloak" I usually get drawn into some scrap or other between you and
Tony. Last time it was about using disc media as backups which (as I recall)
you and Tony agreed on, and it was me who was the outcast.

I changed my nick since then, because I subscribed to uk.rec.humour, and
someone already had it. Considering the amount of bad blood that flows in
this group (for some reason - I'd love to understand why videographers can't
get on) it's really good that in my newsgroup list, this group and the
humour group lie side by side. Of the two, I read this one first, because I
usually need a pick-me-up by the time I'm finished.

Message has been deleted

Dave R

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 8:56:11 AM8/26/04
to
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:14:17 GMT, "G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com>
allegedly wrote:

> No - I'm a regular lurker

Well as you've now progressed to posting, please sort out your news reader
so that it leaves in the attributions. Then we all know who you are
replying to, without have to reload previous articles. Cheers.

G Hardy

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 12:53:59 PM8/26/04
to
> Well as you've now progressed to posting, please sort out your news reader
> so that it leaves in the attributions. Then we all know who you are
> replying to, without have to reload previous articles. Cheers.

LOL - the posts are less than 24 hours old. You'd rather see the whole
thread reproduced in one post than look back through previous ones?

If you don't like the way I edit them, I've no problem being in your
killfile.


Malcolm Knight

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 1:13:15 PM8/26/04
to
"G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:HAoXc.641$Jn6...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...

> > Well as you've now progressed to posting, please sort out your news
reader
> > so that it leaves in the attributions. Then we all know who you are
> > replying to, without have to reload previous articles. Cheers.
>
> LOL - the posts are less than 24 hours old. You'd rather see the whole
> thread reproduced in one post than look back through previous ones?

That's not what was said, you were asked only to leave in the attribution.
Look it up in a dictionary if that's too long a word for you.

> If you don't like the way I edit them, I've no problem being in your
> killfile.

Welcome to mine, selfish buffoon.
--
Malcolm


Jukka Aho

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 1:01:26 PM8/26/04
to
G Hardy wrote:

>> Well as you've now progressed to posting, please sort out your news
>> reader so that it leaves in the attributions. Then we all know who
>> you are replying to, without have to reload previous articles.
>> Cheers.

> LOL - the posts are less than 24 hours old. You'd rather see the whole
> thread reproduced in one post than look back through previous ones?

He did not ask you to leave in "the whole thread reproduced in one
post". He only asked you to leave in the attributions, such as the
line "G Hardy wrote:" above.

--
znark

G Hardy

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 1:27:13 PM8/26/04
to
> He did not ask you to leave in "the whole thread reproduced in one
> post". He only asked you to leave in the attributions, such as the
> line "G Hardy wrote:" above.

Aaah - I see.

So instead of looking in the "from" column in the message list, he wants me
to waste space by holding his hand and maintaining the running commentary,
when I'm only ever responding to the post above mine.

It's the first time anyone's ever mentioned that to me. Not that it's going
to change the way I post.


:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 1:38:45 PM8/26/04
to

"G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:R3pXc.702$Jn6...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...

> > He did not ask you to leave in "the whole thread reproduced in one
> > post". He only asked you to leave in the attributions, such as the
> > line "G Hardy wrote:" above.
>
> Aaah - I see.
>
> So instead of looking in the "from" column in the message list, he wants
me
> to waste space by holding his hand and maintaining the running commentary,
> when I'm only ever responding to the post above mine.

Not everyone uses version 6 of Outlook Express, not everyone has the same
fields showing. It's got nothing what so ever to do with hand holding, what
if his NNTP server never received the message you are replying to, the
reader will have no previous message to even refer back to. What if the
message becomes deleted, now or in the future ? It looks to me that you
(like so many others) need to learn some basic facts about how Usenet works.

>
> It's the first time anyone's ever mentioned that to me. Not that it's
going
> to change the way I post.
>

Well if you want to look like a stubborn mule....


G Hardy

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 2:40:39 PM8/26/04
to
> Not everyone uses version 6 of Outlook Express...

Your point being?

Dave (who started this tangent) uses Xnews, which does show the sender in
the list of messages. If it can be configured so that column is missing, and
that's what he's done, why does it then become my problem to keep him
appraised as to who wrote what?


> ...what


> if his NNTP server never received the message you are replying to, the
> reader will have no previous message to even refer back to

Again, why am I reasponsible for accommodating his ISP's inadequacies? If
the message didn't get to his server, surely it's his responsibility to
establish the conversation background, not mine.


> Well if you want to look like a stubborn mule....

And a buffoon, it seems.


:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 3:29:30 PM8/26/04
to

"G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:H8qXc.898$Jn6...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...

> > Not everyone uses version 6 of Outlook Express...
>
> Your point being?
>
> Dave (who started this tangent) uses Xnews, which does show the sender in
> the list of messages. If it can be configured so that column is missing,
and
> that's what he's done, why does it then become my problem to keep him
> appraised as to who wrote what?

Why bother to include anything with your reply then, you obviously think
including parts of the previous text that you are replying to is important,
so why not who you are talking to or about ?

>
>
> > ...what
> > if his NNTP server never received the message you are replying to, the
> > reader will have no previous message to even refer back to
>
> Again, why am I reasponsible for accommodating his ISP's inadequacies? If
> the message didn't get to his server, surely it's his responsibility to
> establish the conversation background, not mine.

No, the Usenet convention is to quote the name and message reference so that
if now or at some point later people can trace the previous message. Yes he
is responsible for obtaining the required message(s), but you are required
to supply a reference to allow that - surely ?...

>
>
> > Well if you want to look like a stubborn mule....
>
> And a buffoon, it seems.
>

Well if the hat fits....


H Bergeron

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 3:38:22 PM8/26/04
to

Not yet, have used only sp so far. Will try lp to see if there's any
change in the effect and report back here. Won't have a chance to play
until the weekend though.

Many thanks for the input!

H Bergeron

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 3:39:23 PM8/26/04
to

No, only one camera involved and only sp mode used.

Many thanks for the input.

Jukka Aho

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 3:35:07 PM8/26/04
to
G Hardy wrote:

> So instead of looking in the "from" column in the message
> list, he wants me to waste space by holding his hand and
> maintaining the running commentary, when I'm only ever
> responding to the post above mine.

Not all newsreader programs show posts threaded (i.e. stacked
under each other in a tree-like hierarchy) - nor do all people
want to read them that way. Sometimes all you get is just a
simple list of messages, sorted chronologically in the order
in which they were originally sent, regardless of the
discussions in which they "belong".

Also, many of the newsreader programs automatically hide (or
can be configured to automatically hide) the messages you
have already read from the list - not instantly after reading,
but the next time you come back to check if there are any new
messages written to that newsgroup. In other words, the whole
discussion is not necessarily visible all the time - and many
people _like_ it that way.

Moreover, it is the nature of NNTP, Usenet et al. - the whole
system of newsgroups and the servers - that sometimes messages
written on different servers arrive out of order. You may a
followup before the original post.

Last but not least, attribution lines for quoted passages is
an established Usenet tradition, and at least Outlook Express -
the program you seem to be using for posting - inserts them
automatically when replying to a message (so if your messages
do not have attribution lines, you have deliberately edited
them out, manually.)

* * *

Admittedly, the default format for attribution lines is rather
verbose - a little bit _too_ verbose! - on Outlook Express.
This - and a lot of other little defects, such as the lack
of color-coded quote levels and the weird default position
of signatures - can be easily fixed by using the OE-QuoteFix
utility:

<http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/>

* * *

You might also want to see

<http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote1.html>

--
znark

G Hardy

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 3:58:14 PM8/26/04
to
> Why bother to include anything with your reply then, you obviously think
> including parts of the previous text that you are replying to is
important,
> so why not who you are talking to or about ?

I only include what I'm replying to specifically. Everything else is in the
archives. There is no point including the entire content of the previous
thread, just what I am choosing to comment on.

I never reply to more than one post in each post of mine (or at least if I
do, it's through oversight). So it's easy enough to see - the person I'm
replying to is the one above me in the thread. In all the time I've been
using UseNet, you, Dave and Jukka are the only one who seem to have a
problem with this. In fact, even you've never mentioned it before - only
reacting to Dave's post.


> ...the Usenet convention is to quote the name and message reference so
that
> if now or at some point later people can trace the previous message...

You're losing me now. The only UseNet archive I've used is Google Groups,
and that arranges the thread hierarchy in exactly the same way Outlook
Express does, and it tells you who posted the message. I'm sure you can come
up with some archive that doesn't do any of this but if that's what you
three use, I still don't see how that makes it my problem.


> Well if the hat fits....

Indeed.

Let's just agree to differ - if it bothers you that much you can stick me in
your killfile and the massive inconvenience of the way I trim replies will
no longer be a problem for you.


H Bergeron

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 4:00:44 PM8/26/04
to
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:47:04 GMT, N...@yahoo.com (SjT) wrote:

>There's nothing i like more than finding a love letter from H Bergeron
><nos...@thank.you>:
>
>>It worked - sort of. But there are "glitches" on the captured footage:
>>bursts of noise on the audio and flashing squares of colour on the
>>screen. Neither of these is in evidence when I view the tape on the
>>camera.
>
>What are you using to capture?

Hardware: PCI 400 Mbps IEEE 1394 PCI card (same card also has USB 2.0,
but I've not done anything with that)

Software: Pinnacle 9 and Ulead VideoStudio 7. Same problem occurs with
both.

>And are you using the same capture utility to capture your live ccd
>footage as your recorded footage?

Yes

>Maybe you could try a standalone capure utility if you havent already?

Can you recommend one?

>I cannot get my head around this at all, when you view the footage
>back is it definetly present in the footage and not being generated as
>you watch it? i.e. check the waveforms for these sound abnormalities
>to make sure they really are in the recording, and slow the footage
>down in your editing software to check whether the image problems
>appear in slow motion too.

If I try to capture the same footage twice, the glitches do not occur
in exactly the same frame. I can freeze-frame on the problem and it
usually affects only an isolated frame - the ones on either side are
clean.

There is one bit of tape which is particularly badly affected, where
as well as single-frame glitches there is a scatter of bad squares in
a roughty vertical band which persists for several seconds (diiferent
squares in different frames). I only get this pattern from that
particular section of tape but different capture attempts differ from
each other at the single-frame level.

>Also, if you have DV In on your camera maybe you could copy back to
>another tape and see how the video camera plays it back after its been
>in your computer,

Will try this and report back

>if it plays it back fine then obviously the stream
>that is captured is unprocessed by the camera, and maybe this could be
>the fault? -Confused- :(

Many many thanks for the response!

Jukka Aho

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 3:59:24 PM8/26/04
to
John Russell wrote:

> But wouldn't a camera equipped with good drop out correction
> use that to fix the DV out, not just the displayed LCD image?

Could be either way. Maybe the drop out masking functionality
is integrated to the decoder, and there is no way to get out
a repaired raw DV data stream - just the decoded data.

Just a theory, though. Camcorder manufacturers never publicly
document the inner workings of their products (unless the
marketing department has some point to prove.)

--
znark

:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 4:57:11 PM8/26/04
to

"G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:qhrXc.1098$Jn6...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...

> > Why bother to include anything with your reply then, you obviously think
> > including parts of the previous text that you are replying to is
> important,
> > so why not who you are talking to or about ?
>
> I only include what I'm replying to specifically. Everything else is in
the
> archives.

With no way of find them. How does someone know you were replying to me and
not King Kong if you don't leave my message references intact ?!

There is no point including the entire content of the previous
> thread, just what I am choosing to comment on.

But we are not talking about the entire content, just the message
references, are you really that clueless...

>
> I never reply to more than one post in each post of mine (or at least if I
> do, it's through oversight). So it's easy enough to see - the person I'm
> replying to is the one above me in the thread. In all the time I've been
> using UseNet, you, Dave and Jukka are the only one who seem to have a
> problem with this. In fact, even you've never mentioned it before - only
> reacting to Dave's post.
>

You are that clueless about how Usenet works, someone could easily read your
reply BEFORE they receive my message that you have replied to. and have no
idea who you are replying to.

>
> > ...the Usenet convention is to quote the name and message reference so
> that
> > if now or at some point later people can trace the previous message...
>
> You're losing me now. The only UseNet archive I've used is Google Groups,
> and that arranges the thread hierarchy in exactly the same way Outlook
> Express does, and it tells you who posted the message. I'm sure you can
come
> up with some archive that doesn't do any of this but if that's what you
> three use, I still don't see how that makes it my problem.


You said in your message that "However misguided the advice, don't knock it.
He's trying to help." please can you expand on what you meant please.

How is anyone ever going to find the post that contained your original
message or the message you were replying to....

....unless I also quote this bit, or at least part of it,


"G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com> wrote in message

news:TRaXc.218$h53...@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net... ?

>
>
> > Well if the hat fits....
>
> Indeed.
>
> Let's just agree to differ - if it bothers you that much you can stick me
in
> your killfile and the massive inconvenience of the way I trim replies will
> no longer be a problem for you.
>

It's nothing to do with kill files, it's all to do with having a workable
archive that is searchable.

You really do need to get a clue or two about the 'hows and whys' of Usenet
IMO. :~(


H Bergeron

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 6:09:14 PM8/26/04
to
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 02:12:25 +0300, "Jukka Aho" <jukk...@iki.fi>
wrote:

>H Bergeron wrote:
>
>>> try capturing with a different camera? try the same tape (and
>>> other tapes if you like) with (a) different camera(s), to see
>>> whether it's possible a camera problem, or a tape problem.
>
>> Good idea, I'll see if I can borrow another camera.
>
>You might also want to try playing back the offending tapes
>in your camera, but connected to some other computer (with a
>known-good Firewire setup.)

Good idea, I will try this when I get a chance and report back here.
Many thanks for the response!

G Hardy

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 6:12:45 PM8/26/04
to
> You said in your message that "However misguided the advice, don't knock
it.
> He's trying to help." please can you expand on what you meant please.
>
> How is anyone ever going to find the post that contained your original
> message or the message you were replying to....

Erm - that post was 12 levels up from this one.

No wonder people like you need a full history in each post. If you want to
know what I mean, ask in response to that post, not at the bottom of one of
your self-propagated tangents.

Actually - don't bother. If it's not clear, I don't think further
explanation will help.


Jukka Aho

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 6:02:22 PM8/26/04
to
G Hardy wrote:

> Dave and Jukka are the only one who seem to have a
> problem with this. In fact, even you've never
> mentioned it before - only reacting to Dave's post.

I do not have "a problem" with you or your writing style.
I have only attested that attribution lines are an
established convention in Usenet (and related newsgroup
hierarchies) and explained the reasoning behind them;
even offered some links which further explain their
purpose.

Using attribution lines is simple common courtesy to the
readers - in a similar way as using a real name in the
"From" header, dividing your text into easily digestable
paragraphs, trimming your quotes, using ">" as the quote
character (instead of some ad hoc markup), and using a
proper signature delimiter. That is all there is to it.

* * *

I cannot speak for the others, or for you, but to me at
least, the Usenet - and related newsgroup hierarchies,
such as the uk.* hierarchy - is not a place where I
would scribble notes merely for my personal convenience
and enjoyment. I do not write messages to myself; I
rather write them for others to read.

Keeping this in mind, if the purpose of writing messages
is not just warming up my fingers on cold winter nights
but that others could (and would) easily read them, and
maybe find them intelligible enough to comment on them
- which, of course, is my intention; otherwise I would
not be writing them - it does not help my cause a bit if
I deliberately break established Usenet conventions just
for the heck of it, making my messages harder to figure
out than they would necessarily have to be.

--
znark

:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 6:37:16 PM8/26/04
to

"G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:xftXc.1401$Jn6...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...

> > You said in your message that "However misguided the advice, don't knock
> it.
> > He's trying to help." please can you expand on what you meant please.
> >
> > How is anyone ever going to find the post that contained your original
> > message or the message you were replying to....
>
> Erm - that post was 12 levels up from this one.

Exactly, you could quote a message in a weeks time (say if you were away
from the computer for instance), people might have cleared their local
messages and thus have no way of downloading the message to which you were
referring to and read the full context if you don't quite the message
headers ?

>
> No wonder people like you need a full history in each post. If you want to
> know what I mean, ask in response to that post, not at the bottom of one
of
> your self-propagated tangents.

You really don't understand what Usenet is, you really don't, it might be
best if you go back into lurking mode again and try to get a grasp.

>
> Actually - don't bother. If it's not clear, I don't think further
> explanation will help.
>

I don't think I will bother, you are obviously without a clue so any further
explanation is pointless.


G Hardy

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 6:47:32 PM8/26/04
to
> > Dave and Jukka are the only one who seem to have a
> > problem with this. <snip>

>
> I do not have "a problem" with you or your writing style.

I apologise - I've lumped you in with the other two.


> I cannot speak for the others, or for you, but to me at
> least, the Usenet - and related newsgroup hierarchies,
> such as the uk.* hierarchy - is not a place where I
> would scribble notes merely for my personal convenience
> and enjoyment. I do not write messages to myself; I
> rather write them for others to read.

Good point - duly noted.


> ...it does not help my cause a bit if


> I deliberately break established Usenet conventions just
> for the heck of it, making my messages harder to figure
> out than they would necessarily have to be.

Perhaps the reason it's never been an issue before is because I don't
(usually) get involved in long rambling threads, especially when they
deteriorate into an off-topic slagging match. You make some good points, and
you make them well, but you've not commented on the fact that the subject
line hasn't changed throughout this disagreement in "style" or "convention".
Surely if I'm breaking internet conventions, keeping an irrelevant subject
line is a bigger one than neglecting to remind everyone who wrote what.


G Hardy

unread,
Aug 26, 2004, 7:01:57 PM8/26/04
to
> You really don't understand what Usenet is, you really don't, it might be
> best if you go back into lurking mode again and try to get a grasp.

OK


Message has been deleted

Malcolm Knight

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 2:23:25 AM8/27/04
to
"A.B. Normal" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b98af12...@news.newshosting.com...

> > You really don't understand what Usenet is, you really don't, it might
be
> > best if you go back into lurking mode again and try to get a grasp.

Just where are all these cretins suddenly coming from or is it that fool
Hardy in disguise?
--
Malcolm


:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 3:58:28 AM8/27/04
to

"A.B. Normal" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b98af12...@news.newshosting.com...
> <uk.rec.video.digital , :::Jerry:::: , m...@privacy.net>
> <2p770kF...@uni-berlin.de>
> <Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:37:16 +0100>

>
> > Exactly, you could quote a message in a weeks time (say if you were away
> > from the computer for instance), people might have cleared their local
> > messages and thus have no way of downloading the message to which you
were
> > referring to and read the full context if you don't quite the message
> > headers ?
>
> I see , You want people to do stuff on the assumption of what some other
> posters might or might not do .

I assume you are a total moron but that should not stop me from showing you
a little respect....

>
> > > No wonder people like you need a full history in each post. If you
want to
> > > know what I mean, ask in response to that post, not at the bottom of
one
> > of
> > > your self-propagated tangents.
> >
> > You really don't understand what Usenet is, you really don't, it might
be
> > best if you go back into lurking mode again and try to get a grasp.
>

> Actually , It would appear to be yourself who doesnt quite grasp what
> usenet is and by the sound of it you never will .
>
> Setting yourself up as a dictator when you have no more or no less
> rights than anybody on usenet is what exactly ? .

I suggest you read <http://www.usenet.org.uk/> and then read again until you
understand the established conventions of Usenet.


:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 4:02:41 AM8/27/04
to

"G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:8MtXc.1455$Jn6...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...

<snip>


> Surely if I'm breaking internet conventions, keeping an irrelevant subject
> line is a bigger one than neglecting to remind everyone who wrote what.
>

Well your first error is about the internet, Usenet is not the 'internet'.

Next, no it is not a bigger mistake, but as you are totally clueless as to
how Usenet and newsreaders work you have little chance if understanding why.


Dave R

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 7:25:07 AM8/27/04
to
Well this thread certainly ballooned up!


On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:53:59 GMT, "G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com>
allegedly wrote:

> LOL - the posts are less than 24 hours old. You'd rather see the whole
> thread reproduced in one post than look back through previous ones?

All I asked (civilly) is that you leave in the _attribution_ line for the
person whose post you are replying to. You're the only person I've seen
that cuts them out. I didn't believe that Outlook was *that* brain dead,
or are you doing it manually?

> If you don't like the way I edit them, I've no problem being in your
> killfile.

I don't really care if you have a problem with it or not... but thanks for
the update.

I thought it were a enough simple request. It's only 100 characters or
so.

G Hardy

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 7:48:03 AM8/27/04
to
> ...is it that fool
> Hardy in disguise?

Not me - check the headers.


Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

G Hardy

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 10:01:02 AM8/27/04
to
> Sceneanalyzer (I think thats spelt right).

Close - http://www.scenalyzer.com

One of the things it can do is break the capture into multiple scenes, based
on camera cuts. I upgraded to the latest version of my editor, and its
capture utility offered the same. I tried it for a project, and it (roughly)
doubled the time I took to edit the project! I'm sure it's just because I'm
used to working with 13GB DV AVIs.


Dave R

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 10:22:36 AM8/27/04
to
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:05:19 GMT, N...@yahoo.com (SjT) allegedly wrote:

> There's nothing i like more than finding a love letter from

> ":::Jerry::::" <m...@privacy.net>:
>
>>It looks to me that you
>>(like so many others) need to learn some basic facts about how Usenet
>>works.

> He quotes the body text thats all what matters, you don't need to know
> 'WHO' it is that said it as you can look in the thread tree if it
> really bothers you to know,

You're making a huge assumption on how people have their news readers set
up, and the article retention of the various NNTP servers.

> usenet is not a PM system, all posts are
> directed to everyone who subscribes, god you're such a twat at times
> you really are, the guy is looking for help and you jump on him.

You seem to have a thing for Jerry. Just get a room or something.

> ...i've got far better things to be doing then fuelling your
> trollathon.

Clearly you don't :-)

:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 10:51:56 AM8/27/04
to

"A.B. Normal" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b99367a8...@news.newshosting.com...

<snip>

You utter cretin !


:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 10:57:27 AM8/27/04
to

"SjT" <N...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:412ef0a2....@130.133.1.4...

> There's nothing i like more than finding a love letter from
> ":::Jerry::::" <m...@privacy.net>:
>
> >It looks to me that you
> >(like so many others) need to learn some basic facts about how Usenet
works.
>
> I see you're having no problem replying to each of his posts, what a
> load of shit you're spouting Jerry.

>
> He quotes the body text thats all what matters, you don't need to know
> 'WHO' it is that said it as you can look in the thread tree

<snip the rest of your total clap-trap.

What frigging tree you cretin, there is no tree showing, there is no other
message showing. Get a clue you total CRETIN

http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post


Were hhave all these idiot TROLLs come from FFS ?!


:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 11:00:51 AM8/27/04
to

"Dave R" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:Xns95527E9F5A...@130.133.1.4...

> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:53:59 GMT, "G Hardy" <nos...@nospam.ntlworld.com>
> allegedly wrote:
>
> > LOL - the posts are less than 24 hours old. You'd rather see the whole
> > thread reproduced in one post than look back through previous ones?
>
> All I asked (civilly) is that you leave in the _attribution_ line for the
> person whose post you are replying to. You're the only person I've seen
> that cuts them out. I didn't believe that Outlook was *that* brain dead,
> or are you doing it manually?

He is doing it manually, IE will leave all the replied to message intact or
it will remove all of the replied to message.


Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

Dave R

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 12:18:08 PM8/27/04
to
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:53:44 GMT, N...@yahoo.com (SjT) allegedly wrote:

> Well then the other guy can't be blamed because people choose to have
> posts purged once they have been read or they have the tree view
> disabled, don't blame this poor guy i mean comeon it's usenet not a
> fucking invitation to dinner with the queen.

It's one line FFS. It's a de-facto standard used by millions of people
across the world. Even you.

> The guy left the OP body text in his reply that is enough, you dont
> need to know who wrote the original text do you?!

Yes. My memory isn't a computer, I forget things, especially trivial
things, so it's nice to be reminded of who said what.

> This is usenet not some private email chat lobby.

I don't see how this is relevant at all.

> Yeah i do, this group used to be really good with many decent people
> posting and loads of good information, now its just a complete joke,
> hence why i cant be arsed to post on the majority of occasions
> anymore, and it's mainly down to one guy i'm afraid.

That's crap. This group had flame wars going on since it was created.
People have ideas on how to do things, and temperatures get hot.

Yes Jerry's baiting of Tony can wear a bit thin, as does yours of Jerry.

> I can't beleive people have such mental issues tbh, if he has problems
> with what people say on here then why the hell cant he post in a
> polite way instead of flaming and getting so easily annoyed.

I don't know. Try asking him. Politely.

:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 12:29:22 PM8/27/04
to

"SjT" <N...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:412f58b2....@130.133.1.4...
> There's nothing i like more than finding a love letter from Dave R
> <m...@privacy.net>:

>
> >> He quotes the body text thats all what matters, you don't need to know
> >> 'WHO' it is that said it as you can look in the thread tree if it
> >> really bothers you to know,
> >
> >You're making a huge assumption on how people have their news readers set
> >up, and the article retention of the various NNTP servers.
>
> Well then the other guy can't be blamed because people choose to have
> posts purged once they have been read or they have the tree view
> disabled, don't blame this poor guy i mean comeon it's usenet not a
> fucking invitation to dinner with the queen.

No, but it's an invitation to read and make sense of a thread, what if the
person reading the message has never seen the message that has been replied
to, HTF does the reader even go in search of the missing message if (s)he
doesn't have any quoted headers to say what the message ID is - that string
of numbers isn't just added for fun you know !

>
> The guy left the OP body text in his reply that is enough, you dont

> need to know who wrote the original text do you?! This is usenet not


> some private email chat lobby.

Yes, because the message might well have been edited in such a way that the
original meaning is not clear when the message is read a day, week or year
after the reply was sent. Usenet is NOT real time, messages arrive out of
sequence, messages get referred back to a week, month, year or more after it
was originally sent.

>
> He seems a really polite guy and he's been treated like shit and i'm
> defending the poor cunt.

And quite correctly to, if you are defending the idiot you are no better
than he is.

>
> >> usenet is not a PM system, all posts are
> >> directed to everyone who subscribes, god you're such a twat at times
> >> you really are, the guy is looking for help and you jump on him.
> >
> >You seem to have a thing for Jerry. Just get a room or something.
>

> Yeah i do, this group used to be really good with many decent people
> posting and loads of good information, now its just a complete joke,
> hence why i cant be arsed to post on the majority of occasions
> anymore, and it's mainly down to one guy i'm afraid.

So what you are saying is that since those people cam along it has become a
joke, I agree it has, seeing that I've been here since the groups CFV and
creation !

You really should get a clue before mouthing off and making a total fool of
yourself, as you did when you thought you would add your ignorant view to
the charter posting...


Message has been deleted

G Hardy

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 1:06:23 PM8/27/04
to
> >One of the things it can do is break the capture into multiple scenes,
based
> >on camera cuts. I upgraded to the latest version of my editor, and its
> >capture utility offered the same. I tried it for a project, and it
(roughly)
> >doubled the time I took to edit the project! I'm sure it's just because
I'm
> >used to working with 13GB DV AVIs.
>
> Did scenalyzer give you any different results when capturing though?!

I didn't actually try it - the unique features it offered when it was first
written (split by scene, split by filesize) were unique enough that it
helped people hampered by O/S and/or codec filesize limitations. I never
suffered from these so I didn't look into it further. The capture program
that now comes with Mediastudio can do all this.

I have been advised to give it a try, though - one of the things I do get a
lot is an "audio beep" in DV files - alternate samples on one of the stereo
channels are set to -32767 for the duration of a frame. It's been attributed
to Canon's non-standard audio timing schema (I'm told) and that using a
bespoke capture program would probably get rid of it. Being a skinflint,
though, I just wrote a VB program to replace the samples with the average of
the sample values either side.


> It's much nicer to work with split clips as you can simply delete
> those that you dont require, and if you archive the .avi files direct
> to a data DVD-RW its much much easier.

I can't see how it can be anything other than nicer to work with split clips
rather than the massive files that I've grown used to. It will just take
time to get into a new way of working. I can see other benefits too -
especially the ability to back up finished projects to floppy disk.


:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 1:03:18 PM8/27/04
to

"A.B. Normal" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b9975d44...@news.newshosting.com...

> <uk.rec.video.digital , :::Jerry:::: , m...@privacy.net>
> <2p912bF...@uni-berlin.de>
> <Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:51:56 +0100>

>
> > <snip>
> >
> > You utter cretin !
> >
>
> If somebody reads this in a weeks time - how are they supposed to know
> what you are replying too .

Because I left in the headers, and thus they could refer back to your
ignorant POV, but you (as a troll) edited them out to try and prove your
warped POV...

Your message SHOULD have looked like the following,

<quote>
":::Jerry::::" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2p912bF...@uni-berlin.de...

</quote>

QED.


Message has been deleted

:::Jerry::::

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 4:29:21 PM8/27/04
to

"A.B. Normal" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b99856de...@news.newshosting.com...

<snip trolling post>

You're nothing but a total cretin.

G Hardy

unread,
Aug 27, 2004, 5:27:02 PM8/27/04