Does anyone know of a device that can pillarbox SD 4:3 composite video, as when I upscale it to output to HDMI, the device that upscales doesnt do any aspect ratio checking and outputs it in stretchy vision!
Device to pillarbox SD 4:3 composite video before upscaling
It sounds as if you're upscaling the analogue SD composite video to digital HD in the device. Some TVs won't allow you to set 4:3 mode (to pillar box the picture) when fed an HD signal because, by definition the only allowed aspect ratio for HD is 16:9 (when you see 4:3 HD, like the Star Trek blu rays, for example, the pillar boxes are effectively added at source to create a 4:3 picture set inside a 16:9 frame).
Why not set the device to output SD (rather than HD) via HDMI and let the TV do the upscaling to HD internally? That way the TV should still allow you to set 4:3 to pillar box the picture.
Why not set the device to output SD (rather than HD) via HDMI and let the TV do the upscaling to HD internally? That way the TV should still allow you to set 4:3 to pillar box the picture.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“It sounds as if you're upscaling the analogue SD composite video to digital HD in the device. Some TVs won't allow you to set 4:3 mode (to pillar box the picture) when fed an HD signal because, by definition the only allowed aspect ratio for HD is 16:9 (when you see 4:3 HD, like the Star Trek blu rays, for example, the pillar boxes are effectively added at source to create a 4:3 picture set inside a 16:9 frame).
Why not set the device to output SD (rather than HD) via HDMI and let the TV do the upscaling to HD internally? That way the TV should still allow you to set 4:3 to pillar box the picture.”
“It sounds as if you're upscaling the analogue SD composite video to digital HD in the device. Some TVs won't allow you to set 4:3 mode (to pillar box the picture) when fed an HD signal because, by definition the only allowed aspect ratio for HD is 16:9 (when you see 4:3 HD, like the Star Trek blu rays, for example, the pillar boxes are effectively added at source to create a 4:3 picture set inside a 16:9 frame).
Why not set the device to output SD (rather than HD) via HDMI and let the TV do the upscaling to HD internally? That way the TV should still allow you to set 4:3 to pillar box the picture.”
I would, but the only options out of the converter unit is 720p and 1080p, so Im looking for a device that would add the pillarboxing to an analogue SD composite signal.
Its fine for all SD 16:9 content though, of course!
Is there a reason why you cannot just connect the source directly to the TV, why are you trying to upscale it as it will not improve the picture quality, indeed it may even degrade it? What device are you actually using, someone may know of a solution if you identify it.
Originally Posted by anthony david:
“Is there a reason why you cannot just connect the source directly to the TV, why are you trying to upscale it as it will not improve the picture quality, indeed it may even degrade it? What device are you actually using, someone may know of a solution if you identify it.”
“Is there a reason why you cannot just connect the source directly to the TV, why are you trying to upscale it as it will not improve the picture quality, indeed it may even degrade it? What device are you actually using, someone may know of a solution if you identify it.”
I have found a semi-workaround by as you say letting the TV upscale for 4:3, but this device works fine for 16:9.
Thankfully most of the time I use my Freesat Freetime box, for my main TV viewing, which of course outputs over HDMI and pillarboxes 4:3 SD.
The device I got was mainly for viewing VHS, strangely enough, as my TV doesnt upscale very well.
This is the device I brought: https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/...?ie=UTF8&psc=1
There seems to be many different versions of that class of converter and none of them offer the ability to output digital SD and none of them even mention aspect ratio switching. Presumably they're all based around the same chip giving the same feature set.
The issue goes right back to when SD widescreen was introduced. Plenty of equipment didn't handle 4:3 to 16:9 switch correctly and to this day you sometimes see 4:3 video clips incorrectly stretched to 16:9 and 16:9 incorrectly squashed to 4:3 too. There's nothing embedded in a composite video signal to tell a display (or a converter) what aspect ratio is in use. There's no automatic way to detect and switch when the signal is composite video or s-video. Some equipment such as PVRs or DVD players could signal the aspect ratio by applying voltage to a certain pin in a SCART connector, but not on the composite video or S-video connector.
Sorry I can't suggest a solution beyond what anthony david suggested.
The issue goes right back to when SD widescreen was introduced. Plenty of equipment didn't handle 4:3 to 16:9 switch correctly and to this day you sometimes see 4:3 video clips incorrectly stretched to 16:9 and 16:9 incorrectly squashed to 4:3 too. There's nothing embedded in a composite video signal to tell a display (or a converter) what aspect ratio is in use. There's no automatic way to detect and switch when the signal is composite video or s-video. Some equipment such as PVRs or DVD players could signal the aspect ratio by applying voltage to a certain pin in a SCART connector, but not on the composite video or S-video connector.
Sorry I can't suggest a solution beyond what anthony david suggested.
Wouldn't it be better to get some software on your PC and then import the raw 4:3 video into the PC. You can then do what you like with it depending on the software package. You could then make a copy at any resolution you want within a 16:9 frame. that would future proof it and you would be able to just play it on any 16:9 display.
Originally Posted by Brian The Dog:
“Wouldn't it be better to get some software on your PC and then import the raw 4:3 video into the PC. You can then do what you like with it depending on the software package. You could then make a copy at any resolution you want within a 16:9 frame. that would future proof it and you would be able to just play it on any 16:9 display.”
“Wouldn't it be better to get some software on your PC and then import the raw 4:3 video into the PC. You can then do what you like with it depending on the software package. You could then make a copy at any resolution you want within a 16:9 frame. that would future proof it and you would be able to just play it on any 16:9 display.”
Thats my long term plan to do such a thing, as my VHS tapes likely wont last for ever, as you say it would future proof! I need the equipment to do such a thing and what I have seen so far isnt brilliant, maybe you know something?
I would then burn onto DVDs and play them on my bluray player, which again like my freesat box can output 4:3 SD over HDMI correctly pillarboxed.
This is a long term solution though and I wanted something that would work in the short term. I guess the workaround of putting the composite video straight into the TV does work OK as a short term idea.
Some devices embed an aspect ratio flag in the frame blanking, The composite SD SCART o/p of my Humax T-2 does this and the Sony TV in my kitchen, which is fed via an analogue modulator, follows it.
HD was designed as a widescreen only system, as a result 4X3 HD is not an option on most TVs except via pillar boxing at source. Does your convertor improve VHS pictures? It is such a poor format that I would have thought your TVs upscaling would have been adequate. VHS pictures are poor on modern flat screen TVs possibly due to the problem of having to combine two jittery fields with noisy syncs in to one progressive frame for display.
HD was designed as a widescreen only system, as a result 4X3 HD is not an option on most TVs except via pillar boxing at source. Does your convertor improve VHS pictures? It is such a poor format that I would have thought your TVs upscaling would have been adequate. VHS pictures are poor on modern flat screen TVs possibly due to the problem of having to combine two jittery fields with noisy syncs in to one progressive frame for display.
Originally Posted by anthony david:
“Some devices embed an aspect ratio flag in the frame blanking, The composite SD SCART o/p of my Humax T-2 does this and the Sony TV in my kitchen, which is fed via an analogue modulator, follows it.
HD was designed as a widescreen only system, as a result 4X3 HD is not an option on most TVs except via pillar boxing at source. Does your convertor improve VHS pictures? It is such a poor format that I would have thought your TVs upscaling would have been adequate. VHS pictures are poor on modern flat screen TVs possibly due to the problem of having to combine two jittery fields with noisy syncs in to one progressive frame for display.”
“Some devices embed an aspect ratio flag in the frame blanking, The composite SD SCART o/p of my Humax T-2 does this and the Sony TV in my kitchen, which is fed via an analogue modulator, follows it.
HD was designed as a widescreen only system, as a result 4X3 HD is not an option on most TVs except via pillar boxing at source. Does your convertor improve VHS pictures? It is such a poor format that I would have thought your TVs upscaling would have been adequate. VHS pictures are poor on modern flat screen TVs possibly due to the problem of having to combine two jittery fields with noisy syncs in to one progressive frame for display.”
On a widescreen VHS picture it looks alright upscaling and where it doesnt overscan it shrinks the picture slightly, which helps on my HD TV. You do get bits round the edges as it doesnt overscan, but I like the fact you get the whole picture. If my device pillarboxed or my TV could turn overscan off for SD composite video I guess I would finally have a half decent picture from my old VHS tapes.
I would still like to know of a good device to transfer my VHS tapes onto the computer, so if anyone knows of anything good please let me know.
Originally Posted by lotrjw:
“Thats my long term plan to do such a thing, as my VHS tapes likely wont last for ever, as you say it would future proof! I need the equipment to do such a thing and what I have seen so far isnt brilliant, maybe you know something?
I would then burn onto DVDs and play them on my bluray player, which again like my freesat box can output 4:3 SD over HDMI correctly pillarboxed.
This is a long term solution though and I wanted something that would work in the short term. I guess the workaround of putting the composite video straight into the TV does work OK as a short term idea.”
“Thats my long term plan to do such a thing, as my VHS tapes likely wont last for ever, as you say it would future proof! I need the equipment to do such a thing and what I have seen so far isnt brilliant, maybe you know something?
I would then burn onto DVDs and play them on my bluray player, which again like my freesat box can output 4:3 SD over HDMI correctly pillarboxed.
This is a long term solution though and I wanted something that would work in the short term. I guess the workaround of putting the composite video straight into the TV does work OK as a short term idea.”
That would be what I would do in your situation. Make sure your video editing and DVD/Blu Ray burning software can add the correct widescreen "flag" into the digital video. I believe, even today, not all such software can do this reliably.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“That would be what I would do in your situation. Make sure your video editing and DVD/Blu Ray burning software can add the correct widescreen "flag" into the digital video. I believe, even today, not all such software can do this reliably.”
“That would be what I would do in your situation. Make sure your video editing and DVD/Blu Ray burning software can add the correct widescreen "flag" into the digital video. I believe, even today, not all such software can do this reliably.”
When I edited the video I would just add the pillarboxing, as the horizontal resolution from VHS isnt high enough to make a difference like it would for something that was full 720*576 4:3 SD. I will then either add the flag for SD video or upscale to full HD not in real time so the software would make a good job.
Originally Posted by lotrjw:
“When I edited the video I would just add the pillarboxing, as the horizontal resolution from VHS isnt high enough to make a difference like it would for something that was full 720*576 4:3 SD. I will then either add the flag for SD video or upscale to full HD not in real time so the software would make a good job.”
“When I edited the video I would just add the pillarboxing, as the horizontal resolution from VHS isnt high enough to make a difference like it would for something that was full 720*576 4:3 SD. I will then either add the flag for SD video or upscale to full HD not in real time so the software would make a good job.”
Agreed. There's no longer any point to keeping it 4:3 nowadays, so pillar boxing it into a 16:9 frame at source makes sense.
Incidentally, the reason you can now see the jittery, ragged edges of the analogue video frame is that old CRT TVs were designed to overscan somewhat so you wouldn't see the ragged edges, but digital TVs, fed with a digital signal, don't need that at all. They show an exact image when the digital source resolution matches the panel's resolution. Some TVs have a mode for analogue sources where the incoming video is scaled up, "magnifying" it slightly to deliberately loose the edges, to create the effect of over scanning.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“Agreed. There's no longer any point to keeping it 4:3 nowadays, so pillar boxing it into a 16:9 frame at source makes sense.
Incidentally, the reason you can now see the jittery, ragged edges of the analogue video frame is that old CRT TVs were designed to overscan somewhat so you wouldn't see the ragged edges, but digital TVs, fed with a digital signal, don't need that at all. They show an exact image when the digital source resolution matches the panel's resolution. Some TVs have a mode for analogue sources where the incoming video is scaled up, "magnifying" it slightly to deliberately loose the edges, to create the effect of over scanning.”
“Agreed. There's no longer any point to keeping it 4:3 nowadays, so pillar boxing it into a 16:9 frame at source makes sense.
Incidentally, the reason you can now see the jittery, ragged edges of the analogue video frame is that old CRT TVs were designed to overscan somewhat so you wouldn't see the ragged edges, but digital TVs, fed with a digital signal, don't need that at all. They show an exact image when the digital source resolution matches the panel's resolution. Some TVs have a mode for analogue sources where the incoming video is scaled up, "magnifying" it slightly to deliberately loose the edges, to create the effect of over scanning.”
My TV will effectively 'overscan' anything at 480 or 576 whatever way it is input without means to change it.
If it gets a HD resolution it will 'overscan' by default but it can be turned on and off easily.
I assume thats quite normal behavior for a HD flatpanel TV?
The ragged edges, as you say, actually arent so bad, its more weird that there is very thin black bars (not proper pillarboxing) that were part of the analogue image to give it the correct shape on a CRT TV, but mean nothing in the HD domain! Also you get a row of off white dashes on the very top left of the picture, which I assume are from the old wide screen signalling, but my TV be blowed if it recognises that even though an analogue input! Its a shame my converter box doesnt see that either for some kind of aspect switching!
Originally Posted by lotrjw:
“My TV will effectively 'overscan' anything at 480 or 576 whatever way it is input without means to change it.
If it gets a HD resolution it will 'overscan' by default but it can be turned on and off easily.
I assume thats quite normal behavior for a HD flatpanel TV?
The ragged edges, as you say, actually arent so bad, its more weird that there is very thin black bars (not proper pillarboxing) that were part of the analogue image to give it the correct shape on a CRT TV, but mean nothing in the HD domain! Also you get a row of off white dashes on the very top left of the picture, which I assume are from the old wide screen signalling, but my TV be blowed if it recognises that even though an analogue input! Its a shame my converter box doesnt see that either for some kind of aspect switching!”
“My TV will effectively 'overscan' anything at 480 or 576 whatever way it is input without means to change it.
If it gets a HD resolution it will 'overscan' by default but it can be turned on and off easily.
I assume thats quite normal behavior for a HD flatpanel TV?
The ragged edges, as you say, actually arent so bad, its more weird that there is very thin black bars (not proper pillarboxing) that were part of the analogue image to give it the correct shape on a CRT TV, but mean nothing in the HD domain! Also you get a row of off white dashes on the very top left of the picture, which I assume are from the old wide screen signalling, but my TV be blowed if it recognises that even though an analogue input! Its a shame my converter box doesnt see that either for some kind of aspect switching!”
Some TVs I have seen have an overall setting called "1:1 pixel mapping" (or something similar) which the user can turn off. Your TV sounds as if it has the opposite and "overscans" everything by default. For digital sources you'd normally want that 1:1 setting turned on (overscan disabled) so that you see everything in the picture. When it's turned off, for analogue sources at least, the TV scales up the picture to loose "beyond the edge of the screen" the edges of the image that look untidy.
If you're watching old off air recordings, the white patterns are probably teletext information encoded in the first few lines of the signal. In the days of of CRT TVs, these lines were not normally visible due to overscan. It's actually possible to recover the teletext data from old S-VHS recordings in most cases. Regular VHS doesn't have the bandwdth to do this.
The panel size of your TV may be influencing this as well. You mentioned that it's "HD Ready". This means the panel is probably either 720 or 768 pixels high with 1280 pixels in width. HD is broadcast with 720 or 1080 pixels vertically. If the panel is 720 pixels vertically, there's no issue (720 scales down from 1080 easily), but if the panel is 768 it may offer additional settings that affect scaling. 768 is a bit taller that 720 (giving roughly a 16:10 aspect ratio for the panel), so there may be an option to either fill the full height of the panel, at the expense of losing a bit off each side or, keep the full width, at the expense of slight letterboxing top and bottom. Or it may simply distort the image slightly to force a 16:9 image to fill a 16:10 screen.
For a 4:3 source, a 768 panel TV may enlarge it to fill the full height of the screen, giving slightly narrower pillar box bars.
It sounds as if you have a 768 panel TV.
The options available depend on the implementation in the particular model of TV.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“Some TVs I have seen have an overall setting called "1:1 pixel mapping" (or something similar) which the user can turn off. Your TV sounds as if it has the opposite and "overscans" everything by default. For digital sources you'd normally want that 1:1 setting turned on (overscan disabled) so that you see everything in the picture. When it's turned off, for analogue sources at least, the TV scales up the picture to loose "beyond the edge of the screen" the edges of the image that look untidy.
If you're watching old off air recordings, the white patterns are probably teletext information encoded in the first few lines of the signal. In the days of of CRT TVs, these lines were not normally visible due to overscan. It's actually possible to recover the teletext data from old S-VHS recordings in most cases. Regular VHS doesn't have the bandwdth to do this.
The panel size of your TV may be influencing this as well. You mentioned that it's "HD Ready". This means the panel is probably either 720 or 768 pixels high with 1280 pixels in width. HD is broadcast with 720 or 1080 pixels vertically. If the panel is 720 pixels vertically, there's no issue (720 scales down from 1080 easily), but if the panel is 768 it may offer additional settings that affect scaling. 768 is a bit taller that 720 (giving roughly a 16:10 aspect ratio for the panel), so there may be an option to either fill the full height of the panel, at the expense of losing a bit off each side or, keep the full width, at the expense of slight letterboxing top and bottom. Or it may simply distort the image slightly to force a 16:9 image to fill a 16:10 screen.
For a 4:3 source, a 768 panel TV may enlarge it to fill the full height of the screen, giving slightly narrower pillar box bars.
It sounds as if you have a 768 panel TV.
The options available depend on the implementation in the particular model of TV.”
“Some TVs I have seen have an overall setting called "1:1 pixel mapping" (or something similar) which the user can turn off. Your TV sounds as if it has the opposite and "overscans" everything by default. For digital sources you'd normally want that 1:1 setting turned on (overscan disabled) so that you see everything in the picture. When it's turned off, for analogue sources at least, the TV scales up the picture to loose "beyond the edge of the screen" the edges of the image that look untidy.
If you're watching old off air recordings, the white patterns are probably teletext information encoded in the first few lines of the signal. In the days of of CRT TVs, these lines were not normally visible due to overscan. It's actually possible to recover the teletext data from old S-VHS recordings in most cases. Regular VHS doesn't have the bandwdth to do this.
The panel size of your TV may be influencing this as well. You mentioned that it's "HD Ready". This means the panel is probably either 720 or 768 pixels high with 1280 pixels in width. HD is broadcast with 720 or 1080 pixels vertically. If the panel is 720 pixels vertically, there's no issue (720 scales down from 1080 easily), but if the panel is 768 it may offer additional settings that affect scaling. 768 is a bit taller that 720 (giving roughly a 16:10 aspect ratio for the panel), so there may be an option to either fill the full height of the panel, at the expense of losing a bit off each side or, keep the full width, at the expense of slight letterboxing top and bottom. Or it may simply distort the image slightly to force a 16:9 image to fill a 16:10 screen.
For a 4:3 source, a 768 panel TV may enlarge it to fill the full height of the screen, giving slightly narrower pillar box bars.
It sounds as if you have a 768 panel TV.
The options available depend on the implementation in the particular model of TV.”
My TV is a 1366x768 panel which is almost exactly 16:9 (likely off by very few pixels one way or the other).
No 1:1 scaling that would be a very good feature, but for VGA and HDMI I can at least turn so called overscan off for 720p 1080i/p and VGA many more resolutions, such as using 1366x768.
I havent tried it, but I think from a PC source I can even put 1366x768 over HDMI, but I have just let my PC output 1080p over HDMI to my TV.
So no unusual shape to the TV thankfully, or stretching 16:9 to fill 16:10 which I would hate!
At least HD looks decent on it though, SD not so great unless its upscaled by something other than the TV.
Basically as long as the resolution I imput is higher than 1366x768 its ok as the TV downscales fine, anything lower than 1366x768 and it doesnt look so good, unless its been upscaled first. Its just a shame I have to do so much scaling to get SD to look good on it!
Originally Posted by lotrjw:
“My TV is a 1366x768 panel which is almost exactly 16:9 (likely off by very few pixels one way or the other).
No 1:1 scaling that would be a very good feature, but for VGA and HDMI I can at least turn so called overscan off for 720p 1080i/p and VGA many more resolutions, such as using 1366x768.
I havent tried it, but I think from a PC source I can even put 1366x768 over HDMI, but I have just let my PC output 1080p over HDMI to my TV.
So no unusual shape to the TV thankfully, or stretching 16:9 to fill 16:10 which I would hate!
At least HD looks decent on it though, SD not so great unless its upscaled by something other than the TV.
Basically as long as the resolution I imput is higher than 1366x768 its ok as the TV downscales fine, anything lower than 1366x768 and it doesnt look so good, unless its been upscaled first. Its just a shame I have to do so much scaling to get SD to look good on it!”
“My TV is a 1366x768 panel which is almost exactly 16:9 (likely off by very few pixels one way or the other).
No 1:1 scaling that would be a very good feature, but for VGA and HDMI I can at least turn so called overscan off for 720p 1080i/p and VGA many more resolutions, such as using 1366x768.
I havent tried it, but I think from a PC source I can even put 1366x768 over HDMI, but I have just let my PC output 1080p over HDMI to my TV.
So no unusual shape to the TV thankfully, or stretching 16:9 to fill 16:10 which I would hate!
At least HD looks decent on it though, SD not so great unless its upscaled by something other than the TV.
Basically as long as the resolution I imput is higher than 1366x768 its ok as the TV downscales fine, anything lower than 1366x768 and it doesnt look so good, unless its been upscaled first. Its just a shame I have to do so much scaling to get SD to look good on it!”
A panel that size means there's always some scaling going on (for the usual resolution sources at any rate), and it's not a "nice" easy integer scale factor either. Scaling down from a 1080 source (reducing by a factor of .71111) would still work pretty well though, as you indicated, because you're reducing the resolution.
Quite agree on distortion, btw. I can't abide stretchy-vision where some people insist on making a 4:3 image fill the whole of a 16:9 screen because they "don't like the black bars".
Each to their own, of course, but I like my circles to be circles and not stretched or squashed into ellipses.
Not found of zooming and cropping either, or "pan and scan", which used to be the norm for showing films on TV.
OAR every time for me.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“A panel that size means there's always some scaling going on (for the usual resolution sources at any rate), and it's not a "nice" easy integer scale factor either. Scaling down from a 1080 source (reducing by a factor of .71111) would still work pretty well though, as you indicated, because you're reducing the resolution.
Quite agree on distortion, btw. I can't abide stretchy-vision where some people insist on making a 4:3 image fill the whole of a 16:9 screen because they "don't like the black bars".
Each to their own, of course, but I like my circles to be circles and not stretched or squashed into ellipses.
Not found of zooming and cropping either, or "pan and scan", which used to be the norm for showing films on TV.
OAR every time for me.”
“A panel that size means there's always some scaling going on (for the usual resolution sources at any rate), and it's not a "nice" easy integer scale factor either. Scaling down from a 1080 source (reducing by a factor of .71111) would still work pretty well though, as you indicated, because you're reducing the resolution.
Quite agree on distortion, btw. I can't abide stretchy-vision where some people insist on making a 4:3 image fill the whole of a 16:9 screen because they "don't like the black bars".
Each to their own, of course, but I like my circles to be circles and not stretched or squashed into ellipses.
Not found of zooming and cropping either, or "pan and scan", which used to be the norm for showing films on TV.
OAR every time for me.”
Yes I do agree OAR every time!
I guess you can see why I was asking what I was asking now, considering the technicalities of my TV!
So do you or anyone else know of some good kit for inputting my VHS tapes to my PC?
I've been looking into this as I decided it was time to transfer some old memories on VHS and S-VHS to digital to preserve them in the best quality possible.
So, I've bought an "Elgato Video Capture, Digitise Video for Mac, PC or iPad (USB 2.0), white". £75 on amazon. There are lots of similar devices there at much cheaper prices, which might give as good results, but I was wary of the quality (of both hardware and software) of those.
I also bought a Time Base Corrector to, hopefully, improve the stability of the analogue signal before capture. "AV Toolbox AVT-8710". £183 from a reseller on amazon. I plan to try capturing both with and without it to see what difference it makes to captured video.
I'll let you know how I got on after I've had a chance to try them out.
So, I've bought an "Elgato Video Capture, Digitise Video for Mac, PC or iPad (USB 2.0), white". £75 on amazon. There are lots of similar devices there at much cheaper prices, which might give as good results, but I was wary of the quality (of both hardware and software) of those.
I also bought a Time Base Corrector to, hopefully, improve the stability of the analogue signal before capture. "AV Toolbox AVT-8710". £183 from a reseller on amazon. I plan to try capturing both with and without it to see what difference it makes to captured video.
I'll let you know how I got on after I've had a chance to try them out.
Originally Posted by GDK:
“I've been looking into this as I decided it was time to transfer some old memories on VHS and S-VHS to digital to preserve them in the best quality possible.
So, I've bought an "Elgato Video Capture, Digitise Video for Mac, PC or iPad (USB 2.0), white". £75 on amazon. There are lots of similar devices there at much cheaper prices, which might give as good results, but I was wary of the quality (of both hardware and software) of those.
I also bought a Time Base Corrector to, hopefully, improve the stability of the analogue signal before capture. "AV Toolbox AVT-8710". £183 from a reseller on amazon. I plan to try capturing both with and without it to see what difference it makes to captured video.
I'll let you know how I got on after I've had a chance to try them out.”
“I've been looking into this as I decided it was time to transfer some old memories on VHS and S-VHS to digital to preserve them in the best quality possible.
So, I've bought an "Elgato Video Capture, Digitise Video for Mac, PC or iPad (USB 2.0), white". £75 on amazon. There are lots of similar devices there at much cheaper prices, which might give as good results, but I was wary of the quality (of both hardware and software) of those.
I also bought a Time Base Corrector to, hopefully, improve the stability of the analogue signal before capture. "AV Toolbox AVT-8710". £183 from a reseller on amazon. I plan to try capturing both with and without it to see what difference it makes to captured video.
I'll let you know how I got on after I've had a chance to try them out.”
Thanks
Sorry to drag an old thread up, but after getting a new TV, that will change the aspect ratio of HDMI sources whatever the resolution of the picture, I can now use my Scart to HDMI converter quite happily for the purpose I brought it. While I might have to manually select 4:3 aspect ratio in these circumstances, thats certainly preferable to not being able to change it at all!
Out of interest, what is the lifespan of VHS tapes? I have some from 1980 that still play like new, but they can't last forever - but how long will they last do you think?
Originally Posted by Soundbox:
“Out of interest, what is the lifespan of VHS tapes? I have some from 1980 that still play like new, but they can't last forever - but how long will they last do you think?”
“Out of interest, what is the lifespan of VHS tapes? I have some from 1980 that still play like new, but they can't last forever - but how long will they last do you think?”
Well made tapes kept in a stable, preferably slightly cool, environment will probably play OK for some time to come. Tapes kept in the loft or an unheated garage may not. Some tapes were poorly made and the binder layer fails causing them to rapidly become unplayable. I checked many of my old ones recently to see if they were OK, one BASF Chrome tape played but the pictures were very noisy indeed. In theory you should spool them end to end yearly to reduce problems with print through, but life's too short.
