Increase recording quality?

Pierre_S wrote on 3/12/2024, 3:50 PM

Want to tranfer VHS to digital form.

Will primarily use this to burn DVD, but will also want to have the option to use other formats in the future.

So i want some "quality margin" when transfer analog to digital.

In many posts in this forum that concern this subject, it is adviced to use MXV as the capture format. Beacause it is not a lossy format.

Do you agree?

But there seems not to be any option of that in the program. Is MPEG2 the only availble option to record the analog signal in this version?

MAGIX Video easy Video Saver
Version 7.0.1.12 (UDP3)

When you want to transfer analog to digital you finaly end up in a menu where you both can choose the quality and start the recording.

⬇️

If you choose "User defined"in the "Recording quality" box. There are 12 parameters for the video quality.

The obvious parameter is "coding-quality". Is it independent of the other 11 parameters, or must they also be changed?

The preselected level is "Faster", is this the "DVD" level, and if it is changed to "Quick", will the quality then slightly be higher then the "DVD" level?

I have no prior knowledge or experience in videos. Will "DVD" level, or "coding-quality" raised to "Quick", be enough, if i later want to transfer video to MPEG-4?

There is also an option for "Automatic Scene Recognation", will this be a problem, or is this function integrated in standard MPEG2/MPEG4 format?

Pierre

Comments

CubeAce wrote on 3/12/2024, 5:42 PM

Hi.

First I will say I don't use Rescue Your Video Tapes. Few if any people who answer questions here do so I'm not sure of the saving possibilities you have.

There is nothing basically wrong with using MPEG-2. It is just a less efficient at compression so file sizes tend to be larger for a given perceived quality. The more bits used and the less compression used the more detail is preserved. You can have too many bits though and making any video file can go any one of three ways. Just right, too much data loss through either too much compression or too small an amount of bits allowed to capture all of the available data, and too much unused data in the bit stream where most of the 0 and 1 bits have no meaningful information.

Determining what is the correct amount of bits is the tricky part and probably best to overdo the amount of bits used to ensure all the data that could be recorded is.

You want the least amount of compression which is set by the Fastest to Best setting. Best having the least compression. You could change the Bit rate mode to constant to be on the safe side and up the average bit rate but make sure any numbers you enter are devisable by 8 or you will get a non functioning recording. The Maximum bit rate shown was determined by Magix and should be enough as a file from a VHS tape is not likely to have as much information in it as some digital files.

Do not make the average bit rate more than the maximum bit rate.

The colour and contrast were not as high as more modern digital files tend to have. I think that MPEG 2 only has the choice of Main for profile or level but could be wrong. If it also has High, then choose that. Leave the audio alone.

Personally I would just keep the source files when finished with the project and not worry about trying to get a higher resolution file of the finished project. You are never going to have higher quality files than the original source files. Then if or when Video editors can do more to enhance older recordings, recreate the project again in the new editor.

Again, personally I would not use MXV for long term archival purposes. First it is not completely lossless or why is there a quality slider option?

Secondly, such files can only be played within a Magix Editing program and as such could be vulnerable should such programs in the future not exist or be able to be used on future operating systems.

True lossless file types would create huge file sizes. I used uncompressed AVI to export a 25fps 1080 x 720 video clip and it comes to using 3.88GBs per minute of file running time.

Not only do such files take up a lot of disk storage, they can be hard to read without stuttering on all but solid state drives and most of the file is made up of empty data. There are perfectionists that will say that it is worth it but really the trick is to try to capture the best image you can directly off of the VCR. Make sure the tape transport is in good working condition and clean as possible. Make sure connections are good and you are getting the best signal into your computer as possible. Record the files at the best resolution and bit depth you can.

Keep hold of your original digital files after.

Ray.

AAProds wrote on 3/12/2024, 8:48 PM

@Pierre_S

Ref MXV, it does yield better quality but, by the looks, is only available in Video Easy's big brothers, Magix Movie Studio and VPX. As Ray said, it's a proprietary Magix codec and you do run the risk of being stranded with it being unreadable in other programs.

If you intend converting to MP4 later on, make a high-quality recording in MPEG 2. Go for something like an average bitrate of 15,000kbps, with a max of say 20,000.

You want the coding quality on "Best".

I will defer to others re variable bitrates verses constant bitrates for capture. Constant bitrate is inefficient from a space POV, because you waste data on slow-moving or static scenes. There may be advantages for the actual capture (easier on the CPU) and later encoding (better quality) though.

There is also an option for "Automatic Scene Recognation", will this be a problem, or is this function integrated in standard MPEG2/MPEG4 format?

Best not to use this during recording. It can be done after capture by right-clicking on the video object.

An issue you may come up against is dropped frames; depending on your PC specs, it may struggle with encoding, in real time, to MPEG 2 at higher bit rates. In that case, you'll have to lower the bitrate until you don't drop frames.

@CubeAce

True lossless file types would create huge file sizes. I used uncompressed AVI to export a 25fps 1080 x 720 video clip and it comes to using 3.88GBs per minute of file running time.

Ray, "lossless" and "uncompressed" are not the same. Lossless files are around a 1/4 of the size of uncompressed files. Unless there is a compatibility reason for doing so, there is no need to use uncompressed. Lossless codecs have to be installed but that isn't a difficult task.

CubeAce wrote on 3/12/2024, 11:21 PM

@AAProds

Hi Al.

I don't know about video encoding from that perspective but my cameras are capable of recording to12 and 14 bit raw in either lossless, compressed, or uncompressed or I also have the option of 16 bit tiff as well as jpeg. I can see differences in each choice I make and mainly it is in the colour accuracy as well as dynamic range but the higher the quality setting the more work is needed when eventually needing to convert it into a useful image file such as jpg to bring the colour, dynamic range, and other attributes such as sharpness and noise under control.

As far as I'm concerned I tried exporting to 'Uncompress movie' to see what size file it produced with 8 bits per colour channel and no B or P files produced where predictive blending of frames normally occurs and quality can be compromised especially if it going to be converted yet again to another video file type at a later stage.

Personally I would not use uncompressed AVI for this as it is too wasteful but also I am against using GOP structures with B and P frames in them and if I was making a copy of an analogue tape would prefer to choose to use all H264 using all I frames instead as well as a slightly higher Average bit depth and Constant bit rate when converting to digital on the initial render from analogue tape.

But by far the most important thing is maintaining duplicate copies on separate media and checking on them at regular spaced intervals for corruption as they will not degrade as such but just become unretrievable as the media degenerates. If one set becomes corrupt another copy should be made immediately from the readable media. Maybe a copy of a program such as Handbrake should also be archived as well.

MPEG-2 has successfully stayed with us for a relatively long time as has H264 since its introduction while H265 may already be being superseded by AV1 as it is free from licencing concerns. so as far as I am concerned both MPEG-2 and H264 would be my options for archiving with the condition of using all I frames and avoiding both B and P frames which is what I actually have done for a long time for my own archiving of completed projects using H264. The resulting file sizes are never more than 20% larger than the original digital files and easy to edit and play back.

This is still very early days of digital video as well as digital data itself and as such I see nothing set in stone as yet. Not all file types at present are easily dealt with on differing operating systems and no-one really knows the future.

Ray.

AAProds wrote on 3/13/2024, 12:12 AM

@CubeAce

Ray, I don't see the relevance of most of that to this situation.

Personally I would not use uncompressed AVI for this as it is too wasteful but also I am against using GOP structures with B and P frames in them and if I was making a copy of an analogue tape would prefer to choose to use all I frames instead as well as a slightly higher Average bit depth and Constant bit rate when converting to digital on the initial render from analogue tape.

You have no control over the bit depth. Analogue lossless (not "uncompressed") AVIs are all i-frames (if you could call them that). You also have no control over the bitrate.

CubeAce wrote on 3/13/2024, 12:57 AM

@AAProds

Hi Al.

My earlier image in my first post shows all of that in the MediaInfo data but I see where the confusion set in on my last reply as I omitted that I would use H264 and have amended my post accordingly.

Ray.

AAProds wrote on 3/13/2024, 1:33 AM

@CubeAce

Ray, we're going off on yet another tangent. Here's the Mediainfo report from an analogue capture in Lossless MagicYUV:

What program are you using to capture AVIs from VHS that gives you control over the bit depth and bitrate?

Edit: Spelling.

AAProds wrote on 3/13/2024, 3:47 AM

@Pierre_S

A knowledgeable source has informed me that Constant Bit Rate is better for recording as a master copy.

johnebaker wrote on 3/13/2024, 4:44 AM

@Pierre_S, @AAProds, @CubeAce

Hi Pierre, Al, Ray

Putting aside Constant Bitrate, IPB frames etc, there are a few points which should be taken into account to avoid disappointment in expectations vs actual result when digitising VHS tapes..

VHS has an approximate equivalent to 320 x 480 (NTSC) and 352 x 576 (PAL) - therefore not a lot of data to work with.
The source video is Interlaced, the digital format Progressive - this conversion can result in some visual issues eg combing, where there is fast action in the video.
The condition of the tape(s) with respect to dropouts, banding, sync issues
The condition of the player being used to record from ie heads are clean and in good condition, tracking does not have issues with the tape.

I agree with Als suggestion 'make a high-quality recording in MPEG 2. Go for something like an average bitrate of 15,000kbps, with a max of say 20,000'

Using Constant Bit Rate is, IMO, not necessary given the low resolution of the source video, the values for bitrate suggested are 'more than enough' and the max value is unlikely to be reached.

If you are going to be digitising a lot of videotapes, it may be worth looking into Neat Video Denoiser, several users in the forum, including myself, use it for denoising and cleaning up video - in my case denoising low light recordings - a demo version is available to test with.

HTH

John EB