ATI All in Wonder 9600 with Studio 9.3.0

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by brickled, Nov 2, 2004.

  1. brickled

    brickled Guest

    hello all,

    i'm capturing footage from vcr tapes into the capture device that came w/ my
    ati video card. the same output that looks great on my tv looks very
    marginal when captured into my pc. I have the latest and greatest
    software/hardware.

    if my tv can display the footage wonderfully then how is it that my capture
    device can't accept the same exact signal to near its best quality?

    in particular, there's a "waviness" across the top of the captured video
    that is never seen when playing directly to our tv.

    thanks for everyone's thoughts!
     
    brickled, Nov 2, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. brickled

    Larry Guest

    In article <I2Nhd.15889$5i5.7747
    @newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
    says...
    > hello all,
    >
    > i'm capturing footage from vcr tapes into the capture device that came w/ my
    > ati video card. the same output that looks great on my tv looks very
    > marginal when captured into my pc. I have the latest and greatest
    > software/hardware.
    >
    > if my tv can display the footage wonderfully then how is it that my capture
    > device can't accept the same exact signal to near its best quality?
    >
    > in particular, there's a "waviness" across the top of the captured video
    > that is never seen when playing directly to our tv.
    >
    > thanks for everyone's thoughts!
    >
    >
    >


    Are they commercially made tapes??
    If so they may have an older form of what was called
    "copyguard" which messed up the vertical/horizontal sync
    signal JUST ENOUGH to mess with copying. It was used before
    "MacroVision" became the default.

    Also some VCRs have pretty poor sync to begin with, causing
    "Flagging" (waving or jiggling at the top of the picture).
    Most tvs are tolerant of it (or its lost in the overscan)
    but recording devices of all kinds are sensitive to it.

    If the capture card works for "Off the air" capture but not
    for the vcr then try a better quality vcr.

    There is also the problem of aging (of the tape) the tapes
    "stretch" or "shrink" just enough over time to cause time
    base correction to be needed.( no cheap fix for this )


    --
    Larry Lynch
    Mystic, Ct.
     
    Larry, Nov 2, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. brickled

    brickled Guest

    the footage i'm capturing is footage that was originally dumped from a
    camcorder 8 mm tape (so no copyright issues to be concerned with). when i
    play this tape to my tv the output is great - when i capture this exact same
    output with my ati capture device, i get very marginal results - especially
    of concern is the waviness across the top of the screen. so either my tv is
    correcting a lot of this or my capture device is taking a perfectly good
    signal and messing it up as it captures it....


    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <I2Nhd.15889$5i5.7747
    > @newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
    > says...
    > > hello all,
    > >
    > > i'm capturing footage from vcr tapes into the capture device that came

    w/ my
    > > ati video card. the same output that looks great on my tv looks very
    > > marginal when captured into my pc. I have the latest and greatest
    > > software/hardware.
    > >
    > > if my tv can display the footage wonderfully then how is it that my

    capture
    > > device can't accept the same exact signal to near its best quality?
    > >
    > > in particular, there's a "waviness" across the top of the captured video
    > > that is never seen when playing directly to our tv.
    > >
    > > thanks for everyone's thoughts!
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Are they commercially made tapes??
    > If so they may have an older form of what was called
    > "copyguard" which messed up the vertical/horizontal sync
    > signal JUST ENOUGH to mess with copying. It was used before
    > "MacroVision" became the default.
    >
    > Also some VCRs have pretty poor sync to begin with, causing
    > "Flagging" (waving or jiggling at the top of the picture).
    > Most tvs are tolerant of it (or its lost in the overscan)
    > but recording devices of all kinds are sensitive to it.
    >
    > If the capture card works for "Off the air" capture but not
    > for the vcr then try a better quality vcr.
    >
    > There is also the problem of aging (of the tape) the tapes
    > "stretch" or "shrink" just enough over time to cause time
    > base correction to be needed.( no cheap fix for this )
    >
    >
    > --
    > Larry Lynch
    > Mystic, Ct.
     
    brickled, Nov 2, 2004
    #3
  4. brickled

    Larry Guest

    In article <lsOhd.15995$5i5.15842
    @newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
    says...
    > the footage i'm capturing is footage that was originally dumped from a
    > camcorder 8 mm tape (so no copyright issues to be concerned with). when i
    > play this tape to my tv the output is great - when i capture this exact same
    > output with my ati capture device, i get very marginal results - especially
    > of concern is the waviness across the top of the screen. so either my tv is
    > correcting a lot of this or my capture device is taking a perfectly good
    > signal and messing it up as it captures it....
    >



    The issue is most probably Time Base correction, Time base
    becomes more of an issue every time the video is recorded..
    If you copied the 8mm to VHS and dont have the 8mm
    available then you wont get what you want, you are already
    dealing with a second generation copy of what was a poor
    (assuming consumer level 8mm gear) quality picture to begin
    with.

    First you have to understand that it doesen't look as good
    on TV as you think it does. The TV simply doesnt have
    enough resolution using the output of a VCR to show you
    whats bad about it!

    Even a low resolution Computer monitor make a tv signal
    look like crap, because the computer monitor has enough
    resolution to show the picture warts and all.

    Like I said. Do an "OFF THE AIR" capture and if that
    works, then the ATI card is not at fault.

    Remember that the computer monitor IS NOT a television, and
    it WONT blur out the flaws in the tv signal, which is
    essentially what a TV does.

    The poor resolution of a television is why we were happy
    with VHS as a medium for movies. You couldn't see what you
    were missing anyway.

    --
    Larry Lynch
    Mystic, Ct.
     
    Larry, Nov 2, 2004
    #4
  5. brickled

    brickled Guest

    ok, i'm w/ u that a tv's resolution is lower than a monitor's.........but if
    i can get a very acceptable result on the tv, it stands to reason that i
    should be able to get an acceptable result when the end target use is also
    going to be viewed on a tv.....

    i'm trying to get my hands on the original as to avoid using the vhs
    altogether......see if that helps.

    when i do go directly from my cam tapes to the capture card, i get better
    results but still, i'm much more happy w/ what i see on the tv when i output
    the cam directly to my tv vs. capturing it onto my computer & then feeding
    the result back to my tv (in the form of a finished dvd).


    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <lsOhd.15995$5i5.15842
    > @newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
    > says...
    > > the footage i'm capturing is footage that was originally dumped from a
    > > camcorder 8 mm tape (so no copyright issues to be concerned with). when

    i
    > > play this tape to my tv the output is great - when i capture this exact

    same
    > > output with my ati capture device, i get very marginal results -

    especially
    > > of concern is the waviness across the top of the screen. so either my tv

    is
    > > correcting a lot of this or my capture device is taking a perfectly good
    > > signal and messing it up as it captures it....
    > >

    >
    >
    > The issue is most probably Time Base correction, Time base
    > becomes more of an issue every time the video is recorded..
    > If you copied the 8mm to VHS and dont have the 8mm
    > available then you wont get what you want, you are already
    > dealing with a second generation copy of what was a poor
    > (assuming consumer level 8mm gear) quality picture to begin
    > with.
    >
    > First you have to understand that it doesen't look as good
    > on TV as you think it does. The TV simply doesnt have
    > enough resolution using the output of a VCR to show you
    > whats bad about it!
    >
    > Even a low resolution Computer monitor make a tv signal
    > look like crap, because the computer monitor has enough
    > resolution to show the picture warts and all.
    >
    > Like I said. Do an "OFF THE AIR" capture and if that
    > works, then the ATI card is not at fault.
    >
    > Remember that the computer monitor IS NOT a television, and
    > it WONT blur out the flaws in the tv signal, which is
    > essentially what a TV does.
    >
    > The poor resolution of a television is why we were happy
    > with VHS as a medium for movies. You couldn't see what you
    > were missing anyway.
    >
    > --
    > Larry Lynch
    > Mystic, Ct.
     
    brickled, Nov 2, 2004
    #5
  6. brickled

    Smarty Guest

    The ATI capture cards do a mediocre job of converting analog video to
    digital. They use cheap analog to digital converters, very primitive synch
    separators, and poor color demodulators, I also ran into severe lip synch
    issues when capturing longer (30 minute and up) programs. I eventually gave
    up after owning and trying 3 ATI All In Wonder cards and reading the threads
    of others with similar experiences. Some people have had success with them,
    but I have not.

    My eventual solution was to go to better capture devices which totally
    eliminated the problems cited above. For analog capture I now use either a
    Sony Digital Media Converter which outputs Firewire DV streams, and
    Hauppauge PVR-250 cards which output directly to DVD compatible MPEG2 files.
    Both work superbly well, as does the Canopus ADVC. These devices totally
    outperform the ATI boards, which do a lot of things quite well but capturing
    external analog video is not one of them.

    Smarty


    "brickled" <> wrote in message
    news:JJPhd.16088$...
    > ok, i'm w/ u that a tv's resolution is lower than a monitor's.........but
    > if
    > i can get a very acceptable result on the tv, it stands to reason that i
    > should be able to get an acceptable result when the end target use is also
    > going to be viewed on a tv.....
    >
    > i'm trying to get my hands on the original as to avoid using the vhs
    > altogether......see if that helps.
    >
    > when i do go directly from my cam tapes to the capture card, i get better
    > results but still, i'm much more happy w/ what i see on the tv when i
    > output
    > the cam directly to my tv vs. capturing it onto my computer & then feeding
    > the result back to my tv (in the form of a finished dvd).
    >
    >
    > "Larry" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> In article <lsOhd.15995$5i5.15842
    >> @newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
    >> says...
    >> > the footage i'm capturing is footage that was originally dumped from a
    >> > camcorder 8 mm tape (so no copyright issues to be concerned with). when

    > i
    >> > play this tape to my tv the output is great - when i capture this exact

    > same
    >> > output with my ati capture device, i get very marginal results -

    > especially
    >> > of concern is the waviness across the top of the screen. so either my
    >> > tv

    > is
    >> > correcting a lot of this or my capture device is taking a perfectly
    >> > good
    >> > signal and messing it up as it captures it....
    >> >

    >>
    >>
    >> The issue is most probably Time Base correction, Time base
    >> becomes more of an issue every time the video is recorded..
    >> If you copied the 8mm to VHS and dont have the 8mm
    >> available then you wont get what you want, you are already
    >> dealing with a second generation copy of what was a poor
    >> (assuming consumer level 8mm gear) quality picture to begin
    >> with.
    >>
    >> First you have to understand that it doesen't look as good
    >> on TV as you think it does. The TV simply doesnt have
    >> enough resolution using the output of a VCR to show you
    >> whats bad about it!
    >>
    >> Even a low resolution Computer monitor make a tv signal
    >> look like crap, because the computer monitor has enough
    >> resolution to show the picture warts and all.
    >>
    >> Like I said. Do an "OFF THE AIR" capture and if that
    >> works, then the ATI card is not at fault.
    >>
    >> Remember that the computer monitor IS NOT a television, and
    >> it WONT blur out the flaws in the tv signal, which is
    >> essentially what a TV does.
    >>
    >> The poor resolution of a television is why we were happy
    >> with VHS as a medium for movies. You couldn't see what you
    >> were missing anyway.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Larry Lynch
    >> Mystic, Ct.

    >
    >
     
    Smarty, Nov 2, 2004
    #6
  7. brickled

    Larry Guest

    In article <JJPhd.16088$5i5.14897
    @newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
    says...
    > ok, i'm w/ u that a tv's resolution is lower than a monitor's.........but if
    > i can get a very acceptable result on the tv, it stands to reason that i
    > should be able to get an acceptable result when the end target use is also
    > going to be viewed on a tv.....
    >
    > i'm trying to get my hands on the original as to avoid using the vhs
    > altogether......see if that helps.
    >
    > when i do go directly from my cam tapes to the capture card, i get better
    > results but still, i'm much more happy w/ what i see on the tv when i output
    > the cam directly to my tv vs. capturing it onto my computer & then feeding
    > the result back to my tv (in the form of a finished dvd).
    >
    >
    >


    What quality setting are you using for the capture???

    I use "high quality DVD" setting using ATIs own capture
    software, then import int whatever Im using to edit/produce
    the video.

    A good quick computer (>>2 ghz Pentium or Athlon) will
    capture DvD quality "ON THE FLY" without dropping frames.


    --
    Larry Lynch
    Mystic, Ct.
     
    Larry, Nov 2, 2004
    #7
  8. brickled

    Larry Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > The ATI capture cards do a mediocre job of converting analog video to
    > digital. They use cheap analog to digital converters, very primitive synch
    > separators, and poor color demodulators, I also ran into severe lip synch
    > issues when capturing longer (30 minute and up) programs. I eventually gave
    > up after owning and trying 3 ATI All In Wonder cards and reading the threads
    > of others with similar experiences. Some people have had success with them,
    > but I have not.
    >


    These problems usually only plague people with << 2ghz
    systems or slow/cluttered harddrives.

    The BIG problem is ATI doesn't advertise what powerhogs the
    All In Wonder card is. It REALLY needs a fast system and
    fast hard-drives before it can do what its supposed to.

    Even then, if the hard drive gets fragmented, or the UDMA
    mode gets messed with by windows (which happens even with
    XP Pro) you go right back to skipped frames, and stuttery
    video.

    The current line of All In Wonders (with current drivers)
    doesn't seem to have sound sync problems.



    --
    Larry Lynch
    Mystic, Ct.
     
    Larry, Nov 2, 2004
    #8
  9. brickled

    brickled Guest

    i've tried all the different settings, from "good" to "best" - all giving
    similar results.

    i think i'm just gonna give up on the ati and fork over the cash for the
    canopus advc-100.

    after researching it today, it was highest rated by actual users at many of
    the dvd authoring type websites.

    thanks for everyone's help...

    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <JJPhd.16088$5i5.14897
    > @newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
    > says...
    > > ok, i'm w/ u that a tv's resolution is lower than a

    monitor's.........but if
    > > i can get a very acceptable result on the tv, it stands to reason that i
    > > should be able to get an acceptable result when the end target use is

    also
    > > going to be viewed on a tv.....
    > >
    > > i'm trying to get my hands on the original as to avoid using the vhs
    > > altogether......see if that helps.
    > >
    > > when i do go directly from my cam tapes to the capture card, i get

    better
    > > results but still, i'm much more happy w/ what i see on the tv when i

    output
    > > the cam directly to my tv vs. capturing it onto my computer & then

    feeding
    > > the result back to my tv (in the form of a finished dvd).
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    > What quality setting are you using for the capture???
    >
    > I use "high quality DVD" setting using ATIs own capture
    > software, then import int whatever Im using to edit/produce
    > the video.
    >
    > A good quick computer (>>2 ghz Pentium or Athlon) will
    > capture DvD quality "ON THE FLY" without dropping frames.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Larry Lynch
    > Mystic, Ct.
     
    brickled, Nov 2, 2004
    #9
  10. brickled

    Smarty Guest

    Larry,

    My ATI problems were indeed with slower machines (2 GHz) I used at that
    time. However, these were the fastest machines sold in that era (2002-2003)
    and way above the requirement stated by ATI for using their cards. It is
    indeed true that lip synch issues were profoundly worse when frames were
    dropped. It is also my experience however that a capture made with no
    dropped frames whatsoever, using a 2 GHz machine with plenty of RAM and a
    very fast and uncluttered (dedicated) capture disk with its own dedicated
    controller (either IDE or Firewire) produced poor digital files with choppy
    video, very poor lip synch, and video that had numerous severe problems. The
    faults were bad enough that DVDs which I burned were grossly inferior to
    other captures I was able to do with any of several other methods I
    compared. In defense of ATI, the card did a very nice job of TV time
    shifting, had fast graphics, and a lot of other nice features, and was very
    inexpensive considering all the things it could do. Getting the right
    drivers for it to work properly was a bit tricky, and I never found the DVD
    video captures to be worth any serious consideration.

    Since a new capture card like the PVR-250 is only $80 if you shop for it
    carefully, I now recommend it as a much better solution. I have to admit
    that I have NOT looked at ATI cards since mid 2003 and a lot may have
    improved / changed since then.

    Smarty


    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    >> The ATI capture cards do a mediocre job of converting analog video to
    >> digital. They use cheap analog to digital converters, very primitive
    >> synch
    >> separators, and poor color demodulators, I also ran into severe lip synch
    >> issues when capturing longer (30 minute and up) programs. I eventually
    >> gave
    >> up after owning and trying 3 ATI All In Wonder cards and reading the
    >> threads
    >> of others with similar experiences. Some people have had success with
    >> them,
    >> but I have not.
    >>

    >
    > These problems usually only plague people with << 2ghz
    > systems or slow/cluttered harddrives.
    >
    > The BIG problem is ATI doesn't advertise what powerhogs the
    > All In Wonder card is. It REALLY needs a fast system and
    > fast hard-drives before it can do what its supposed to.
    >
    > Even then, if the hard drive gets fragmented, or the UDMA
    > mode gets messed with by windows (which happens even with
    > XP Pro) you go right back to skipped frames, and stuttery
    > video.
    >
    > The current line of All In Wonders (with current drivers)
    > doesn't seem to have sound sync problems.
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > Larry Lynch
    > Mystic, Ct.
     
    Smarty, Nov 3, 2004
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    696
    Silverstrand
    Aug 28, 2005
  2. thing
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    330
    thing
    Jun 23, 2004
  3. thing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    329
    thing
    Jul 2, 2004
  4. Anonymous
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    322
    The GHOST of WOGER.
    Jul 4, 2004
  5. GraB
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    605
    Rob J
    Jul 23, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page