Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

ADVC-100 and real time video in a crt TV

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
Anonymous
June 5, 2004 12:13:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

I'm considering a Canopus ADVC-100 for my analog/digital transfers.
Since I intend to watch videos (my material as well as comercial DVDs)
in a common Sony TV, I would like to know:
How good is the image quality provided by ADVC-100's video OUTs ? Is
it good enough so that I need not spend extra money for a video card
that has decent TV-out (such as the Matrox 550) ?
Can a full DVD movie be played in the computer's DVD player and
watched through the ADVC-100 in the TV in real time?
I'd very much appreciate any clarifying word on this.
best to all
Anonymous
June 5, 2004 11:02:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

<visitor2@zaz.com.br> wrote ...
> I'm considering a Canopus ADVC-100 for my analog/digital transfers.
> Since I intend to watch videos (my material as well as comercial DVDs)
> in a common Sony TV, I would like to know:
> How good is the image quality provided by ADVC-100's video OUTs ? Is
> it good enough so that I need not spend extra money for a video card
> that has decent TV-out (such as the Matrox 550) ?

The ADVC-100 is likely equivalent to a decent to high-end
computer video card. The ADVC is likely better than low-end
video cards. Of course, you realize that NTSC (or PAL in your
country) is much lower resolution than most modern computer
images.

> Can a full DVD movie be played in the computer's DVD player and
> watched through the ADVC-100 in the TV in real time?

I've never seen anyone doing that. It would require decoding the
DVD (MPEG) and then re-encoding it into DV. Not impossible,
but not an optimal way of doing business, so it wouldn't surprise
me if nobody is doing it.
Anonymous
June 5, 2004 9:36:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

> > Can a full DVD movie be played in the computer's DVD player and
> > watched through the ADVC-100 in the TV in real time?

"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote:

> I've never seen anyone doing that. It would require decoding the
> DVD (MPEG) and then re-encoding it into DV. Not impossible,
> but not an optimal way of doing business, so it wouldn't surprise
> me if nobody is doing it.

I see, so any video material to be outputted from the analog OUTs of
the ADVC-100 must first be encoded in the DV format. I agree that this
makes it impracticle to use it as a DVD TV-out, maybe in 5 years from
now computer CPUs will be fast enough for that.
Thanks for making it clear, Richard.

So, for that particular task (DVD movies out to TV) to be achieved
with decent TV image quality, I guess my options would inevitably
include spending money for an extra device : either a Matrox video
card (450/550/650) or else something like the Xcard.
Is anyone in this group familiar with either of these two solutions ?

Again, thanks for following.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 5, 2004 10:19:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

<visitor2@zaz.com.br> wrote ...
> I see, so any video material to be outputted from the analog OUTs of
> the ADVC-100 must first be encoded in the DV format. I agree that this
> makes it impracticle to use it as a DVD TV-out, maybe in 5 years from
> now computer CPUs will be fast enough for that.
> Thanks for making it clear, Richard.

CPUs are fast enough for that now. The issue is that you and a guy
in Armenia may be the only ones on the planet that want to do it. :-)

> So, for that particular task (DVD movies out to TV) to be achieved
> with decent TV image quality, I guess my options would inevitably
> include spending money for an extra device : either a Matrox video
> card (450/550/650) or else something like the Xcard.
> Is anyone in this group familiar with either of these two solutions ?

A standalone DVD player (particular one of the Chineese ones)
is likely both cheaper and has better user interface/convienence.
(Not to mention a longer expected lifetime and better resale value.)
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 1:47:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote
> CPUs are fast enough for that now.

Well, then I still don't get it. Even with latest pentiums, doesn't it
take
hours to have mpeg-2 re-encoded to DV (which is what the ADVC-100
needs to put out)? I'm talking about been able to instantly watch how
an mpeg-(1,2,4) video looks on a common TV, with image that it
comparable to at least that of a standalone DVD player.

And yes, a standalone DVD player could do it, but I still don't see a
model that has full and proven support for mpeg-4, and this nowadays
can be a serious drawback. So what happens if I want to TV-check
mpeg-4 samples or versions of the videos that I shoot in DV or other
larger format ? I'd have to rely on authoring/burning DVDs or SVCDs
which are more space consuming and without the choice of mpeg
data-reading (playing the video file straight from the computer).
all the best
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 9:57:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

<visitor2@zaz.com.br> wrote in message
news:f2a3834.0406062047.75b11412@posting.google.com...
> "Richard Crowley" <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote
> > CPUs are fast enough for that now.
>
> Well, then I still don't get it. Even with latest pentiums, doesn't it
> take
> hours to have mpeg-2 re-encoded to DV (which is what the ADVC-100
> needs to put out)? I'm talking about been able to instantly watch how
> an mpeg-(1,2,4) video looks on a common TV, with image that it
> comparable to at least that of a standalone DVD player.
>
> And yes, a standalone DVD player could do it, but I still don't see a
> model that has full and proven support for mpeg-4, and this nowadays
> can be a serious drawback. So what happens if I want to TV-check
> mpeg-4 samples or versions of the videos that I shoot in DV or other
> larger format ? I'd have to rely on authoring/burning DVDs or SVCDs
> which are more space consuming and without the choice of mpeg
> data-reading (playing the video file straight from the computer).
> all the best

What is it you're trying to do? My workflow is to watch the raw
video on a "real" video monitor either while logging, or while
capturing. If any quality adjustments are required (contrast, pedestal,
chroma phase, chroma level, etc.) they are made at that point, clip
by clip. After that point it is just a matter of editing together, applying
special effects, titles, etc. Encoding into MPEG* is usually the
last step. What are you editing with? All the versions of Premiere
I've used output real-time to DV/Firewire.
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 11:23:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

visitor2@zaz.com.br wrote:

[snip]

>I'm talking about been able to instantly watch how
>an mpeg-(1,2,4) video looks on a common TV, with image that it
>comparable to at least that of a standalone DVD player.

According to the ADVC-100 "manual" (more like a pamphlet), "When the
ADVC-100 is connected to your Canopus capture card...When you playback
from the hard drive, the signal will be sent out to the DV device and
analog output." It says that the ADVC-100 can be used with the
following Canopus DV products: EZDV, DVRaptor, DVRaptor-RT.

Don't ask me to clarify any of that because I can't. But it does
sound like it is possible to do what you want although it may require
more than just the ADVC-100. Perhaps you could find more information
at the Canopus website; they have some web forums there.
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 1:36:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Thanks.

In other words, I'd really have to buy an extra hardware device: if
not one of the mentioned Canopus products (maybe redundanct with the
ADVC ?), then either a Matrox card (with its all-purpose good TV-out)
or the Xcard (VGA-RGB with hardware mpeg-4 decoding). The choice being
a matter of user's priority.

Unfortunately there's almost no information available as to how they
compare to each other, since nobody seems to make such use.
Canopus and Matrox stuff are well regarded among video or graphics
professionals, but the Xcard not fitting in either category appears
relegated to manufacturer's word.


DeepOne@ix.netcom.com wrote :
> According to the ADVC-100 "manual" (more like a pamphlet), "When the
> ADVC-100 is connected to your Canopus capture card...When you playback
> from the hard drive, the signal will be sent out to the DV device and
> analog output." It says that the ADVC-100 can be used with the
> following Canopus DV products: EZDV, DVRaptor, DVRaptor-RT.
>
> Don't ask me to clarify any of that because I can't. But it does
> sound like it is possible to do what you want although it may require
> more than just the ADVC-100. Perhaps you could find more information
> at the Canopus website; they have some web forums there.
Anonymous
June 7, 2004 11:13:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote
> Encoding into MPEG* is usually the last step.

Certainly.
All I'm talking about is a convenience matter: being able to display
video straight from the computer on a common 29-inch Sony TV. There a
number of reasons to justify this. One example: you want to show
videos to people and it is uncomfortable for them to stay in front of
a computer that is confined to a room's corner. Seating comfortably
and watching the TV would make things much more enjoyable, and in my
case I'd have a good reference as to how the videos perform in real
world. Since DV and non-compressed video would require loading and
unloading huge amounts of data from an to the HDs, mpeg versions would
fall handy, being readily available and you wouldn't be tied to
viewing only the video material that you're working at the moment. I'm
not saying by any means that this is what people should do, it's just
that it's very convenient in my circumstances.
Anonymous
June 8, 2004 1:15:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

<visitor2@zaz.com.br> wrote in message
news:f2a3834.0406071813.5cab34eb@posting.google.com...
> "Richard Crowley" <rcrowley7@xprt.net> wrote
> > Encoding into MPEG* is usually the last step.
>
> Certainly.
> All I'm talking about is a convenience matter: being able to display
> video straight from the computer on a common 29-inch Sony TV. There a
> number of reasons to justify this. One example: you want to show
> videos to people and it is uncomfortable for them to stay in front of
> a computer that is confined to a room's corner. Seating comfortably
> and watching the TV would make things much more enjoyable, and in my
> case I'd have a good reference as to how the videos perform in real
> world. Since DV and non-compressed video would require loading and
> unloading huge amounts of data from an to the HDs, mpeg versions would
> fall handy, being readily available and you wouldn't be tied to
> viewing only the video material that you're working at the moment. I'm
> not saying by any means that this is what people should do, it's just
> that it's very convenient in my circumstances.

Either a video card that outputs NTSC or an inexpensive scan converter,
which converts VGA to NTSC. The ADVC-100 is a tool for a different purpose.

Steve King
!