Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Radius Telecast, Mac and General Vid Cap Questions

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 28, 2004 8:08:11 PM

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

I've got a couple of questions on my Radius VideoVision SP Telecast
(PCI version) setup. If anyone is still using one of these, or
remembers one from a few years back some info would be much
appreciated. I've read alot on the system but haven't used it much
yet.

1. Should I want to capture uncompressed video can I use the Telecast
and turn compression off in software?

2. I'm planning on getting a pro S-VHS VTR, just waiting for one at a
decent price. Occasionally I see them with component out. The
Telecast supports component capture, but will I see any benefit over
S-Video with S-VHS? Betacam decks are no where near my budget. I
don't plan on outputting back to tape and the highest quality source
I'd be recording would be the occasional commerical SVHS tape.

3. In addition to the Telecast I've got a Targa 2000 Pro. I don't
want to rehash comparisions of video quality between the Telecast and
Targa - I've read the old usenet postings. The Telecast does offer
digital audio input (AES/EBU, S/PDIF) but given what I'll be
recording, SVHS or NTSC broadcast, is this even an advantage for me?

4. I've got a chance to get a base model Aurora Igniter for a low
price - under $100. Would this more modern card be a significant
improvement?

thanks for the advice,

Tom
Anonymous
November 29, 2004 6:09:16 AM

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

Tom <tmbannon@comcast.net> wrote:
: 3. In addition to the Telecast I've got a Targa 2000 Pro. I don't
: want to rehash comparisions of video quality between the Telecast and
: Targa - I've read the old usenet postings. The Telecast does offer
: digital audio input (AES/EBU, S/PDIF) but given what I'll be
: recording, SVHS or NTSC broadcast, is this even an advantage for me?

Are you going to be capturing from analog S-VHS tapes? If so, as far as *I*
know the audio there is analog. And if this is the case, I don't think you
will benefit using S/PDIF. If your source is analog video, but digital audio,
then by all means - yes.

--Leonid
Anonymous
November 29, 2004 10:00:24 PM

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

Tom <tmbannon@comcast.net> wrote:
: That's what I assumed, just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing
: anything.

I think the only time you need to use S/PDIF in for video capturing is when
you capture from LaserDiscs. Or from DVDs, but with DVDs, you don't want to
capture them. You want to rip them.

: Since I'm not planning to output back to tape (if I do DVD rips as
: well, might as well keep all output on DVD) is there any benefit in
: using MJPEG compression at all??? Should I just be doing uncompressed
: capture and encoding MPEG2 from there?

If your final result is DVD, then you don't need MJPEG compression. If you can
capture uncompressed, go for it. Another option is Huffyuv lossless codec.


--Leonid
November 29, 2004 10:00:25 PM

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

> I think the only time you need to use S/PDIF in for video capturing is when
> you capture from LaserDiscs. Or from DVDs, but with DVDs, you don't want to
> capture them. You want to rip them.

Understood. Is there any reason to ever capture from a DVD rather than
ripping? Normally of course not, but wondering if there would ever be
a reason to capture from DVD rather than rip. Avoiding some new copy
protection is the only thing I can think of. And of course capture
doesn't give you dvd menus.

> If your final result is DVD, then you don't need MJPEG compression. If you can
> capture uncompressed, go for it. Another option is Huffyuv lossless codec.

I'll have to check if I can capture uncompressed with the Telecast.
That's one other reason I'm considering getting this Igniter, it will
do both MJPEG compressed and uncompressed.

Is there any reason to use MJPEG anymore??? I've read that MPEG2
should almost always result in smaller file sizes than MJPEG of equal
quality. I know MPEG2 can't be edited as cleanly as DV or MJPEG so I
can see the advantage of those codecs for editing. But since
uncompressed really isn't a big deal anymore is there still a reason
for compressed capture?

I've considered getting a real-time MPEG2 capture card but hear that's
not the best way to go.
!