Why is Digital8 camcorder passthru output different than i..

Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

I've been using a Digital8 camcorder to do some video capture using DV
format, this case capturing 8mm film, going in to the computer via Firewire.
I'm running into a problem.

I find that when I output through the camcorder directly to the capture
program without recording to tape first, I get an odd vertical banding
artifact when the resulting avi file is rendered for tape output or DVD. The
banding isn't extremely pronounced but it's there and enough to be
distracting when viewing. I'm basing this on what I see on a tv monitor,
i.e. outputting to the tv instead of to a VHS tape, or playing a test DVD
made from the file on a tv. However, this doesn't occur when recording to
tape first in the Digital8 format and then outputting that to the computer
and then rendering..

This banding also occurs when playing analog tapes through the Dig8
camcorder (this camcorder is backwards compatible) to the computer.

It doesn't occur when going through composite cables and capturing as an
mjpeg avi file instead of the DV format.

I thought it would be the same, but apparently there's some difference in
the DV output from the camcorder when doing it on the fly as opposed to
going from DV tape output.

Any ideas why this is happening, why it would be different and how it can
fixed? Capturing on the fly in the DV format is preferable for various
reasons. Time savings and the size of the resulting files among them.

Using WinXP Home, Sony TRV-240 Dig8 cam, Pinnacle Studio 9 as my capture
program. (Also tried using AMCap, with no difference in the results)

Thanks for all input.
13 answers Last reply
More about digital8 camcorder passthru output
  1. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Doc wrote:

    > I find that when I output through the camcorder directly to the
    > capture program without recording to tape first, I get an odd
    > vertical banding artifact when the resulting avi file is
    > rendered for tape output or DVD.

    You probably have web space somewhere where you can copy files for
    others to download? A short downloadable test clip (say, a second's
    worth of original, unprocessed DV AVI material that displays the
    problem) would probably help in investigating the phenomenon.

    --
    znark
  2. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    "Jukka Aho" <jukka.aho@iki.fi> wrote in message
    news:0%RUe.22878$qh7.19199@reader1.news.jippii.net...
    > Doc wrote:
    >
    > > I find that when I output through the camcorder directly to the
    > > capture program without recording to tape first, I get an odd
    > > vertical banding artifact when the resulting avi file is
    > > rendered for tape output or DVD.
    >
    > You probably have web space somewhere where you can copy files for
    > others to download? A short downloadable test clip (say, a second's
    > worth of original, unprocessed DV AVI material that displays the
    > problem) would probably help in investigating the phenomenon.

    A second isn't enough, you really need to see a fair amount of the video and
    see it on a tv to see it and the webspace I have available via my internet
    provider isn't large enough hold several seconds of raw video. The lesser
    resolution of even higher quality Windows media or Realmedia files obscures
    it.

    I did put together a site where you can see it a bit through stills if
    you've got a decent monitor. Don't be misled by the presence of black
    borders on some of them. Some of them had had a border applied and the ones
    that are mjpeg hadn't. Doesn't have any effect on the banding artifact.


    http://home.mpinet.net/~docsavage20/examples_of_video_banding/index.html


    Since I've tracked down the fact that it's there when doing it "on the fly",
    but not if doing playback from a Dig8 tape, finding out what's different
    about the output would probably yield some answers.
  3. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    > http://home.mpinet.net/~docsavage20/examples_of_video_banding/index.html

    Personally, I'd be much more worried about the drastic color difference
    and not so concerned about these edges!

    Guess: The passthru is going through an analog stage, probably to show
    OSD information. and you're seeing ringing on high-frequency components
    (vertical edges). The tape output does not go through the OSD stage.
  4. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    > http://home.mpinet.net/~docsavage20/examples_of_video_banding/index.html

    You have been through here before with this same "problem"
    and these same pictures. I'd guess that you may not get any
    better answer in this round.

    When I crank my imagination up to 11, I think I can see your
    "vertical lines". At best they are what I would call a "3rd
    order effect". There are certainly much more deserving
    parts of the video that could use your attention.
  5. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Doc wrote:
    > I've been using a Digital8 camcorder to do some video capture using DV
    > format, this case capturing 8mm film, going in to the computer via
    > Firewire. I'm running into a problem.
    >
    > I find that when I output through the camcorder directly to the
    > capture program without recording to tape first, I get an odd
    > vertical banding artifact when the resulting avi file is rendered for
    > tape output or DVD. The banding isn't extremely pronounced but it's
    > there and enough to be distracting when viewing. I'm basing this on
    > what I see on a tv monitor, i.e. outputting to the tv instead of to a
    > VHS tape, or playing a test DVD made from the file on a tv. However,
    > this doesn't occur when recording to tape first in the Digital8
    > format and then outputting that to the computer and then rendering..
    >
    > This banding also occurs when playing analog tapes through the Dig8
    > camcorder (this camcorder is backwards compatible) to the computer.
    >
    > It doesn't occur when going through composite cables and capturing as
    > an mjpeg avi file instead of the DV format.
    >
    > I thought it would be the same, but apparently there's some
    > difference in the DV output from the camcorder when doing it on the
    > fly as opposed to going from DV tape output.
    >
    > Any ideas why this is happening, why it would be different and how it
    > can fixed? Capturing on the fly in the DV format is preferable for
    > various reasons. Time savings and the size of the resulting files
    > among them.
    >
    > Using WinXP Home, Sony TRV-240 Dig8 cam, Pinnacle Studio 9 as my
    > capture program. (Also tried using AMCap, with no difference in the
    > results)
    >
    > Thanks for all input.

    It seems to me you have a 60Hz hum when connecting to the computer. Try to
    run the camcorder only on batteries and use the same power strip for all
    connected gear, especially the computer and VCR.
    --
    ciao Ban
    Bordighera, Italy
  6. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    "Ban" wrote ...
    > Doc wrote:
    >> I find that when I output through the camcorder directly to the
    >> capture program without recording to tape first, I get an odd
    >> vertical banding artifact when the resulting avi file is rendered for
    ....
    > It seems to me you have a 60Hz hum when connecting to the computer.
    > Try to run the camcorder only on batteries and use the same power
    > strip for all connected gear, especially the computer and VCR.

    Powerline mains hum would appear as horizontal "banding".
    Furthermore, here in NTSC-land, the hum bars move slowly
    up the frame, taking ~10 seconds to make it through the whole
    frame. (This is because of the 59.94 field rate vs. our 60 Hz
    power freq.)

    "Doc" said he was seeing "vertical" bands. Or perhaps he
    should clarify so we are all on the same page. Vertical bands
    is not a very common video artifact. I've never seen such a
    thing. Of course, a picture is worth a thousand Usenet
    postings and followups.
  7. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    I read in sci.electronics.design that Richard Crowley
    <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> wrote (in <11i93cb75om460c@corp.supernews.com>)
    about 'Why is Digital8 camcorder passthru output different than its
    digital tape output?', on Sun, 11 Sep 2005:

    >"Doc" said he was seeing "vertical" bands. Or perhaps he
    >should clarify so we are all on the same page. Vertical bands
    >is not a very common video artifact. I've never seen such a
    >thing.

    Thin vertical lines used to be a sign of parasitic oscillation in the
    equipment, not necessarily in the video chain. Horizontal/line output
    tubes/valves used to suffer from Barkhausen oscillation, which produced
    quite a crop of vertical lines.

    Broad brightens variations, more 'stripes' than 'lines' can be due to
    velocity modulation of the horizontal scan.
    --
    Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
    If everything has been designed, a god designed evolution by natural selection.
    http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk
  8. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    "John Woodgate" wrote ...
    > Thin vertical lines used to be a sign of parasitic oscillation in the
    > equipment, not necessarily in the video chain. Horizontal/line output
    > tubes/valves used to suffer from Barkhausen oscillation, which
    > produced quite a crop of vertical lines.
    >
    > Broad brightens variations, more 'stripes' than 'lines' can be due to
    > velocity modulation of the horizontal scan.

    Right. I remember both from back in the earliest video
    equipment I worked with (the last days of firebottles).
    But I've never seen anything like either of those in any
    solid state equipment (and certainly not in digital).

    I'm guessing he means horizontal bands moving vertically.
  9. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    <larwe@larwe.com> wrote in message
    news:1126488649.212537.222810@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    > > http://home.mpinet.net/~docsavage20/examples_of_video_banding/index.html
    >
    > Personally, I'd be much more worried about the drastic color difference
    > and not so concerned about these edges!

    Not really a big point of concern. Different lighting situations, different
    projector and the mjpeg capture allows you to adjust the color balance as
    you capture. I just made the mjpeg captures quickly to see if the banding
    artifact was there.

    > Guess: The passthru is going through an analog stage, probably to show
    > OSD information.

    OSD?

    > and you're seeing ringing on high-frequency components
    > (vertical edges). The tape output does not go through the OSD stage.

    Hmm. Why would it not go through this stage with the tape?
  10. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    "Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> wrote in message
    news:11i9nv2oi58q38a@corp.supernews.com...
    > > http://home.mpinet.net/~docsavage20/examples_of_video_banding/index.html
    >
    > You have been through here before with this same "problem"
    > and these same pictures. I'd guess that you may not get any
    > better answer in this round.

    Since I have new information - i.e. noticing the difference between
    passthough and tape output, and posting to additional forums, I figured it
    would be worth putting it out there again. Plus, there's always a chance of
    getting it in front of different eyes.


    > When I crank my imagination up to 11, I think I can see your
    > "vertical lines". At best they are what I would call a "3rd
    > order effect". There are certainly much more deserving
    > parts of the video that could use your attention.

    They're there. No imagination needed. Those vertical lines that I described
    on the webpage are them, though they're more obvious when you actually see
    the video on a tv. This is the best I can do with limited webspace
    bandwidth. I'm more concerned with getting rid of this artifact than focus
    or whatever issues at the moment.
  11. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    "Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> wrote in message
    news:11i9hv8slhlv06d@corp.supernews.com...

    > I'm guessing he means horizontal bands moving vertically.

    If by "he" you mean me, I mean vertical bands. It's as if the image were
    being viewed through many, many thin vertical strips of glass whose edges
    are *almost* invisible but not quite.
  12. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    > > Guess: The passthru is going through an analog stage, probably to show
    > > OSD information.
    >
    > OSD?

    On Screen Display.

    > > and you're seeing ringing on high-frequency components
    > > (vertical edges). The tape output does not go through the OSD stage.
    >
    > Hmm. Why would it not go through this stage with the tape?

    Perhaps because the passthrough is assumed to be a quick preview thing
    and the tape output is for production. Note, I did say it was a guess.
    My camcorders both show different information on the LCD vs. the
    composite output, and different information again on the DV stream. The
    LCD shows battery information and a bunch of other stuff; time,
    position on tape, etc. The composite output only shows an icon
    indicating the current function (PLAY, REC, etc). The DV output doesn't
    have any superimposed info.
  13. Archived from groups: sci.electronics.design,alt.photography,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    <larwe@larwe.com> wrote in message
    news:1126523030.686246.271060@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    > > > Guess: The passthru is going through an analog stage, probably to show
    > > > OSD information.
    > >
    > > OSD?
    >
    > On Screen Display.
    >
    > > > and you're seeing ringing on high-frequency components
    > > > (vertical edges). The tape output does not go through the OSD stage.
    > >
    > > Hmm. Why would it not go through this stage with the tape?
    >
    > Perhaps because the passthrough is assumed to be a quick preview thing
    > and the tape output is for production. Note, I did say it was a guess.
    > My camcorders both show different information on the LCD vs. the
    > composite output, and different information again on the DV stream. The
    > LCD shows battery information and a bunch of other stuff; time,
    > position on tape, etc. The composite output only shows an icon
    > indicating the current function (PLAY, REC, etc). The DV output doesn't
    > have any superimposed info.

    Essentially the same on mine. You can include the info on the LCD display on
    the composite output if you want (not sure why anyone would) but not on the
    DV output.

    However, not sure about the "passthrough simply a preview tool" thing. Going
    by the manual, it's supposed to work, but clearly there's *something*
    different about the 2 different types of DV output.
Ask a new question

Read More

Tuner Cards Camcorders Graphics