| Author |
Message |
mrlipring
Guest
|
 Posted:
Tue Nov 30, 2004 5:32 am Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
In article <prinq01l6kjnmoev9un2ofkn1g9g5q59rs@4ax.com>,
tonymorgan@rhylonline.com says...
| Quote: | On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:37:13 +0000 (UTC), mrlipring
mrlipring@shitmail.com> wrote:
In article <29cmq0dsn6kt3rhbotmougelqdnti667hl@4ax.com>,
tonymorgan@rhylonline.com says...
Snipped....
Keep spouting that bullshit, tony.
You really must let us into your secret. How can you store an analogue
video signal on a PC? I always thought that it can only be stored as a
digital signal (which, last time I looked is NOT analgue).
You do talk such utter crap - it amazes me that you claim to be a
professional. God help the video industry if you're an example.
And clearly, you are completely clueless about firewire from your
responses.
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info
|
First off, as i've told you before, i've NEVER, not anywhere, claimed to
be a pro. I'm not. I wouldn't want to be. Editing's not my thing, but i
know enough about editing and codecs and all that shenanigans to be able
to tell you you're talking shit.
I particularly like the way you've snipped everything i said, then told
me i was wrong. No justification for why you say that, just the
statement. If i prove you wrong more, will you stick your fingers in
your ears and shout "la la la la la! can't hear you!"? You're really
pathetic. If i'm wrong about something, feel free to prove it and teach
me something. I don't proclaim to be a fountain of knowledge, but for
your argument against me to be so weak that you don't even state it?
I'll quote myself, since you didn't.
In article <MPG.1c15688c5725dd76989698@news.btinternet.com>,
mrlipring@shitmail.com says...
| Quote: | In article <29cmq0dsn6kt3rhbotmougelqdnti667hl@4ax.com>,
tonymorgan@rhylonline.com says...
A signal over S-Video must be captured/digitalized.
No quality loss there...
So you have a 100% efficient capture solution then? No external noise
introduced? Perfectly shielded cables etc? I think not.
You are confused.... Here, I'll try to help you understand:
S-video ---> AVI DV = no quality loss
nonsense. DV is a lossy compression codec. No analogue > digital
conversion can have no quality loss, no matter the codec. Better kit
will do a better job, but it is IMPOSSIBLE to get a lossless analogue
capture.
DV ---> S-video = quality loss
Agreed.
AVI DV ---> S-video = quallity loss
Agreed. Although that's what you just said above. Repeating yourself?
DV ---> MPEG = quality loss
Indeed
MPEG ---> DV = no quality loss
Nonsense again. For the same reasons, DV is a lossy codec. What is
"mpeg" anyway? That's a pretty vague term these days.
device(1) ---> Firewire ---> device(2) = no quality loss
Keep spouting that bullshit, tony.
|
and you said:
| Quote: |
You really must let us into your secret. How can you store an analogue
video signal on a PC? I always thought that it can only be stored as a
digital signal (which, last time I looked is NOT analgue).
|
Now... Where did i say that i could store analogue video on a pc? Unless
you're purposely misunderstanding "analogue capture". You know, as does
everyone else, that i mean capturing FROM an analogue source, as opposed
to digital. You KNOW i meant that, because we were talking about
capturing from svideo. what would i be capturing TO, if not a digital
destination, exactly? Yes, you know it, but you're being an obtuse prick
for the sake of it. Go you.
I didn't even mention firewire ONCE in my response either. Clueless, am
i? I was talking about the fact that DV, as a codec, is lossy. Indeed,
after a few generations of DV > DV purely digital encoding, artifacts
appear. That doesn't happen with a truly lossless codec like huffyuv.
Couple that with the fact that no analogue > digital capture device is
100% clean and efficient, and there's no way you can say that:
| Quote: | S-video ---> DV = no quality loss
|
since you have to go from analogue to digital, which WILL NOT BE
PERFECT, then you have to compress to DV, which is a lossy codec.
Now, if you want to discuss this/tell me i'm talking shit, please do,
but don't just snip all of this and say i'm wrong, have a sensible
discussion for once. tell me what you disagree with. I won't hold my
breath though, given your (easily checkable) track record.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ed Anson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:09 am Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
Broons Bane wrote:
| Quote: | Hi there.
(I'm new to this stuff)
I have a video camera capable of outputting to svideo or firewire and I want
to do video editing on my pc.
|
The S-Video is intended for output to a monitor so you can watch your
video. The FireWire is intended for transfer to your PC for editing.
| Quote: |
My pc has an svideo port, but not firewire. Should I buy a firewire card or
will I be able to download my digital video tapes to the pc using svideo?
|
Unless your PC was specifically configured for video editing, I suspect
that the S-Video port is an output (for a monitor) and cannot be used to
capture video.
Even if your S-Video port is connected to a video capture card, I would
not recommend using it in this case. I am assuming that your cam records
in DV format. So consider these alternatives:
Using FireWire, you can transfer a bit-perfect copy of what's on your
tape into your PC for editing.
Using S-Video, the camera first converts the compressed video on your
tape to analog video. That analog signal passes through a cable, picking
up noise and distortion. The capture card digitizes the analog signal,
causing additional quantization errors, and then compresses it back to
DV. You lose quality in every step along the way.
| Quote: |
Thanks in anticipation :)
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Morgan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:09 am Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:37:13 +0000 (UTC), mrlipring
<mrlipring@shitmail.com> wrote:
Snipped....
| Quote: | Keep spouting that bullshit, tony.
|
You really must let us into your secret. How can you store an analogue
video signal on a PC? I always thought that it can only be stored as a
digital signal (which, last time I looked is NOT analgue).
You do talk such utter crap - it amazes me that you claim to be a
professional. God help the video industry if you're an example.
And clearly, you are completely clueless about firewire from your
responses.
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Morgan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:10 am Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:41:27 GMT, "Nick" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Tony Morgan" <tonymorgan@rhylonline.com> wrote in message
news:89bkq0p5vbi194npbp8ca9ao3kve6m7o09@4ax.com...
Although I use firewire, USB2 is faster.
I'm afraid I'd disagree. It is *supposed* to be faster, but USB2 is a
"step-down" communication protocol, and will rarely run at anywhere
near it's max speed (and much slower than firewire).
So why do ext hard drives now utilise USB2 rather than Firewire ?
While all video editors support capture through firewire, not all will
capture through USB2. And relatively few digital camcorders support
USB2, while all support firewire.
Most capture thru usb, usb2 or firewire. My dads sony, my sharp vlz1h
and my brothers ancient (4yrs old) smasung.
I'd be interested, BTW, in learning just which digital camcorders DO
support USB2. Ditto with video editors.
Windows MM 1 and 2.
|
I've just checked - and MM2 does not support USB2. And I rather doubt
that MM1 did, since USB2 was only introduced after MM2 was released
(and MM1 discontinued).
And Cyberlink.
I assume that you're referring to Cyberlink Powerdirector. According
to their site it: "Supports a wide range of video sources for maximum
flexibility: DV Camcorders, MicroMV digital camcorders, Analog
Camcorders, PC Cameras, TV Tuners, and more. Video can be captured in
MPEG-1, MPEG-2, AVI or DivX* formats (*Note: Only for capturing from
analog sources)."
No mention there (or anywhere else on their site) about USB2.
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Morgan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:09 pm Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 05:32:51 +0000 (UTC), mrlipring
<mrlipring@shitmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | In article <prinq01l6kjnmoev9un2ofkn1g9g5q59rs@4ax.com>,
tonymorgan@rhylonline.com says...
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:37:13 +0000 (UTC), mrlipring
mrlipring@shitmail.com> wrote:
In article <29cmq0dsn6kt3rhbotmougelqdnti667hl@4ax.com>,
tonymorgan@rhylonline.com says...
Snipped....
Keep spouting that bullshit, tony.
You really must let us into your secret. How can you store an analogue
video signal on a PC? I always thought that it can only be stored as a
digital signal (which, last time I looked is NOT analgue).
You do talk such utter crap - it amazes me that you claim to be a
professional. God help the video industry if you're an example.
And clearly, you are completely clueless about firewire from your
responses.
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info
First off, as i've told you before, i've NEVER, not anywhere, claimed to
be a pro. I'm not. I wouldn't want to be. Editing's not my thing, but i
know enough about editing and codecs and all that shenanigans to be able
to tell you you're talking shit.
I particularly like the way you've snipped everything i said, then told
me i was wrong. No justification for why you say that, just the
statement. If i prove you wrong more, will you stick your fingers in
your ears and shout "la la la la la! can't hear you!"? You're really
pathetic. If i'm wrong about something, feel free to prove it and teach
me something.
|
Just do as I've suggested in my follow-up.
I don't proclaim to be a fountain of knowledge, but for
| Quote: | your argument against me to be so weak that you don't even state it?
|
It isn't rocket-science to do as I've suggested in my follow-up.
| Quote: |
I'll quote myself, since you didn't.
In article <MPG.1c15688c5725dd76989698@news.btinternet.com>,
mrlipring@shitmail.com says...
In article <29cmq0dsn6kt3rhbotmougelqdnti667hl@4ax.com>,
tonymorgan@rhylonline.com says...
A signal over S-Video must be captured/digitalized.
No quality loss there...
So you have a 100% efficient capture solution then? No external noise
introduced? Perfectly shielded cables etc? I think not.
You are confused.... Here, I'll try to help you understand:
S-video ---> AVI DV = no quality loss
nonsense. DV is a lossy compression codec.
|
You are clearly deliberately avoiding the fact that the image was
first captured on miniDV tape (aka DV).
Your trouble is that you deliiberately take things out of context to
start an argument.
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roberto Divia
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:09 pm Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
Tony Morgan wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:15:34 +0100, Roberto Divia
Roberto.Divia@cern.ch> wrote:
Tony Morgan wrote:
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:50:28 GMT, "Nick" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote:
Firewire is 100% same quality as original tape.
Firewire is a communication protocol. It has nothing whatsoever to do
with quality. It is the method used by your video editor to store the
captured video (AVI DV) that maintains the quality.
The issue is another.
Do try to get it right :-)
A signal over S-Video must be captured/digitalized.
No quality loss there...
|
Of course there is a quality loss! The signal has to be converted
by the camera from digital to S-Video and then back to digital by
the PC. Double conversion!
| Quote: | DV over FireWire is copied bit by bit. This may (and most probably will)
cause a worse quality
Untrue...
|
True. Please read the IEEE 1394 standard and all FireWire FAQs and
you will see that FireWire *is* digital.
| Quote: | of videos captured over S-Video
Perhaps you could inform us just which video editors allow the capture
over S-video?
|
You need a capture device to convert S-Video to digital. Then you
can use the captured video stream in a video editor.
The same applies to FireWire with the difference that the video
stream does not have to be captured but just moved (logged).
| Quote: | compared to the
same video transferred over FireWire.
You are confused.... Here, I'll try to help you understand:
S-video ---> DV = no quality loss
S-video ---> AVI DV = no quality loss
DV ---> S-video = quality loss
AVI DV ---> S-video = quallity loss
DV ---> MPEG = quality loss
MPEG ---> DV = no quality loss
device(1) ---> Firewire ---> device(2) = no quality loss
Take it step-by-step :-)
Device ---> Firewire ---> device(2) = no quality loss.
Take it step-by-step and I'm sure it will become clear.
|
Desolate, the above is not entirely correct.
A DVCAM writes to its media in digital form. The content of the media
must then be transferred into the editing system. Using FireWire, the video
stream is copied "as-is", bit by bit (you would achieve the same result by
moving the media to the PC, e.g. using a memory stick). With S-Video, the
data stream must be first encoded (digital to analogue) on the camera side
and then captured (analogue to digital) on the PC side.
What we are comparing are the two paths:
DV ---> D/A ---> S-Video ---> A/D ---> DV
DV ---> FireWire binary transfer ---> DV
DV to MPEG and MPEG to DV is outside the scope of this discussion.
You say (correctly) "DV ---> S-Video = quality loss". This is *exactly*
what the DVCAM has to do to send its data over S-Video! The DVCAM has
DV on its media and must convert it to send it over S-Video: quality
loss!
The statemente "S-video ---> DV = no quality loss" and
"S-video ---> AVI DV = no quality loss" are wrong. How do you convert
S-Video into DV in a loseless way? S-Video must be sampled, converted
to digital. And the quality of the output depends on the capabilities
of the capturing device. Less capabilities = less quality. This is not
true for FireWire adapters, where the only required capability is to
be able to sustain the input data rates on the Host Bus Adapter side.
P.S. I was a member of the IEEE 1394 working group. I am not confused.
I know very well how FireWire works ;-)
Ciao,
--
Roberto Divia` Love at first sight is one of the greatest
============= labour-saving devices the world has ever seen.
Mailbox: C02110 CERN-European Organization for Nuclear Research
E-mail: Roberto.Divia@cern.ch CH-1211 GENEVE 23, Switzerland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Morgan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:09 pm Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 01:28:43 +0000, Tony Morgan
<tonymorgan@rhylonline.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:37:13 +0000 (UTC), mrlipring
mrlipring@shitmail.com> wrote:
In article <29cmq0dsn6kt3rhbotmougelqdnti667hl@4ax.com>,
tonymorgan@rhylonline.com says...
Snipped....
Keep spouting that bullshit, tony.
You really must let us into your secret. How can you store an analogue
video signal on a PC? I always thought that it can only be stored as a
digital signal (which, last time I looked is NOT analgue).
You do talk such utter crap - it amazes me that you claim to be a
professional. God help the video industry if you're an example.
And clearly, you are completely clueless about firewire from your
responses.
|
I should perhaps have suggested that you do something that a so-called
"professional" should have little difficullty in doing:
1. Shoot a test card. Observe the lines resolution. About
500 lines ?
2. Display via S-vdeo. Lines resoulution? About 500 lines ?
3. Capture into PC using firewire. Lines resoulution ?
About 500 lines (same as in (1) and (2) above) ?
Demonstrates that it's you who are taling bullshit.
---
Tony Morgan
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrlipring
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:41 pm Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
In article <tf9oq0tni33ceilskg19gk9lbvg4ed6qdh@4ax.com>,
tonymorgan@rhylonline.com says...
| Quote: | On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 01:28:43 +0000, Tony Morgan
tonymorgan@rhylonline.com> wrote:
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:37:13 +0000 (UTC), mrlipring
mrlipring@shitmail.com> wrote:
In article <29cmq0dsn6kt3rhbotmougelqdnti667hl@4ax.com>,
tonymorgan@rhylonline.com says...
Snipped....
Keep spouting that bullshit, tony.
You really must let us into your secret. How can you store an analogue
video signal on a PC? I always thought that it can only be stored as a
digital signal (which, last time I looked is NOT analgue).
You do talk such utter crap - it amazes me that you claim to be a
professional. God help the video industry if you're an example.
And clearly, you are completely clueless about firewire from your
responses.
I should perhaps have suggested that you do something that a so-called
"professional" should have little difficullty in doing:
1. Shoot a test card. Observe the lines resolution. About
500 lines ?
2. Display via S-vdeo. Lines resoulution? About 500 lines ?
3. Capture into PC using firewire. Lines resoulution ?
About 500 lines (same as in (1) and (2) above) ?
Demonstrates that it's you who are taling bullshit.
---
Tony Morgan
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info
|
errm... How does that demonstrate no loss in quality? Tony, you're
really losing it these days. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrlipring
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 30, 2004 3:43 pm Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
In article <i3aoq0po0l09tbumvkho0870bpiba6f6p6@4ax.com>,
tonymorgan@rhylonline.com says...
| Quote: |
Just do as I've suggested in my follow-up.
|
Aw, you liked my post so much you replied to it twice. That's sweet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nick
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 01, 2004 12:02 am Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
"Tony Morgan" <tonymorgan@rhylonline.com> wrote in message
news:bmhnq0pslbmp62mtapqdg30nakehpjt90h@4ax.com...
| Quote: | On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:41:27 GMT, "Nick" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote:
I've just checked - and MM2 does not support USB2. And I rather doubt
that MM1 did, since USB2 was only introduced after MM2 was released
(and MM1 discontinued).
|
MM1 did as well.
| Quote: | And Cyberlink.
No mention there (or anywhere else on their site) about USB2.
|
Must be your setup/camcorder then.
Nick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stuart McKears
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 01, 2004 12:06 pm Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 22:28:49 GMT, "Nick" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Tony Morgan" <tonymorgan@rhylonline.com> wrote in message
news:bmhnq0pslbmp62mtapqdg30nakehpjt90h@4ax.com...
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:41:27 GMT, "Nick" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote:
I've just checked - and MM2 does not support USB2. And I rather doubt
that MM1 did, since USB2 was only introduced after MM2 was released
(and MM1 discontinued).
MM1 did as well.
And Cyberlink.
No mention there (or anywhere else on their site) about USB2.
Must be your setup/camcorder then.
Nick
|
Client software doesn't need to know about USB or USB2, if it supports a serial
input then it should support either (some very old or badly written software
might have timing problems with the top speed of USB2)
Three things determine the use of USB2 - whether the remote sender can send
using USB2, whether the client motherboard supports USB2 and whether the OS also
supports USB2 (XP does, I think you need specialist drivers for older OSs)
Stuart
www.mckears.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roger
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 02, 2004 6:03 pm Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
"Broons Bane" <nochance@youmustbejoking.com> wrote in message
news:30tt06F34hndeU1@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: | [snippy]
I have a video camera capable of outputting to svideo or firewire and I
want to do video editing on my pc.
My pc has an svideo port, but not firewire. Should I buy a firewire card
or will I be able to download my digital video tapes to the pc using
svideo?
|
Firewire is the norm for DV cam transfer.
Firewire seems to come in two flavours:
Original (1394a) at 400 Mb/sec.
Latest version (1394b) at 800 Mb/sec.
USB also in two flavours:
USB 1= 1.2 Mb/sec
And USB 2= 480 Mb/sec.
However its worth noting that most external capture cards for Digital
Terrestrial Television (Freeview) employ the USB 2 connection.
I'm not entirely clear on the reasons why its Firewire for DV camcoder Mpeg
files and USB for digital television Mpeg files.
Entering guess work mode:
Firewire: DV downloaded from a cam corder will be a closed file with
opening and closing data.
USB: The Mpeg stream from a TV decoder has no specific beginning or end, so
its not a closed file. USB can handle this better???
Perhaps someone better informed can comment.
Roger |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurence Payne
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:03 am Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:07:31 +0000, Tony Morgan
<tonymorgan@rhylonline.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Firewire is 100% same quality as original tape.
Firewire is a communication protocol. It has nothing whatsoever to do
with quality. It is the method used by your video editor to store the
captured video (AVI DV) that maintains the quality.
|
Correct, but misleading. The signal made available at the Firewire
port is a full-quality one. The signal made available at the s-video
port isn't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurence Payne
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:03 am Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:50:28 GMT, "Nick" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Although I use firewire, USB2 is faster. Get one of those instead.
|
Oh dear! That old one again.
Sure, use USB2. IF your camera has a USB2 port capable of passing
video. Which it doesn't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurence Payne
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:03 am Post subject:
Re: svideo or firewire? |
|
|
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:26:14 -0000, "Broons Bane"
<nochance@youmustbejoking.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Thanks everybody - firewire it is!
I remember the days when PC's had it as standard. Mustn't have taken of eh?
|
Eh? Firewire is relatively new. I don't think it's ever been
considered "standard" on PCs, in the way parallel, serial and USB
ports have. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in