Frustrated Newbe could use some help!

[morse]

I own a PCI G200 Marvel 16 megs of SDRAM and the extra Matrox DVD Module. I have it running it in Windows 98SE.

Abit BE6 rev II
Celeron 1.1 Ghz,
500 megs of Crucial P133 ECC,
28 GB Seagate 7200 RPM Ultra 66 Barracuda on Primary Ultra 66 controller
30 GB Maxtor 7200 Ultra 100 on Secondary Ultra 66 controller

I installed the OS, the chipset drivers, installed NIC drivers, updated Windows and IE, installed Matrox drivers, installed Matrox video tools. Note I have no choice on Matrox drivers and video tools because of my DVD module. I must use 98SE and I must use particular drivers and video tools.

Then I installed the latest NIMO pack. Installed Ulead VideoStudio 6 and patched with latest update. After installing all this I use the highest quality available setting in Matrox Video Tools to record TV broadcasts.

MJEG encoding
CD-quality audio
704X480 (NTSC)
30 frames/sec
3.103MB/sec


After recording a TV broadcast I use VideoStudio 6 to remove the commercials. Create MPEG-1 or VCD MPEG-1 and then burn to CD for archival purposes.

This setup worked great for a short time. But all of a sudden after encoding I end up with an intermittent pixel breakup, into square blocks.... in the top right hand edge of the video. It represents about 15 percent of the top edge and comes and goes intermittently during playback of edited files. My original Matrox avi files are OK so I assumed it had something to do with the encoding down to mpeg-1 VCD.

The first thing I tried was to encode to MPEG-2 = SVCD, something I have done successfully before. This got rid of the pixel breakup problem but caused a audio sync problem...which has never occurred before.

So the first thing I tried was to remove ULEAD, clean up the registry and drive and then reinstall. No difference. Next I restored a known good backup and then encoded the avi files again. When the same problem reoccurred I knew it had to be in the original recordings...even though the original avi files play back OK.

It must be a corrupt codec but how can I tell. Can anybody advise me how to deal with this.

I use my Marvel to record various TV broadcast, encode to mpeg-1 VCD and then archive on CDs. I just assumed I should be doing this at the highest quality. Am I right. How should I be doing this?

Also when I output one of my VCDs to <TV Out> it doesn't fill my TV screen. It is a little off to the right and there is a black edge ..why is this?

I am considering installing a separate Win98 boot, just for recording and editing purposes. Something that would be consistent and wouldn't get screwed up with updates. What codec should I be using to record with for my purposes?

Any help or comments or advice appreciated!

[Ted222]

morse,

I had a similar setup before. The best quality I was able to get out of my Marvel was when using PICVideo codec. This wont help for your broadcast recordings unless you use an external TV tuner like a VCR and then record through the RCA jacks to PICVideo. The big problem is you run out of hard drive space pretty quickly, and you really need a 50 buck Promise RAID card with 2 hard drives hooked to it, to really use the codec properly.

I was never really pleased with the quality of PCVCR recordings.

good luck,

Ted

[Will Hay]

Hello morse/ted,
Why two additional hdd's Ted?
Why not just one additional hdd hooked to the RAID card, used purely for capture?
Thanks,
Will
--
Will Hay
A novice too!

[Ted222]

Will,
Because in this case, the reason for the RAID is speed, not storage space. PICVideo creats big files which need the extra performance of a RAID to be trouble free.

(sustained through-put, not burst speed....otherwise there is no need for the RAID). DV video is much more compact and does not require a RAID setup, but such is not the case here, if I am reading the original question right.

Ted

[Will Hay]

Thanks, I understand that.
The point I tried to make but perhaps phrased badly was..
...wouldn't a file captured to a single hdd on a RAID card be sufficient?
When I say a single hdd on a RAID I mean in addition to the primary IDE hdd of course.
Have I misunderstood the ability of a RAID card, isn't the primary hdd still cabled to the motherboard (as convention dictates), and a second hdd linked to the RAID card?
This brings me back to my initial point, why a further hdd on the RAID card?
I ask this as I'm about to buy a second hdd (100gb-ish) and a promise card.
I think I'm missing something here ...........
Thanks,
Will

[Ted222]

Will,
Without the second hard drive the RAID is just another IDE controller and you don't get the performance of a 2 drive RAID, which is the whole point for a RAID(more than one drive).

As I said, it isn't the extra space so much as the extra performance that is needed to use PICVideo at its highest quality - which is where you need to start in order to end up with the highest quality when you re-encode to MPEG-1 for a VCD.

Ted

[Will Hay]

I see now Ted, thanks.
Assuming C was your boot drive and D & E were your hdd's on your RAID controller...
Would it make most sense to install your capture software to D & capture to E, rather than C to D?
I take it C to D would be defeating the object of installing a RAID card?
Thanks Ted, I clearly didn't understand the function of a RAID card.
Will

[SitFlyer]

Originally posted by Will Hay
I see now Ted, thanks.
Assuming C was your boot drive and D & E were your hdd's on your RAID controller...
Would it make most sense to install your capture software to D & capture to E, rather than C to D?
I take it C to D would be defeating the object of installing a RAID card?
Thanks Ted, I clearly didn't understand the function of a RAID card.
Will

I'm afraid you still don't clearly understand. Perhaps reading this thread will help clear thing up?

http://forums.murc.ws/showthread.php?s=&postid=300735#post300735

[Brian Ellis]

Put it as simply as I can, Will.

You boot up on your C: drive, as usual. You have all your apps on the C: drive, or another partition or IDE drive, as you wish. You have two (or more) identical drives on a RAID controller, set up for striping (RAID 0), and this looks like a single drive, taking the next letter up. This drive will appear to have about twice the capacity of a single drive and will run at almost twice the speed.

IOW, if you buy 2 60 Gb drives which happen to have a sequential transfer write rate of, say, 15 Mb/s as an ordinary UDMA IDE set up, on RAID 0 you will get one apparent drive of 120 Gb at 30 Mb/s (roughly speaking).

Capisce?

[Will Hay]

I see, that *is* a little clearer, thanks.
So the function of RAID 0 combines the number of drives on the controller card and utilises their combined speeds and storage.
I take it both drives are seen as one additional drive, ie. two 60gb Matxor drives would be seen as one 120gb but running twice as fast, yes?
I'm only capturing analogue video (short clips) using the Matrox RR-G (although this may change to an ATI Radeon ViVo 64mb DDR shortly, I have one to try), most of my stuff is twenty to thirty minuts long maximum, occasionally two hours (I'm capturing 8mm tape of my newborn son and converting old vhs to vcd).
I'm definately going to buy a second hdd, but do you think for what I'm doing RAID is going too far?
I'm having problems with frame loss, something I put down to Via and SB1024 and have considered everything from a new motherboard and sound card, right up to the Canopus ADVC100.
I only have a limited amount to spend (£300 max).
I haven't installed anything other than the software that came with the Matrox remote, and having tried virtualdub for capture find I lose more frames than I do with the Matrox software.
Also, I've heard a lot about this hufflepuff codec, is that an essential part of capture (I'm afraid all the different codec's somehat baffle me too)?
So, considering I'm not imputing DV would I be as well simply having a second hdd on the secondary IDE (as master), or would you recommend a couple of hdd's on a promise card?
One thing worth pointing out is...
...Im capturing analogue at around 3mb/s using the standard Matrox software and then converting using the templates within TMPGEnc to convert to vdc compliant meg.
Does 3mb/s sound reasonable for what I'm doing?
Thanks, and thanks for the link.
Will Hay
--
Ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of.

[Will Hay]

Post above in response to Sitflier but thanks Brian - I think I have got it now
W.