analog capture: convert to DV ?

[VJ]

Hello,

I'm about to assemble a new system (once all the parts have arrived). It most likely will only be a matter of time before I add some video-capture card.

What are the benefits/disadvantages of using an analog -> DV converter in combination with a firewire card to perform analog capture in comparison to a genuine analog capture card ?

E.g. :
1. http://www.canopus-uk.com/US/product...pm_advc-50.asp
with a firewire controller (none onboard however)

or perhaps:
2. http://www.canopus-uk.com/US/product..._advc-1394.asp

Initially, I don't foresee DV capture, but option 1. would allow me to save a PCI slot (only firewire-controller needed; which I could then also use for drives, ...). Option 2. also requires just one PCI-slot, but perhaps this firewire-interface is less suitable for drives ?


Jörg

[wkulecz]

Advantages: As close to hassle free as windows can get if you choose something like the Canopus ADVC-100. Quality is great. Dropped frames and audio sync problems are a thing of the past.

Disadvantages: Computer playback of DV captures is inferior to playback of other capture formats. Unless you are going back to tape or encodig to mpeg this can be a problem if you want to watch your video on the computer. The DVDmax feature on Matrox G40 and above cards can pretty much solve the problem though.

--wally.

[VJ]

Originally posted by wkulecz
Advantages: As close to hassle free as windows can get if you choose something like the Canopus ADVC-100. Quality is great. Dropped frames and audio sync problems are a thing of the past.

And what about the ADVC-50 solution ? This requires a firewire-card in order to have capture-abilities. I suspect the card then playes a big part ? I have seen 64bit firewire cards, so that might turn out to be an interesting combination (esp. as it would keep other devices running at their speeds)...
e.g. : http://www.indigita.com/products/hos...idt88xpci.html

Also, how does the ADVC-100 perform when connecting firewire harddrives ?

Disadvantages: Computer playback of DV captures is inferior to playback of other capture formats. Unless you are going back to tape or encodig to mpeg this can be a problem if you want to watch your video on the computer. The DVDmax feature on Matrox G40 and above cards can pretty much solve the problem though.

Is this a common problem, or typical for the DV->analog conversion solutions ? Does the processing power help improve the situation ?


Jörg

[Brian Ellis]

I've been using an ADVC-100 for nearly a year, now. It's terrific. As Wally says, hassle-free in trumps, with an ordinary cheapo IEEE-1394 card. No dropped frames, no synch issues. Quality of results superior or as good as with the Marvel I used previously for 99% of shots (perhaps marginally inferior with very fast movements, such as pans, but I don't think many would notice). Another advantage: when you upgrade to a DV camera, footage captured via the bridge and from the cam is entirely compatible with one another (no conversions, same quality, assuming high quality input).

But there's more to come, if you edit in MSP7 and have the ADVC-100 (not the -50): real-time preview on a TV without sacrificing a port. If you have a G-500, for example, this gives you two screens for editing and a third for previewing, which allows overscan and gamma issues to be resolved as you are actually working. Or you may opt for the expensive Parhelia to have four screens! It may give you Wimbledon neck, though

[Dr Mordrid]

Wimbledon neck....cute

I love editing with the Parhelia with triplehead. Great

Dr. Modrid

[VJ]

Are there other differences between the -100 and the -50 besides the realtime preview ?
(as far as I can tell, the -50 does not allow for analog output, it only serves input towards the PC; the -100 model supports both in/output).

I seem to have been mixing model numbers (-50, -100, -1394 )... How does the ADVC-1394 fit in this picture ? It is a PCI-card that allows capturing from both IEEE1394 and analog. I have a sense this is the ADVC-50 combined with a firewire-card... right ? Is it any good in addressing other firewire devices (harddisks, ...) wrt performance ?

Performance wise, is this the ranking one might give :
1. firewire + ADVC-100
2. firewire + ADVC-50
3. ADVC1394


Jörg

[Brian Ellis]

Jörg

In terms of capture performance, I don't think, at least in theory, there will be much difference in your 1, 2 or 3. I would guess you are right about the ADVC-1394, but I've never tried it or the -50, so cannot tell from experience. The RT Preview with the -100 is a perk from the analogue o/p. I'd hate to lose it, now.

[fberger]

I own the ADVC-50. The other difference not mentionned above is that you may be able to remove Macrovision protection on the -100 by holding down the button for 30 seconds. The -50 does not have such a button since it's only analog to DV. If you try to capture a Macrovision protected tape with the -50 it'll make the video signal unusable.
When I bought mine the other significant difference was price, $100 off for the -50.I already had a Pyro card, so the 50 was fine for me.

I would recommend looking at the 1394 if you also need a firewire card since you'll get all functions on the same card. Or get yourself a nice Matrox RTX.10 for a few more bucks...

[VJ]

Well, the -1394 would be an all-in-one solution, but it would slow down one of my busses to 32bit/33 MHz, besides the fact that it probabely misses out on some functionality (in comparison to the -100 model). The ability to pop in a faster IEEE card (e.g. 64bit/66 MHz) and then use a converter-box, seems to be more appealing in that aspect (was one of the reasons for me to start considering the route). Also the fact that a seperate firewire card would have more ports might be interesting when expanding (harddisk, ...)


Jörg