Some days I hate new electronics
#12
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by S1997,Jun 11 2010, 08:37 PM
Dave, maybe you could record this version on your DVD.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/archive/ind...p/t-892838.html
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/archive/ind...p/t-892838.html
#13
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by zzziippyyy,Jun 11 2010, 08:53 PM
ya cant get a clear pic on a tv that shows 1080 lines of resolution from a source thats barely showing 400
I've been working on the MG for the past two days and haven't messed with this problem. I plan to try an (1) HDMI cable and (2) burn a DVD from VHS. If neither of these approaches improves anything, then I'm stuck with what I have. I have 90 days to return the LG tv or the recorder but I probably won't.
#14
Registered User
Originally Posted by zzziippyyy,Jun 11 2010, 08:53 PM
ya cant get a clear pic on a tv that shows 1080 lines of resolution from a source thats barely showing 400
and HDMI cable will not help with resolution as that's a digital cable it will help with the DVD feed but no so much with the vcr feed to the tv
BUT for cables buy from monoprice - best prices for hdmi cables
#15
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Bass,Jun 14 2010, 06:04 AM
he's right... hence the reason analog tv looks awful on a high def tv
and HDMI cable will not help with resolution as that's a digital cable it will help with the DVD feed but no so much with the vcr feed to the tv
BUT for cables buy from monoprice - best prices for hdmi cables
and HDMI cable will not help with resolution as that's a digital cable it will help with the DVD feed but no so much with the vcr feed to the tv
BUT for cables buy from monoprice - best prices for hdmi cables
#16
Dave,
The process of making a 1080 image out of a 480 line image is called up-converting.
Basically the TV needs to have the blank lines filled in between what you have.
This entails taking the average of each of the neighboring pixels in the display.
A Simple average would be the pixel above and below, but this looks like crap usually.
It's better to take the pixel to the left and the right from the line above each pixel, the do the same on the line below.
These are not a straight average but a weighted average since the distance is farther away, it's not as important.
With 2 million pixels per frame at 30 frames per second, that a lot of multiply and add operations to derive each new pixel.
Unless you spent a lot on your video processor, it is very hard to do in real time.
you might be able to capture it with a computer video card and run some cleanup on it.
you don't care how long it takes to run cleanup and then save it to dvd.
The process of making a 1080 image out of a 480 line image is called up-converting.
Basically the TV needs to have the blank lines filled in between what you have.
This entails taking the average of each of the neighboring pixels in the display.
A Simple average would be the pixel above and below, but this looks like crap usually.
It's better to take the pixel to the left and the right from the line above each pixel, the do the same on the line below.
These are not a straight average but a weighted average since the distance is farther away, it's not as important.
With 2 million pixels per frame at 30 frames per second, that a lot of multiply and add operations to derive each new pixel.
Unless you spent a lot on your video processor, it is very hard to do in real time.
you might be able to capture it with a computer video card and run some cleanup on it.
you don't care how long it takes to run cleanup and then save it to dvd.
#17
Hi Dave :wave:
What you are seeing is many generations of technology that don't play well together.
Many HDTVs do a rather pitiful job of handling the digital to analog conversions, to go from NTSC (old American TV standard) to ATSC (new digital standard). This sounds like it should be relatively easy, but it is not.
I know that this will sound like a real PIA but my suggestion is to convert all of you VHS tapes to DVD using something like http://www.roxio.com/
I say this for two reasons. The software will upconvert and I believe it will oversample, and might even reduce/remove video noise, artifacts, etc. The second reason is that VHS tape has a shelf life. I really do not remember what that life span is, but the take itself (I believe it is the polymers) break down over time.
If you want to archive on recordable CDs, I would also look at archiving CDs which are a bit more, but have less volatile compounds in that that wi break down over a very long time.
That's my 2 cents.
What you are seeing is many generations of technology that don't play well together.
Many HDTVs do a rather pitiful job of handling the digital to analog conversions, to go from NTSC (old American TV standard) to ATSC (new digital standard). This sounds like it should be relatively easy, but it is not.
I know that this will sound like a real PIA but my suggestion is to convert all of you VHS tapes to DVD using something like http://www.roxio.com/
I say this for two reasons. The software will upconvert and I believe it will oversample, and might even reduce/remove video noise, artifacts, etc. The second reason is that VHS tape has a shelf life. I really do not remember what that life span is, but the take itself (I believe it is the polymers) break down over time.
If you want to archive on recordable CDs, I would also look at archiving CDs which are a bit more, but have less volatile compounds in that that wi break down over a very long time.
That's my 2 cents.
#18
Thread Starter
Thanks Ken, the Roxio connection sure looks good in the video they play. That gives me another reason to buy a new pc, as mine getting as old as my VHS tapes.
#19
Thread Starter
I played the tapes over the HDMI; no improvement at all. No surprise. Next we try a burn...
#20
Originally Posted by dlq04,Jun 14 2010, 10:32 AM
Thanks Ken, the Roxio connection sure looks good in the video they play. That gives me another reason to buy a new pc, as mine getting as old as my VHS tapes.
I used an earlier version of Roxio to convert VHS dive trips to DVD and the quality was noticeably better.