On Fridays we'll allow posts that don't normally fit in the usual data-hoarding theme, including posts that would usually be removed by rule 4: “No memes or 'look at this '”
We are not your personal archival army. No unapproved sale threads or advertisement posts. #Vhs to digital mac 720x480 free#
No memes or 'look at this old storage medium/ connection speed/purchase' (except on Free Post Fridays). 
Search the Internet, this subreddit and our wiki before posting. And we're trying really hard not to forget.ģ.3v Pin Reset Directions :D / Alt Imgur link Along the way we have sought out like-minded individuals to exchange strategies, war stories, and cautionary tales of failures. Everyone has their reasons for curating the data they have decided to keep (either forever or For A Damn Long Timetm). government or corporate espionage), cultural and familial archivists, internet collapse preppers, and people who do it themselves so they're sure it's done right. Among us are represented the various reasons to keep data - legal requirements, competitive requirements, uncertainty of permanence of cloud services, distaste for transmitting your data externally (e.g. While I am all for giving the client what they want, if the client exhibits suicidal tendencies or barks at the moon, I usually try to find another place to earn my living.We are digital librarians. However, once you have the video on tape, you and your client are wasting time and money to put the video in uncompressed form. Other people here will have to chime in as to whether the potential for improved color gamut (by not using the DV codec at all) would compensate for having to convert to/from the analog realm. Instead, if you are in a studio, you could take the analog output from the camera and feed that into some sort of capture device and, from that device, capture to uncompressed, if that is really the holy grail your client truly wants. The only uncompressed option that would make any sense - and this would be dependent on the camera - would be to NOT RECORD ON THE TAPE in the first place. It is a totally, fruitless, stupid, pointless exercise to capture or convert to uncompressed. So, there's NO DIFFERENCE between capturing a DV tape as DV, versus capturing as uncompressed? Once the bits are on DV tape - even though I tried to be clear - there is nothing you can do to improve this. I don't know a nice way to say this, so here it is: It is just a stupid thing to do. You are going to require ten times the storage, and the video will take far longer to work with. For the task you are describing, it is a complete and total waste of time and money. If you do cuts-only on that video in Vegas, it will not disturb or change one pixel of your video and again, when you output to DV, the resulting video will be not just as good as the original, it will BE IDENTICAL to the original video.įinally, there is no improvement in quality that you gain by rendering to uncompressed AVI. 
The quality captured on that tape is transferred - exactly - to your computer. Well, when you capture a DV tape, you are simply copying the bits from the tape.
Many capture at 640x480, but keep in mind the intended final delivery format after capture and cleanup. His request is not logical, and you need to talk him out of his request. VHS is usually captured to lossless media as a YUY2 colorspace at 720x480 NTSC (720x576 PAL), using lossless codecs such as huffyuv, Lagarith, or UT Video. However, I think you need to understand what musicvid and ushere were trying to tell you, namely that your client really doesn't know what he is asking for. The DV video which you capture from your camera consumes about 13 GB/hour, or less than 1/10 that amount. The answer is that 720x480 uncompressed video consumes 2.36 GB/minute which, if you multiply by 60, equals 142 GB/hour.įeel free to use Google to verify these numbers The basic question is easy to answer by just using Google OR by rendering one minute of 720x480 video to an uncompressed file and then multiplying by 60.
0 kommentar(er)
