Camera codecs - are they any good?

gdsmith wrote on 5/15/2003, 7:45 AM
Does anyone have any information/comments on the video conversion capability of camcorders as compared to stand alone converters (such as Canopus)? It seems like this is a significant, but not well known (or discussed) capability of modern camcorders.

I note, for example, that the Sony TRV-38 has the ability to convert analog to digital and vice versa; other Sony's do as well (although, as I understand it, European versions of Sony cameras have this capability disabled...I'm not sure about Canon).

How do the hardware codecs in the camcorders (Sony, Canon, etc.) compare with other alternatives?

Comments

farss wrote on 5/15/2003, 8:13 AM
i use my D8 more for doing this that anything else.
But I do hear that its not the best way to go, doesn't worry me as alas the stuff I'm handed is on VHS so I'm not about to feed strawberries to swine.

The chapwho owns the pixelmonger web site is certainly down on using camera codecs for A/D, I recall his beef was that they are optimised to suit the CCDs in the camera which is not quite the same as what you get from a analogue feed, something to do with the color space.

But for all that unless you're a purist and a well healed one at that its not a bad solution.
The only thing I'd warn you off is the Hollywood Dazzle unless they have dramticaly improved it recently. It takes at least six frames to get its act together and if it looses video in it goes into a coma or worse still it recovers but dalek audio. Actaully it would be a great audio effects box if it was consistent. That was a total bummer for me as I usually capture a whole 3 hour VHS tape and then chop it up so I don't have to mother hen the thing through 7 programs. With the dazzle forget it, first clip fine then 6 with progressively worse audio.
mikkie wrote on 5/15/2003, 11:49 AM
Adding to what farss posted...

A DV camera can tailor its compression circuitry to complement the CCDs, & it can also be tailored by the engineers to better suit the average viewers color perceptions (people most often don't recognize pure blue as such for a better known example). To my knowledge this is something that varies camera by camera. Some like the newer ZR Canons (which specify they handle pass thru conversion) may be more accurate then others. If a camera is rated poorly, then I imagine it's conversion would suffer.

There are I think about 3 brands of lower priced boxes other then Dazzle & Canopus - how any of them perform when it comes to color accuracy, whether they're any better then cameras I have no idea and haven't seen any real testing to say one way or the other. About the only one I've seen any reports on is out of England and about 2x the Canopus price if I remember correctly.
BillyBoy wrote on 5/15/2003, 11:52 AM
Not exactly on topic, but interesting:

http://www.embedded.com/story/OEG20010418S0038


I have a Canon ZR and it seems to handle color conversion nicely in pass-through. :-)