Does VHS just suck?

yirm wrote on 11/26/2001, 10:25 PM
Well, my Digital 8 camcorder may not be perfect, but it's pretty damn good. I play it back on our big screen TV, and you can see imperfections, like graininess when there isn't much light. But overall, it's nice and crisp. No pain looking at it.

But when I look at a VHS tape I record to, it just looks awful. It has a harsh quality, and it looks like there is distortion that plays off the graininess of the D8 source. Is this the medium (VHS), or the consumer grade VCR I'm using? Are there high quality recorders that won't send me to the poor house? What do I do to make better looking VHS tapes?

-Jeremy

Comments

CDM wrote on 11/26/2001, 10:34 PM
Basically, compared to what's out there these days: yes, VHS sucks. To get the best copy, clean your heads, and record at SP speed (the fastest speed). There's no point in spending a lot of money on a VCR.

Also, S-video is better than composite (RCA) and composite is better than Coax. (as inputs to the VCR)

cdm
yirm wrote on 11/26/2001, 10:38 PM
CDM:

Basically, compared to what's out there these days: yes, VHS sucks. To get the best copy, clean your heads, and record at SP speed (the fastest speed). There's no point in spending a lot of money on a VCR.

Yirm:

I'm recording at SP, but I should clean the heads. Isopropyl alcohol and a Q-Tip okay?

CDM:

Also, S-video is better than composite (RCA) and composite is better than Coax. (as inputs to the VCR)

Yirm:

Hmm. Didn't know Composite is better than Coax. I guess that makes sense since the audio and video signals are separated. Anyway, I'm using composite. Neither VCR I have has an S-Video input.

Thanks again for your valuable input.

-Jeremy
Chienworks wrote on 11/27/2001, 12:12 AM
Also keep in mind that there are physical limitations to the VHS format
as well. The resolution is only about 200 lines, as compared to 480 for
DV. It's analog, instead of digital, so even the 1st generation master
from your camcorder is going to be worse than a digital tape. The S/N
ratio is also very low, which adds lots of noise and fuzziness to the
picture.

All things considered, i'll agree with your premise: yes, VHS sucks.
It sure beats Super 8 film though!

Oh, and when cleaning the heads, try to avoid Q-tips. The fibers can get
stuck in the very tiny head gaps, dry out, and become abrasive. Not only
do they come between the tape and the head causing more signal loss
than the dirt caused, but they end up rubbing against the tape like sand
paper. Not good! Look for the foam tipped swabs (Radio Shack has them,
as a last resort if you can't find them elsewhere). True, the foam also
crumbles eventually, but in much larger pieces than the Q-tip fibers and
it won't get caught in the heads. And don't get the Alcohol on the rubber
pinch roller. This can dry out the rubber and make it crack. There is a
special rubber cleaning and lubricating solution available if you really
want to get carried away.
Erk wrote on 11/27/2001, 1:02 AM
I'm also very disappointed with my VHS dubs, and I'm looking into geting a VCR with S-video inputs.

What's the story with "S-VHS" recorders/players? That just means they take S-video, right? If I record a VHS tape using the S-video inputs, do they play back OK on regular VCRs? Is it worth the extra money? Or does it take an S-VHS player to take advantage of the better recording?

Thanks for enlightening me.
chewbonkay wrote on 11/27/2001, 6:50 AM
No, S-VHS and S-video are 2 different things. S-Video is simply another type of input (and as everyone has said is the preferred way to go). Any recording originally made with S-video inputs will play back on any VCR. S-VHS, or Super VHS, is a type of higher resolution VCR (I think maybe double that of traditional VCR???). An S-VHS recording WILL NOT play back properly on a non S-VHS unless the playback VCR has "Quasi-S-VHS" playback capability. Look for that in the manual.

I own a S-VHS JVC (post back if you'd like the model, I don't recall right now) that has S-video input and output that can record both regular VHS and S-VHS depending on a client's request. I prefer to work in digital so I didn't want to spend the $$ on a commerical S-VHS and feel that the consumer model I purchased will do the job. The S-VHS quality definitely approaches that of digital MUCH more than a regular VHS. Hope that helps.

jmpatrick wrote on 11/27/2001, 7:03 AM
I have to jump in here. While there may be a lot of hassles associated with working in Super 8, image resolution isn't one of them. Super 8 has about 1315 lines of resolution to Digital's 480. The trick is to properly shoot and transfer the film to realize the benefits of the added resolution...not an easy thing to do without quality equipment. Modern Digital cameras features lenses that far better than what is available on all but the best Super 8 cameras. The transfer process is also critical. Rank transfers are very expensive...but the only way to maintain resolution. I just wish Super 8 was easier on the wallet.

jp

------------------------------------------------
Visit my Band! Mysteries & Secrets Revealed!
http://www.illusionrock.com