I use the last method.
For best results use good tape, much to my surprise I've found good qulaity dub stock does give a better result.
Also I record on a SVHS deck fed via S-Video, just how much difference that makes I really cannot say. I'm told for the ultimate quality use one of the now hard to find dubbing decks that don't support LP. These monsters write a slightly wider track so there's less noise on playback. Again I've not been able to try this myself so please don't make word for it.



Bob.

Thanks very much Bob and Peter for these replies. I find the problem of recording direct from the computer to the camcorder to the VHS recorder (without recording on tape) is that each time you need to make another VHS tape copy (after switching off the computer), the computer has to go through the rendering process again. But at least you can copy a 2-hour video in full without having to make any joins. I guess this method might produce the highest quality VHS tape because there are no losses in video quality when copying to DV tape and then back from DV tape to VHS tape?

I find the disadvantage of copying from DV tapes to a VHS recorder is that most consumer DV tapes record only 60 minutes of high quality video, so if you are making a 2-hour video (as I am at present) you have to use two 1-hour tapes, which means you have to spend time in making a join on the VHS tape at the 1-hour point. I guess you are also increasing the wear and tear on your camcorder if you copy lots of DV tapes to VHS tapes.

Regards, Fred

Hi Fred. if you need to go back and make more copies later, you can render the project as a DV AVI file which should print to tape without further rendering. Only drawback is the disk space the AVI file will occupy.

Richard Hunter

Farss' comment on tape stock and machine are totally correct.

Look into getting a Time Base Corrector (TBC). Some prosumer VCRs will come with one. This improves the output signal quality and sometimes gives you setup options for color/luminence correction. Also, does not require multiple passes and computer time.

Dave T2

Fred,
The method I've started using lately is to record off of the DVD onto VHS tape using my inexpensive ($119 at Costco) combo DVD/VHS deck. I've found that the copies are better than recording from my camcorder direct to VHS usng an AVI file. Not sure why that is but suspect it's because the transfer rate is better between the DVD and VHS media in the combo drive. Like stated above, use the highest quality VHS tape you can find to get better results. For future copies, all I have to do is pop in the DVD and tape and copy without tying up my computer. No complaints from clients so far. Hope this helps.
Randy

I've found that recording to VHS via S-input makes a big difference, particularly on titles, where were really fuzzing up with standard RCA connectors.

Greg

The TBC built into certain S-VHS machines does not process any video fed into the machine, it is only used for VHS and S-VHS videotape playback. Any video which was originally from a digital source, like DV camcorder footage, and has been kept in the digital domain does not need timebase correction. Of course, when making a VHS to DV dub, a TBC is almost mandatory.

John

I also use a combo DVD/VHS player to copy from DVD to VHS (Zenith XBV342 - one of the few that have the "copy" button). I won't go back to DV to VHS again. First, I don't have to render twice. Second, I get a smaller mpeg instead of the larger avi file, and Third, I don't put wear on my camcorder.

I could do a pass through (since I have two VHS recorders near my computer), but then it ties up the computer. Using the DVD to VHS I don't tie up anything (and I watch the progress using my ATI all in wonder showing the TV/VCR input).

Quality wise it is fine, especially since I buy "master" grade VHS in 50 unit bulk (76 cents a tape (varies by length), instead of $8.00 for "master" quality) at www.pro-tape.com.

I've found the using the camcorder as a pass-thru for making copies isn't the best way. Signal-wise, you're picking up the connection from the PC to the camcorder in the RCA or S-Video outputs, which may appear as a faint line or two. I'd copy to the camcorder first, unplug the firewire cable, then make your copies to VHS.

Thanks a lot for all the interesting replies given to date. With regard to the posting by Richard Hunter (jaegersing) I rendered the 2 hour video to a DV AVI file, and this produced a 25.3 GB file. This procedure certainly reduced the rendering time down from about 25 minutes to 3 and a half minutes (with the AVI file Vegas still rerendered the prerendered video file 0090.W64). Thanks for this tip Richard.

Regards, Fred

"I've found the using the camcorder as a pass-thru for making copies isn't the best way. Signal-wise, you're picking up the connection from the PC to the camcorder in the RCA or S-Video outputs, which may appear as a faint line or two. I'd copy to the camcorder first, unplug the firewire cable, then make your copies to VHS."


Thanks for this observation, but I wondered if there was any deterioration in the video quality when you actually record on to DV tape, and then back from DV tape on to VHS tape? I had assumed (probably incorrectly) that if you bypassed making a DV tape copy, you would get a better result by copying from the computer to the camcorder to the VHS recorder all at the same time.

Regards, Fred

Theoretically the results SHOULD be the same. When you record to DV what's on the tape is a bit copy of the AVI file in the computer. The A/D converters in camera are either converting from that data stream or the one coming down the firewire cable.
However DV25 tape is far more error prone than hard disks so the risk is getting dropouts in the tape affecting the data going to the A/D converters and hence onto the tape. This is to say nothing of wear on expensive DV heads. I don't know why someone is getting faint lines in the analalogue outputs to the VCR, could well be a ground loop problem that needs investigation. Try running the camera off batteries.
Bob.