Vegas does not pass yuy2 nor any flavor of Y'CbCr. The internal engine decodes to RGB. Then, the encoder of choice determines the finished color space.

Thanks for the answers.

But I want your advice. What will be better quality:

• To capture YUY2 material in YUY2 colorspace with UtVideo codec and let Vegas to decode to RGB when editing.
• Or to capture that YUY2 material in RGB with UtVideo codec? (It does internal conversion, not recording null bites)

Wich conversion to RGB is better quality, someone knows?

You are asking the same questions and expecting different answers.

It doesn't matter with vhs. 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 are both overkill.

You are asking the same questions and expecting different answers.

It doesn't matter with vhs.

I am NOT asking about VHS, man. Forget about it. There is no matter what I will capture through S-Video card – VHS, BETACAM or DV.

I am asking which type of conversion to RGB is better quality.

Neither.

Why are you shooting the messenger?

4:2:0>4:2:2>4:4:4 = 4:2:0

4:2:0>4:4:4>4:4:4 = 4:2:0

4:2:0>4:2:0>4:4:4 = 4:2:0

4:2:0>4:2:0>4:2:0 = 4:2:0

Oh, and good luck on your math finals!

"Wich conversion to RGB is better quality, someone knows?"

Someone may know the answer to your question, but there are very few people that spend a lot of time thinking about such things.

I think I understand why you are focused on the best quality transfer from analog to digital that you can achieve. Possibly, the content on those tapes represent a significant part of your life or the lives of your family or friends. Or maybe it represents your life-long work product and you want it to make sure that it's available into your future and after you're gone. I've been in a similar quandary with about 50 hours of my own live audio performance audio tapes from my early life. I can tell you from experience that seeking perfection is the enemy of the most important aspect of the project, getting it done.

[opinion]

Agonizing over which application does the best conversion is well into diminishing returns.

[/opinion]

Here's some reading material to keep you busy while the tape drive is running.

Someone may know the answer to your question, but there are very few people that spend a lot of time thinking about such things.

I think I understand why you are focused on the best quality transfer from analog to digital that you can achieve...

Thanks for the answer.

You are right. But I don't want to make a mistake and record all my important materials, let's say to UtVideo RGB, if Vegas does YUY2 to RGB conversion better, or vice versa.

So I hope, that someone knows something about that.

4:2:0>4:2:2>4:4:4 = 4:2:0

4:2:0>4:4:4>4:4:4 = 4:2:0

4:2:0>4:2:0>4:4:4 = 4:2:0

4:2:0>4:2:0>4:2:0 = 4:2:0

Oh, and good luck on your math finals!

I am talking about tomatoes – you are talking about potatoes.

Good luck to you too.

 

Wich conversion to RGB is better quality, someone knows?

I know.

The better way for the perfection-crazed ones is to provide Vegas with something 4:4:4.
YUV444 will do fine, in this case. Beware of bitrates and think twice whether you really need RGB.
BT matrix depends on the source material, quite obviously.

Why???

Because Vegas DOES NOT PERFORM CHROMA UPSAMPLING upon decoding of the 422 & 420 material.

No, Sir, it doesn't! No chroma upsampling!! At all!!! Ever!!!!

That's, actually, is the one biggest bug-of-the-bugs of Vegas of all times, while also the one I haven't heard of someone complaining about. Just a couple of folks recommended using "Chroma blur" filter for better chroma keying of the unfortunate Canon DSLR's videos.*

...Just look at the scary picture of 300% magnified timeline snapshot of AVC-encoded formerly-PNG image that was sharpened to "Sharpen=500" for clarification of the effect after importing back into Vegas.

And this is 300% magnified re-imoprted UTVideo YUV444:

_______________________________________________________

* -- I do not recommend using internal "Chroma blur" filter 'cause I declare it incorrectly behaving based on false assumptions. It does do Gaussian blur which is ...errr... irrelevant here, to say it politely. The chroma blurring operation requires neighboring pixels' chroma to be mixed in equal proportions with no influence from distant ones, which essentially means BOX BLUR.

The better way for the perfection-crazed ones is to provide Vegas with something 4:4:4.
YUV444 will do fine, in this case. Beware of bitrates and think twice whether you really need RGB...

😄 You are the first guy who says, that Vegas does not transform any of color spaces internaly to RGB.

No, Vegas works in RGB, that is fact. So if you have an option to choose between a file in YUY whatever mode and file in RGB color space to work in Vegas – RGB file is the best solution. Because then Vegas will not do any color conversions and your video will not loose quality.

4:4:4 is needless for me, because my card captures incoming analog signal to PAL YUY2 4:2:2 format.

...I was almost sure I was talking to myself...

P.S. (for somebody who actually reads me):

YUV <---> RGB conversions, when arranged properly, are ABSOLUTELY LOSSLESS.
Losslessly invertible in perpetuity. By the design and nature of theirs.

Your source is 4:2:0. Wrapping it as 4:2:2 in capture is called "adding air." Nothing gained, so no added bits to "convert."

If the illusion pleases you, there is no harm.

We hope you revisit the discussion after running your own controlled tests.

Done here. This seems to have evolved to an issue of respect rather than math.

Your source is 4:2:0. Wrapping it as 4:2:2 in capture is called "adding air."

If the illusion pleases you, there is no harm.

We hope you revisit the discussion after running your own controlled tests.

Done here. This seems to be an issue of respect rather than math.

 

I have answered to the same „thesis“ in my other post, but I repeat here specially for you.

When an analog signal (whatever it is) is going through digital capture card, which is YUY2 4:2:2 (for example), then it is digitized to that color format. So we are getting that YUY2 4:2:2 material inside capture card – that is what I am talking about. And the next step is when the card sends that digitized signal to a codec.

That's a really good story. But you provided no supporting documentation. Was it a salesperson who told you that?

Card make, model, specs, and an original upsampled capture please; that's how we work it here.

You did say "S-video card," correct?

That's a really good story. But you provided no supporting documentation. Was it a salesperson who told you that?

So make any tests yourself if you need them.

Why I should try to convince someone, that the Earth is round? Go to space and make some photos if you need a proof for elementary thing.

And this discussion is pointless. I want to hear straight answers to my questions from people and not to spend all the time for bla bla bla...

You've answered to my first question about Vegas. Thank you for that.

But I don't want chit-chat any more.

Your nose is growing.

It seems to me that with an analog source, the pixels in the 4:2:0 original won't perfectly line up with the pixels in the capture. And so preserving the 4:2:2 of the capture would seem to have some value. No?

The mismatch you suggest seems visually inconsequential compared to the PbPr/CbCr mismatch that would occur with upsampled analog chroma, if such a thing were actually taking place. In English, that means "fringes." Remember, this stuff only has 3 Mhz bandwidth, about half of old-school analog teevee.

You can suppress the edge and bit loss damage; you can't really improve it AFAIK, no more than you can change potatoes into tomatoes. So, "preserving" bad reds may not be such a worthy goal after all.

;?)