FirstLoveMovies

I am not entirely happy with the size of the files I'm putting out, for the quality I want to achieve. Though I'm using a digital video recorder, it's connected via S-Video, and there's only so much you can do with analogue video. (S-Video has a resolution of 480i or 576i, and my DVR captures at 720i - no room for improvement there...)

I have recently acquired an HD Satellite receiver with a DVI output. I've connected this directly to my LCD monitor, and the quality improvement is really noticed. HD channels are of course incredible, but even the regular channels cleaner, crisper, and as far as I can tell, NOT interlaced. (Probably 720p.) Broadcast channels don't look too much better, but the specialty channels where I rip my TV shows sure do.

My theory is, that without interlacing to contend with, AutoGK will be able to make much better AVIs. The file sizes may not change, but they'll contain more definition.

So I bought myself a Christmas present this year, and ordered an HDMI/DVI capture card. This card captures the digital information sent to it (ie the MPEG-2 signal) via the DVI output, and writes it to the hard drive. Unlike analogue capture cards, there is no on-the-fly encoding. My card will give me true digital rips of whatever my sat box is putting out. The only quality loss you will see is when I encode the file with AutoGK.

So until I'm setup, I plan on only capturing movies that may not play again for a while. While the TV shows I'm posting are new to many FLM members, they're quite common over here. I'm in no impending danger of missing anything.

Thanks for you comments!

HDMI/DVI capture card How much did that set you back? I'm drooling just imagining it.

Do check your other specs. Capturing to disk places a lot of stress on the HDD and disk controller. Make sure your system is up to the task.

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/produc ... techspecs/

The link above shows the 'pro' version, but I wasn't interested in the extra analogue capabilities it had so I went with the regular version with just HDMI.

The card cost me $350 Canadian. I tried a cheaper deal on ebay, but for some reason the credit card was refunded and card never sent. This time, I ordered from a company in my province, so I paid a bit more - but no cross border hassle. Hope to get it soon!

As for system requirements, I think I'm ok. But I'll upgrade if needed.

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/suppor ... techID=177

Hmm..12MB per second - your HDD should be able to handle that. No problems there.

I'm no technical genius, but I think I copy DVDs to my PC faster than 12MB/sec. The highest quailty setting on my DVR is 9.5MB/sec.

Waiting is the hardest part...

terry666 wrote:My theory is, that without interlacing to contend with, AutoGK will be able to make much better AVIs. The file sizes may not change, but they'll contain more definition.

Unless you are planning on using a more efficient codec like AVC you will have to change the bitrate resulting in larger file sizes.

terry666 wrote: So I bought myself a Christmas present this year, and ordered an HDMI/DVI capture card. This card captures the digital information sent to it (ie the MPEG-2 signal) via the DVI output, and writes it to the hard drive. Unlike analogue capture cards, there is no on-the-fly encoding. My card will give me true digital rips of whatever my sat box is putting out. The only quality loss you will see is when I encode the file with AutoGK.

This card does not work as you say it does, it’s main purpose is for capturing uncompressed video, not MPEG-2 signals at all. Your sat box will receive the MPEG-2 stream decode it and output it to HDMI, the card will receive the video save it to your hard drive, (assuming your computer has the bandwidth to record the uncompressed signal and your hard drive is big/fast enough, if not you’ll have to use on-the-fly encoding assuming your CPU is fast enough) these cards are completely different to HDTV tuners, which will capture the MPEG-2 stream directly to your hard drive, what is broadcast is what is captured exactly byte for byte, you don’t even need a fast CPU to record since the cards are more like network cards than traditional analog capture cards you can just record the stream without rendering the video. With the HDMI capture cards this does not happen, the video will be converted first.

terry666 wrote: Thanks for you comments!

Glad to help.

That's a real bummer. I knew there had to be something. (Don't I feel stupid. )

But, capturing HD is not my really goal. Most of the big shows and movies that are broadcast in HD at this moment are being captured by better people than me. What I want is the ultimate PVR for my sat box. Capturing HDMI has GOT to be better than capturing S-Video. (Maybe equal with capturing component?) I'm just basing this on what I can see visually when I switch between the two signals, on a non-HD channel. And I'm also assuming the HDMI signal is not interlaced since I can connect my PC LCD monitor directly to it. Please don't tell me I'm wrong there too...

I'm past the point of no return, so I have to do my best to make this work. If I have to upgrade my system, so be it.

What luck! OrionPax's response made me dig deeper in my research, and I also found out that HDCP (copy protection) may be a problem when capturing HDMI. My card hadn't been sent yet, so I was able to upgrade my order to the 'Pro' version of the Blackmagic Intensity. The 'Pro' has added component inputs, which can carry a signal of 1080p, and since it's analogue (ugg), it doesn't carry HDCP. (I'm just not sure if my HD sat box, a Motorola DSR505, puts out 1080p on it's component outputs...). I also "think" that HDCP would only be on the HD channels, and not the non-HD channels I want to capture. The 'Pro' card would also allow me to continue using the DVI output for my monitor, while capturing through component.

Maybe there's a better component capture card? Component video is better than S-Video, right?

I left the card "on hold" for another day to hear more comments on this matter. Thanks!!

The more research I do, the more my dreams are dashed by reality....

terry666 wrote:I also "think" that HDCP would only be on the HD channels, and not the non-HD channels I want to capture.

According to the Wikipedia article regarding HDCP, "Analog outputs from digital receivers do not require output restrictions, but the analog output must be limited to a resolution of 480p, which effectively limits sets with analog input to non-HD resolutions."

But the whole thing is tied to the "broadcast flag" which was mandated by the US Congress for digital output from HDTV demodulators, and then thankfully was struck down by the courts. (Congress will probably reenact it slightly differently but that hasn't happened yet). Also, the standards allow HD content to be played on non-HDCP equipment but only if they are downsampled to much lower quality (e.g. via the analog outputs), but the relative scarcity/expense of such equipment right now has kept the studios from turning the flag on for most HD content so far. So for the immediate future it might not matter much.