#Home Video-Please Read
8 messages in this thread
Anyone who is using the Vidiola Premium or the Video Blaster- Please provide
some feedback on using the cards for home video production. 5-10 minute videos
are fine, but want reasonable quality. Would the average person watching the
videos produced by the cards consider the results to be inferior?
I see this question regularly on the forum, but have never seen a good answer.
A subjective answer is fine. Just let us know what you are using and are YOU
satisfied with the results.
TIA, Warren
Warren:
>> the Vidiola Premium or the Video Blaster…Would the average person watching
the videos produced by the cards consider the results to be inferior?<<
First off, these products, and most of the products in their catagory, are
designed for multimedia use. Thus the primary purpose of these cards is to
digitize video and "overlay" it onto the computer screen and/or compress video
so it may be used in a multimedia application _on_the_computer_screen_.
So, the answer to your question is more obvious… the average person is going
to be looking at that video on a computer screen, likely be quarter size or
smaller (unless there is a further hardward assist regrettably called "video
acceleration;" ie, the video doesn't go faster), and playing 10-30fps. Will
the average person consider that inferior video quality? inferior to watching
TV? Well, sure. But that isn't really the point of these cards.
We get a little confused because a minority of products in this catagory do
offer analog output, and perhaps this spawned your question. The Video Premium
PRO does offer it, but the Video Premium and the Video Blaster do NOT. (Also,
miro, FAST, Diamond, Videologic, & ASL do.). With these products you can
digitize video, edit in Adobe Premiere or DVP, etc., then output to tape. The
picture quality will vary depending on the card, but will be less than VHS
quality. Will the average viewer see the difference? That of course depends
on the viewer. My off the cuff answer is that it's fine for home movies and
low end industrials.
We have made a CD-ROM showing the results of our PC Capture Card study from New
Media Magazine (Nov94). It shows side by side, interactive comparisons of many
still images from the top nine cards. They're zoomable so one can inspect them
carefully. Production costs prohibit give aways, but if there is interest we
can probably sell them for something like $30 (I'll investigate).
Jeff Sauer
Desktop Video Group
FWIW I'd be interested in that if you did it for Miro, Fast, etc. and put it
on Hi8 or SVHS tape so that one could compare for strictly video editing. I
don't have the need for MM PC capture and VGA playback tho.
Thanks.
-jts
Jeff,
Thanks for the reply. It seems that you have had the fortunate experience of
trying out most, if not all, of the leading cards.
What about the possibility of a VHS video tape with examples from the cards
that support output to tape? If not, I am interested in getting a copy of the
CD. What better way to evaluate quality than seeing it firsthand.
Let me know…Thanks…Warren
Jeff:
>First off, these products, and most of the products in their catagory, are
designed for multimedia use. Thus the primary purpose of these cards is to
digitize video and "overlay" it onto the computer screen and/or compress video
so it may be used in a multimedia application _on_the_computer_screen_.<
Thanks for the clarification!
Best,
Tim
Warren:
>Anyone who is using the Vidiola Premium or the Video Blaster- Please provide
some feedback on using the cards for home video production. 5-10 minute videos
are fine, but want reasonable quality.<
Don't know the Vidiola Premium offhand, but if we're talking Creative Lab's
VideoBlaster, and unless it's improved a LOT in the last year or so, it's
pretty strictly a lower-end multimedia card (for digitizing video to your
computer that isn't going to be output back to tape after being edited).
I'm assuming you'd like a card that can digitize video at a high enough
resolution that, after you nonlinear edit it, can be re-output back to video at
least at VHS quality. 800×600 pixels at 24-bit resolution at 60 fields/second
are the numbers I've heard bandied about on this forum as the minimum required,
which ain't what any lower-end capture card can do (like the VideoBlaster I
mention above, or the VideoSpigot, or even Intel's Smart Video Recorder).
Hope this helps,
Tim Liebe
It helps a lot…Thanks for the feedback.
Since we are on the subject, what about the more expensive cards such as the
Targa 2000 (I think that is right). Will they meet the need? I am not sure if I
want to invest that much money in a card right now, but at least it would give
me a benchmark for comparison in the future.
So, if anyone has experience with this card (or similar), let me know.
Remember, this is only for personal use.
Thanks…Warren
Warren:
>Since we are on the subject, what about the more expensive cards such as the
Targa 2000 (I think that is right). Will they meet the need? <
Probably–though as you mentioned, they're pretty expensive. Since this is
pretty much still a hobby for you, you have to decide if you want to invest
that kind of money…
As for details, I'll let folks who've had more experience than me chime in…
Best,
Tim