Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SonicVanguard
Okay...that just doen't make any sense to me. I'm not doubting you, but I think it's not due to the cards quality, but rather it's lack of quality. Analog capture is a what you see is what you get medium - if it's there, it will be captured. But some capture cards are not capable of full screen, full motion capture. So the reduced resolution and reduced frame rate may explain why anomalies that are present on a tape were not captured...
|
Yes, I understand what your are saying, and that's why a lot of smaller TVs look sharper than larger CRT TVs. However, I don't believe it's due to the quality of the card. The Asus 8200 Deluxe was / is a premium card and captures in real time at various sizes including MPEG1 to 704X480 and formats from AVI to YUV 4:2:2 and 4:2:0 (other than that being a DVD format, I couldn't tell you what it means, but I know you know
)
To try to make more sense: Different render engines can give widely different end results using the same souce clip. (sorry if I'm not using all the right / professional words in this post.) That's why TMPGEnc is so popular here and why I got it (based on other forum members recommendations). It easily takes twice as long as other methods, but the quality difference is notable.
I don't know why there seems to be a difference between my 9800 versus the 8200 (and I'm Not knocking my 9800!). Maybe the 9800 is a more exact duplicate. Maybe the 8200's software has better correction algorithms to take out the grain / salt-n-pepper. Maybe the 8200 carries over the last frame if it detects a bad / garbled frame. I don't know and don't pretend to.
If / when I ever put the 8200 Deluxe into another box, I'll do a comparison. If fact, my next spare parts build will have that card in it.
Hope I made more sense this time.
TwoRails