Do zoomers care about CCD videography? I have some old VHS video cameras I restored that have 1/2" CCD sensors inside and they look great if you bypass the tape and export the raw video right to a capture card.I've been trying to market myself to zoomers who want the VHS effect but nobody is biting .
>>4314064
raw CCD output
At this point I got about 2 hours of VHS recordings from the last year. I've posted it to YT and even tried tiktok with zero exposure
>>4314071That actually does look pretty good.What's this one from?
>>4314075an 80s Panasonic camera, in low light it gets noisy, but in daylight it does well.
>>4314078
>>4314064just make a v/h/s ripoff and people will ate that shit up
>>4314087I can do plenty of VHS recordings but I want to make some money off this. If I could sell sessions for $40 I could pay for all the equipment and batteries I bought in 2 sessions. I have two identical cameras so I can even go for the multi-angle artistc approachic
>>4314064I'm a little confused here, what's going on?I understand you are hacking old cameras and shooting to a secondary slave device rather than recording to VHS, but this looks decent.Was interlacing shit done between the sensor readout and writing to VHS and did you bypass that for a real 60p global shutter 640x480 feed? or did you de-interlace this? or is this footage sped up?
>>4314105Thats true but thats not what I did for that video.Like you said, I can do it that - do a direct video out from the camera to a capture card - which will give me a 29.97 fps 480i uncompressed file, which I then filter and deinterlace into 60fps progressive file (and then make mp4s or webms from it)I can also the do the same thing BUT record to tape, and then feed a tape player video out to the capture card.. etc. Thats what's going on in that webm.What you are seeing is a de-interlaced 60fps video, more closely to what "tape" video actually looked like. Tape CAN look good provided you have a decent quality tape/capture path. Throughout the 90s/00s however the only way to digitize tapes was to record them to DVDs at whatever shitty resolution the player gave you, locked in at 29fps interlaced footage.
>>4314064what vhs camera has a 1/2" ccd? I would be interested in buying that
>>4314064No.LoFi > Looking unintentionally like shit. > Looking intentionally like actual shit from the anus.
>>4314118Most cameras from the 80s I think. By the time VHS-C cameras came around they switched to 1/8" sensors
>>4314064Broooooo. I got this big bitch and would love to not hassle with vhs tapes. I really like the look of the video it produces.Can you recommend me a portable capture card, possibly with a screen? The ccd viewfinder is in b&w, so I can't confirm the white balance is properly set.I have a vhs player + capture card + obs that I use to record my videos with, but a portable solution would be so much better.
>>4314064Oops. Forgot pic. Got this for 80 bucks at an auction. In the 90s these cameras were over 7k dollars new.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakesamsungCamera ModelSM-G998U1Camera SoftwareG998U1UESAFXD1Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.8Focal Length (35mm Equiv)24 mmImage-Specific Properties:Compression SchemeJPEG Compression (Thumbnail)Image Height1800Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:05:15 14:46:39Vertical Resolution72 dpiHorizontal Resolution72 dpiImage Width4000Lens Aperturef/1.8Exposure Bias0 EVExposure ProgramNormal ProgramColor Space InformationsRGBUnique Image IDXA8XLNF00SMImage Height1800Brightness0.4 EVWhite BalanceAutoExposure ModeAutoExposure Time1/40 secFlashNo FlashF-Numberf/1.8ISO Speed Rating320Image Width4000Focal Length6.70 mmMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageScene Capture TypeStandardLight SourceUnknown
>>4314164Nice, you got an SVHS tape and an SVCR too? hell yeahi tried using one of those Ninja portable HD screens but it doesnt accept the lowest resolution of the camera input
>>4314154>>4314164Oh I thought you meant like a camcorder. That makes more sense, but I'm not willing to take a shoulder mount camera with me places
>>4314231I do mean like a camcorder. These 80s panasonics have 1/2" CCD sensors which may actually be M43 sensor sized.The smaller late 90s handheld ones are more portable but the sensor is smaller too
>>4314229I have a svhs tape, but not player for it. If I realized I would have gotten one instead of my stinky normal vhs player.My concern is that the video out is those older ports.Oh yeah, the damn things weighs way too much. I can only shoulder it for like 10-15 mins at a time. You'd also look like a maniac filming at the post office with it.
>>4314236you will need a special connector in order to get svideo direct output https://www.avsforum.com/threads/oddball-jvc-7-pin-y-c-to-standard-s-video.1442427/
>>4314071>composite video>rawi hate to break it to you anon, but it is heavily processed, and not raw. for fucks sakes you even have a date overlay
>>4314277Youre right, raw was the wrong word. What I shouldve said was that the image was a direct video output from the camera, as opposed to recording to a vhs tape then capturing the footage from the tape.This removes the middleman step.
>>4314265Fug.
Sovl.HD video was a mistake
>>4314295Early tube HD cameras are a marvel and have plenty of sovl. It's only when everything went CMOS that the soul was sucked out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW26YMe8iUQhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbBuBRY3iJ8
>>4314461>1035i>upscaled
>>4314109
Meant to take a picture
>>4314702So good
Comp cuz webm is a pain in the ass
These are really cool. It's disappointing no one wanted to hire you. How do you record directly to a capture card on these? I assume there is a cable for direct TV out, is someone making retrofit units to take SD cards that you plug in from the external out port?
>>4314785I already took mine
>>4314805>>4314810>>4314829what camera is this?
>>4315778First two are off a FinePix S5800 and last one is Pentax Optio Z10
>>4315034Nice
>>4314236> Oh yeah, the damn things weighs way too much. I can only shoulder it for like 10-15 mins at a time. You'd also look like a maniac filming at the post office with it.pussy
>>4316091I gotta work up to it. It may be a combo of weight + uncomfortable shoulder pad.You don't understand the temptation I have to do a 1st amendment audit with a huge 90s TV broadcast like camera.
>>4314064Do you sell these on ebay or something? I'd be interested
>>4315813Thank you.
I have one but the battery is junk and the tape drive keeps chewing up my tapes. Did you battery work or did you have to diy a battery for it
>>43149352nd this question I’m interested as well in learning more. Best of luck OP I think it looks cool as fuck
>>4316223Do I sell the ones I fix up? Not currently. I'd like to make a video service using multiple vhs cameras as kind of a home-movies-vibe but with a little extras kick>>4317139They still make brand new batteries for my cameras, they're about $35 each and can last 1-1.5 hours>>4317648>>4314935its a complex process that involves the video-out jack on the camera to a VCR and a TBC, which is then connected to a USB/AV adaptor into the computer, where it is captured raw, around 28 GBs per hour.Then you filter and clean the video, then run it through a deinterlacer and eventually down to an x264/x265 codect to your final mp4 which can then be shared on social media,websites,youtube like i did herehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQoCyteuDckunfortunately YT's processing make the video look worse than the original
>>4317861>28 GBs/hr Anon of Quality, you can get YT to encode at better quality by rendering vid in high res containerSticking it in 4k gives higher bitrate for *final* encodes
>>4317869The issue is that these videos are captured at 720x480 and deinterlaced to 480p. If you know an upscaler that can go from 480 to 4K im all ears but i think it would look just as bad if not worse than the "HQ 480" mode that youtube has now
>>4317870DaVinci Resolve has several upscale options. I believe setting your timeline to 4k (could always export at lower res, say 1080) is one way of doing it automatically. If you play around with encoding several test vids at different resolutions/bitrates and upload them to youtube to compare you will see the benefits of increased bitrate.Check out some youtube upload bitrate/resolution test vids, some pretty good quality is possible.
>>4317877Thanks man. I have that program actually but never use it, I'll see what it can do. if it can import 480p or even 720p video then thats a good start.
