VHS Recording of games

[ttony_at]

While cleaning up my house I stumbled on a VHS tape I made a few

years ago, recordings of the play of the some Atari games I had to send

to freinds.

 

I remember the trouble I had getting the games recorded. The picture

always turned out very fuzzy at SPL speed, a little better at LP and better

still at SP, but not quite as perfect as the real thing.

The games all look crystal clear when played through a VCR.

But things look blurry when they're played back.

 

I found the only way to record it perfectly was to use a Super-VHS VCR

(JVC) and record on a Super VHS tape (in Super VHS format).

 

I can't understand is why it's much harder to record than regular TV?

I'm assuming this won't be a problem with recordable DVDs.

 

Tony

[bjk7382]

You can check my signature for a very long vhs recording of a 2600 game, and like you said it doesn't come out well at all. It has to be something with the way the 2600 sends the signal to the tv, because one of my vcr's will record it and play it back with no picture, and yet an older vcr is what I had to use to actually get my video.

 

If you actually watch the video, the first three levels are in black and white for some reason, but after that the rest is color.

 

I don't have a super vhs recorder, but it would be nice to get my hands on a standalone dvd recorder that hooks up to a tv, and see if it would make some good captures

[sidcrowe]

bjk7382: Will your avi play in Quicktime? I'd like to try, but I have a Mac and that's a lonnnnng download on dialup

 

ttony_at: Here's how you do it. Get a miniDV camcorder with "analog to digital pass-through." Push the Atari through your vcr and right into the cam, and right into a 'puter :wink:

[keilbaca]

When I record my games, they have no sound, but I record them using my webcam. That way it feeds into the computer, I also have a capture card if I need to do it that way, with sound. But those files end up HUGE especially if its a long recording. Good thing I have a lot of space, because afterwards I can just condense them down using Tmpegenc.

[atari_aaron]

Hmmm... I wonder if it has anything to do with the Atari sending out 60 fps, while the vcr is recording a signal at 30 fps. But that probably has nothing to do with it. What the heck do I know.

 

Back in the day I recorded several games. For some reason I thought it would be a great way to make a movie. Never did anything with it. Just sat on a shelf as a bunch of starmaster, riverraid and adventure clips. I thought I had accomplished something grand, a real technical acheivement. But that's what dumb twelve year olds do.

 

As I remember it, I think my taped games looked like crap too.

 

Aaron

[sidcrowe]

Analog to digital pass through, right into a Mac with imovie, edit, and done

[Albert]

If you want to record games from a 2600, the best way to do it would be to get an S-Video mod and then record them that way. The picture will be much sharper than through the RF inputs. Also, rather than going through a VCR, you can also record straight to your computer if you have a video card with a/v inputs (such as the various ATI All-in-Wonder cards). I used one of those cards to take nearly all the Atari Jaguar screenshots for AtariAge, since at the time there were no viable Jaguar emulators I could take screenshots with.

 

..Al

[keilbaca]

I have an A/V mod on my atari, and that works great with my capture card. If you see the pictures for Space Treat Deluxe when we played that on the hsc, that's what i used. I had to stop using the capture card because of i got my 2nd monitor back, but the picture really does look like an emulator lol. Its that clear, and videos are just as clear.

[sidcrowe]

Can't argue with those screenshots, and I know nothing of PCs, so go his way instead

[Brad2600]

I recorded a few games of Spitfire Attack that I played and the quality was not bad at all.

 

It probably depends on the VCR and quality of the tape you use as well.

[Robert M]

I never tried it myself, but I suspect the problems other people are reporting is due to the fact that for all known VCS games the image is progressive scan and the NTSC television standard for shows is an interlaced image. Your VCS is probably expecting an interlaced image and when it gets the progressive scan image the software inside shows its limitations. There is no reason a VCR can't record both progressive scan and interlaced signals onto tape correctly, but if the designers never expected to see a progressive scan signal their code may not handle it well.

 

The only difference between the 2 formats is the progressive scan has the same number of scanlines every frame. The interlaced signal has an even number of scanlines for one frame and then an odd number (ideally 1 more) of scanlines in every other frame. The TV weaves 2 interlaced frames together to get double the vertical resolution of a progressive image, but at half the frequency 30 Hz versus 60 hertz.

 

Regards,

[Robert M]

Hmm... I did some googling, and I noticed that there are combo DVD/VCR machines which list DVD recording of progressive scan images as a feature. So one of these devices might be ideal for a VCS gamer looking to record his game play. Here is an example link:

 

http://www.activeplaza.com/buy_home_video_...4/1-mid281.html

 

Cheers!

[ZylonBane]

The only difference between the 2 formats is the progressive scan has the same number of scanlines every frame.  The interlaced signal has an even number of scanlines for one frame and then an odd number (ideally 1 more) of scanlines in every other frame.

Oh good god.

 

I can just imagine what happened here-- you heard someone talking about "odd" and "even" fields, and somehow got it in your head that they were talking about the actual number of scanlines in each field being odd and even.

 

Well no, that's not what it means. Odd and even just refer to entire sets of fields. Every NTSC field should be exactly 525 scan lines. An odd and an even field (also referred to as the A and B fields) combine to form one frame .

 

Furthermore, the 2600 does not put out a progressive-scan display, as the term is normally used. Progressive scan generally means a full FRAME is sent at once, without interlacing. What the 2600 generates is the same FIELD (odd or even, doesn't matter), over and over. It's not interlaced, but it's not a full frame either.

[ZylonBane]

Oh, bugger. 525 lines per FRAME, not field. Always wish for one more press of that Preview button. Yes, that yields 262.5 lines per field. No, that doesn't seem to make sense, but that's what my references say.

 

Actually this entire subject area gives me a headache. I'm going home.

[Robert M]

The only difference between the 2 formats is the progressive scan has the same number of scanlines every frame.  The interlaced signal has an even number of scanlines for one frame and then an odd number (ideally 1 more) of scanlines in every other frame.

Oh good god.

 

I can just imagine what happened here-- you heard someone talking about "odd" and "even" fields, and somehow got it in your head that they were talking about the actual number of scanlines in each field being odd and even.

 

oh bad god.

 

Zylon, you dumb fuck. TV sets have no concept of a frame being made up of 2 fields, odd and even. If they do, then the designer was a dumbfuck, probably you.

 

A TV set has a flip flop inside. When the Vertical sync signal is sent the TV uses the the state of the flip flop to decide if it should begin the next screen worth of lines, 1/2 scanline height offset from the last frame. Thus creating and interlaced image from 2 complete odd/even fields forming 1 complete frame or image. Right?

 

The TV toggles the flip-flop every time it detects a Horizontal sync. If the number of Horizontal syncs in the field are odd the flip flop will in the opposite state it was in when the field started. If the number of horizontal syncs in the signal are even then the flip/flop is the same state it was at the beginning of the field.

 

Furthermore, the 2600 does not put out a progressive-scan display, as the term is normally used. Progressive scan generally means a full FRAME is sent at once, without interlacing. What the 2600 generates is the same FIELD (odd or even, doesn't matter), over and over. It's not interlaced, but it's not a full frame either.

 

WTF?! How is it not a progressive-scan? What magical component is missing from the signal that would make it a "full-frame"? There are no odd and even fields making up a frame in a progressive display. 1 Field = 1 Frame in a progressive scan signal. That is how the VCS manages to produce 60 frames a second on NTSC televisions.

 

I admit in my original post I used frame for field much like you did, but your knowledge about TV's and TV signals is flawed.

 

Cheers!

 

Rob[/b]

[ZylonBane]

WTF?!   How is it not a progressive-scan?   What magical component is missing from the signal that would make it a "full-frame"?

The other half of the scan lines.

[bjk7382]

bjk7382: Will your avi play in Quicktime?

 

I don't think so (without checking) but the video is in .avi format. I am not sure if quicktime plays anything but .mov files (that is all I use it for)

[ttony_at]

Thanks for replies. I got similiar answers at a VCR newsgroup.

 

http://makeashorterlink.com/?V59522BD9

 

(click, wait 5 seconds)

[Nukey Shay]

Erm...let's get back to the problem...

 

A) The visual looks good during creation

B) The visual looks crappy on playback

 

Part of the answer is the recording speed, yes...since higher-speed recordings yield slightly better results (due to a longer stretch of tape being available to hold the sample). The electronic components themselves could generate interference lines on the tape...and the components of the VCR itself could be wearing out (so that the previous data isn't being erased properly as new video is recorded over old). And just reusing tape can yield a progressively-worse recording over time. So there's a number of things that could be playing a part in the problem.

 

 

One question:

How are you viewing the image while it's recording? Are you viewing it through the VCR's tuner (TV/VCR set to "VCR")? Or the TV's (TV/VCR set to "TV")? The problem could be as simple as the VCR's tuner not properly tuned to the game console. Try adjusting the fine tuning knob/dial on the VCR itself.