#Canopus advc110 not found full

For optimal quality, I use it in XP mode, which records only 1 hour of material on each disc. An image comparison shows it can produce tearing at the top of frame: I found () very helpful in understanding the differences between devices and what they are meant to do. I think it would be better to capture the DV from the ADVC-300 on a computer and compress that to MPEG2 for DVD rather than doing extra A to D and D to A conversions.

A lot depends on the quality and features of the DVD recorder. Reading the reviews on () makes me think there must be better options but I am not sure about that for your workflow. So unless anyone can suggest a better analogue-to-analogue TBC unit, I'll probably have to go with the ADVC-300.

Which forum did you find that discusses these? I am always trying to figure out a better workflow for (S)VHS to H.264. A lot of the quality issues depend on the device(s) after the AVT-8710.

#Canopus advc110 not found full

I am not sure how one would compare the image quality as one is an analog to digital DV converter with built in filters and line TBC and the other outputs an analog signal and is a full frame TBC. The AVT-8710 is only a Time Base Corrector not a capture device. Well you cannot really compare the two like that. Also the ADVC-300 appears to produce much better picture quality judging by the forums I've looked at. Looks like the AVT-8710 doesn't have any noise reduction capability: so it's not really suitable for my purpose.

How is the quality of the DV to s-video converter? I don't think you want to go analog->DV->analog->DVD if you don't have to, certainly not for a simple noise filter. Yes you're absolutely right, it won't work as an analogue-to-analogue device unless I buy a FireWire to S-Video DAC to use in conjunction with it (which may actually be a cheaper option than buying an analogue-to-analogue TBC with noise reduction!)