UltraStudio4K vs Teranex for cross convert

Do you have questions about Desktop Video, Converters, Routers and Monitoring?
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

trevor555

  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2018 4:21 am
  • Real Name: trevor almedia

UltraStudio4K vs Teranex for cross convert

PostFri Jun 15, 2018 4:29 am

I am trying to decide whether to buy a Teranex or an Ultrastudio 4K to do some conversions.

Specifically NTSC 29.97 to 1080p 23.97. ( I am converting VHS tapes)

Can the Ultrastudio 4K manage this?

Is it's de-interlacing as good as the Teranex?

What about how they deal with motion - will the Teranex do a better job or are they the same algorithms?

I'd rather save the money if Ultrastudio 4K is doing the same job - PLUS it acts as a capture device which the current Teranex models don't.
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4317
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: UltraStudio4K vs Teranex for cross convert

PostFri Jun 15, 2018 7:39 pm

I don't think UltraStudio can do any fps conversion.

Teranex is not good for fps conversion either as it uses simple blending.
If you want decent result then it's job for Tachyon or Alchemist or open source tools.
Offline

trevor555

  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2018 4:21 am
  • Real Name: trevor almedia

Re: UltraStudio4K vs Teranex for cross convert

PostSat Jun 16, 2018 3:20 am

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:If you want decent result then it's job for Tachyon or Alchemist or open source tools.



I'm confused, I thought that's exactly what it was for and that it did at least a very good job.
Offline
User avatar

Marc Wielage

  • Posts: 4709
  • Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:46 am
  • Location: Hollywood, USA

Re: UltraStudio4K vs Teranex for cross convert

PostSat Jun 16, 2018 6:44 am

29.97fps to 23.98fps is also the worst-case scenario for judder and other motion artifacts. It looks hiiiiiiideous. Even through a Snell Alchemist, it's problematic at best. Even worse when you consider the artifacts and flaws of VHS. And also worse still if any of this 29.97 material has 23.98fps interlaced film material in it (which it often does.
marc wielage, csi • VP/color & workflow • chroma | hollywood
Offline

trevor555

  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2018 4:21 am
  • Real Name: trevor almedia

Re: UltraStudio4K vs Teranex for cross convert

PostSat Jun 16, 2018 9:44 am

Marc Wielage wrote:29.97fps to 23.98fps is also the worst-case scenario for judder and other motion artifacts. It looks hiiiiiiideous. Even through a Snell Alchemist, it's problematic at best. Even worse when you consider the artifacts and flaws of VHS. And also worse still if any of this 29.97 material has 23.98fps interlaced film material in it (which it often does.


May I ask what your recommendation is for software on a Mac that would be better suited to this specific conversion? I own FCPX, Compressor and Media Encoder.
Offline

trevor555

  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2018 4:21 am
  • Real Name: trevor almedia

Re: UltraStudio4K vs Teranex for cross convert

PostSat Jun 16, 2018 5:39 pm

OK, so I borrowed a Teranex 2D.

Did a VHS capture, here are my results:

Setup A) VHS player > Teranex 2D > SDI to Thunderbolt Mini Recorder > Media Express.

Teranex was set to go from interlaced input NTSC to output 1080p 23.98 ProRes422.

results:
Soft signal.
Noise cleaned up somewhat.
Colours seem stable
Audio in perfect sync.

Setup B) VHS player > Intensity Pro > Media Express.

Captured as 59.94i NTSC.
Converted to 1080p 23.98 ProRes in Pavtube HD converter.

results:
Sharper image than Teranex
Noisy signal (like what was on tape, no worse)
Colors waver around a little bit
Audio in perfect sync.

My question is: Is my software conversion using Pavtube HD Converter technically ok? Is there some pulldown/cadence issue I am not addressing by doing this? It seems too easy that it's managed the conversion quite well and the sound is perfect.

Return to Post Production

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests