How am I going to be able to use my VHS recorders when digital is forced on us?

"Ad C" wrote in message
k...
snip

I think the VHS will still be with us for a good long while yet,
even if
Dixons do not think so, I see Currys are still selling them, which
is
very strange.

Not really, Dixons business model is to appeal to the brain dead,
unthinking customer, those that is told to jump do so - why so you
think there tag line goes something like 'The home of new technology,
?

VHS might be dying, it's not dead yet and magnetic tape is certainly
not dead...

"Ad C" wrote in message
k...
snip

JVC invented the thing, it is just a shame that JVC own VCRs are a
load
of poop.


I think you need to rephrase that - their *domestic* VCR's are poop.

In article ,
says...

NOW compilation albums are still released on cassette, but I think
that's it :-)

That is strange, I thought no one would have bothered with cassettes.

Marky P (listening to the new Coldplay album on vinyl).


I do not blame you, apart from a fact I am not a fan of coldplay.

"Chris Howells" wrote in message
...
Roger R wrote:
The normal tape length is 3 hrs, whereas DVD's are limited at present to
1 hr
without reducing quality, and many programmes -the sort I'm interested in
anyway- are often over 1 hr. VHS tape is down to under 99p per 3 hr
tape. Ok
the quality is not comparible to DVD but is that too important for many
programmes. s-video tape if it is.

Even if you increase the quality so you can fit more than 1 hr onto a DVD5
it will probably be much higher quality than VHS. Additionally dual layer
DVD9 DVD-Rs are coming down in price allowing you to fit more onto a
single DVD. The last time I checked there were around the £4 mark.

How much do they put on commercial DVDs per disc? How long is a film before
they have to split it between two?

--
Max Demian

Roger R wrote:
I don't have a TV console type DVD recorder as yet so this is a bit
tounge in cheek, but IMO they are not as flexible as tape because the
tape can be interrupted, wound back a bit and then 'lined up' for the
subsequent recording. e.g. if the start of an advert break is missed,
the tape can be rewound to the last bit of programme and then lined
up ready for a restart when the programme material restarts producing
an apparently seamless playback. Can a DVD recorder do that?
My Philips DVDR70 certainly can.

The normal tape length is 3 hrs, whereas DVD's are limited at present
to 1 hr without reducing quality, and many programmes -the sort I'm
interested in anyway- are often over 1 hr. VHS tape is down to under
99p per 3 hr tape. Ok the quality is not comparible to DVD but is
that too important for many programmes. s-video tape if it is.
The Philips can record up to 6 hours on one DVD+R/+RW with only the six hour
options being noticebly artefact-y. (Okay, that's not a proper word, but
it'll do ;-) )

1 = Better than standard DVD
2 = Standard DVD
2x,3 and 4 = Better than VHS

I'm uncertain how DVD recorders deal with stream or tape drop outs.
The tape just records the drop out and picks up again, can DVD
recorders cope?
You mean if and when it loses the signal? Don't know as it's never happened
yet and I've had it about 2 years; though it doesn't get used that much for
standard off-air recordings as I have a Tivo.

--
Carl Waring
http://getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=1495

"Ad C" wrote:

says...

But not that make, which got such awful reviews its being discounted

Also these PVR's can not really replace the VCR. They are fine for
recording things you are going to watch and then get rid of, but some
things you may want to keep.

There are some PVRs which have an integral DVD-burning drive, allowing
recordings to be archived and removed from the hard-drive.

Even without that facility, a separate DVD-R machine could be hooked up in
order to archive programmes from the HDD (or even off air).

"Roger R" wrote...

"Dave" wrote:

Ad C wrote:

Also these PVR's can not really replace the VCR. They are fine for
recording things you are going to watch and then get rid of, but some
things you may want to keep.

Stuff you want to keep, you burn onto a DVD. If your DVD recorder has
a hard disc as well as a burner, you can edit-out commercials, etc
first, before you burn. If it only has a burner, you can do the
editing on a computer, if you want to.

Either way, you will end up with a much more compact storage system,
probably of higher quality, and probably more durable.

Hmm.. 'probably'.. IMO tape is still the most flexible, reliable,
dependable
and inexpensive storage medium for video.

WORM DVD-Rs are nowadays very cheap (under a pound), and in use on (say) a
DVD-RW machine, can record at sugnificantly better than S-VHS quality for up
to 4:05 per disc.

AIUI tape is the only medium used professionally in TV studios.

The BBC nowadays archives ready-for-broadcast material on servers as well as
on tape. Not that VHS (for all the stalwart service it has provided since
the late seventies) should be compared with broadcast-quality tape used at
television stations and in TV archives.

"Roger R" wrote...

"André Coutanche" wrote:

[ ... ]

Once DVD recorders are ubiquitous (and they've made more progress than
one might have expected a few years ago when they were strictly
early-adopter kit), I think you could apply all those adjectives to
DVDs.

I don't have a TV console type DVD recorder as yet so this is a bit tounge
in
cheek, but IMO they are not as flexible as tape because the tape can be
interrupted, wound back a bit and then 'lined up' for the subsequent
recording.
e.g. if the start of an advert break is missed, the tape can be rewound to
the
last bit of programme and then lined up ready for a restart when the
programme
material restarts producing an apparently seamless playback. Can a DVD
recorder do that?

Not exactly in the way you mention, but a (recorded) commercial break can be
edited out very easily by "hiding" it during the editing process. If the
recording is being made with the viewer in attendance, the pause facility
allows very clean editing-out (iem non-recording) of a commercial break or
other unwanted material.

The normal tape length is 3 hrs, whereas DVD's are limited at present to 1
hr
without reducing quality, and many programmes -the sort I'm interested in
anyway- are often over 1 hr. VHS tape is down to under 99p per 3 hr tape.
Ok
the quality is not comparible to DVD but is that too important for many
programmes. s-video tape if it is.

That is wrong. Even using the 4:05 hour facility on my JVC DVD-RW (and
DVD-RAM) machine, the quality is a *lot* better than VHS. At the 2:04
setting, there is no comparison.

At present I am confident about the recording when its on tape, but don't
feel
the same about the DVD's I've burned, espcially when some top brand CD
back-ups
made only a couple of years ago turned out to be unreadable.

You can always copy a disc onto VHS as a baxk-up... :-)

Max Demian wrote:

"Chris Howells" wrote in message
...
Roger R wrote:
The normal tape length is 3 hrs, whereas DVD's are limited at present to
1 hr
without reducing quality, and many programmes -the sort I'm interested
in
anyway- are often over 1 hr. VHS tape is down to under 99p per 3 hr
tape. Ok
the quality is not comparible to DVD but is that too important for many
programmes. s-video tape if it is.

Even if you increase the quality so you can fit more than 1 hr onto a
DVD5 it will probably be much higher quality than VHS. Additionally dual
layer DVD9 DVD-Rs are coming down in price allowing you to fit more onto
a single DVD. The last time I checked there were around the £4 mark.

How much do they put on commercial DVDs per disc? How long is a film
before they have to split it between two?


Already been done with the special editions of the Lord of the Rings films.
There are 3 (or 4?) commentaries plus the actual soundtrack, and the films
themselves are over 3 hours.

Bruce S.
--
Replace the by by blueyonder

On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 21:26:01 +0100, Ad C
wrote:

In article ,
says...

DVD recorders are still dropping in price. Bye the time of analogue
switch off, recording to DVD will likely be cost efficient.


I hope they are more reliable then.

They should be - a VCR is a very complex piece of kit - a DVD recorder
is much simpler, and therefore it should be possible to make it as
reliable, if not more so, than a VCR.

Having said that, I've had my Panasonic DVD recorder for almost a
year, and that is *very* reliable. On the rare occasion I have had a
problem with a recording, this has been down to dirt getting on the
disc.

--
Dave
Sheffield, England, UK

http://www.gnudawn.co.uk/