[El Mago]

Can anyone throw me a frickin' bone and comment on the difference between the 2 as far as for simple TV viewing?

Any pro's or con's on either would be helpful too.

Thanks.

[sandsl]

I don't think the EyeTV 200 is shipping in decent quantities yet, says 30 days on they're website (http://www.elgato.com/shop/eyetv200.html).

All relevant information about both products is on the el gato website - take a look.

[El Mago]

Yeah, I have been through their website. I just wanted some actual feedback from users.

[fetopher]

I'm not a user of either, but I've been looking into getting the original for a while. When the new one came out, it was a no-brainer for me. Whenever USB goes up against Firewire, I'll spend the extra buck for Firewire every time. Heck, I wish my camera was Firewire. As soon as I get a chance to see the new one in person, I'll probably snatch it up.

[Weezer]

I have the original, and the extra $200 plus the increase in hard drive space that the mpeg-2 will take up would make me wanna stay with the original. Had it been a firewire mpeg-4 I would have been sold, but I would rather have the hd space.

[midwinter]

Originally posted by Weezer:
I have the original, and the extra $200 plus the increase in hard drive space that the mpeg-2 will take up would make me wanna stay with the original. Had it been a firewire mpeg-4 I would have been sold, but I would rather have the hd space.

is MPEG-2 really all that much bigger? I thought the file sizes were roughly comparable.

[joe]

Originally posted by midwinter:
is MPEG-2 really all that much bigger? I thought the file sizes were roughly comparable.

The problem isn't MPEG2 - it's the higher video resolution you're capturing over Firewire. EyeTV200 captures up to 704*480 - that's more than 4x the resolution of the original EyeTV (and most other USB devices) at 320*240. MPEG2 isn't that bad. In fact, it's actually more compressed than the older MPEG1 codec used by the original EyeTV. I'd guess you'd use about 1GB per hour from an EyeTV200 / MPEG2 capture - though that can be adjusted down by reducing the bit rate and/or video resolution.

In order to really appreciate the EyeTV200 you have to remember most Firewire devices capture using the DV codec instead of MPEG2. They use DV to be compatible with iMovie (IE no software needed). However, DV uses more than 10x as much drive space as MPEG2. I have an old NIN / DirecTV concert around from my Formac Studio days that clocks in at 19GB in DV. The resulting MPEG2 would be more like 1.5GB. And the EyeTV200 does that in hardware on the fly. It also includes editing software so that you don't need to use iMovie. I can definitely see an EyeTV200 in my future I'm holding off though until we can get some real owner feedback and maybe some sample video captures posted somewhere.......joe

[Mr Heliums]

I have the original EyeTV and was really surprised by the quality of the recordings, even in low res mode. I just can't fault the video quality of the recorded programs on my iBook screen. I can't see the benefit, unless you're recording digital content, of higher definition recording.

One important factor is hard drive space: low res recordings use up 1Gb for approx 90 minutes of video. I couldn't squeeze any more my 'book's minimal hard drive anyway. If you're exporting tracks to QuickTime, for example, you need to allow for twice the space occupied by the recording in order to transfer the file.

In short, unless you need the programs in pristine quality, the original is excellent.

[dvenne]

I also have the original EyeTV plugged in to my 17 inch iMac. Once you expand the window to a decent size, the poor resolution of USB shows. I would and probably will welcome the firewire EyeTV 200. The recording might take more space but the quality might be worth it. The price of hard drive is farely low depending how much you like watching shows on your mac.

[C.J. Moof]

Originally posted by Mr Heliums:
Unless you need the programs in pristine quality, the original is excellent.

I'm with Heliums here, except I'd describe the quality as "completely fine enough" rather than excellent. (The HDTV converted to Divx captures of Alias I once downloaded were excellent). I find watching the shows on my EyeTV and a standard broadcast TV to be just fine..... I'm sure if I had a 55" DLP system I wouldn't be so impressed, but fortunately, I'm not burdened with such troubles.

It all depends on how picky you are. While I appreciate the quality of DVD over VHS, I don't feel the need to squeeze every bit of quality out of OTA broadcast TV.

I'm just looking forward to getting my EyeHome so I can watch these recordings from my couch, and not my desk chair, or having a hot powerbook on my lap.

[Titom]

I'm with Heliums here, except I'd describe the quality as "completely fine enough" rather than excellent.
-----------------
I agree, very nice for programs that you want to watch then erase to save hd space.

Video's (any video format) takes a lot of space.

For what I understand, eyetv org. is rather good for quality vs hard drive space. (mp-1)

I enjoy making vcds. VCD builder is very good application to make channels, and a startup picture.

[midwinter]

Originally posted by C.J. Moof:
I'm with Heliums here, except I'd describe the quality as "completely fine enough" rather than excellent. (The HDTV converted to Divx captures of Alias I once downloaded were excellent). I find watching the shows on my EyeTV and a standard broadcast TV to be just fine..... I'm sure if I had a 55" DLP system I wouldn't be so impressed, but fortunately, I'm not burdened with such troubles.

It all depends on how picky you are. While I appreciate the quality of DVD over VHS, I don't feel the need to squeeze every bit of quality out of OTA broadcast TV.

I'm just looking forward to getting my EyeHome so I can watch these recordings from my couch, and not my desk chair, or having a hot powerbook on my lap.

This is actually the thing that's driving me to pick up one of the new Eye TVs. My old one is great on my 13" TV, or even on my 19". But on my 32" HD set, you can really see the compression.

The DVDs I make with Eye TV are completely acceptable, but if they can be significantly better using the new gadget, I'm all for it.

Cheers
Scott

[joe]

Originally posted by dvenne:
I also have the original EyeTV plugged in to my 17 inch iMac. Once you expand the window to a decent size, the poor resolution of USB shows.

I've downloaded some of the original EyeTV samples posted here (HQ). Compared to PCI and Firewire TV tuners the original EyeTV is definitely lacking in video quality even when recorded at HQ. I know a lot of EyeTV owners don't want to hear that. But dvenne is correct - the video quality issue applies to just about any USB video capture device except the ADS Instant DVD USB. The EyeTV isn't being singled out, it's just those of us with PCI and Firewire solutions have probably noticed the video quality problem more easily.

The main advantage of the original EyeTV was always with El Gato's software. The EyeTV200 will have that and add much (VERY much) higher video quality (more than 4x the resolution). It will also be bus powered and have MPEG2 compression in hardware. Based on that, I'm wondering how long El Gato will continue selling the EyeTV once the EyeTV200 is released? The EyeTV200 totally trumps any other TV tuner solution on Mac. In fact, with the on-board MPEG2 compression and video inputs (s-vid, composite) I'd say it has a huge advantage over all the Firewire-DV capture devices out there. This thing has the potential to dominate the Mac consumer / video capture market IF it delivers on the specs. I'm betting it will, we'll see......joe

[midwinter]

I would contend that USB has little or nothing to do with it. Eye TV records as mpeg-1 video on the fly. It is the poor quality of mpeg-1 that you're complaining about, not the limitations of USB.

[alex_kac]

Except that the reason its MPEG1 is because of USB 1.1's slow interface. If they could do Mpeg 2 with USB 1.1 I'm sure they would.

[midwinter]

Originally posted by alex_kac:
Except that the reason its MPEG1 is because of USB 1.1's slow interface. If they could do Mpeg 2 with USB 1.1 I'm sure they would.

I don't necessarily buy this. My old Interview USB dongle made great looking video when it was uncompressed. It was HUGE, but it looked good.

The point, in the end, is that for whatever reason, el Gato settled on MPEG-1 as the video codec, and the quality issues people are complaining about are because of the video codec it uses, not something inherent to USB.

Anyway, this is neither here nor there. I'm still waiting for a review of the new Eye TV....

Cheers
Scott

[joe]

Originally posted by alex_kac:
Except that the reason its MPEG1 is because of USB 1.1's slow interface. If they could do Mpeg 2 with USB 1.1 I'm sure they would.

Actually, they already have. That's why I singled out the ADS Instant DVD USB in my previous reply. It does MPEG2 compression in hardware and sends it over USB1.x. And this is full 720*480 DVD quality video. Since the video is compressed before sending it across USB1.x, it uses hardly any bandwidth (1-6Mbps). This is not a TV tuner though - just a video capture device. But if it had a TV tuner the results would be the same - high quality video with low USB bandwidth.

By comparison most other USB TV tuners and USB video capture devices send raw uncompressed video over the USB bus which limits you to about 320*240. The video is then compressed by your Mac cpu instead. This is done to get the price down on the TV tuner and/or video capture device. Dropped frames are common with these especially when capturing audio and video. And they can loose sync. The original EyeTV gets around this by handling the compression in hardware before sending it across the USB bus. This solves the audio/video sync problem and dropped frames. So compared to other USB devices the EyeTV is a major improvement (except ADs instant DVD).

Unfortunately, the EyeTV resolution is still only 320*240. And the lower res really stands out when compared to PCI and (especially) Firewire TV tuner and video capture devices doing over 4x the res (720*480). Seriously, if you haven't owned both, statements about "high quality" EyeTV video are unrealistic at best - especially compared to PCI and FW devices. If anything it's the TiVO-like EyeTV software and video compression that make it such an excellent device. The upcoming EyeTV200 should address the quality issues and combine the best of both worlds (easy of use and high quality 704*480 video). And since the EyeTV200 also has S-video and composite inputs it will probably be the best all around video capture solution on Mac to date (for consumers).............joe

[joe]

Originally posted by midwinter:
I would contend that USB has little or nothing to do with it. Eye TV records as mpeg-1 video on the fly. It is the poor quality of mpeg-1 that you're complaining about, not the limitations of USB.

I agree. That's why I excluded the ADS Instant DVD in my post. The Instant DVD captures 720*480 MPEG2 over USB1.x compared to 320*240 MPEG1 from the EyeTV. However, for some reason (probably cost savings) all USB TV tuners to date have been limited to 320*240 (compressed or uncompressed). The Firewire and PCI tuners have 4x greater resolution or more. Resolution is by no means the only measure of video quality. But if you have good cable TV reception you will see a major difference between 320*240 recordings and 720*480 recordings..............joe

[midwinter]

Originally posted by joe:
I agree. That's why I excluded the ADS Instant DVD in my post. The Instant DVD captures 720*480 MPEG2 over USB1.x compared to 320*240 MPEG1 from the EyeTV. However, for some reason (probably cost savings) all USB TV tuners to date have been limited to 320*240 (compressed or uncompressed). The Firewire and PCI tuners have 4x greater resolution (or more). Resolution is by no means the only measure of video quality. But if you have good cable TV reception you will see a major difference between 320*240 recordings and 720*480 recordings..............joe

This is my only real concern about the new Eye TV. I've got digital cable, so I imagine that the captured video will look quite nice. But $350.... Oof.

[GORDYmac]

Originally posted by midwinter:
This is my only real concern about the new Eye TV. I've got digital cable...

Will the new EyeTV 200 work with digital cable? I think it's only analog.

[midwinter]

Originally posted by GORDYmac:
Will the new EyeTV 200 work with digital cable? I think it's only analog.

Right. It's just like he original one.

[kjb]

One thing I like about the MPEG-1 of the orig. EyeTV is that it allows me to burn DVDs longer than the 120 min maximum of the DVDs I have. I've been recording and burning 2 hour, 2 hour 15 minute, even 2 hour 30 minute movies off my satellite. The quality is totally acceptable, and given that you're never going to get all the surround sound goodies of a real DVD with any of the TV recording solutions out there, my EyeTV seems like a heck of a deal at $200.

I don't know this for sure, but I would assume that recordings created directly in MPEG-2 would make that 120 minute limit of DVDs a reality. But, that's just my guess. If not, and we would still be able to burn beyond the 2 hour mark in higher quality, then by all means, the EyeTV 200 is the way to go for higher quality.

Kevin

[midwinter]

Originally posted by kjb:
One thing I like about the MPEG-1 of the orig. EyeTV is that it allows me to burn DVDs longer than the 120 min maximum of the DVDs I have. I've been recording and burning 2 hour, 2 hour 15 minute, even 2 hour 30 minute movies off my satellite. The quality is totally acceptable, and given that you're never going to get all the surround sound goodies of a real DVD with any of the TV recording solutions out there, my EyeTV seems like a heck of a deal at $200.

I don't know this for sure, but I would assume that recordings created directly in MPEG-2 would make that 120 minute limit of DVDs a reality. But, that's just my guess. If not, and we would still be able to burn beyond the 2 hour mark in higher quality, then by all means, the EyeTV 200 is the way to go for higher quality.

Kevin

Hell. I get FIVE 42-minute episodes of the West Wing on a single DVD.

[C.J. Moof]

Hell, I just put the first 9 episodes of Season 3 of 24 on one data DVD. My DVD player won't play it, but my computers will. That's OK, I already watched them, they're just there b/c they're cheap and easy to archive.

Why's it only 5? Seems like a video DVD should be able to get the same amount a data disc does, but there must be something else going on....

[midwinter]

Originally posted by C.J. Moof:
Hell, I just put the first 9 episodes of Season 3 of 24 on one data DVD. My DVD player won't play it, but my computers will. That's OK, I already watched them, they're just there b/c they're cheap and easy to archive.

Why's it only 5? Seems like a video DVD should be able to get the same amount a data disc does, but there must be something else going on....

OK. Now this is weirding me out. Toast Titanium barks at me if I try to put more than 5. What, specifically, are you doing?

Cheers
Scott

[midwinter]

Well honk my hooter!

I don't know where I got it in my head that I could only fit 5 43-minute episodes per disk. I'm burning TEN episodes of the West Wing right now.

[kjb]

Originally posted by midwinter:
Well honk my hooter!

I don't know where I got it in my head that I could only fit 5 43-minute episodes per disk. I'm burning TEN episodes of the West Wing right now.

Please do explain in detail.

Kevin

[midwinter]

Originally posted by kjb:
Please do explain in detail.

Kevin

I should admit that I may have spoken too soon. I have yet to *burn* the actual disk, and it may bark at me before it's all over.

I use Toast Titanium to do all of this. When I capture a television show, I click "burn VCD" to save it as a proper MPEG-1 file into a folder. I quit toast when it launches. Once I have enough, I simply move them over to Toast Titanium, which builds menus and handles all of the encoding. It did not indicate that I had filled the disk when I clicked burn, so we'll see what happens.

I'm about halfway through the encoding process (which I imagine only de-muxes the MPEG, upsamples the audio, and then re-muxes).

I'll report back when it's done encoding in about an hour (I'm on a G4/533).

Cheers
Scott

[midwinter]

No joy. Barked at me once it was finished encoding. I've removed one, and so now we're down to 9.

Will report back.

[midwinter]

Originally posted by midwinter:
No joy. Barked at me once it was finished encoding. I've removed one, and so now we're down to 9.

Will report back.

Burning now. Toast apparently keeps some sort of cache of what it's already encoded.

9 is the magic number (and perhaps 10, since one of these 9 is high quality).

[C.J. Moof]

I would think audio resampling would not be your friend... but if it works, it works.

My method was to use Disk Utility to make a new blank 4.7 gig DVD image, copy episodes to the DVD, and burn it. I think I would get 10 on there if one ofthem wasn't in HQ mode.

As I said, my DVD player doesn't have any idea what this disc is, but that's not what I was going for... if you get 9 episodes on a disc your player plays, all the better! Mine is pure data.

You must be using Toast 6, right?

[midwinter]

Originally posted by C.J. Moof:
I would think audio resampling would not be your friend... but if it works, it works.

My method was to use Disk Utility to make a new blank 4.7 gig DVD image, copy episodes to the DVD, and burn it. I think I would get 10 on there if one ofthem wasn't in HQ mode.

As I said, my DVD player doesn't have any idea what this disc is, but that's not what I was going for... if you get 9 episodes on a disc your player plays, all the better! Mine is pure data.

You must be using Toast 6, right?

Yes. Toast does everything for you to make them playable. It's really amazingly easy. I'll have another disk's worth in a few days. I figure ten ought to be no trouble.

Ugh, at the DVDs I've wasted!

[joe]

Originally posted by midwinter:
This is my only real concern about the new Eye TV. I've got digital cable, so I imagine that the captured video will look quite nice. But $350.... Oof.

Yeah, it seems pricey. I paid $399 for my Studio dv/tv originally and that was on plastic to ease the pain (up front anyway). However, you really get what you pay for. Both the Studio and EyeTV are more than just TV tuners. Both have TiVO-like capabilites. And the Studio adds a boat-load of video i/o options. And then there's the near-DVD quality of the recordings....

As for digital, I used the S-video input of my Studio to watch and record from my DSS dish. I still had to use the DirecTV remote to change channels, but you couldn't beat the quality.........joe

[joe]

Originally posted by GORDYmac:
Will the new EyeTV 200 work with digital cable? I think it's only analog.

I was able to use the S-video input of my Formac Studio dv/tv with digital sattlelite with excellent results. However, check out this info from the EyeTV200 FAQ:

http://www.elgato.com/products/eyetv200faq.html#faq33

FWIW - that's PRECISELY how my Panasonic VCR and RCA DSS receiver worked together. Of course they had infra-red built in. And since they were stacked, the dish receiver would bounce the commands off the opposite wall and back to the VCR to start and end recording. So if El Gato can pull this off with a small add-on IR widget, we'll be able to schedule digital recordings right off the Titan web site. I realize the *IF* in that statement. This is still in the planning stages. But it's been done before with VCRs so it's not impossible. Alternatively you can still use the a/v inputs and digital remote as I did with my Studio / DSS setup...........joe

[joe]

Originally posted by kjb:
I don't know this for sure, but I would assume that recordings created directly in MPEG-2 would make that 120 minute limit of DVDs a reality. But, that's just my guess.

AFAIK, only Apple has time restrictions on video DVD recording. My Formac Devideon DVD burner and software will burn video DVDs up to 6 hours. You can vary the bit rate and quality the same as if it were a VHS tape. And this capability is not limited to computer DVD burners either. The standalone consumer DVD burners (VCR replacements) can burn 6 hour DVDs too. Take a look at the Panasonic model info here. There's a chart at the bottom of the page showing 6 hour DVD recording in EP mode:

http://www.panasonic.com/consumer_el...p#morefeatures

The info in that chart for 12 hour DVD recording is for double sided DVD media. And of course the hard drive models (like TiVOs) can record even more before dumping to DVD - assuming you want to save your shows.

OTOH, there are now consumer DVD players capable of DivX and MPEG4 playback. So you may be able to cram even more video on a DVD - though that may technically be a data DVD disc instead of a video DVD. This approach probably requires a computer (for now). Here are some MPEG4 - capable DVD decks:

http://www.kiss-technology.com/?p=dvd&v=users

Personally I'd be happy with 6 hour DVDs. But I don't know if El Gato's EyeTV200 software allows as much adjustment with their MPEG2 compression as my Formac Devideon did. They mention 2gigs per hour on their FAQ. But that's at the highest quality setting (XP) for other DVD software. Lower settings like EP are needed to get 6 hours of MPEG2 on a DVD............joe

[midwinter]

Originally posted by joe:
Yeah, it seems pricey. I paid $399 for my Studio dv/tv originally and that was on plastic to ease the pain (up front anyway). However, you really get what you pay for. Both the Studio and EyeTV are more than just TV tuners. Both have TiVO-like capabilites. And the Studio adds a boat-load of video i/o options. And then there's the near-DVD quality of the recordings....

As for digital, I used the S-video input of my Studio to watch and record from my DSS dish. I still had to use the DirecTV remote to change channels, but you couldn't beat the quality.........joe

Right. At the moment, I'm really happy with what I'm getting. I mean, for $200, I'm using the thing like a DVD making factory. I'll bet I've made 40 in the past couple of weeks.

And if they can look better, I may have to shell out the cash and give my Eye TV to my wife so she won't miss her Thursday night shows when she's gone.

[joe]

Originally posted by midwinter:
And if they can look better, I may have to shell out the cash and give my Eye TV to my wife so she won't miss her Thursday night shows when she's gone.

Ditto! But because of the cost, I'm going to wait for some owner feedback before buying an EyeTV200. I'm also hoping El Gato fixed the problem with slow channel changing from the original.

However, everything I wrote above about the Formac dv/tv was from owning and using one for years. It was a blast and I miss having it around. So if the EyeTV200 doesn't pan out I'll probably end up buying the new Studio TVR. Formac dropped the price to $299 and improved the DV hardware codec over the earlier dv/tv model that I owned. Competition is a good thing! We're going to end up with 2 excellent Firewire tuner solutions with better features and a lower price .....joe

[blackbird_1.0]

um, i've got some questions

i've got a g5 and i want to know what card i need to be able to watch satellite through my mac and be able to record stuff

would a "formac" video card work?

i really need some help, i posted this in another forum, no one answered, and i'm lost

[roders]

In my experience eye TV's software is VERY cpu intensive.

[joe]

Originally posted by blackbird_1.0:
would a "formac" video card work?

i really need some help, i posted this in another forum, no one answered, and i'm lost

No problem, you've come to the right place First, the Formac is an external device. You have an internal PCI option, the new G5 version of the Alchemy TV Tuner. I've owned both. And from my experience it all boils down to cost vs higher video quality and features:

Alchemy G5 advantages:
-internal, saves desktop space and less cables
-lower cost ($100 w/o remote, $150 with remote)
-wireless remote

Formac Studio TVR advantages:
-highest video quality (though the upcoming EyeTV200 may equal this)
-the most video i/o options for external devices (VCR, camcorder, etc)
-compatilble with iMovie.
-TiVO-like software (web scheduled recordings, etc).
-Firewire bus powered (no wall wart supply needed).

And of course you have other external options as well - mostly USB. Given the high quality of your sattlelite dish I'd shy away from any USB device except the ADs Instant DVD USB or the upcoming EyeTV200.

Hope that helps.......joe


EDIT - I should've added that the upcoming EyeTV200 is also Firewire and bus powered - not USB. Also, the Instant DVD USB does not have a TV tuner. Though you wouldn't want to use a TV tuner to view or capture video from your dish since it reduces quality. Best option is to use the S-video port with any of the devices mentioned above.

[::maroma::]

I'm very interested in the EyeTV 200. It would be my first of such a device, so I don't have any experience here. But reading the info on Elgato's site, it says this:

"EyeTV 200 features Composite, S-Video and Stereo Audio connectors, allowing users to hook up video devices to EyeTV, such as VCRs, camcorders or DVD players. From these devices EyeTV encodes video to MPEG-2 in real-time, to be stored on the Mac."

Does this mean I could hook up my home DVD player and rip a commercial DVD to MPEG-2? This would be great for archiving and such, but isn't there some sort of legal restrictions on this sort of thing? Or do commercial DVDs have some sort of protection that will not allow this?

[midwinter]

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
I'm very interested in the EyeTV 200. It would be my first of such a device, so I don't have any experience here. But reading the info on Elgato's site, it says this:

"EyeTV 200 features Composite, S-Video and Stereo Audio connectors, allowing users to hook up video devices to EyeTV, such as VCRs, camcorders or DVD players. From these devices EyeTV encodes video to MPEG-2 in real-time, to be stored on the Mac."

Does this mean I could hook up my home DVD player and rip a commercial DVD to MPEG-2? This would be great for archiving and such, but isn't there some sort of legal restrictions on this sort of thing? Or do commercial DVDs have some sort of protection that will not allow this?

If they *do* capture, they won't look very good. I've tried (since it was faster than ripping one of my own to carry with me on a trip).

[Paul_N]

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
Does this mean I could hook up my home DVD player and rip a commercial DVD to MPEG-2? This would be great for archiving and such, but isn't there some sort of legal restrictions on this sort of thing? Or do commercial DVDs have some sort of protection that will not allow this?

Highly unlikely. Although I haven't used one yet (I'm 99% positive I'll be buying one), I have to believe that the product implements Macrovision protection to prevent this very thing. 99.5% of all video recording devices have macrovision in them for atleast the last 10 years. Hell, VCRs had macrovision since the mid to late 80s.

Like another poster mentioned, even if it didn't the quality wouldn't be that good. If you are going to spend money on a DVD, why lower the quality? You have a nice progressive scan DVD player with a built in 12-17" monitor. Go get a nice set of headphones (Sennheiser's used to offer a dolby-pro-logic (not dolby digital) decoders) and sit back and enjoy the flick.. Why degrade?

Also, I'd have to imagine that the the battery life is going to suffer greately. Think about it, you are continually parsing through a 4gb file on disk. Atleast with a DVD disc the hard drive spins down and the only thing that is being accessed is the disc, memory and the video card. I'm sure spinning the disc and powering the laser consumes less power then spinning up an constantly accessing the hard disk.

Just my $0.02,
-Paul

[::maroma::]

Ahh, good points. I think that answers my question. I remember trying to copy some VHS movies a long while back and the result was just horrible. I'm thinking that's the copy protection you are talking about.

I'm still wanting one of these real bad. Can't wait till they are released and I can read some reviews!

[badtz]

is there a reason they chose 704x480 instead of 720x480 ??

maybe there's a technical answer that I'm tossed about

[badtz]

Does anyone have the original EyeTV and burned it to a DVD to playback on your TV? How's the quality? Do you initially record the video in "high quality" mode also?

Would you gain quality by burning to a DVD instead of VCD?

[GORDYmac]

The video looks fine on my 27" TV. Just imagine having a photo at 640 x 480, and applying the blur filter once. That's what it looks like if the video is recorded at high quality.

It's perfectly acceptable to me--considering the video was recorded at half the TV resolution. No MPEG artifacts at the high quality setting either.

You don't gain anything other than storage capacity by going to DVD. Toast doesn't modify the video information, only the audio.

[badtz]

Originally posted by GORDYmac:
The video looks fine on my 27" TV. Just imagine having a photo at 640 x 480, and applying the blur filter once. That's what it looks like if the video is recorded at high quality.

It's perfectly acceptable to me--considering the video was recorded at half the TV resolution. No MPEG artifacts at the high quality setting either.

You don't gain anything other than storage capacity by going to DVD. Toast doesn't modify the video information, only the audio.

would you lose quality [video] from the original 'high quality' mpeg-1 by burning on a VCD instead of a DVD?

I'm trying to debate between the USB or the new Firewire version

[yoyoman]

my freind has the tvr from studio mac. Loves the sucker.

[GORDYmac]

Originally posted by badtz:
would you lose quality [video] from the original 'high quality' mpeg-1 by burning on a VCD instead of a DVD?

Not if you use Toast. Toast would create a DVD or VCD using the same high quliity video file. Just be sure that your VCD file is less than 42 minutes if you record at high quality.