1 00:00:00,070 --> 00:00:06,270 So, you’ve found yourself looking at a side-by-side comparison of Beta and VHS in 2017. 2 00:00:06,270 --> 00:00:07,270 Awesome! 3 00:00:07,270 --> 00:00:11,990 All kidding aside, here’s a disclaimer: It’s not exactly easy to find a Beta machine 4 00:00:11,990 --> 00:00:13,579 in stellar shape. 5 00:00:13,579 --> 00:00:18,929 These recordings were made with my best Beta VCR, which is well over 30 years old now. 6 00:00:18,929 --> 00:00:23,480 This video has been re-uploaded to address an unfair advantage the VHS footage had in 7 00:00:23,480 --> 00:00:26,590 the previous version: the age of the VCR. 8 00:00:26,590 --> 00:00:31,140 I didn’t see this as a huge problem given it was a standard VHS unit, but user 9 00:00:31,140 --> 00:00:36,579 did rightly point out that the newer VHS machine has VHS HQ enabled, and it has 10 00:00:36,579 --> 00:00:38,960 digital signal processing which would give it an edge. 11 00:00:38,960 --> 00:00:44,530 So, I set up the RCA dinosaur from 1979 and recorded the output from that machine, and 12 00:00:44,530 --> 00:00:46,399 replaced the original VHS footage. 13 00:00:46,399 --> 00:00:51,641 I didn’t re-record the VHS tape with the RCA machine because it’s doesn’t record 14 00:00:51,641 --> 00:00:56,390 so well, so it’s possible that the VHS footage has the tiniest of edges given the tape’s 15 00:00:56,390 --> 00:01:01,579 been recorded on a newer machine, but still it’s being played back on a venerable antique. 16 00:01:01,579 --> 00:01:06,740 Note however that the audio from the original upload is still being used for the VHS segments. 17 00:01:06,740 --> 00:01:09,290 And with that out of the way, let’s continue. 18 00:01:09,290 --> 00:01:13,290 This footage comes from a simple stroll around my local area (yes this is Downtown Lombard 19 00:01:13,290 --> 00:01:16,980 and Lilacia Park, and I’m surprised how many people recognized it so quickly). 20 00:01:16,980 --> 00:01:22,150 I shot this at 60 frames per second in full HD on my OnePlus 3, using a gimbal for a stable 21 00:01:22,150 --> 00:01:24,009 image in the outdoor scenes. 22 00:01:24,009 --> 00:01:29,030 I then made a DVD of this footage, then popped that DVD into a Playstation 2 and recorded 23 00:01:29,030 --> 00:01:33,979 from the PS2’s composite video output to a Beta machine and a VHS machine. 24 00:01:33,979 --> 00:01:38,280 This is the Beta Machine, it’s a Toshiba which brags about its front-loading system. 25 00:01:38,280 --> 00:01:44,360 The VHS machine used to record onto the tape was this Panasonic DMR-ES40V. 26 00:01:44,360 --> 00:01:52,080 I recorded the segments twice on both formats, at SP and SLP on VHS, and Beta 2 and 3 on 27 00:01:52,080 --> 00:01:58,860 Beta. I did not record on Beta 1 because the vast majority of machines from as early as 1979 28 00:01:58,860 --> 00:02:02,860 have Beta 1 disabled due to its impractical use of tape. 29 00:02:02,860 --> 00:02:08,940 A 1 hour tape length wasn't long enough, and Sony decided it just wasn't worth it anymore 30 00:02:08,940 --> 00:02:12,920 So I don't even own a machine capable of recording at Beta 1 31 00:02:12,920 --> 00:02:18,060 and the vast majority of Beta machines throughout the format war could not record at Beta 1 speed. 32 00:02:18,070 --> 00:02:23,770 I disabled HiFi sound on the VHS machine to ensure you are hearing the great mono linear 33 00:02:23,770 --> 00:02:24,960 soundtrack. 34 00:02:24,960 --> 00:02:29,020 After recording the segments, I used the DVD recorder function of the Panasonic to capture 35 00:02:29,020 --> 00:02:31,860 the video from both VCRs over the same composite cable, and I used this machine for good reason. 36 00:02:31,860 --> 00:02:37,250 All video capture cards that I’ve used produce garbage output because they insist on de-interlacing, 37 00:02:37,250 --> 00:02:40,210 producing 30p footage that looks like crap. 38 00:02:40,210 --> 00:02:46,810 This DVD recorder doesn’t bother with De-interlacing and instead produces a glorious NTSC 29.97 39 00:02:46,810 --> 00:02:49,160 frames per second, interlaced output. 40 00:02:49,160 --> 00:02:54,430 Importantly, it can record onto DVD-RAM discs, which I then popped in my laptop. 41 00:02:54,430 --> 00:03:00,120 The Panasonic unit writes .vro files on the DVD ram disc, and for some reason Sony Movie 42 00:03:00,120 --> 00:03:03,320 Studio can open these files and understand them. 43 00:03:03,320 --> 00:03:04,510 Premiere cannot. 44 00:03:04,510 --> 00:03:06,580 So good thing I keep my laptop around. 45 00:03:06,580 --> 00:03:11,830 I then rendered each of these output videos as a new NTSC standard mp4, at a ridiculously 46 00:03:11,830 --> 00:03:16,830 high bit-rate to ensure all the analog smoothness is captured, and then onto a flash drive and 47 00:03:16,830 --> 00:03:19,410 over to my desktop for editing in Premiere. 48 00:03:19,410 --> 00:03:24,170 In the last video, I uploaded at 30p, and Premiere didn’t do a good job deinterlacing 49 00:03:24,170 --> 00:03:25,770 that time, either. 50 00:03:25,770 --> 00:03:29,250 This upload is at 60p, and it looks much better. 51 00:03:29,250 --> 00:03:33,940 Note that you may have to go full-screen on a PC to actually get the 60p footage. 52 00:03:33,940 --> 00:03:37,870 I will blow these up and even to some split-screen magic, but if you’re watching fullscreen 53 00:03:37,870 --> 00:03:43,330 on even a 1366x768 display, you’re getting all the detail possible. 54 00:03:43,330 --> 00:03:47,100 Trust me, this is the clip scaled at 100% in a 1080p render. 55 00:03:47,100 --> 00:03:48,140 See? 56 00:03:48,140 --> 00:03:53,060 So, again due to the age of the Toshiba machine, you’ll have to forgive some of its problems, 57 00:03:53,060 --> 00:03:55,090 like the occasional signal dropout. 58 00:03:55,090 --> 00:03:56,930 But for the most part, the image is stable. 59 00:03:56,930 --> 00:03:59,760 I’ll shut up for a moment and let the video speak for itself. 60 00:03:59,760 --> 00:04:04,000 I’ll be switching the audio source back and for for your viewing pleasure. 61 00:05:02,870 --> 00:05:06,750 These stills are some royalty free images filled with color to show how color rendering 62 00:05:06,750 --> 00:05:08,970 compares between the two formats. 63 00:05:08,970 --> 00:05:13,590 Both VHS and Beta use a color-under encoding technique, and the resolution of the color 64 00:05:13,590 --> 00:05:16,980 is quite poor compared to the image resolution. 65 00:05:16,980 --> 00:05:21,090 Both formats struggle with red, but this Beta machine seems to be doing worse. 66 00:05:21,090 --> 00:05:23,620 That could easily be just this particular machine. 67 00:05:46,800 --> 00:05:51,000 The Indian head test card helps compare image resolution by comparing the converging line 68 00:05:51,000 --> 00:05:52,000 patterns. 69 00:05:52,000 --> 00:05:53,760 It’s pretty similar. 70 00:05:53,760 --> 00:05:59,500 On both formats the SMPTE color bars look pretty gnarly, particularly with magenta and 71 00:05:59,500 --> 00:06:02,000 the red-blue border. 72 00:06:11,830 --> 00:06:16,490 First off, the image is not noticeably sharper than VHS, at least I can’t see a significant 73 00:06:16,490 --> 00:06:17,490 difference. 74 00:06:17,490 --> 00:06:20,990 There’s nothing about the output from the Beta machine that says to me, this is superior 75 00:06:20,990 --> 00:06:22,430 to VHS. 76 00:06:22,430 --> 00:06:25,540 Aside from its occasional dropouts, it looks nearly identical. 77 00:06:25,540 --> 00:06:29,389 EXCEPT, in this footage, look at the sky. 78 00:06:29,389 --> 00:06:34,100 This is the so-called fingerprint effect that was present on virtually all Beta 2 recordings. 79 00:06:34,100 --> 00:06:37,690 It’s not always visible, but it’s always there. 80 00:06:37,690 --> 00:06:41,650 The Rise and Fall of Beta piece I referenced in the previous video discusses this phenomenon. 81 00:06:41,650 --> 00:06:45,910 But, here’s one area where Beta does visibly beat VHS. 82 00:06:45,910 --> 00:06:50,530 The recording at Beta 3 is noticeably sharper than the SLP recording. 83 00:06:50,530 --> 00:06:54,330 Sound is also slightly better, which would make sense as the linear tape speed on Beta 84 00:06:54,330 --> 00:06:56,360 3 is higher than SLP. 85 00:06:56,360 --> 00:07:00,260 The Beta machine which made these recordings has a high amount of wow and flutter in the 86 00:07:00,260 --> 00:07:04,940 audio at Beta 3, and that is probably due to bad filter capacitors in the capstan motor 87 00:07:04,940 --> 00:07:06,130 power supply. 88 00:07:06,130 --> 00:07:11,940 However, as we exhaustively discussed in the last video, comparing Beta 3 to SLP is almost 89 00:07:11,940 --> 00:07:17,210 wrong, as recording time is comparable being Beta 3 and VHS LP. 90 00:07:17,210 --> 00:07:22,010 SLP provided recording time far far longer than any Beta 3 deck. 91 00:07:22,010 --> 00:07:26,710 There appear to be no Beta machines capable of recording at all three speeds, with Beta 92 00:07:26,710 --> 00:07:30,500 1 being disabled all the way back in 1979. 93 00:08:02,270 --> 00:08:06,660 So to conclude, Beta 2 looks pretty close to VHS SP. 94 00:08:06,660 --> 00:08:11,370 Which makes sense, as Beta 2 is in reality equivalent to VHS LP. 95 00:08:11,370 --> 00:08:16,910 Remember, Beta 1 was sharper than VHS SP, but as Beta 2 was the technical companion 96 00:08:16,910 --> 00:08:20,220 of VHS LP, the quality got pretty similar. 97 00:08:20,220 --> 00:08:25,450 And again, Beta 1 (the technical companion to VHS SP) was disabled on the vast majority 98 00:08:25,450 --> 00:08:26,900 of Beta decks. 99 00:08:26,900 --> 00:08:31,230 As I said in the last videos, by disabling Beta 1, Sony got rid of much of the picture 100 00:08:31,230 --> 00:08:33,800 advantage Beta had over VHS. 101 00:08:33,800 --> 00:08:38,490 But I think they had to kill it off, after all a 2 hour base recording time on an L-500 102 00:08:38,490 --> 00:08:43,860 tape sounds acceptable, but a 1 hour time on Beta 1 sounds almost useless. 103 00:08:43,860 --> 00:08:47,890 I’ll let this video play out, but before I go I thought I would mention the technical 104 00:08:47,890 --> 00:08:50,620 cousin of Beta known as Betacam. 105 00:08:50,620 --> 00:08:54,450 A lot of comments on the past video are saying that Beta never really lost the format war 106 00:08:54,450 --> 00:08:56,760 because it lived on in the professional realm. 107 00:08:56,760 --> 00:09:01,760 That’s not correct, though, because Betacam is a completely different format from consumer 108 00:09:01,760 --> 00:09:02,760 Betamax. 109 00:09:02,760 --> 00:09:08,060 Yeah, betacam cassettes are mostly the same as your standard Beta tape, but you can’t 110 00:09:08,060 --> 00:09:12,060 play any Betacam recording on a standard issue consumer Beta deck. 111 00:09:12,060 --> 00:09:16,760 Also, in the professional realm, the Betacam standard was amended to include a physically 112 00:09:16,760 --> 00:09:24,080 larger Betacam L cassette which contained more tape, because at this point sony finally 113 00:09:24,080 --> 00:09:28,520 threw in the towel and acknowledged that the standard Beta cassette was too small. 114 00:09:28,520 --> 00:09:32,230 The professional market would benefit greatly by using the same basic cassette throughout 115 00:09:32,230 --> 00:09:36,860 its iterations, and since professional equipment is pushing into new-car pricing territory, 116 00:09:36,860 --> 00:09:39,200 cost was never too much of a barrier. 117 00:09:39,200 --> 00:09:42,770 Betacam eventually became fully digital, even HD. 118 00:09:42,770 --> 00:09:47,020 But again, it doesn’t belong in a discussion on the format war, because Betacam was never 119 00:09:47,020 --> 00:09:49,320 marketed to consumers. 120 00:09:49,320 --> 00:09:50,920 Anyway, Thanks for watching!