Metadata considerations for tape support #750
Labels
enhancement
help wanted
ld-decode
An issue only affecting the ld-decode[r]
ld-decode-tools
An issue only affecting the ld-decode-tools
Lots of discussion on discord about the possibilities of expanding metadata support for tapes. It's likely that, in the first case, it will simply be considered a 'format' and placed with CAV/CLV to distinguish tape from LaserDiscs. However, there were some good notes about the complexities; so this issue is to keep them in case needed:
--
Stephen_Neal: Timecode in tape is interesting - as it's not really mandated by the tape format, it's more a choice. Linear Timecode is carried on audio tracks, Vertical Interval Timecode (aka VITC) is embedded in the VBI of the video signal. Both are standardised. There are some oddball VHS indexing systems that use custom modulation of the CTRL track - but they are quite niche and are more indexing rather than timecode standards.
[12:43] Stephen_Neal: So you could have VITC or LTC on VHS, S-VHS, Hi8, UMatic - or both. (VITC gives you timecode when you have pictures, LTC gives you timecode when the tape is moving)
I think it could be categorized (imo) by:
Stephen_Neal: I think CTL and LTC are two different types - most VCRs that used LTC for timecode will also have had a separate CTL track (not sure about Video8/Hi8)
[14:08] Stephen_Neal: I'd also avoid mono vs stereo and instead include a track count and track type format - so you can cope with 3 x Linear tracks, 2 x FM + 1 x Linear, 2 x FM + 2 x Linear, 2 x FM + 2 x PCM etc.?
[14:10] Stephen_Neal: It depends whether the metadata needs to carry 'how many audio tracks' (Dual Mono and Stereo would both = 2) or 'how many audio tracks AND what they are used for' (Dual Mono and Stereo would have different metadata). It then gets complex
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: