View Single Post
Old 12th July 2015, 10:15   #31699  |  Link
Schwartz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Ideally an upscaler would work magic. In real life we have to make do with what science has given us so far. If you want an algo which doesn't ring by itself, try Bilinear, Nearest Neighbor or Gaussian. Ouch. Pretty much everything else rings. Even NNEDI3 adds a bit of ringing in some situations. As Hyllian already mentioned, some ringing is sometimes beneficial, which makes the whole thing difficult. E.g. try some frequency burst test patterns without ringing. You'll get very bad results.
True. I've been digging into the subject a bit since yesterday and benchmarked some scalers. I ended up just running Mitchell. I do a lot of picture downsizing with Mitchell and it turns out that it's pretty damn good for video upsizing as well. Probably nothing for the 'sharper' crowd but I find it's a nice compromise.

I've never really seen NNEDI3 ring, but then again I don't see sxbr 50-75 ring all that much either. But all of my image doubling happens to SD content where it can 'do some work', a bit of smoothing is usually desired. Pixel-perfect encodes I leave alone.

I second the user who said he'd enjoy more sxbr options. 60-65 might be the sweet spot for me. Maybe an input field?

Last edited by Schwartz; 12th July 2015 at 10:18.
Schwartz is offline   Reply With Quote