Quote:
Originally Posted by Anima123
|
The pictures you posted look almost identical to me. Aside from the creases in his forehead and the creases in the sleeve of the passerby I'm not seeing anything noticeably different between the two. Of the two I think the first one (strength 1 with two passes) looks better than the second one (strength 0.50 with four passes).
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi
In my tests 10 passes with strength 0.10 looks almost identical to 1 pass with strength 1.00. So 2 passes with strength 0.40 should look almost identical to 1 pass with strength 0.80. If you disagree, please show me a screenshot where 2 passes with 0.40 look clearly better than 1 pass with 0.80.
This is extremely important, because different strength values don't cost performance. But 2 passes is exactly twice as slow as 1 pass.
|
Given both the performance difference and the small difference I see between the two pictures Anima posted I vote for the higher strength with less passes. In my testing I see very little ( on my sources) in the low, medium, high, and ultra settings you noted before. I could see myself using the low or medium settings, but don't think I'd every use the high or ultra settings given how much of a performance hit they are with not enough significant image improvement. (Pretty much the same reason why I choose to use Super-xBR instead of NNEDI3).
Edit: I like the way it combines with image enhancements (not the upscaling refinement version) of Adaptive Sharpening (not sure on the strength...0.3 or 0.5 maybe), but I'll hold back on further commenting on that until you want to talk about combining effects.