Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Hardware & Software > Software players

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 23rd May 2016, 06:02   #38121  |  Link
JarrettH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 860
Hey thanks both. I actually sort of consumed my evening with installing displayCAL haha. I eventually created a 3D LUT with the Spyder 2 without much trouble.

p.s. My display is a CCFL LCD (NEC ea231wmi), so it's still a good pairing of technology

How do you think I should setup the rendering, Asmodian? I keep it at "this display is already calibrated" + full exclusive

Edit:

Realized the gamma is - by default - set to 2.4 in displayCAL madvr preset, which would explain the wash out. I removed the screenshots until I run it again.

Last edited by JarrettH; 23rd May 2016 at 07:44.
JarrettH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 06:57   #38122  |  Link
x7007
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 315
Madshi , if I have Bluray 3D which I use . which is not SidebySide or Top&Buttom , it is Active 3D TV with Nvidia 3DTV software. I can't make it to show actual 3D when using 3D on AUTO in madvr with 3DTV Enabled. it says D3D11 Windowed or Fullscreen (3D) but there is nothing being visible as 3D. my TV goes to 3D mode when it detect supported 3D software or Nvidia 3DTV enabled, and Potplayer goes to 3D mode, but again nothing is visible as 3D , just plain 2D. can I fix that ? I can't watch the movie in PowerDVD because I need subtitles and the movie doesn't have subtitles and I can't add to powerdvd srt subtitles, is there other way for that too ? in PowerDVD it works properly, 3D is visible and pretty much perfect.

Windows 10
Nvidia 970
3DTV Drivers

the movie is bluray Active 3D not just MKV normal file.

Last edited by x7007; 23rd May 2016 at 06:59.
x7007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 08:13   #38123  |  Link
Siso
Soul Seeker
 
Siso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian View Post
Especially the Spyder2 is too old for modern displays, I had to replace my Spyder3 years ago because it could not read accurate colors on the new WLED backlights that seem ubiquitous now or on anything with a wide gamut. Also as they age the filters change so the meters do simply go bad with time (heat, water, oxygen, etc.). Edit: I used the meter with Argyllcms, not their software, which as mentioned, is not very good.

A 3DLUT and a Windows calibration as done by Spyder's software is not the same thing. Think of the Windows calibration as the first step of a calibration and the 3DLUT as the full calibration done in one step.

huhn mentioned using the rendering option "enable windowed overlay" because madVR bypasses the GPU's calibration hardware completely in that mode but it loads the values from the GPU and applies then internally at its high bit depth and before dithering. This does offer better quality but it does not help if the values are bad to start with.
Wasn't there a problem with out of gamut colors using a 3DLUT with windowed overlay mode?
Siso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 10:27   #38124  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by JarrettH View Post
Hey thanks both. I actually sort of consumed my evening with installing displayCAL haha. I eventually created a 3D LUT with the Spyder 2 without much trouble.

p.s. My display is a CCFL LCD (NEC ea231wmi), so it's still a good pairing of technology

How do you think I should setup the rendering, Asmodian? I keep it at "this display is already calibrated" + full exclusive

Edit:

Realized the gamma is - by default - set to 2.4 in displayCAL madvr preset, which would explain the wash out. I removed the screenshots until I run it again.
why should a gamma of 2.4 result in a washed out image?
the 3D LUT is most likely fixing black clipping.

but what so ever not an madVR issue.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 12:57   #38125  |  Link
baii
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by JarrettH View Post
Hey thanks both. I actually sort of consumed my evening with installing displayCAL haha. I eventually created a 3D LUT with the Spyder 2 without much trouble.

p.s. My display is a CCFL LCD (NEC ea231wmi), so it's still a good pairing of technology

How do you think I should setup the rendering, Asmodian? I keep it at "this display is already calibrated" + full exclusive

Edit:

Realized the gamma is - by default - set to 2.4 in displayCAL madvr preset, which would explain the wash out. I removed the screenshots until I run it again.
Bt 1886 on low contrast ratio display (say 1000:1) tend to look wash out, try the pure 2.2 and use the black offset so you don't get black crush.

You can find more about all this stuff on the corresponding avs forum thread.

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk
baii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 13:58   #38126  |  Link
XMonarchY
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by baii View Post
Bt 1886 on low contrast ratio display (say 1000:1) tend to look wash out, try the pure 2.2 and use the black offset so you don't get black crush.

You can find more about all this stuff on the corresponding avs forum thread.

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk
Pure 2.2 will also be washed out with 2.2 Power Law gamma in the same places that look washed out with BT.1886 gamma, BUT not AS washed out. If a film is using low black levels properly, BT.1886 image will look better.

IMHO, BT.1886 is the way to go on ANY display, be it extremely low-contrast (sub 1000:1) TN/IPS panel, barely acceptable contrast VA (~3000:1) panel, acceptable contrast VA (~5000:1) panel, or high contrast high quality CRT/Plasma/OLED panel.

Also, I don't think you need to select Black Offset or Compensation because ArgyllCMS and DisplayCAL have fixed the elevated blacks problems a LONG time ago.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 14:05   #38127  |  Link
Magik Mark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 666
Can the anti halo algorithm address the halo generated by SVP?
__________________
Asus ProArt Z790 - 13th Gen Intel i9 - RTX 3080 - DDR5 64GB Predator - LG OLED C9 - Yamaha A3030 - Windows 11 x64 - PotPlayerr - Lav - MadVR
Magik Mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 15:14   #38128  |  Link
JarrettH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 860
Here are the images I removed. I use 2.2 gamma on my monitor (it's matte IPS).

3dlut (uses 2.4 gamma)

Spyder 6500k 2.2


3dlut (uses 2.4 gamma)

Spyder 6500k 2.2


3dlut (uses 2.4 gamma)

Spyder 6500k 2.2

Last edited by JarrettH; 23rd May 2016 at 15:45.
JarrettH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 15:37   #38129  |  Link
XTrojan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 88
6500k or 2.2 is Normal, if you notice on dark areas in 2.4 there's major black crushes, the benefit is clearness but white/dark areas tend to get issues. The result is a "tunnel-vision" effect, where the surroundings often end up irrelevant or very dark, making you focus mostly on the stuff in the middle. This can be good for horrors, dramas, tarantino movies and similar but for action Marvel/Michael Bay etc this often makes it unwatchable.

I would stay at 2.2, it tends to give the best balance, dynamic contrast modes on TVs have the same black crush effect, albeit not as strong as pure 2.4, since modern TVs can detect black areas and adapt, but it still isn't recommended to go above 2.2.

Last edited by XTrojan; 23rd May 2016 at 15:52.
XTrojan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 16:14   #38130  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
Compared NNEDI3 64 + SR3 vs. deringing + super-xbr 150 + SR1 (both quadrupling).

NNEDI3:



super-xbr:



NNEDI3:


super-xbr:


Funny thing is that super-xbr with higher sharpness is less aliased than lower sharpness. This offers quite some possibilities, since with deringing filter, halo boosting isn't a real problem anymore with super-xbr and its line bloating can already be significantly lowered by just SuperRes 1, which doesn't reintroduce lots of ringing unlike higher SR settings when combined with deringing filter.
So, it seems to me that this super-xbr settings combination is now a real alternative to NNEDI3 while it requires just a fraction of computing power at the same time. I can't spot a clear winner quality wise with these examples (ok, the cartoon shows much less ringing with the deringing filter).
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 20:42   #38131  |  Link
e-t172
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by XMonarchY View Post
Pure 2.2 will also be washed out with 2.2 Power Law gamma in the same places that look washed out with BT.1886 gamma, BUT not AS washed out. If a film is using low black levels properly, BT.1886 image will look better.

IMHO, BT.1886 is the way to go on ANY display, be it extremely low-contrast (sub 1000:1) TN/IPS panel, barely acceptable contrast VA (~3000:1) panel, acceptable contrast VA (~5000:1) panel, or high contrast high quality CRT/Plasma/OLED panel.
This. The whole point of BT.1886 is to compensate for low contrast displays, which is why the shape of the curve changes depending on black/white levels which are fed as parameters to the formula.
e-t172 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 20:47   #38132  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
the cartoon sxbr image has a ton of ringing are you sure the anti ringing was used on it?

i have to say both cartoon image are not looking good.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 21:18   #38133  |  Link
Uoppi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian View Post
Is the "cleanup image borders by cropping" option not a good solution? It is probably meant to clean up faded or distorted edges of analogue captures but it could work well here too?
About that cleanup feature: I was pleasantly surprised to realize that madVR is apparently analyzing the image to decide if cleaning is required or not - you're saying that's what it's meant to be doing, right?

I definitely don't want any unnecessary cropping with high quality sources whereas with some DVD rips (Monty Python's Flying Circus being a prime example) I need to set the cropping to at least 3 or more for all borders.

Initially I kind of assumed all content would get brutally cropped, whether needed or not. But I have to say I really like the versatility of the zoom functions and that's saying a lot because previously I was biased against "any kind of zooming or cropping" to preserve the original aspect ratio.
Uoppi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 21:19   #38134  |  Link
Uoppi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian View Post
Is the "cleanup image borders by cropping" option not a good solution? It is probably meant to clean up faded or distorted edges of analogue captures but it could work well here too?
About that cleanup feature: I was pleasantly surprised to realize that madVR is apparently analyzing the image to decide if cleaning is required or not - you're saying that's what it's meant to be doing, right?

I definitely don't want any unnecessary cropping with high quality sources whereas with some DVD rips (Monty Python's Flying Circus being a prime example) I need to set the cropping to at least 3 or more for all borders.

Initially I kind of assumed all content would get brutally cropped, whether needed or not. But I have to say I really like the versatility of the zoom functions in general and that's saying a lot because previously I was biased against "any kind of zooming or cropping" in order preserve all image content..
Uoppi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2016, 22:04   #38135  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
the cartoon sxbr image has a ton of ringing are you sure the anti ringing was used on it?
Yes, compare it to super-xbr 150 without deringing:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...26#post1768426
The deringing filter shouldn't be any more aggressive, you can see it already killing some detail in the lighttower picture. I think its strength is just right, judging from what I've seen so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
i have to say both cartoon image are not looking good.
The source is not good and quadrupling makes ugly artifacts much more visible, no matter how good the upscaling is.

Edit: Btw: New Crimson 16.5.3 driver seems to fix performance regression of 16.5.2.
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2016, 00:35   #38136  |  Link
fedpul
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
Yes, compare it to super-xbr 150 without deringing:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...26#post1768426
The deringing filter shouldn't be any more aggressive, you can see it already killing some detail in the lighttower picture. I think its strength is just right, judging from what I've seen so far.


The source is not good and quadrupling makes ugly artifacts much more visible, no matter how good the upscaling is.
Hi aufkrawall, I have been making some comparisons and I think SXBR 150 is too sharp and make a lot of artifacts (ringing especially) visible (even when de-ringing enabled, without it, it just rings a lot). Obviusly it depends on the source quality. I think SXBR AB 25 is one of the most balanced doubling upscalers when it comes to: resources, image quality and artifacts masking. Just my humble opinion.
fedpul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2016, 08:23   #38137  |  Link
chros
Registered User
 
chros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by e-t172 View Post
This. The whole point of BT.1886 is to compensate for low contrast displays, which is why the shape of the curve changes depending on black/white levels which are fed as parameters to the formula.
Quote:
Originally Posted by XMonarchY View Post
Pure 2.2 will also be washed out with 2.2 Power Law gamma in the same places that look washed out with BT.1886 gamma, BUT not AS washed out. If a film is using low black levels properly, BT.1886 image will look better.

IMHO, BT.1886 is the way to go on ANY display, be it extremely low-contrast (sub 1000:1) TN/IPS panel, barely acceptable contrast VA (~3000:1) panel, acceptable contrast VA (~5000:1) panel, or high contrast high quality CRT/Plasma/OLED panel.

Also, I don't think you need to select Black Offset or Compensation because ArgyllCMS and DisplayCAL have fixed the elevated blacks problems a LONG time ago.
This is simply not true.
It depends at least 3 criteria: viewing condition, panel type (black level of the display as e-t172 said), user preference.
You don't want to watch movie Alien with BT.1886 during the night on a IPS panel with 0.14cdm black.
More info here: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/139-di...l#post40108362
But there's also a dedicated thread for this here: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=172783
__________________
Ryzen 5 2600,Asus Prime b450-Plus,16GB,MSI GTX 1060 Gaming X 6GB(v398.18),Win10 LTSC 1809,MPC-BEx64+LAV+MadVR,Yamaha RX-A870,LG OLED77G2(2160p@23/24/25/29/30/50/59/60Hz) | madvr config
chros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2016, 13:15   #38138  |  Link
Asmodian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 4,406
Does it matter what curve you use on this imagined display? You do not want to watch Alien on a display with 0.14 cd/m^2 black.

Your choice is black crush or washed out, using 2.4 or 2.2 gamma doesn't change much. At night, in the dark, 2.4 looks better to me, 2.2 is for a well lit room. BT.1886 avoids black crush while pure power 2.2 or 2.4 will crush black some with that high of a black level.

We should be in the calibration thread, not madVR's.
__________________
madVR options explained
Asmodian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2016, 16:39   #38139  |  Link
JarrettH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 860
I tried Gamma 2.2 and this it looks a lot better to me (shadows aren't as lifted/elevated looking). And yep, you have to take so much into account for your user experience (I view at night, matte IPS, what target brightness I want, my display is also not natively capable of 2.4 gamma - closer to 2.2).

These aren't exact frames, but I want to follow-up to show the difference (of course this is display dependent, etc and may be useless haha)





JarrettH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2016, 16:48   #38140  |  Link
CarlosCaco
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Brasil, SP, São Paulo
Posts: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post

Ok. So how can I reproduce this problem? I'll need a step-by-step guide. Meaning: I need your "settings.bin" file (or "HKCU\Software\madshi\madVR\Settings", if there's no "settings.bin" on your PC). Then I need to know the exact source and target resolutions we're talking about. And a debug log. All this from the situation where image doubling activates but upscaling refinement does not.


Madshi, as you asked, here my settings.bin and my debug log from the supersampling situation where image doubling activates but upscaling refinement does not


http://www.filedropper.com/madvrdebugsettings

movie resolution : 1280x720

display resolution: 1366x768



thanks for your atention and patience
__________________
Desktop, i5 2500, 8GB, N570 GTX TF III PE/OC
Asus X555LF, i7-5500U, 6GB Ram, Nvidia 930m/HD 5500
Windows 8.1 Pro x64

Last edited by CarlosCaco; 24th May 2016 at 17:04.
CarlosCaco is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.