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. |
22nd May 2020, 21:33 | #381 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 77
|
Quote:
I am absolutely willing to test any script suggestion that anyone has. When I said I didn't see the point of posting test clips, I was only referring to test clips based on my own ideas. I'm currently out of ideas. :P Also, Vdub2 question. Does anyone actually use Vdub2 for outputting video after editing, or do you just edit the project and then save the AVS script? If Vdub2 is used to output video, what export settings should I use? Last edited by JoelHruska; 22nd May 2020 at 21:35. |
|
22nd May 2020, 21:50 | #382 | Link | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,056
|
Digging though the old posts in this thread, I stumbled upon the "QIVTC" script by h_h. It had three obvious problems, all of which I've managed to fix: first, it assumed a field parity that would be wrong 99.999% of the time, so I added a modification that Stainless and I have been working on for my own scripts, which automatically detects and uses the correct field parity. Second, after going through all the trouble of using QTGMC's weird shitty pseudo-motion-interpolation to create something that might look like natively 60 fps content if you were stoned, it decimated down to 23.976 fps for no damn reason. I cut that line out. Third, it used QTGMC's "very slow" preset, which has an extra dependency that the other speed settings don't have and which QTGMC's own documentation admits is a waste of CPU cycles for almost no quality improvement. So I restored it to its default "slower" setting. The final QIVTC looks like this:
Code:
function QIVTC(clip Video) { underpants = GetParity(Video) ? 0 : 1 A = Video.Tfm(mode=0, PP=1, MI=20, Slow=2, CThresh=4, Micmatching=0).QTGMC().SelectEven() B = Video.Tfm(field=underpants,mode=0, PP=1, MI=20, Slow=2, CThresh=4, Micmatching=0).QTGMC().SelectEven() C = Video.Tfm(mode=0, MI=20, Slow=2, CThresh=4, Clip2=A, Micmatching=0) D = Video.Tfm(field=underpants,mode=0, MI=20, Slow=2, CThresh=4, Clip2=B, Micmatching=0) Interleave(C,D) QTGMC(InputType=1, ShutterBlur=3, ShutterAngleSrc=180, ShutterAngleOut=180, SBlurLimit=8) } As for my opinion on the results of this corrected version, I have to say... it's a brave and probably clever attempt, but ultimately it fails to do what a deinterlacer is supposed to do: get rid of visible interlacing. This is why I set cthresh and mthresh so low. At this script's settings, lots of interlacing still slips through: That might not seem like a big deal at standard definition, but it'll play hell with AI upscalers. It also shares the same flaws as QTGMC: (a) it's slow, (b) it has lots of dependencies, (c) it bobs everything indiscriminately rather than preserving the original progressive frames whenever possible, and (d) it generates worse interpolation than other temporally-aware bobbers, then tries to hide the bad data by replacing all the good data around it (original scanlines) with more bad data. Basically it's just QTGMC with less aliasing but worse detection and removal of interlacing. Also, since I'm not a QTGMC guru, I don't know exactly how the script is supposed to work, so all support, maintenance, and further improvement concerns should be directed to h_h and Stainless. Quote:
Quote:
4) it looks the same on a 60 hz monitor anyway Quote:
Code:
Mpeg2source("601.d2v") A=Tfm(field=1,mode=0,slow=2,pp=2,mchroma=false,cthresh=-1,micmatching=0).converttorgb().generalconvolution(matrix = "0 -1 0 0 4 0 0 -1 0",divisor=2,auto=false).converttoyv12() B=Tfm(field=0,mode=0,slow=2,pp=2,mchroma=false,cthresh=-1,micmatching=0).converttorgb().generalconvolution(matrix = "0 -1 0 0 4 0 0 -1 0",divisor=2,auto=false).converttoyv12() C=Tfm(field=1,mode=0,slow=2,mchroma=false,cthresh=-1,clip2=A,d2v="601.d2v",flags=1,micmatching=0) D=Tfm(field=0,mode=0,slow=2,mchroma=false,cthresh=-1,clip2=B,d2v="601.d2v",flags=1,micmatching=0) interleave(C,D)
__________________
I ask unusual questions but always give proper thanks to those who give correct and useful answers. Last edited by Katie Boundary; 24th May 2020 at 05:09. |
|||
22nd May 2020, 21:51 | #383 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,829
|
Quote:
MeGUI is pretty easy, It's script creator comes with a preview so you can modify a script and preview the changes, or create the script yourself via other means, load it into MeGUI's video section and add it to the job queue. The encoder preset used for each job is the preset selected at the time the job is added to the queue. You can create your own. For x264, you'd generally just pick a quality (CRF value) the slowest speed preset you can stand (I generally use slow or slower) and maybe select a tuning (I generally use the film tuning). MeGUI also supports Xvid, X265 and a huffyuv lossless output (via it's pre-rending option). For VD2, using the File/Save menu the selecting x264 as the compression method, the configuration looks like this. Is that what you meant? Or you can pick a lossless option supported by the program you're want to use to import the output. If you're opening and editing the source video rather than a script, but want to open the edited video in a script, you'd possibly do it that way. |
|
22nd May 2020, 22:15 | #385 | Link | |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 5,034
|
Quote:
__________________
Groucho's Avisynth Stuff |
|
22nd May 2020, 22:21 | #387 | Link |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 5,034
|
Correct.
__________________
Groucho's Avisynth Stuff |
22nd May 2020, 22:25 | #388 | Link | |
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 7,406
|
Quote:
After setting up the video encode the way he likes and if he wants an MKV out of it, go File->Save As->Matroska and let 'er rip. |
|
22nd May 2020, 22:30 | #390 | Link |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 5,034
|
Just use the Universal Installer.
__________________
Groucho's Avisynth Stuff |
22nd May 2020, 22:46 | #392 | Link |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 5,034
|
You'll find it here. If you decide to use it I'd recommend the one with AVS+ 3.5.1.
__________________
Groucho's Avisynth Stuff |
22nd May 2020, 23:04 | #394 | Link | ||||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,829
|
Quote:
Where did your "Converting boolean values to integers and other AVSI problems" thread go? Did you delete it? You can do what you like with the function, but don't give me any credit. The slower the QTGMC preset in progressive mode, the less likely it'll cause "wobbles" in straight lines and sharp edges. Whether "very slow" makes much difference I don't know. I used it because that's what JoelHruska had been using previously, and the idea was to stabilise the picture as much as possible. Obviously you're the QTGMC expert now, so you'd know though.... It decimated to 23.976 because the output desired at the time was 23.976, and it looked quite smooth at the frame rate. Quote:
Funnily enough, if lower TFM threshold settings caused it to take more pixels from the QTGMC de-interlaced clip you regularly claim not to like, despite all the evidence posted previously showing it can be better (which you've continually ignored) you're saying that would be better? The final instance of QTGMC isn't de-interlacing, just smoothing the output. Quote:
The idea was to use TFM to field match, but not de-interlace itself, then QTGMC de-interlaces those frames, the logic behind that being the frames being de-interlaced by QTGMC would always be the same frames TFM wants to use to replace the combed pixels later on. Whether it works better or not, I don't know. Other than that it's just another variation of your method, and so far still looks better than any script you've posted. How about you upload a sample yourself instead of pontificating, so we can compare it to the sample encode I no doubt linked to when I posted the script? Quote:
Here's a script showing the pixels TFM is taking to repair combing. Video = last A = Video.Tweak(bright=200) B = Video.Tweak(bright=200) C = Video.Tfm(field=0,mode=0, MI=20, Slow=2, CThresh=4, Clip2=A, Micmatching=0) D = Video.Tfm(field=1,mode=0, MI=20, Slow=2, CThresh=4, Clip2=B, Micmatching=0) Interleave(C,D) Here's what the frame you posted looks like using the settings from my script (or roughly, I don't know the frame number). Here's what it looks like using cthresh=2 and mthresh=2. Video = last A = Video.Tweak(bright=200) B = Video.Tweak(bright=200) C = Video.Tfm(field=0,mode=0, mthresh=2, Slow=2, CThresh=2, Clip2=A, Micmatching=0) D = Video.Tfm(field=1,mode=0, mthresh=2, Slow=2, CThresh=2, Clip2=B, Micmatching=0) Interleave(C,D) The TFM settings from my script. cthresh=2 and mthresh=2. The TFM settings from my script. cthresh=2 and mthresh=2. Your most recent TFM settings aren't much different. They don't detect any combing in frame 4500 (the first screenshot I used as an example). Try it for yourself. A = Tweak(bright=200) B = Tweak(bright=200) C=Tfm(field=0,mode=0,slow=2,mchroma=false,cthresh=1,MI=30,blockx=4,mthresh=2,clip2=A,micmatching=0) D=Tfm(field=1,mode=0,slow=2,mchroma=false,cthresh=1,MI=30,blockx=4,mthresh=2,clip2=B,micmatching=0) interleave(C,D) How about a sample encode instead of posting nonsense? Last edited by hello_hello; 23rd May 2020 at 00:15. |
||||
23rd May 2020, 00:43 | #395 | Link |
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 7,406
|
Can the two of you please stop? I've already asked hello_hello via PM to just leave you alone. I have no idea why he even persists. Now I ask you to leave him alone. Just ignore each other. Is it so hard? I thought he was on your ignore list. What happened? You just relished the thought of letting have it? Me, I'm easy, but you don't want Swede to make good on his threats.
By the way, both Swede and I can see what you wrote and then thought the better of it just above. |
23rd May 2020, 00:58 | #396 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,056
|
I DO leave him alone. Everything I've said in response to him has either been debunking his bullshit claims about me or an impersonal analysis of his claims about video editing. Not once in the history of this forum have I gone on the offensive against him.
__________________
I ask unusual questions but always give proper thanks to those who give correct and useful answers. |
23rd May 2020, 01:26 | #397 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Region 0
Posts: 1,436
|
Quote:
It may even be replacing anything between the top most line and bottom most line that have detected interlacing in them. |
|
23rd May 2020, 01:29 | #398 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,056
|
Quote:
That would explain a LOT. EDIT: I'm going through more of the DS9 footage and I'm extremely impressed by how much of this is straight film. The space battles, for example, are rendered at pure film; you don't have ships moving at 24 fps while firing phasers at each other that are animated at 30 fps. This is a huge departure from earlier seasons of Berman-era Star Trek, where you'd see, for example, the Enterprise-D moving at 24 FPS while stars whizzed by at 30. When Weyoun points at a screen showing some animation or another, the animation moves at 24 fps in sync with his hand, like that was an actual functioning display that they had on-set during filming and not something that was green-screened in later (as was done in Andromeda). Even the fades to and from black around commercial breaks are done at film. As far as I can tell, the only orphaned fields in this whole episode are during the opening and possibly closing credits (I haven't checked the closing credits yet), the credit fade-ins and fade-outs right after the opening credits, and around scene changes. A few frames of true 60hz content (i.e. "not text, not fades") do exist during the wormhole opening and closing at the end of the opening credits. This episode would benefit strongly from a deinterlacing approach that favors preserving the original progressive frames untouched, even if it means reduced quality in the orphaned fields. This doesn't mean that a decimation down to 24 is safe, however. Those scene changes keep screwing up the cadence.
__________________
I ask unusual questions but always give proper thanks to those who give correct and useful answers. Last edited by Katie Boundary; 23rd May 2020 at 02:05. |
|
23rd May 2020, 02:21 | #399 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Canada
Posts: 49
|
Quote:
|
|
23rd May 2020, 02:37 | #400 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,056
|
Meaning it stops being a 3:2 pattern and any given group of five consecutive frames won't necessarily have exactly three frames that should be decimated and two that should be kept.
__________________
I ask unusual questions but always give proper thanks to those who give correct and useful answers. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|