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 > Capturing and Editing Video > Avisynth Usage

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 23rd May 2020, 02:46   #401  |  Link
zapp7
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Canada
Posts: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katie Boundary View Post
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've scrubbed through about 18 episodes in the first season creating TFM override files for each, and while that does happen, it is very rare. When it does happen it's usually the first frame of the next scene that is problematic, and QTGMC handles it pretty well. The effect isn't even noticeable upon playback.
zapp7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2020, 02:48   #402  |  Link
Katie Boundary
Registered User
 
Katie Boundary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 746
No, it happens with practically every scene change.
__________________
If I ask "How do I do X?" or "what happens if I do X?", and X is a very bad thing that no one would ever normally do, assume that I already know this, and that I have Katie reasons for asking anyway.
Katie Boundary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2020, 03:02   #403  |  Link
zapp7
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Canada
Posts: 48
We must not be talking about the same thing then.
zapp7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2020, 09:35   #404  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by manono View Post
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.
She went back through the thread, copied an old script I posted, then proceeded to post mostly incorrect nonsense about it. Why should I simply leave that uncorrected? Sometime in the future someone might think her nonsense should be taken seriously. If Katie copied something you'd posted and then proceeded to post incorrect assumptions about it, wouldn't you reply to correct her?

What did I write? I edited that post quite a few times to change and add things.
Edit: I've looked through the edits (I forgot you could do that) but I still can't see what you're referring to.

Last edited by hello_hello; 23rd May 2020 at 10:35.
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2020, 09:48   #405  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Careful, that's really not how TFM works. TFM doesn't replace pixels. It replaces entire lines of pixels. The TFM help file is misleading IMHO. I thought it only replaced the small areas of the frame that have detected interlacing. Like it made a mask of the moving part and would leave the underlying image. I'm nearly certain that it replaces the entire line for any line that has has detected interlacing in it. So in content like this DS9 stuff it's basically replacing the entire frame even if you're using PP>=5.

It may even be replacing anything between the top most line and bottom most line that have detected interlacing in them.
If you look at the screenshots in this post you'll see I've used a script to show which pixels are being taken from the de-interlaced clip. A simple version would be this:

DeintClip = Tweak(Bright=200)
TFM(Clip2=DeintClip)

Most of the screenshots just show it taking specific pixels, but one of them shows it's replacing the whole frame, somewhat inexplicably to my eye, but the screenshot immediately below that one shows that with slightly different settings, it's only taking specific pixels. I think it may relate to setting the MI argument too low, although I haven't tested that, but the screenshots show it must be replacing just the combed pixels, and probably a small area around them, most of the time.
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2020, 11:27   #406  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by zapp7 View Post
What do you mean by screwing up the cadence?
It means that normally for telecined content you can step through it and see a pattern of three clean frames and two combed frames repeating, but during the fades from one shot to the next, they've been overlaid without ensuring the pattern isn't interrupted. They're both still telecined with a pattern of 3 clean and 2 combed frames, but the clean and combed frames don't line up for each shot during the fades.

This is the sort of fade I'm referring to. I've made it brighter so it's easier to see. For the first screenshot, the shot that's fading in doesn't show telecine combing while the shot that's fading out does. A few frames later on it's the opposite.





Keep in mind though, DVDs were originally intended to be displayed on an interlaced display (CRT), so this sort of thing would display perfectly fine. For a progressive display, and when converting to progressive for encoding, it's a problem. If you simply keep decimating one in five frames for 23.976, one of the shots will probably have "jerky" movement during the fades.
One solution is to de-interlace those sections to remove the combing, and to keep them at 29.97fps. That way they'll look smooth, but the end result would be little sections of 29.97fps progressive amongst the 23.976 detelecined progressive frames, and you have to decide how to deal with it.

A player performing detelecine and deinterlacing on the DVD would probably treat those fades as video (29.97fps) and de-interlace them, effectively outputting a variable frame rate, which would look quite smooth.

Last edited by hello_hello; 23rd May 2020 at 11:43.
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2020, 15:24   #407  |  Link
Stereodude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Region 0
Posts: 1,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by hello_hello View Post
If you look at the screenshots in this post you'll see I've used a script to show which pixels are being taken from the de-interlaced clip. A simple version would be this:

DeintClip = Tweak(Bright=200)
TFM(Clip2=DeintClip)

Most of the screenshots just show it taking specific pixels, but one of them shows it's replacing the whole frame, somewhat inexplicably to my eye, but the screenshot immediately below that one shows that with slightly different settings, it's only taking specific pixels. I think it may relate to setting the MI argument too low, although I haven't tested that, but the screenshots show it must be replacing just the combed pixels, and probably a small area around them, most of the time.
Interesting... I saw a number of jello like rolling shutter sort of artifacts that were caused by the deinterlacing of CG portions that were subsequently avoided with flags=5. It looked to be replacing some entire lines. Specifically in S06E01 at around 105 seconds in the Defiant as it flies toward the camera.
Stereodude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2020, 15:57   #408  |  Link
scharfis_brain
brainless
 
scharfis_brain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,636
@hello_hello:

from a theoretical standpoint it sould be perfectly possible to retrieve a non-jerky 24p decimation out of two 3:2 cadences blended together.
For sure field matching will be broken. But the decimation of a 50:50 blend of two cadences should be (manually) possible.
__________________
Don't forget the 'c'!

Don't PM me for technical support, please.
scharfis_brain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2020, 19:21   #409  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by scharfis_brain View Post
@hello_hello:

from a theoretical standpoint it sould be perfectly possible to retrieve a non-jerky 24p decimation out of two 3:2 cadences blended together.
For sure field matching will be broken. But the decimation of a 50:50 blend of two cadences should be (manually) possible.
I've got to say I'm extremely disappointed at being forced to evaluate my entire view of everything, but you're right.
There's been so much debate about how to handle this source that I've obviously became guilty of over-thinking it, so I went back to basics.

It appears TFM can sail through all the broken cadences on it own, except one. TFM().TDecimate repeats a frame, and I couldn't convince it not to, so I removed it manually.
As it's just the opening sequence, I waited until a fade to black to repeat a frame to make up for it.

As it turns out, disabling MicMatching doesn't even make a difference for the opening sequence as I'd come to believe it would. It does however, help with the progressive section I tacked onto the end of the sample for testing, which by the way is the only thing preventing me from wanting to stick my head in a hole somewhere now, because the existence of at least one progressive 29.97fps section still supports an argument for VFR encoding.

I'll upload a sample in a little while. There's still one section I'm not happy with at 23.976fps, so I'm working on it now.
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2020, 23:51   #410  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,311
Here's the new encode of the opening sequence.

Clip "A" does normal field matching for the majority of the CGI and all the film sections.
Clip "B" is me being pedantic about making the movement of the stars smoother after the wormhole (behind the text). It's not smooth even if you bob it, so that's probably as good as it gets.

The first lot of Trims combine the two clips, deleting one repeated frame during a transition in the CGI, and repeating a frame during a fade to black to compensate.
The second lot of Trims are just used for optional filtering on the decimated video.

I couldn't find a happy that allowed TFM to de-interlace the text as it fades in/out without unnecessarily de-interlacing half the picture, so I left it, as I think it's the lesser of two evils. Personally, I don't care about it that much. Whether it's encoded as VFR or 23.976, or 59.94, I'm now of the opinion fussing over making sure TFM caught all the combing was heading in the wrong direction. Based on the following test, TFM isn't de-interlacing a single pixel in the whole sample. At least none that I saw.

DeintClip = Tweak(Bright=200)
TFM(PP=5, MicMatching=0, Clip2=DeintClip)

Quote:
DGDecode_mpeg2source("D:\VTS_02_1_sample.d2v")

Crop(8,0,-8,0)

A = TFM(pp=5, MicMatching=0).TDecimate()
B = TFM(pp=5, y0=180, y1=300, MicMatching=0).TDecimate()

A.Trim(0,2118) + \
A.Trim(2120,2643) + \
B.Trim(2644,2799) + \
A.Trim(2799,0)

Smooth = \
"""QTGMC(InputType=1,TR2=3,Preset="Slower",ShutterBlur=3,ShutterAngleSrc=180,ShutterAngleOut=180,SBlurLimit=8)"""

Trim(0, 58).MCDegrainSharp() + \
Trim(59, 578) + \
Trim(579, 2971).Eval(Smooth) + \
Trim(2972,0).MCDegrainSharp()

Resize8(640, 480)
VTS_02_1_sample 23.976.mkv

Last edited by hello_hello; 24th May 2020 at 10:42.
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2020, 00:05   #411  |  Link
Katie Boundary
Registered User
 
Katie Boundary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 746
I just realized that, since Joel is putting a GUIDE together and not distributing full video files, there's room for several different AVIsynth scripts and several different target frame rates, with notes on why people might want to select - or not select - each one.

I'd also love to see some examples of what happens when an interlaced frame gets put through AI upscaling.


Oh and I just noticed this article:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExtremeTech
If you don’t want to run content at 29.97fps, there’s another option — re-encode it at 23.976fps. Convert the interlaced frames, lower the frame rate, and you’ll end up with imperfect, highly noticeable jerks and jumps during fast-paced space combat scenes — which are exactly the ones we are trying to preserve. This is known as judder. Judder sucks.
WHOA WHOA WHOA, no. That's NOT what judder is. Judder is when p24 content is displayed on a 60 hz device, or when telecined film content is bobbed or field-matched to p60, resulting in half of the frames lasting 1/20th of a second and the other half lasting 1/30th of a second, alternating, instead of each one lasting 1/24th of a second. It's not noticeable to humans, although some people claim it is. When you take higher-framerate (p30, i60) content and decimate it down to 24, that's called a "war crime".
__________________
If I ask "How do I do X?" or "what happens if I do X?", and X is a very bad thing that no one would ever normally do, assume that I already know this, and that I have Katie reasons for asking anyway.

Last edited by Katie Boundary; 24th May 2020 at 00:54.
Katie Boundary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2020, 03:49   #412  |  Link
Asmodian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 3,960
While I do agree with most of your post I take exception to this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katie Boundary View Post
It's not noticeable to humans, although some people claim it is.
I suspect you expected this feedback.

All the things you care about yet you don't believe this is a problem? Humans cannot even see it?
__________________
madVR options explained
Asmodian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2020, 04:02   #413  |  Link
Katie Boundary
Registered User
 
Katie Boundary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 746
If you're on drugs that have significantly altered your perception of time in such a way that the world around you seems to be moving in slow motion, like Fry in that episode of Futurama where he drinks 100 cups of coffee in a single day, then you might notice it.
__________________
If I ask "How do I do X?" or "what happens if I do X?", and X is a very bad thing that no one would ever normally do, assume that I already know this, and that I have Katie reasons for asking anyway.
Katie Boundary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2020, 04:25   #414  |  Link
JoelHruska
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 77
Per request, here are clips of specific scenes from Sacrifice of Angels from a VOB of the DVD. Clip explanations below. Clips are cut to 10 seconds or less per Manono's advice, unless it made no sense to split the scene at that point. Contiguous versions of two longer scenes (FFE = First Fleet Engagement, SFE = Second Fleet Engagement) are available below. I tried to start each clip with a few frames of padding on each side.

In most of the clips below, there are specific places I'm hoping to achieve better antialiasing results. I used QTGMC partly because it fixed some of the problems I'm going to describe below and would like to duplicate this (or improve upon the initial repair). I'm going to describe some specific problem spots I saw in the 23.976 version of this footage because it's all I have for reference and because I was attempting to repair very specific things in certain cases.

Apparently, I cannot offer a direct download link via SendSpace unless I have a premium account. A link to 13 of the 14 uploaded clips is here:

https://fs01u.sendspace.com/upload?S...TINATION_DIR=5

You do not need to download "FirstFleeetEngagement-Complete" if you download "FirstFleetEngagement-Short1" through "Short3." The complete version of "SecondFleetEngagement" is only available on OneDrive below due to size restrictions. Files are abbreviated as "FFE" and "SFE" on OneDrive after I realized the file names were too long for easy display. The 14th file is "SFE-Complete" and it does contain a few scenes on the Defiant that are not embedded in SFE-1 -- SFE-5.

Alternately, if you want individual file downloads, you can use the OneDrive links below:


A link to the entire directory is here.

https://1drv.ms/u/s!AphTLFRW13WMjk7i...dRO9I?e=3NcPQ3

Individual file links in-line below. Each individual file link will open a OneDrive link. OneDrive does *not* require you to have a login, and you can download by hitting the button in the upper-left-hand corner.

FirstDefiantFlyby:

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjlmk...A7rPM?e=UFmhtT

There's aliasing on both the Excelsior-class ships (inside the nacelles) and the Defiant's angle of attack in this scene is hard to fix. QTGMC against 23.976 fps did a very good job of resolving a troublesome flicker on the Defiant's left "shoulder" that gave me a lot of trouble, but I never had a great solution to the in-nacelle aliasing. Would like to nuke that from orbit.

FirstDominionFleet:

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjlKd...fALn3?e=RgO5tL

At the end of this clip there are three Jem'Hadar scarab fighters visible. All three have strong horizontal aliasing across their bottoms. I'd like to eliminate it as part of properly processing the scene. QTGMC using my repair script against a 23.976 MKV does a very good job of eliminating the horizontal lines.

SecondDefiantFlyby:

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjleX...0nKcK?e=mzSZ13

This is one where I've had trouble with some scripts causing backwards movement in the small fighters that fly across the screen. The background ships are basically fine no matter what you run against them.

First Fleet Engagement (FFE) 1-3

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjlTG...HFrqU?e=mDKlE4

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjlHg...l2aGB?e=dfREGR

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjlYt...lENGV?e=yWZGR5

This scene hasn't been problematic, per se, but it's definitely one of the major CGI battle scenes of the episode, so it's included for those reasons. If you want to download the entire contiguous clip, you can do so here (100MB file).

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjlpF...psSD_?e=gmrWr5

Second Fleet Engagement (SFE) 1- 5

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjljS...ek-we?e=nswJKR

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjlWM...I3x6M?e=DjUO8I

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjlMe...v6E3y?e=mhfNsh

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjlA2...H_ocz?e=YWsefX

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjk8D...98s-w?e=3ehQve

The second full fleet engagement. Major things I'm hoping to fix include nacelle-aliasing and the very aliased lines across the bottom of the Miranda-class vessel's ventral saucer. (SFE-1). The other scenes of SFE have been pretty solid, but are included here for completeness' sake. The SFE clips 1-5 omit the Defiant scenes that take place in-between the CGI shots. The full file, available here:

SendSpace is limited to 300MB, so if you want the full file, OneDrive is the only place to go.

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjlvP...w7gN7?e=qOAQeq


Includes the Defiant interim scenes as well as the CGI scenes.

Trivia: According to the VFX team that built the show, this was the most-detailed fleet battle they ever shot. They brought in tactical experts specifically to help them design the fight. SFE is the arguable high-water mark for DS9's entire seven-year run, so if there was one CGI scene to absolutely nail, this one would be it.

Sisko-On-Defiant

Finally, I've uploaded a clip that I thought might be useful for seeing how DS9 mixes and matches VFR content together. All frame rate references measured using MPC-HC. The frame rate when the DVD is played back begins at 29.97 fps, but starts dropping immediately. By the time the shot switches to Defiant, the frame rate is 23.976 fps again -- but it starts increasing back to 29.97 fps when the Ferengi Nog appears on-screen. The clip stays at 29.97 (at least, MPC-HC reports 29.97 for several minutes thereafter).

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AphTLFRW13WMjl_b...TrpuU?e=5ETmw2

I have thought that this could be somehow related to the credits, but there's a later shot on DS9 itself that stays at 29.97 fps well after the credits are finished. I can clip that as well if people want to see it, but this seemed good for now.

Last edited by JoelHruska; 24th May 2020 at 05:38.
JoelHruska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2020, 04:53   #415  |  Link
Katie Boundary
Registered User
 
Katie Boundary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 746
The solution you your aliasing problems is to use a script that reconstructs the original progressive frames and then leaves them the goddamn hell alone.

BTW, I think you say "antialiasing" a lot when you mean "aliasing". Aliasing is bad. Antialiasing is good
__________________
If I ask "How do I do X?" or "what happens if I do X?", and X is a very bad thing that no one would ever normally do, assume that I already know this, and that I have Katie reasons for asking anyway.

Last edited by Katie Boundary; 24th May 2020 at 04:58.
Katie Boundary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2020, 05:39   #416  |  Link
JoelHruska
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 77
Fixed.
JoelHruska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2020, 05:46   #417  |  Link
JoelHruska
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 77
Quote:
When you take higher-framerate (p30, i60) content and decimate it down to 24, that's called a "war crime".
While it's obvious that you are far from the only person to have this opinion, I would prefer a better phrase when discussing 23.976 fps playback of p30/i60 fps footage than "war crime." Is there a specific term?
JoelHruska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2020, 06:15   #418  |  Link
Katie Boundary
Registered User
 
Katie Boundary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 746
Kay, looks good

I've been running more tests and while I still think that both the interpolation and blend variations of my script gives better results than QTGMC in the vast majority of frames, there are still a few interlaced frames where even a straight blending script with no interlacing-detection (treats all frames and pixels as interlaced), no resharpening, and no other fancy stuff...

Code:
A=Tfm(field=1,mode=0,slow=2,pp=2,mchroma=false,cthresh=-1,micmatching=0)
B=Tfm(field=0,mode=0,slow=2,pp=2,mchroma=false,cthresh=-1,micmatching=0)
interleave(A,B)
...STILL doesn't fully deinterlace:



...whereas QTGMC does:



Although this doesn't justify switching over to straight QTGMC, it does make me think that the best script for DS9 specifically might be a variation of my method that incorporates QTGMC. And because "lossless" QTGMC preserves the aberrant field order of the title at the beginning of the opening credits, but "normal" QTGMC smooths it out, this hybrid method would need to incorporate the "lossy" version of QTGMC. So, when you get a chance, try...

Code:
A=qtgmc().selecteven()
B=qtgmc().selectodd()
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)
A few fields around each scene change will get QTGMCed, but most of the frames in each shot will be perfectly restored and then left alone. For the opening credits, the comet's tail will be preserved perfectly because that part is encoded on the DVD as 24 fps progressive, but the rest of the opening credits will be 100% QTGMCed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
While it's obvious that you are far from the only person to have this opinion, I would prefer a better phrase when discussing 23.976 fps playback of p30/i60 fps footage than "war crime." Is there a specific term?
"looking like unmitigated shit" is another good one.
__________________
If I ask "How do I do X?" or "what happens if I do X?", and X is a very bad thing that no one would ever normally do, assume that I already know this, and that I have Katie reasons for asking anyway.
Katie Boundary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2020, 09:42   #419  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
Per request, here are clips of specific scenes from Sacrifice of Angels from a VOB of the DVD. Clip explanations below. Clips are cut to 10 seconds or less per Manono's advice, unless it made no sense to split the scene at that point. Contiguous versions of two longer scenes (FFE = First Fleet Engagement, SFE = Second Fleet Engagement) are available below. I tried to start each clip with a few frames of padding on each side.
Are there any samples of the original video amongst that lot, or is it all re-encoded?
I gather it's lossless but it's encoded as progressive rather than interlaced, I don't know if that makes a difference when it's lossless, in respect to the chroma being upsampled properly. Not to worry though...

I only gave two of them a spin. Pure telecine as far as I can see.
You probably should take Katie's advice and use a method that reconstructs the original progressive frames and then leaves them the hell alone. Or are you too far down the rabbit hole with the 59.94fps idea?

The only reason I went the VFR route is because someone linked to a sample of 29.97fps progressive CGI, and that's the way I'd deal with mixed content, but if it's all telecined except for the odd episode, you can handle those differently when you find them. I gave the CGI the QTGMC treatment, and the film section the MCDegrainSharp treatment, but that was after the frames were reconstructed. If you come across a problem in an episode, cross that bridge when it happens.

zapp7 seem to be happy with detelecining most of it.

I linked to a CFR sample of the opening CGI section earlier. If it's the biggest problem in most episodes, you'll probably get efficient at creating scripts that'll handle it correctly if you want it to be perfect (the latest encode looks good to me at 23.976fps), but the remainder of each episode might mostly require nothing other than field matching and decimation.

samples.zip

Edit: I forgot to resize the SFE-1 encode, it's just cropped.

Katie,
If the script you posted is any indication, you're fussing about combing while using the wrong field order for TFM again. At least for the sample you took the screenshots from.

Last edited by hello_hello; 24th May 2020 at 09:57.
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2020, 10:18   #420  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,311
Damn, I just noticed an oddity in the film section towards the end of the Sisko-on-Defiant sample. It's possibly a field order thing that wouldn't have happened working with the original video, but here's the fixed version.

Sisko-on-Defiant take 2.mkv

Quote:
LWLibavVideoSource("D:\Sisko-on-Defiant.mkv.lwi")
AssumeTFF()
Crop(8,0,-8,0)

TFM(pp=5, micmatching=0).TDecimate()

Trim(0,168).QTGMC(InputType=1, Preset="slower") + \
Trim(169,0).MCDegrainSharp()
Spline36Resize(640,480)
I'm not sure about MCDegrainSharp() for the film sections in every episode. That one seems a bit noisy and it's leaving too much behind for my taste, but anyway....
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 15:18.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.