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. |
16th October 2010, 15:22 | #2 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,391
|
It seems the level of degradation is too bad that deblock_qed would be appropriate. However, seeing how very little change there is, I suppose you didn't use it the right way. You should not filter before qed, and you must not resize before qed, and you must not crop before qed.
You can try a plain Deblock(50), that will be more hard on the blocking. You could also try Bicubicresize(104,56).bicubicresize(1024,576,1,0). This will most definetly remove all of the blocking.
__________________
- We´re at the beginning of the end of mankind´s childhood - My little flickr gallery. (Yes indeed, I do have hobbies other than digital video!) |
16th October 2010, 15:55 | #3 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Italy
Posts: 204
|
Quote:
thanks for other answers... |
|
16th October 2010, 16:07 | #4 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,391
|
There's lots of other options to try.
- fft3dfilter - dfttest - tnlmeans - frfun - dctfun - ... There is no one filter that will turn those TV-caps into gold. Removing the artifacts will also destroy even more of the little detail that actually is there, and/or will make everything more blurry. And sharpening isn't an easy task either, since the source already comes along with halos.
__________________
- We´re at the beginning of the end of mankind´s childhood - My little flickr gallery. (Yes indeed, I do have hobbies other than digital video!) |
16th October 2010, 22:10 | #6 | Link | |
Architect
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 57
|
Quote:
I lowered the defaults in an attempt to reduce blurring/smoothing of film sources, but it seems those defaults may have been too low. I have now updated the defaults in the Deblock_QED script to be more effective, but still within sensible limits. I've also replaced mt_LutSpa()'s legacy parameter 'relative' with the new 'mode' parameter introduced in MaskTools 2.0a45. |
|
19th October 2010, 11:37 | #7 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 773
|
Quote:
|
|
19th October 2010, 12:08 | #8 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,391
|
Don't hold your breath, it's not for such bad sources like shown in the OP, anyway. QED is made to mainly remove blocking at block borders, it does hardly touch the interiour of blocks, in order to keep detail. (Back when deblock_qed was born, my point was that most other deblockers smooth too much detail when you try to remove blocking of otherwise good quality sources.)
With such low quality sources, the problem is not only block borders, but also lots of DCT-crap *inside* of the blocks. And again, QED doesn't even try to clean the block interiours.... Hence, for such sources a plain deblock() is more suited, or mpeg2source()'s deblocking, or fft3d/dfttest/tnlmeans. And yes, all those will make such sources more blurry when they remove the blocking. That's how it is. Cleaning bad sources comes at a price. You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs. Period.
__________________
- We´re at the beginning of the end of mankind´s childhood - My little flickr gallery. (Yes indeed, I do have hobbies other than digital video!) Last edited by Didée; 19th October 2010 at 12:10. |
19th October 2010, 12:09 | #9 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Italy
Posts: 204
|
the dfttest , before Sharpen, creates "rings" on color, characteristic of YV12
is there a way to remove them? the GradFun2DBmod in fact eliminates them pretty good, but creates a grain that I do not like sets so: GradFun2DBmod(str=0.0, strC=0.0, temp=-1, adapt=-1, thr=2.4, mode=2) Last edited by byme; 19th October 2010 at 13:01. |
19th October 2010, 14:01 | #11 | Link |
͡҉҉ ̵̡̢̛̗̘̙̜̝̞̟̠͇̊̋̌̍̎̏̿̿
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: No support in PM
Posts: 712
|
Use some kind of unsharp mask in the first place. A decent sharpener or sharpening combo shouldn't amplify +/-1 pixel value differences.
__________________
dither 1.28.1 for AviSynth | avstp 1.0.4 for AviSynth development | fmtconv r30 for Vapoursynth & Avs+ | trimx264opt segmented encoding |
19th October 2010, 21:57 | #12 | Link |
lurkster
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: D9|D10
Posts: 123
|
byme
Maybe try deblocking the luma at a lower strength than the chroma. It might help by: - Retaining more perceived detail. - Less blurring. - Less sharpening needed. (so as not to enhance haloes) Code:
Example: dfttest(Y=true, U=false, V=false, sigma=16) #Luma deblock dfttest(Y=false, U=true, V=true, sigma=32) #Chroma deblock or FFT3DFilter(sigma=4, plane=0) #Luma deblock FFT3DFilter(sigma=8, plane=3) #Chroma deblock note: sigma strengths aren't tuned. Last edited by Usedocne; 20th October 2010 at 01:00. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|