exist any filter specially done for (deinterlace) flicker

[Didée]

No.

TemporalSoften is, roughly, 100 times faster than TGMC as a whole. Even if temporalsoften2 (very old & outdated, wasn't it designed for Avisynth 2.0, IIRC?) would be some percent faster, it wouldn't matter. Some percent from one percent is ... practically null.

BTW, somewhen lately I made I rough implementation (only POC, not *generally* functional, hence not posted yet) of your faster ME proposal, which also included the transition from MVTools v1.9.x (original TGMC) to the actual MVTools v2.4.x. What I observed was that there's a small speed improvement of "fast-ME" vs. the original "full-ME", but ... somehow, even with "fast-ME", the new MVTools-v2 version was slower than the original MVTools-v1 version ...

It seems a bit ridiculous to put effort into micro-improvements on the script level, when the hosting environment/tools get slower on a macro level ...

[Terka]

yes, i know that the improvement is low.
1.what is the most time consumer in TG? mvtools time could be halved, bob instead of nnedi/edi can be used.
2.so mvtools2 are slower than mvtools1? and what about quality?
3. im using TGMC on DV sources. unfortunately DV has quite big artefacts, so some appear more visible when TGMC calms most of the picture.
but TGMC is far best deinterlacer.

[2Bdecided]

But doesn't MVTools-v2 multi-thread properly? So it could be faster?

I don't know - I find it hard to keep up!

Cheers,
David.

[Adub]

Yes, MVTools2 multithreads nicely with MT. I have seen a speed up of several fps on my "heavy scripts" when compared to v1.

[aegisofrime]

Personally for me TGMC Alpha 3 runs faster than TGMC Beta 2 by adding a Distributor() to the end of the script. I usually get 10 FPS that way when on a pre-rendering job, as opposed to 8 FPS for Beta 2.

[Terka]

how modify TGMC to
use more frames in MVDegrain?

when used filtering like see below on DV source, result is more stable. But im sure Didee knows why he put the other routines to TGMC.

clp=avisource("c:\hj\kamera\avisynth\psi\!Psi.avi")
SetMemoryMax(512)
bob=clp.bob(0,0.5)
bob=clp.nnedi2(field=-2)



# denoise ##############################################################
calm = calmI(bob)
denoised = mo_denoiseAB (calm,bob)
denoised.Sharpen(0.5)
#######################################################################


###################################################
function mo_denoiseAB (clip calm,clip denoise , int "blksize", int "overlap", int "blksize", int "sharp", int "thSAD", int "refframes")
{
clp=denoise
idx = 20
blksize = default(blksize,4) # blksize value (4, 8 or 16)
overlap = default(overlap,blksize/2) # overlap value (0 to half blksize)
sharp = default(sharp,1) # 0=bilinear softest, 1=bicubic, 2=Wiener sharpest
thSAD = default(thSAD,400) # 640didee,200 orig. higher risks motion ghosting and swimming, lower risks blotchy denoising
refframes = default(refframes,8) # temporal radius for MVTools using the "Multi" modification by Josey Wells


vectors = calm.MVAnalyseMulti(refframes = refframes, pel = 2, blksize=blksize, overlap=overlap, sharp=sharp, idx = idx)

clp.MVDegrainMulti(vectors, refframes = refframes, thSAD = thSAD, idx = idx + 1)
return(last)
}

function calmI (clip)
{
t1 = clip.temporalsoften(1,255,255,28,2)
t2 = clip.temporalsoften(2,255,255,28,2)
t1.merge(t2,0.357).merge(clip,0.125)
return(last)
}

[Chainmax]

TGMC's latest version is TempGaussMC_beta1, right?

[Terka]

i think so.

[WorBry]

TempGaussMC_beta1 is the latest/last official release from the author, Didee. There's a modded version TempGaussMC_beta1mod (courstesy of thetoof) that uses the multi-threaded branch of MVtools or MVTools2.

http://avisynth.org/mediawiki/TempGaussMC

Probably both versions can be updated to include NNEDI2, just released:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...28#post1296128

Easy enough to do:

# Create spatially interpolated bob-clips
dbob = clp.bob(0,0.5)
edi  = (EdiMode=="NNEDI") ? clp.nnedi(field=-2)
 \   : (EdiMode=="NNEDI2")? clp.nnedi2(field=-2)
 \   : (EdiMode=="EEDI2") ? clp.SeparateFields().EEDI2(field=-2, maxd=EEDI2maxd) 
 \   : (EdiMode=="Yadif") ? clp.Yadif(mode=1)
 \                        : dbob

[henryho_hk]

I love this function. It works even on those ill-brained footage with mixed interlaced and field-duplicated materials (....though I seem to find ghosting on those field-duplicated scenes.... very occasionally.... It may actually exist in the footage itself... not 100% sure).

[Undead Sega]

Originally Posted by Adub

Typically, the choices between motion compensated deinterlacers lies between MCBob and TempGaussMC. The latter has a nice effect in that it also filters noise, but you can't go wrong with either of these deinterlacers. Just pick the one that works best for your purposes.

sorry for the late response, upon reading all the other replies here, i am still wondering, if MCBob and TempGaussMC are deinterlacers that cant go wrong as u described, what is really the main difference?

as i mentioned before in my previous post, is TempGaussMC 'the' motion compensation technique? i say this because, if i am correct, there are many different techniques that motion compensation has? like on the way it searches pixels and data?

[2Bdecided]

Originally Posted by Undead Sega

if MCBob and TempGaussMC are deinterlacers that cant go wrong as u described

Oh come on man! "you can't go wrong" is colloquial speech - it doesn't mean the result is faultless!

Cheers,
Davd.

[Undead Sega]

Originally Posted by Adub

The latter has a nice effect in that it also filters noise, but you can't go wrong with either of these deinterlacers. Just pick the one that works best for your purposes.

I was only retorting this line here but probably rephrased it wrong or didnt come out right.

anyways, anyone may i ask?

[Didée]

If you expect an "A is better than B, period." answer, then stop reading NOW.



MCBob

Pro:
- "lossless" bobbing, in the sense that the original fields' scanlines remain absolutely unchanged.

Con:
- result is less stable & less compressible than TGMC, i.e. MCBob has more residual bob shimmer in the output.
- instead of field(x)<-->field(x+1) motion compensation, it uses field(x-1)-->(x)<--field(x+1) motion interpolation. Motion interpolation is (much) more prone to fail.
- uses static masking for reckognition of no-motion areas. Though that's good for (really) static areas, there's always the danger that repetitive motion is misjudged.

(Sidenote: MCBob's Shape Transposition Technology is a failed concept..!)



TGMC:

Pro:
- result is more stable & more compressible, residual bob shimmer is (most likely) the most minimal you'll get from any existing bob- or deinterlacing filter for Avisynth.
- uses motion compensation, which is less likely to fail.

Con:
- TGMC is not lossless, i.e. the original fields' scanlines are altered. (*technically* that's a cutback, but it helps to improve the *visual* quality)

Pro AND Con:
- doesn't use any kind of static-masking.
(Pro: since not used, it can not fail.)
(Con: Slightly artificial resolution in perfectly-static areas)

___

In direct comparison of "how much effort" it takes for "what kind of result", I'd say that MCBob is overly expensive.

Personally, in most circumstances I prefer TGMC.

[Dominiko]

I can't understand this complex script and it's way for deflickering. Can it be made usefull for deflickering without deinterlacing(bobing) on progressive frames (from DVD)? And will it be better than simple script like this so called Stab().

[Lynx Pardinus]

What if we combine MCBob and TempGaussMC? I mean using MCBob as the initial bobber for TemGauss instead of NNEDI or yadif.

Do we get the best from both worlds and get a better result or do we get the worst from both worlds?

I have made a try and to my eyes teh result looks better but I would like to know the experts opinion.

[TiGR]

Originally Posted by Lynx Pardinus

What if we combine MCBob and TempGaussMC?

Wouldn’t that be slow as hell?

[Lynx Pardinus]

Of course I am asking quality wise not speed wise.

I know it is slow as hell, I have already tried it. 1 fps to get the MCBob and 1 fps for the TempGauss, 0.5 fps for a T5600.

[shoopdabloop]

0.5 fps!?

so does it produce the results you were hoping for?

[Lynx Pardinus]

I tested it on a video wich still had some noticeable flicker after TempGaussMC and, although it was still not perfect, almost all the flicker had dissapeared.

I also noticed that in some frames where MCBob had better results than TempGaussMC, the new result was closer to MCBob's.