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 5th August 2020, 22:30   #301  |  Link
Maxiuca
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolak View Post
Best motion adaptive engines are in XFile (ex Alchemist) and in Tachyon. Both GPU based. Apparently Nvidia neural based engine is also good.
That really depends on your source material. Tachyon is very fast, the quality is ok, but it does artifacts a lot.

I haven't seen what the software Alchemist can produce but results from the hardware Alchemist are just so-so.

If you have the time and the processing power, FrameRateConverter can give much better results.

BTW. You don't have to buy a license anymore, Tachyon along with other tools made by Cinnafilm are now available online and you just pay per minute of processed material: pixelstrings.com

The commercial tools are also useful when you need to downconvert the frame-rate, which the FrameRateConverter can't do directly. On the other hand, downconversion can be done indirectly with FRC and the results are really good.


Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmeyer View Post
I just tuned past a re-run of M*A*S*H on MeTV and they have used optical flow to make it look like it was shot on video rather than film. I assume they had access to whatever "best of breed" is available for professional use. It too doesn't look very good.
Don't assume they have any idea what they are doing or have access to the "best of breed". Most people (technicians) in Hollywood don't even know anymore what interlace or 3:2 pulldown is.
For example, if you look closely at a stock shot at 11:48 mark ("Surigacal Appliances" storefront) in Seinfeld episode 4x22 ("The Handicap Spot"), you'll see interlace, yet it's 23.976p. And it's not the only this one shot (that one I've remembered for some reason), the HD remaster is ridden with such issues and clearly shows that the company that prepared the 2006 HD remaster had no idea what they were doing. Fast-forward 14 years and nowadays most companies and their employees know even less about old formats and video in general.

Last edited by Maxiuca; 9th August 2020 at 20:12. Reason: Moved one sentence
Maxiuca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th November 2020, 18:13   #302  |  Link
hahadoom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam65 View Post
Hi,
How to install FrameRateConverter on Windows with MPC-HC/BE ?
use AviSynth Filter + AviSynth+
https://github.com/CrendKing/avisynth_filter

Uncheck input formats 10bit 16bit for AviSynth Filter.

1080p avs:
Code:
#8 core CPU
global Threads=8
AvsFilterSource()
FrameRateConverter(last,BlkSize = 16,Preset ="Slow",Output ="auto",Stp =false,Dct = 0,FrameDouble=true)
AvsFilterDisconnect()
Prefetch(Threads)
amd 1700x smooth,but image error may occur for changing the playback progress.
hahadoom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2021, 16:19   #303  |  Link
Selur
Registered User
 
Selur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,259
Seeing that there are a few files over at https://github.com/mysteryx93/FrameR...ree/master/Src hinting at Vapoursynth I was wondering is there a way to use FrameRateConverter natively in Vapoursynth?

Cu Selur
__________________
Hybrid here in the forum, homepage
Selur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2021, 03:26   #304  |  Link
binba
Registered User
 
binba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 30
Thank you for developing this script, and for all the optimizations. It's a challenging field, but FRC absolutely seems to be one of the best tools out there, commercial or not.

As Maxiuca mentioned, I ran my same test clips on Tachyon via Cinnafilm Pixelstrings. ~$2/min. is IMO a fair and handy licensing model, and I could definitely afford running some tests. And FrameRateConverter was markedly better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kolak View Post
They cost serious money. Xfile is 10k$. Tachyon similar.
Only $10K for Xfile? My Googling said it was $125K. 🤑
binba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2021, 03:30   #305  |  Link
binba
Registered User
 
binba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 30
Some questions, and my apologies for reading only the Git readme and 40 out of the 300 posts in the thread (including the last of hfrforever’s adventure �� )… in case this had been answered earlier.


1. 10-bit support: No support for bit depths higher than 8bpc? What's missing for it to be possible?


2. Performance: I have a 24-core Threadripper, and use AviSynth+ with all-64bit plugins whenever possible. FRC was barely using 3% of 2 cores. I didn't expect stellar multicore/multithreaded performance, but is that the expected performance, with how optimization is at this point? On average, FRC ran x16 slower than real-time.

I was able to run multiple VirtualDub instances which was nice, I wonder if could process, say, 12 instances in parallel. But it also makes me wonder, can the .avsi be modified so at first there's a scene-detection-only pass, and then many instances are spun to motion-interpolate scenes in parallel? Then stitch them back into the final output file. This could help get around some of the limitations of MT.


3. 30p to 24p
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxiuca View Post
The commercial tools are also useful when you need to downconvert the frame-rate, which the FrameRateConverter can't do directly. On the other hand, downconversion can be done indirectly with FRC and the results are really good.
Um I just ran a frame rate reduction directly... fed it a 29.97p video (via LSMASHVIdeoSource) and ran FrameRateConverter(Preset="Slow", FrameDouble=false, NewNum=24000, NewDen=1001) and got a 23.976p file. AviSynth/VDub/FRC definitely never complained and I didn't see any obvious artifacts. Was I doing it wrong?... Or skipped every 5th frame without noticing or something of that sort?

Last edited by binba; 9th April 2021 at 03:35.
binba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2021, 16:26   #306  |  Link
manolito
Registered User
 
manolito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 3,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by binba View Post
3. 30p to 24p

Um I just ran a frame rate reduction directly... fed it a 29.97p video (via LSMASHVIdeoSource) and ran FrameRateConverter(Preset="Slow", FrameDouble=false, NewNum=24000, NewDen=1001) and got a 23.976p file. AviSynth/VDub/FRC definitely never complained and I didn't see any obvious artifacts. Was I doing it wrong?... Or skipped every 5th frame without noticing or something of that sort?
This depends on the fps reduction ratio and on the FRC settings. The underlying fps conversion routine by johnmeyer certainly has no problems with downconversions. It is the mask creation which can cause errors.

I found 2 possible causes. The first one can happen when the blend routine calls ConvertFPSLimit outside of the conversion ratio restrictions, and the other one lies in creating the artifact correction mask. In some cases the blocksize has to be corrected to make this routine work.


Attached is a fixed FrameRateConverter.avsi which took care of downconversion errors for me...


//EDIT//
For better speed you can try the parameter "DCT=0". Your preset "Slow" uses DCT=4 which in my experience does not always improve quality. The fftw3.dll filter is the major speed block for FRC, and if you do not use it by specifying "DCT=0" your conversion speed will improve considerably.

//EDIT2//
Not impressed with the attachment approval speed...
Here is another download link:
https://files.videohelp.com/u/172211...rter_fixed.zip

//EDIT3//
Sorry, I mixed up some calling parameters between different FRC versions. The current version of the fixed AVSI is now tested to work with the latest FRC v. 1.3. Please redownload...

Last edited by manolito; 12th April 2021 at 18:19.
manolito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2021, 21:22   #307  |  Link
binba
Registered User
 
binba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 30
Thanks, manolito! I'll see when I find myself back in this research, since the main release happened to work quite well for my fps reduction. (I try to avoid using the term "downconversion" since it's mostly used to mean resolution, and some times bitrate, conversions; but not frame rate.)

I do hope MysteryX takes a look at it and possibly incorporates it into the production release, or else it will get buried in post #306 of thread 174793.. Makes you wonder how much Doom9 wisdom & effort gets lost because it's not always possible to read thousands of posts..
binba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th April 2021, 18:07   #308  |  Link
manolito
Registered User
 
manolito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 3,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by binba View Post
...since the main release happened to work quite well for my fps reduction.

I do hope MysteryX takes a look at it and possibly incorporates it into the production release...
Try to reduce the framerate from 60 fps to 23.976...

I believe that MysteryX did not really care for fps reduction (at least he does not mention it in the header of the script). Most users were also more interested in doubling the rate or doing slow motion conversions. Anyways, MysteryX has not been active in this forum for more than 6 months, so I do not know if he will take a look anytime soon.

My fixes just use the "try ... catch" construct of the AVS script language. Probably a little clumsy, but it works.
manolito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2021, 13:34   #309  |  Link
kolak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Poland
Posts: 2,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by binba View Post
Thank you for developing this script, and for all the optimizations. It's a challenging field, but FRC absolutely seems to be one of the best tools out there, commercial or not.

As Maxiuca mentioned, I ran my same test clips on Tachyon via Cinnafilm Pixelstrings. ~$2/min. is IMO a fair and handy licensing model, and I could definitely afford running some tests. And FrameRateConverter was markedly better.


Only $10K for Xfile? My Googling said it was $125K. ��
125K$ is an old price for hardware box which was about always made to order as stocking them was simply too expensive.
XFile gives better quality and needs just fairly good GPU.

Last edited by kolak; 18th April 2021 at 16:24.
kolak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2021, 16:31   #310  |  Link
kolak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Poland
Posts: 2,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxiuca View Post
I haven't seen what the software Alchemist can produce but results from the hardware Alchemist are just so-so.

If you have the time and the processing power, FrameRateConverter can give much better results.
Problem with old hardware box was fact that it had to work in real time. It was a compromise as they could not make it faster (to keep it been realtime), so they had to reduce quality.

It's not the case for Xfile anymore, so quality is better. It's similar to Tachyon or open source tools, but also quite fast and can work over many GPUs.

I did not use FrameRateConverter itself, but original InterFrame. I think Xfile was bit better (if we take many different source types). You also don't have to play with it as it's quite consistent and has not many settings.
kolak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2021, 19:20   #311  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,559
Can someone test: how does RIFE compare to FrameRateConverter?
https://github.com/HomeOfVapourSynth...FE-ncnn-Vulkan
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2021, 19:44   #312  |  Link
poisondeathray
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryX View Post
Can someone test: how does RIFE compare to FrameRateConverter?
https://github.com/HomeOfVapourSynth...FE-ncnn-Vulkan


Better in some ways , worse in others

In general, RIFE is better with occlusions, object boundaries, y-axis rotational vectors than mvtools2 based tools. I use RIFE to solve problems that FRC or mvtools2 has and composite the results

There are some video comparisions and discussion in the vapoursynth sub forum, with "picket fence" backgrounds . Object boundaries are much cleaner, basically usable with RIFE

RIFE is slower, but ok and usable with a decent GPU. Less tweakable , no settings to adjust (you can use 1 version of a model at a time), and it can fail on some "simple" things. You need to combine /composite results to get the "best" of everything

I tested the non vulkan, non vpy, cuda version of RIFE which is supposedly faster if you have a compatible card. I tried the RIFE vpy version quickly , but I couldn't get the .dll to load, I'll revisit it later when I have time

DAIN is similar to RIFE in terms of results, but 20-30x slower. But there are cases where DAIN produced better results
poisondeathray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2021, 19:50   #313  |  Link
kedautinh12
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,153
I think need mix ver of RIFE and FRC or mvtools2
kedautinh12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2021, 20:13   #314  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,559
Are you saying that RIFE could replace frame blending for artifact masking?

FRC is currently using 3 clips. One fast to calculate, one much slower -- merging both based on a mask. And then frame blending. RIFE could then replace 1 or 2 of those?

First, would have to get RIFE to work in Avisynth.

Last edited by MysteryX; 11th June 2021 at 20:33.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2021, 23:01   #315  |  Link
ChaosKing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryX View Post
First, would have to get RIFE to work in Avisynth.
You have always the http://avisynth.nl/index.php/VapourSource option.
__________________
AVSRepoGUI // VSRepoGUI - Package Manager for AviSynth // VapourSynth
VapourSynth Portable FATPACK || VapourSynth Database
ChaosKing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2021, 01:23   #316  |  Link
poisondeathray
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryX View Post
Are you saying that RIFE could replace frame blending for artifact masking?

FRC is currently using 3 clips. One fast to calculate, one much slower -- merging both based on a mask. And then frame blending. RIFE could then replace 1 or 2 of those?

First, would have to get RIFE to work in Avisynth.
I'm saying in some cases it can. Very clean object edges. That's the main strength. Much better than mvtools2 as a starting point in some cases.

But in other cases - not so much, other BG parts of same scene can have problems too where mvtools2 with mrecalculate did not.

You need to mix/match composite versions with mvtools2 / other optical flow to get the best results. I've been using RIFE to fix mvtools2 (and other traditional optical flow) "fails" such as picket fence, or object rotation, where mvtools2 is basically unusable
poisondeathray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2021, 04:10   #317  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,559
in the case of picket fence -- it's basically RIFE vs Frame Blending. Not a tough competition to win.

On a side note; "the highs don't help as much as the lows hurt". Better quality is great; but it's the artefacts and consistency that matter even more.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2021, 04:49   #318  |  Link
poisondeathray
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryX View Post
in the case of picket fence -- it's basically RIFE vs Frame Blending. Not a tough competition to win.
If you force interpolation, the foreground object boundaries are clean. That's a seriously impressive result. Mvtools2 just can't do it. zorr looked at avs optimizer and running iterations and settings, but it looks like it just can't be done with mvtools2

Rotoscoping is the most time consuming and tedious post production activity. RIFE cuts hours/days/weeks of work off


Quote:
On a side note; "the highs don't help as much as the lows hurt". Better quality is great; but it's the artefacts and consistency that matter even more.
And that's why you need to combine/composite them to get ideal results

Different people have different usage cases. eg. For playback, svpflow scenarios, artifacts might be acceptable.

I'm looking for clean interpolation. Not blending. Post work if necessary
poisondeathray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2021, 06:07   #319  |  Link
Milardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 137
I tried to use the RIFE vapoursynth filter for video playback, but it doesn't work.
Milardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th June 2021, 20:41   #320  |  Link
Selur
Registered User
 
Selur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,259
Quote:
I tried to use the RIFE vapoursynth filter for video playback, but it doesn't work.
I would be surprised if any ML based method was usable for real time playback,... (at least on any hardware I know)
__________________
Hybrid here in the forum, homepage
Selur 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 03:15.


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