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 > Hardware & Software > Software players

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 19th December 2016, 12:03   #41601  |  Link
Oguignant
Registered User
 
Oguignant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by hannes69 View Post
Yeah, it also contributes to climate change using GPUs like many here which are drawing more power alone than my whole desktop computer system including the monitor... Maybe power is way too cheap in many countries...
It is definitely a question of efficiency. Is it efficient to invest 500% more power to gain 0.5% better picture quality
The trend here is obvious: Spending as much money as one wants for a certain GPU and then maxing the load (90% until frames are dropping). And if max drawing algorithms arentīt possible, throw away the half year old GPU and buying a new one. Reminds me sometimes of the gaming scene, there obviously it seems very important to get 500 frames per second for certain games, for whatever thatīs good for.
I think for the people who are so proud of their GPU handling 256 neuron NNEDI3 luma and chroma quadrupling thereīs some need for the possibility of 512 neuron octopling
No offense, only a way of thinking about that.
Energy is expensive in any country, if you use it as fun and not to produce. I believe the concept of global warming was invented by the Chinese to make the American industry stop being competitive... Does not matter, Al Gore and I appreciate what you do to improve climate change.
I contributed using the Air Conditioning to not less than 24 degrees.
__________________
"To infinity, and beyond!"
Oguignant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 13:04   #41602  |  Link
Neo-XP
Registered User
 
Neo-XP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 140
This is what I use now after a lot of testing with films (on good old v0.91.1 with a GTX 970) :

artifact removal : reduce banding artifacts (medium + high)

chroma upscaling : NGU-Med / super-xbr150 + AR + SR4 (no clear winner here, I use NGU-Med because the edges are sharper)
image downscaling : Bicubic150 + AR (relaxed)
image doubling for luma : 2x supersampling with NGU-Med
image doubling for chroma : Lanczos3 + AR
upscaling refinement : soften edges 1 + add grain 3

dithering : Ordered + use colored noise + change dither for every frame
Error Diffusion - option 2 gives better result, but I can't use it for 4K with my GC (90% load and dropped frames).

To remove ringing and dark halos, I just use this in aviSynth :
SetMemoryMax(768)
SetMTMode(3)
ffdshow_source()
SetMTMode(2)
FineDehalo(thmi=128, thma=128, thlimi=50, thlima=50, contra=1.0)
SetMTMode(1)
GetMTMode(false) > 0 ? distributor() : last

I'm still waiting for a new version to come out to disable image quadrupling and use Lanczos3 + AR for chroma doubling (NGU is overkill for this and Bicubic60 is not as sharp). I will then be able to do an apples-to-apples comparison.

Speaking of comparisons, here is one between super-xbr150 + AR + SR4 and NGU-Med for chroma upscaling :



Edges are sharper with NGU, but the texture looks sharper with super-xbr... I can't decide.

Last edited by Neo-XP; 19th December 2016 at 13:18.
Neo-XP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 13:11   #41603  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,778
can you show an image where lanczos 3 AR is better for chroma doubling than bicubic 60 AR?
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 13:34   #41604  |  Link
Neo-XP
Registered User
 
Neo-XP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
can you show an image where lanczos 3 AR is better for chroma doubling than bicubic 60 AR?
Sure, here you are with Bicubic60 AR / Lanczos3 AR / NGU-Med :



Lanczos3 AR is slightly sharper and closer to NGU.
The difference in GPU load is negligible for me (~1% more load).

Last edited by Neo-XP; 19th December 2016 at 13:41.
Neo-XP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 13:36   #41605  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,778
what chroma scaler was used and can you make a source image?
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 13:39   #41606  |  Link
Neo-XP
Registered User
 
Neo-XP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
what chroma scaler was used and can you make a source image?
NGU-Med was used for chroma upscaling for this comparison.
You can test it yourself if you have any doubts, and post results.
Neo-XP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 13:41   #41607  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,778
well i need the image...
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 13:47   #41608  |  Link
Neo-XP
Registered User
 
Neo-XP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
well i need the image...
All I can give you is the FHD image before the chroma doubling to 4K :


Last edited by Neo-XP; 19th December 2016 at 13:50.
Neo-XP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 13:51   #41609  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,778
ok got it amplifying again...

i mean a very very small part of an 720p image was scaled to 720p
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 13:57   #41610  |  Link
Neo-XP
Registered User
 
Neo-XP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
ok got it amplifying again...

i mean a very very small part of an 720p image was scaled to 720p
The source is FHD (1080p). What you see in my comparison is a part of the resulting 4K image.
Neo-XP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 14:18   #41611  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,778
this is a 720p part of the scaled UHD image in 720p from the "hat": https://abload.de/img/720puhdcutkuocr.png

these image from here are amplified: http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?...ostcount=41614

NGU very high/chroma NGU med: https://abload.de/img/bicubic60art1r0o.png
NGU very high/chroma bicubic 60 AR: https://abload.de/img/ngumedokrt7.png

i'm pretty sure lanczos will not make a difference comparing these two.
BTW you can compare lanczos 3 AR and bicubic 60 AR upscaling to get an idea of the difference in chroma which looks like nothing at all to me.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 14:26   #41612  |  Link
Neo-XP
Registered User
 
Neo-XP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
this is a 720p part of the scaled UHD image in 720p from the "hat": https://abload.de/img/720puhdcutkuocr.png

these image from here are amplified: http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?...ostcount=41614

NGU very high/chroma NGU med: https://abload.de/img/bicubic60art1r0o.png
NGU very high/chroma bicubic 60 AR: https://abload.de/img/ngumedokrt7.png
You didn't test with Lanczos there, so what is the point ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
i'm pretty sure lanczos will not make a difference comparing these two.
Yes it makes a difference, I've posted the result and Lanczos performs better than Bicubic
It is not a big difference, but to quote madshi : "highest quality has priority over anything else".

Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
BTW you can compare lanczos 3 AR and bicubic 60 AR upscaling to get an idea of the difference in chroma which looks like nothing at all to me.
I have already done that, and Bicubic is not a good algorithm to upscale.
Can you show an image where bicubic 60 AR is better for upscaling than lanczos 3 AR ?
Neo-XP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 14:49   #41613  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,778
you are showing a difference by amplifying an image to a ridiculous point.
if you need to amplify this than there is no difference it is that simple.

there is no real difference between NGU and bicubic except the arm where NGU is doing bad looks cut out and adds ringing. but NGU chroma doubling does change the image.

if you really want a lanczos 3 AR vs bicubic 60 AR i can do that...
here you go Cr rendered as Y:
https://abload.de/img/1dup4r.png
https://abload.de/img/24arvq.png
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 15:05   #41614  |  Link
Neo-XP
Registered User
 
Neo-XP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
you are showing a difference by amplifying an image to a ridiculous point.
if you need to amplify this than there is no difference it is that simple.
Sorry, but this make no sense. If there was no difference, zooming on the images would produce the same result, which is not the case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
there is no real difference between NGU and bicubic except the arm where NGU is doing bad looks cut out and adds ringing. but NGU chroma doubling does change the image.
I see a lot of differences between Bicubic and NGU for chroma doubling, even at 100% zoom.

Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
if you really want a lanczos 3 AR vs bicubic 60 AR i can do that...
here you go Cr rendered as Y:
https://abload.de/img/1dup4r.png
https://abload.de/img/24arvq.png

https://abload.de/img/24arvq.png is Lanczos3 AR, right ? because it looks sharper.
I don't know how you did that, but it is cool and you can see the differences better

I don't think you can show an image where bicubic 60 AR is better for upscaling than lanczos 3 AR.

Last edited by Neo-XP; 19th December 2016 at 15:23.
Neo-XP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 15:24   #41615  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,778
Quote:
Sorry, but this make no sense. If there was no difference, zooming on the images would produce the same result, which is not the case.
so you are now going to watch stuff with a zoom?
you can show a difference always so we should get scaler in 100 steps with enough zooming it will show a difference.

see doesn't make sense.

Quote:
I see a lot of differences between Bicubic and NGU for chroma doubling, even at 100% zoom.
this image is not zoom and i can see the difference too. NGU and bicubic are totally different scaler while lanczos and cubic scalers are similar.
Quote:
https://abload.de/img/24arvq.png is Lanczos3 AR right ? because it looks sharper.

Can you show an image where bicubic 60 AR is better for upscaling than lanczos 3 AR ?
to be honest i don't even know but i guess it is and it doesn't matter showing Cr only is a very hard amplifying.
the difference is close to nothing it is a waste of time.
on a normal image the Y channel will totally dominate the image.

high quality chroma scaling is questionable small most of the time but the difference are day night if Cr is rendered as Y.

and about "highest quality has priority over anything else".
chroma doubling was remove from madVR before and the main reason/image example it is in again was a 320p pixel art RGB image that showed a difference (it wasn't really better BTW.)

not to talk about even higher bit deep that could be used and other stuff that may show a difference when we zoom in enough.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 16:01   #41616  |  Link
Neo-XP
Registered User
 
Neo-XP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
the difference is close to nothing it is a waste of time.
Yes, I know, but why propose an inferior algorithm to upscale when you could have Lanczos3 AR with the same performance ?

Of course you won't be able to differentiate them in motion at 100% zoom, but that is not the point.
The point, for me at least, is to have the highest quality you can get for your hardware

Bicubic shouldn't be used to upscale anything at all. It is good for downscaling though (with AR).

Last edited by Neo-XP; 19th December 2016 at 17:02.
Neo-XP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 16:10   #41617  |  Link
Mistery 73
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by cork_OS View Post
"Reduce ringing artifacts" madVR filter only removes haloing, not mosquito noise. So you shold try deringing & mosquito noise reduction Avisynth filters.
I am also interested in reducing mosquito noise as I have to use the plagin? I have to enter in the madVR folder?
thank you
Mistery 73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 17:52   #41618  |  Link
Warner306
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,111
I've come across a user trying to create profiles for 3D and non-3D content. This is his rule:

else if (3D) and ((srcWidth > 1280) and (srcWidth <= 1920)) "1080p 3D"
else if (3D) and ((srcWidth <= 1280) and (srcHeight > 720) and (srcHeight <= 1080)) "1080p 3D"

else if (not 3D) and ((srcWidth > 1280) and (srcWidth <= 1920)) "1080p"
else if (not 3D) and ((srcWidth <= 1280) and (srcHeight > 720) and (srcHeight <= 1080)) "1080p"

Can you tell me if anything is wrong with this rule?
Warner306 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 18:07   #41619  |  Link
cork_OS
Registered User
 
cork_OS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Minsk (Blr)
Posts: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mistery 73 View Post
I am also interested in reducing mosquito noise as I have to use the plagin? I have to enter in the madVR folder?
thank you
I was not expecting I will explain the Avisynth usage basics on this forum.
To use Avisynth plugins you need to install one of numerous Avisynth builds, find and download Avisynth plugin on this forum or avisynth.nl, then manually write Avisynth script on its scripting language and open script in video player. You should expect compatibility, stability and speed issues between particular Avisynth build and particular build of particular Avisynth plugin.
__________________
I'm infected with poor sources.

Last edited by cork_OS; 19th December 2016 at 18:09.
cork_OS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2016, 19:08   #41620  |  Link
cork_OS
Registered User
 
cork_OS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Minsk (Blr)
Posts: 143
Sorry, previous post turned up too sarcastic and uninformative.
madVR include no avisynth / vapoursynth support, so opening video in player through avisynth script is the only way of real-time madVR preprocessing.
In addition to overall avisynth usage complexities, a lot of avisynth plugins are still too slow for real-time usage. So madVR existence is the salvation for end users and I pray for it's further development.
Lack of bitrate (and compression artifacts) is the usual thing for nowadays dowloadable / streaming H.264 content, as well as compression artifacts on older MPEG-2 DVDs (and countless MPEG-4 ASP encodes), and I do not know how to reduce compression artifacts while preserving details in real time.
__________________
I'm infected with poor sources.
cork_OS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling

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 13:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.