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 12th July 2015, 00:27   #31681  |  Link
Anime Viewer
Troubleshooter
 
Anime Viewer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyldebrandt View Post
The rear window of the car.
The sample with AS @ 1.5 is ugly as hell. Wax on trees, loss details on fines structures, luma pixels oversharpened. But, less aliasing than ultra SuperRes.

The best combo is not on those samples, uit's NNEDI3 + low set for AS.
I was looking at the image in the forum re-sized size.
When I look at them opened in separate browser tabs at the full image resolution I still like the AS only image best. To me the back car window (including the bricks you see through it), the camera, the roof tiles, the bricks, the stone walkway, the light on top of the cop car, the writing on everything (the car, the house number, the fore mentioned license plate). The only thing that I think may look less real is the bush by the far right house window. Where the leaves on the plant look like they could be more from a painting than actual plant. (I still think the branching/trunk of the bush looks better in the AS only image compared to the others).
Our difference in opinion on what looks good/best is subjective and why its nice to have choices as to what effects we'd each want to have enabled or disabled given particular content.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ver Greeneyes View Post
* although it does add an extra head onto the body of the big dog in the bottom left
haha, I missed the ghost dog in my initial looks at those images.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ver Greeneyes View Post
The bottom image is the original (counterintuitive I know). Check out some of the other images linked from that twitter bot.

Yes, I don't think the Apache license is compatible. But the bigger issue is that it's just a remarkably good looking example* It really does a number on images that aren't composed of animal heads - it's not suitable at all as a general algorithm unless you want to make your videos look extremely psychedelic.
Looking at the dog images, and learning what the real vs modified image was made me think it could be interesting for use on anime/drawn characters to show what a real life counterpart to the characters might look like. Then I saw the other images, and how it seems to like to put disturbing looking eyes on all the other pictures I'm seeing on http://psychic-vr-lab.com/deepdream/ (If that is the area you wanted me to see the other pictures?) Like you said its probably not all that useful in madVR where we want to keep images relatively close to the look of the original source material.
__________________
System specs: Sager NP9150 SE with i7-3630QM 2.40GHz, 16 GB RAM, 64-bit Windows 10 Pro, NVidia GTX 680M/Intel 4000 HD optimus dual GPU system. Video viewed on LG notebook screen and LG 3D passive TV.

Last edited by Anime Viewer; 12th July 2015 at 00:43. Reason: merged posts
Anime Viewer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 00:46   #31682  |  Link
tFWo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 24
Rings of Saturn are gone. Rings of Uranus remain. (madshi don't hate me, mods please don't ban me )

AR filter helps a lot. Alternative color space (acs) is just bad. I prefer algo 1.

But tonight I found out that s-xbr100+ and SuperRes don't like each other. Something is seriously wrong when you use s-xbr with sharpness 100 or higher and SR.

720p source

sxbr100-nosr

http://i.imgur.com/3ujev1b.png

sxbr100-sr-pass1-str1-algo1-noacs (This is what I called dirt in the last post. SR actually blurs/darkens the numbers on the plate.)

http://i.imgur.com/yYiNCzc.png

sxbr100-sr-p1-s1-a1-acson

http://i.imgur.com/TaQ2uOw.png

nn64-sr-p1-s1-a1-noacs (no blurring with NNEDI3)

http://i.imgur.com/YYCEMrK.png

nn64-sr-p1-s1-a1-acson

http://i.imgur.com/TIbk0BD.png

nn64-sr-p1-s1-a2-acson aka Rings of... :P (imagine how this looked without the AR filter)

http://i.imgur.com/Y2a0xuR.png

Last edited by tFWo; 12th July 2015 at 01:53.
tFWo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 00:56   #31683  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
My thinking was that image enhancements should only be activated on demand if you happen to play a source which is overly soft. As such, it would still make sense to run image enhancements and upscaling refinement at the same time.

But all of this is still up for discussion. We're not there yet, though. I want to first reduce all the sharpening options as much as possible. Only afterwards we'll go back to see when to use image enhancements vs upscaling refinement, in combination or not etc...
Ok, I will come back on it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Yes, NNEDI3 is still king. Totally agree there. But it's also still very slow.
With Hawaii GPU, image doubling with 64 neurons can be done for 1080p30 via DirectCompute:
http://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulle...0&postcount=18


Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
I don't know. So you'd be fine with my suggested SuperRes settings?
Yes, I think the values are useful with the current alogorithm.
But I think Shiandow should take a look at the issue Eyldebrandt reported. Maybe there is a connection to why SuperRes seems to become much more aggressive with NNEDI3 compared to super-xbr?
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 00:58   #31684  |  Link
MS-DOS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Any obvious changes compared to the previous build?
Much less ringing and probably other artifacts. The difference is bigger when more passes are used.
MS-DOS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 01:07   #31685  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Yes, but since then I've done some tests and found that I always clearly preferred HQ on. And it's technically, scientifically better, too. And the majority of users seemed to agree, too.

HQ off produces a different look, one that I personally find very artificial looking.
I've had time to read the few pages I missed while I was away and it would appear that the "majority of users" you would be mentioning is actually two guys in this thread, maybe three.

Either way, I fully agree that you are the captain onboard and that what matters most is your own satisfaction eventually. I'm also glad and extremely thankful for the fact that you were kind enough to share this gem of a VR.

I rest my case that I'm quite sure nobody uses the "don't use linear light for dithering" debug option anymore and I would happily trade it for "don't use HQ downscaling for SuperRes" if any possible please.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
You mean softness, not sharpness, right?

If there are compression artifacts, that should be handled by a different filter. Which sadly doesn't exist yet.
I did, my bad. The softness knobs does come in handy sometimes, especially as sxbr50 is a ringing feast so decreasing sharpness and setting softness to 0.01 or 0.02 hits the spot very nicely IME. The latter can also indeed be increased to hide compression artifacts very effectively

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Try adding some AdaptiveSharpen, that makes the image look more like HQ off.
I really like SR's effect on motion-blur, I'm not interested in running another sharpening filter on top but thanks for the advice.

All this said, I'm currently equally impressed by my audio and video rigs and it seems that .15 is the last version of mVR that allows SR softness, disabling HQ and allowing to change the SR sharpness and number of passes(0.65/3 for me). I'm totally cool with sticking with it, I wish sxbr also came with a knob so I could try my luck with 35-40(25 being too soft and 50 too strong) but anyway I'm not interested in mVR with SR having HQ forced and 3 presets only so I might very soon find myself with a lot more free time on my hands...and with no regret at that coz PQ is stellar

I'll remain on the lookout for a version of mVR that will support dimensions changing PS scripts then

Last edited by leeperry; 12th July 2015 at 01:31.
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 01:18   #31686  |  Link
Anime Viewer
Troubleshooter
 
Anime Viewer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post

I rest my case that I'm quite sure nobody uses the "don't use linear light for dithering" debug option anymore and I would happily trade it for "don't use HQ downscaling for SuperRes" if any possible please.
Are you referring to having "don't use linear light for dithering" checked or unchecked? I keep it checked as I see a huge performance hit if I leave it unchecked, so if you're advocating having it unchecked and the option removed then I'm against that. If on the other hand you're advocating having it checked by default with the option to uncheck it removed then I'd be fine with that configuration.
__________________
System specs: Sager NP9150 SE with i7-3630QM 2.40GHz, 16 GB RAM, 64-bit Windows 10 Pro, NVidia GTX 680M/Intel 4000 HD optimus dual GPU system. Video viewed on LG notebook screen and LG 3D passive TV.

Last edited by Anime Viewer; 12th July 2015 at 01:22.
Anime Viewer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 01:26   #31687  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anime Viewer View Post
Are you referring to having "don't use linear light for dithering" checked or unchecked?
I didn't realize it had any effect on performance, I think you would be surprised how much banding this option adds to any gray ramp.......to the point that enabling debanding in mVR and checking this option would be utterly counterproductive IMHO. It might very well also affect your judgment on other post-processing settings.

Fair enough, well there's still some room for an extra option otherwise ^^
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 05:21   #31688  |  Link
Warner306
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by JarrettH View Post
When image doubling, does chroma upscaling happen before chroma doubling?

In that case, would the chain look like...

chroma > super-xbr (chroma upscaling) > super-xbr (chroma doubling)
If you are trying to understand the process from a beginner's perspective and use MPC, the following guide is a good beginner's guide:

http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?...555#pid1843555

http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?...097#pid1849097

Last edited by Warner306; 12th July 2015 at 05:46.
Warner306 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 07:26   #31689  |  Link
ryrynz
Registered User
 
ryrynz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anime Viewer View Post
When I look at them opened in separate browser tabs at the full image resolution I still like the AS only image best.
The 1.5 extreme setting? There's no other image that has AS only enabled. I hope you don't mean that one because it looks absolutely terrible, the contrast it adds to the image alone is enough to gag over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyldebrandt View Post
Here is a sample.
that's the Gone Girl Blu-ray (which is what we can call a very high quality content) upscaled to 3440x1440 résolution in 2.39 ratio.
Chroma is NNEDI3 64, image Doubling is NNEDI3 64, downscaling is CR AR LL.
The SR high no AS image is extremely subtle with lots of very minute changes. There is no significant change here (back up by the image analysis I did) so I think this particular setting for this content is pretty much pointless.

The SR ultra no AS image offers something more substantial but still subtle, more edges are done stronger. I generally like what I see.

The SR ultra 0.3 AS image is actually binary identical to the above no AS image, so you must've goofed it because at the very least there should be dithering differences.

Last edited by ryrynz; 12th July 2015 at 08:10.
ryrynz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 07:53   #31690  |  Link
QBhd
QB the Slayer
 
QBhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyldebrandt View Post
Well, SuperRes is, again, quite better than the previous build.
But it creates a huge amount of aliasing.

Here is a sample.
that's the Gone Girl Blu-ray (which is what we can call a very high quality content) upscaled to 3440x1440 résolution in 2.39 ratio.
Chroma is NNEDI3 64, image Doubling is NNEDI3 64, downscaling is CR AR LL.

Look at the police car, the framing of the rear door.
Not sure what the rest of you are looking at (including the one who posted this) but the last image is stunning. I have been reading a lot of the posts lately, and it seems everyone wants a soft image. Soft=blurry.... I would love a crisp and clear image (with no artifacts, ringing or aliasing of course) And I must say this last image is just that.

QB
__________________
QBhd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 08:17   #31691  |  Link
ryrynz
Registered User
 
ryrynz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by QBhd View Post
And I must say this last image is just that.
I'm not going to get into a sharpening preference discussion, but there's only so far you can go sharpening an image before image quality degrades and I think No SR + AS 1.5 kinda passed it.
Not saying there aren't some obvious "improvements" but there's also a lot not to like with that setting, I'm sure I could find something that suited my tastes better whilst attaining similar sharpness (if I wanted that)

Last edited by ryrynz; 12th July 2015 at 08:22.
ryrynz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 10:15   #31692  |  Link
Schwartz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Ideally an upscaler would work magic. In real life we have to make do with what science has given us so far. If you want an algo which doesn't ring by itself, try Bilinear, Nearest Neighbor or Gaussian. Ouch. Pretty much everything else rings. Even NNEDI3 adds a bit of ringing in some situations. As Hyllian already mentioned, some ringing is sometimes beneficial, which makes the whole thing difficult. E.g. try some frequency burst test patterns without ringing. You'll get very bad results.
True. I've been digging into the subject a bit since yesterday and benchmarked some scalers. I ended up just running Mitchell. I do a lot of picture downsizing with Mitchell and it turns out that it's pretty damn good for video upsizing as well. Probably nothing for the 'sharper' crowd but I find it's a nice compromise.

I've never really seen NNEDI3 ring, but then again I don't see sxbr 50-75 ring all that much either. But all of my image doubling happens to SD content where it can 'do some work', a bit of smoothing is usually desired. Pixel-perfect encodes I leave alone.

I second the user who said he'd enjoy more sxbr options. 60-65 might be the sweet spot for me. Maybe an input field?

Last edited by Schwartz; 12th July 2015 at 10:18.
Schwartz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 11:55   #31693  |  Link
SithUK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 16
I've given up on using a 3D LUT for now. I've tried turning the LAV filter decoding to None (instead of DXVA native), and using the Bilinear chrome upscaler. I tried ticking all boxes in the "trade quality for performance" section. Unfortunately my average render speed sometimes exceeds 50ms on busy action scenes, with 40ms being the minimum for a 25fps film.

It looks like a 5 year old laptop (i5 2.4Ghz/4Gb/HD 4500) is too old tech to manage a 3D LUT.

Fortunately I've sourced a new lamp for my JVC X3 and the colours look ok, so I can live with the setup for now. Thanks for the help in trying to get a 3D LUT to work for me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SithUK View Post
I've had a look and the Ati 540v that I have is basically a mobility hd 4550. Userbenchmark.com has it as comparable to an Intel hd2000.

Should I try selecting all the tick boxes in the trade performance for quality section? The default install has the first half of the options selected already.

The default chroma, up scaling, and down scaling options are already as suggested above. (Bicubic and lanczos)

I tried adjusting the 3d lut bit rate option on the trade performance for quality page to the lowest value of 6. I still had stuttering playback.

Is there anyway to divert the load from the gpu to the cpu?my processor is showing max 6%, and that is likely for only one of the 4 cores.

Is my hope of using a 3d lut with this laptop realistic? (Cpu is i5 m450 @ 2.4Ghz, 4Gb ram, Ati 540v gfx)
SithUK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 12:46   #31694  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anime Viewer View Post
Given both the performance difference and the small difference I see between the two pictures Anima posted I vote for the higher strength with less passes. In my testing I see very little ( on my sources) in the low, medium, high, and ultra settings you noted before. I could see myself using the low or medium settings, but don't think I'd every use the high or ultra settings given how much of a performance hit they are with not enough significant image improvement. (Pretty much the same reason why I choose to use Super-xBR instead of NNEDI3).

Edit: I like the way it combines with image enhancements (not the upscaling refinement version) of Adaptive Sharpening (not sure on the strength...0.3 or 0.5 maybe), but I'll hold back on further commenting on that until you want to talk about combining effects.
Ok, thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyldebrandt View Post
Well, SuperRes is, again, quite better than the previous build.
But it creates a huge amount of aliasing.

Here is a sample.
that's the Gone Girl Blu-ray (which is what we can call a very high quality content) upscaled to 3440x1440 résolution in 2.39 ratio.
Chroma is NNEDI3 64, image Doubling is NNEDI3 64, downscaling is CR AR LL.

Look at the police car, the framing of the rear door.
Could I have a small sample, please? Maybe a PNG of the original Blu-Ray frame might already be good enough, if enlarging the PNG produces the same aliasing artifacts (I think it will).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ver Greeneyes View Post
Like this? (top is processed, bottom is original) Of course there are some problem areas, and there are way more examples where this neural network generates extremely weird things, but I thought its performance on this particular image was pretty incredible.
Euwh, weird!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyldebrandt View Post
The rear window of the car.
The sample with AS @ 1.5 is ugly as hell. Wax on trees, loss details on fines structures, luma pixels oversharpened.
Which is the opposite of what SuperRes does. Which is why I like SuperRes. Although it currently still has its problems. But maybe we can solve them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyldebrandt View Post
To my opinion, i have more to gives to Mathias with this kind of sample, rarer than 480p to 1080p content. I can post hundred of samples
If you can find more samples where you see problems with SuperRes, by all means, hit me! The more samples we have, the better we can work on tuning to SuperRes to get rid of the artifacts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tFWo View Post
Rings of Saturn are gone. Rings of Uranus remain. (madshi don't hate me, mods please don't ban me )

AR filter helps a lot. Alternative color space (acs) is just bad. I prefer algo 1.

But tonight I found out that s-xbr100+ and SuperRes don't like each other. Something is seriously wrong when you use s-xbr with sharpness 100 or higher and SR.

[...] (This is what I called dirt in the last post. SR actually blurs/darkens the numbers on the plate.)
SuperRes tries to make sure that the upscaled image is a "correct" interpretation of the sources. Obviously in this case SuperRes believes that the numbers on the plate are too bright. And if you compare the super-xbr numbers to the NNEDI3 numbers prior to SuperRes, they *are* brighter in the super-xbr image. That's why SuperRes tries to tone them down again. Maybe it doesn't do a very good job at that, but generally that's the concept of SuperRes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
With Hawaii GPU, image doubling with 64 neurons can be done for 1080p30 via DirectCompute
And probably with OpenCL, too. Unless you're stuck with PCIe 1.x or something. Btw, it's not DirectCompute, but PS5.0, I think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MS-DOS View Post
Much less ringing and probably other artifacts. The difference is bigger when more passes are used.
Cool, thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
I've had time to read the few pages I missed while I was away and it would appear that the "majority of users" you would be mentioning is actually two guys in this thread, maybe three.
I think it was four, plus my own strong preference, against only one clear and reliable vote (yours) for HQ off. Yeah, not a lot of votes, but I have to work with what I'm given. Of course I could just tweak the algos myself, based on my own preferences. But just to be safe, I'm asking for feedback. And if the majority vote of the feedback happens to agree with my own eyes, then I think things are pretty clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
I rest my case that I'm quite sure nobody uses the "don't use linear light for dithering" debug option anymore and I would happily trade it for "don't use HQ downscaling for SuperRes" if any possible please.
The "trade quality for performance" options are there to trade quality for performance. What you're asking for has nothing to do with performance. So the option you want would not belong into the "trade quality for performance" section.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post
True. I've been digging into the subject a bit since yesterday and benchmarked some scalers. I ended up just running Mitchell. I do a lot of picture downsizing with Mitchell and it turns out that it's pretty damn good for video upsizing as well. Probably nothing for the 'sharper' crowd but I find it's a nice compromise.

I've never really seen NNEDI3 ring, but then again I don't see sxbr 50-75 ring all that much either. But all of my image doubling happens to SD content where it can 'do some work', a bit of smoothing is usually desired. Pixel-perfect encodes I leave alone.

I second the user who said he'd enjoy more sxbr options. 60-65 might be the sweet spot for me. Maybe an input field?
An input field doesn't fit into the current settings dialog, at least not without a redesign. Maybe I'll add finer options between 50 and 100, but I'm really tired of changing the settings dialog all over again all the time, so I'll probably not do that soon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SithUK View Post
I've given up on using a 3D LUT for now. I've tried turning the LAV filter decoding to None (instead of DXVA native), and using the Bilinear chrome upscaler. I tried ticking all boxes in the "trade quality for performance" section. Unfortunately my average render speed sometimes exceeds 50ms on busy action scenes, with 40ms being the minimum for a 25fps film.

It looks like a 5 year old laptop (i5 2.4Ghz/4Gb/HD 4500) is too old tech to manage a 3D LUT.
That's too bad.
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 13:30   #31695  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
And probably with OpenCL, too. Unless you're stuck with PCIe 1.x or something. Btw, it's not DirectCompute, but PS5.0, I think.
Thanks for that clarification. Can results of DirectCompute even be shared with D3D9?
Problem is the extreme divergent results of copyback performance, some users have far less than half performance of PCIe 3.0 with 2.0, what shouldn't be.
I couldn't use NNEDI3 at all when I had a R9 290X due to this. Since I really like a lot NNEDI3, I'm somewhat tied to Nvidia when I want to use it in madVR.
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 14:17   #31696  |  Link
Anime Viewer
Troubleshooter
 
Anime Viewer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
I didn't realize it had any effect on performance, I think you would be surprised how much banding this option adds to any gray ramp.......to the point that enabling debanding in mVR and checking this option would be utterly counterproductive IMHO. It might very well also affect your judgment on other post-processing settings.
I'm not sure why, but the rendering hit I used to encounter with it unchecked is no longer occurring (perhaps a bug was fixed, or I had a different setting enabled at the time). I'm not noticing any improvement in banding with it unchecked, but maybe the source files I'm testing never had much banding to begin with...


Quote:
Originally Posted by QBhd View Post
Not sure what the rest of you are looking at (including the one who posted this) but the last image is stunning. I have been reading a lot of the posts lately, and it seems everyone wants a soft image. Soft=blurry.... I would love a crisp and clear image (with no artifacts, ringing or aliasing of course) And I must say this last image is just that.
QB
Those are my impressions as well. The last image that was clearer and crisper than the others looked better to me too. Some of the people may be having issue with the strength setting that was apparently used with the last image, and they may view it as overkill since its being labeled at strength 1.5. If the same image was posted with a strength listing of .5 or 1 it might not get as much complaint. Perhaps the same image with a setting of .5, 1, or something in-between would give similar clarity. Regardless I see Adaptive Sharpening as beneficial.
__________________
System specs: Sager NP9150 SE with i7-3630QM 2.40GHz, 16 GB RAM, 64-bit Windows 10 Pro, NVidia GTX 680M/Intel 4000 HD optimus dual GPU system. Video viewed on LG notebook screen and LG 3D passive TV.
Anime Viewer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 14:19   #31697  |  Link
Ver Greeneyes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Euwh, weird!!
Haha, I know. It's kind of fascinating what specialized neural networks can do when given free reign though. I'm sure we'll get to human levels of recognition one day (and it'll stop adding weird eyes all over the place). For a bit more context, there was a google research blog post about their neutral networks here (and this follow-up for the code.

Last edited by Ver Greeneyes; 12th July 2015 at 14:24.
Ver Greeneyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 14:26   #31698  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
Thanks for that clarification. Can results of DirectCompute even be shared with D3D9?
Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anime Viewer View Post
Those are my impressions as well. The last image that was clearer and crisper than the others looked better to me too. Some of the people may be having issue with the strength setting that was apparently used with the last image, and they may view it as overkill since its being labeled at strength 1.5. If the same image was posted with a strength listing of .5 or 1 it might not get as much complaint. Perhaps the same image with a setting of .5, 1, or something in-between would give similar clarity. Regardless I see Adaptive Sharpening as beneficial.
The house, roof and many edges look better in that image, but everything nature (grass, bushes) in front of the house looks absolutely terrible. Looks like a water color / oil painting instead of a photo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ver Greeneyes View Post
Haha, I know. It's kind of fascinating what specialized neural networks can do when given free reign though. I'm sure we'll get to human levels of recognition one day (and it'll stop adding weird eyes all over the place).
Maybe, but NNEDI3 will be ultra fast compared to such kind of algorithms.
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 16:05   #31699  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
The "trade quality for performance" options are there to trade quality for performance. What you're asking for has nothing to do with performance. So the option you want would not belong into the "trade quality for performance" section.
I would also be cool with creating a folder in mVR's folder such as "SuperRes HQ OFF" or something if that's not too much trouble please. You allowed this kind of kludge in the past to force PC levels and a few other things, not the end of the world apparently as it's not adding clutter to the GUI and won't raise questions from newbies either?

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
I think it was four, plus my own strong preference, against only one clear and reliable vote (yours) for HQ off. Yeah, not a lot of votes, but I have to work with what I'm given. Of course I could just tweak the algos myself, based on my own preferences. But just to be safe, I'm asking for feedback. And if the majority vote of the feedback happens to agree with my own eyes, then I think things are pretty clear.
Duly noted, still the middle of summer in the US and EU is more than likely not the best time to take decisions of such paramount importance(to me at least ) when it comes to an option that adds such a nasty veil to the picture IMHO. Talk about one step forward, two steps backwards

That's usually how they do it in my country when they wanna pass laws nobody would agree on, they pass them at night during summer, case closed

Either way, HQ is a complete showstopper for me so if .15 is seriously the last version providing a switch for it then I'm more than likely through with updates till mVR supports resolution-changing PS scripts so I could go nuts and mess with ALL the SR/sxbr settings......any very rough ETA for this please? Apart from "not soon"?

Or maybe I'll get bored of SR at some point as I do realize that it's extremely sharp and I've never been a fan of sharpening to begin with, but its effect on 24p motion blur with HQ off is pure magic to me in combination with monostatic ED2@8bit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anime Viewer View Post
I'm not sure why, but the rendering hit I used to encounter with it unchecked is no longer occurring
If you were using it in combination with any kind of ED, run a gray ramp and you'll both be be horrified and happy to have it unchecked now
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th July 2015, 18:58   #31700  |  Link
iSunrise
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Thanks. Maybe I can add an AR filter to FineSharp in the future.
Extremely interesting idea. Would love to try it out.

But now to my follow-up regarding Finesharp vs. AdaptiveSharpen, which I now had a bit more time to dig deeper, after I did some more tests with different samples.

On a more general note, from the samples I looked at, Finesharp is a lot more uniform with it's sharpening, which especially benefits real-world content, since it doesn't selectively sharpen like AdaptiveSharpen. Which means that, if you want to sharpen the whole image for basically the same value, Finesharp is definitely the way to go. It also looks way more natural due to this behaviour.

AdaptiveSharpen is definitely not a replacement for Finesharp, but more like an additional sharpening effect, which can be beneficial on some content, but (see below) you have to be very careful with higher values.

Also, there are huge (and I mean HUGE) differences when you compare both algorithms using image enhancements and upsaling refinement, more below.

Here's an example, why I would completely stay away from AdaptiveSharpen on the image enhancements tab, no matter what values you set.

Image enhancements - Finesharp 1.0



Image enhancements - AdaptiveSharpen 0.3



I think I don't need to explain the results, they speak for themselves. Finesharp can be used with very high values (I still would recommend not to go much higher than 1.0), while AdaptiveSharpen even beginning from values like 0.1 already rings and 0.3 already rings like crazy and it also adds some very strange look to the image. On game recordings, anime and real-world content, this should be avoided at all cost. For image enhancements, Finesharp is the clear winner on all the content I have looked at and tested. With an additional AR algorithm applied, Finesharp would be very close to perfect.

The situation with the higher ringing that AdaptiveSharpen shows when used in the image enhancement tab, completely reverses when you use AdaptiveSharpen on the upscaling refinement tab. Using the same values from above, AdaptiveSharpen rings a lot less than FineSharp in this tab, however, it still retains that oil painting look that worsens the higher you go with the values.

So, for me, personally, I would stay away from AdaptiveSharpen in the image enhancements tab altogether and only use it in the upscaling refinements tab and also preferably with VERY low values (like 0.1 or maybe even lower).
iSunrise 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 07:14.


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