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. |
10th July 2015, 03:06 | #31621 | Link |
Kid for Today
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
|
So I just spent quite some time comparing .15 and .16:
-0.00 sharpness is less forgiving, I kinda liked slightly increasing it in order to hide compression artifacts but yeah OK unforgiving is good too and I'm currently sitting 80cm away from a 3500:1 32"....I guess 0.00 would be just fine from a 3 meters distance. -I still far prefer HQ off in .15, enabling it utterly veils the picture to me. Major bottleneck at work, this is a definite no-go(using NEDI/J3AR/CR AR LL/monostatic ED2@8bit on mostly 720p content, of course the constantly dancing noise of dynamic dithering would more than likely completely hide the HQ veil and make it virtually impossible to spot - especially ED1). -I'm well aware that my views towards that nasty HQ option would be nitpicking to anyone on this planet but then asking for impressions between HQ algos in .16 is way worse, good luck DBT'ing them for that matter lol. All algos add that same HQ veil to the picture IME and the colorspace option doesn't make any visible difference to me either. All this said, I'm still extremely impressed by how natural PQ looks with 3 passes and 0.75 strength. I would eventually thoroughly enjoy a debug option to disable HQ in .17 but it actually sounds like NEDI might soon be tossed and SR become a silly checkbox without any knob, so I would also be totally cool with sticking with .15 and calling it a day. PQ is honestly and literally beyond all my expectations and I will happily purchase mVR should it go commercial one day Last edited by leeperry; 10th July 2015 at 06:50. |
10th July 2015, 05:14 | #31622 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 255
|
madshi, can we please get super-xbr for image upscaling as well as chroma upscaling?
Currently, Jinc is the best choice for upscaling unless I use image doubling, which causes a slight delay opening and maximizing videos, and it doubles or quadruples and then scales down using Spline instead of just scaling to the proper size, so it's basically doing twice as much work for no reason. |
10th July 2015, 07:37 | #31623 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,127
|
Quote:
A new linear scaler would be nice, though. Jinc is a little boring after years of use. Last edited by Warner306; 10th July 2015 at 07:40. |
|
10th July 2015, 07:57 | #31624 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 255
|
Quote:
Guess I'll stick to Jinc for now. |
|
10th July 2015, 09:39 | #31625 | Link |
Dopax
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 17
|
Greetings to all:
I use madVR with MPC-HC , LAV and ffdshow ; the latter, because occasionally use some avisynth script. Anyway, I do it on a Nvidia GTX 570 and still have doubts about the correct color space should I use and need your wise counsel. Currently, based on what I've learned here, I've my Nvidia in full RGB mode , LAV decoding with RGB levels "untouched as imput" and madVR in TV levels 16-235, as I'm connected via HDMI to a TV Sony KDL 32EX-500 (Bravia Engine 3) that, if I'm not mistaken, does'nt support 0-255 (although I'm not sure if this TV Works internally the signal in limited RGB or YCbCr) It is correct my config ? Thank you all in advance |
10th July 2015, 10:46 | #31626 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 4,407
|
That is correct if your TV does not support full RGB.
If you want the desktop correct as well you would need to switch Nvidia to limited RGB and madVR to full. This does reduce the quality of madVR because the GPU does a full to limited conversion which damages the video compared to madVR outputting limited range and the GPU leaving it untouched.
__________________
madVR options explained |
10th July 2015, 12:33 | #31627 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 42
|
Quote:
See this post to know more about the differencies. And Super-xBR is almost totally different than xBR. It uses a slightly modified edge detection from xbr and interpolate pixels using known linear interpolators (sinc, cubic, bilinear, etc). The edge detection is just a direction guide. And it doesn't use the corner treatment from xbr, so I can't see how a hypothetical super-xbrz would differ from the existent super-xbr. The way I figured out how to combine the edge detection with the linear interpolation of pixels without introducing artifacts only works when exactly doubling the resolution. The same way as NEDI works. For now, if I try to scale by a non power-of-two factor, something goes wrong. Maybe it's possible and I just don't know yet. It's something to research in the future. Last edited by Hyllian; 10th July 2015 at 13:02. |
|
10th July 2015, 14:03 | #31629 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 69
|
I've never seen the appeal of using an upscaler and then slapping on a 'corrective' AR algorithm. Ideally, a scaler shouldn't introduce ringing in the first place. Maybe it's so popular because the red and green bars suggest that it's the best. Remember that these bars aren't an objective assessment. I'd be curious to see each scaler's wave diagram instead. If you want to try something new, there's plenty of other upscalers. I'm a big fan of Spline 3 for upscaling and Mitchell for downscaling. SoftCubic 70-80 is great for dealing with bad encodes and old SD content.
|
10th July 2015, 14:17 | #31631 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
|
The ringing is very obvious with lanczos/spline and afaik, the ringing filter isn't known to really do any harm.
The comparisons with super-xbr and NNEDI3 for chroma led me to the conclusion that Jinc3 AR is doing an extraordinary job. The only disadvantage is that it can look too soft with extreme synthetic sample upscaling, but this isn't really a realistic case. |
10th July 2015, 14:22 | #31632 | Link |
Kid for Today
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
|
Agreed, J3AR hits the spot for chroma IME. But I don't like a very hard-edged chroma as it then tends to interfere with luma too much and look artificial, I kinda suspect that some encoders process it somehow in order to counterbalance the drastic 4:2:0 downsampling so there's really nothing to dig for IMHO(on live-action movies at least, not anime or test patterns eventually).
|
10th July 2015, 16:34 | #31634 | Link | |
Dopax
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 17
|
Quote:
|
|
10th July 2015, 17:00 | #31635 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
|
Suggestion: Could we have a checkbox for image enhancement to just enable it if no luma upscaling is applied?
This would be useful to prevent sharpening of sharpening artifacts when also using it as an upscaling refinement. I think it would be neat to help NNEDI3 with AdaptiveSharpen, but I don't want it combined AdaptiveSharpen of image enhancements, which on the other hand is neat to fight chroma blur a bit. |
10th July 2015, 17:58 | #31636 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 919
|
Quote:
I would love to have a quality interpolation algo in madvR in the future myself.
__________________
System: i7 3770K, GTX660, Win7 64bit, Panasonic ST60, Dell U2410. |
|
10th July 2015, 18:43 | #31637 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
|
Some more NNEDI3 vs super-xbr doubling test. Sorry about the image size, I don't know how to crop always exactly the same pixels.
However, I could do this in future if someone explained this to me. 720p -> WQHD, Jinc3AR chroma super-xbr 100 is sharper than NNEDI3 64, but ringing gets more obvious and lines aren't as clean. NNEDI3 64: super-xbr 100: With AdaptiveSharpen of 0.2 as an upscaling refinement for NNEDI3, the image still looks natural and clean, but is sharper than super-xbr 100 without sharpen: Edit: as a reference, the original frame: http://abload.de/img/frame6ro6g.png I also notice the worse line reconstruction of super-xbr e.g. with clothes of news speakers. Even though it's "just" doubling, the advantage of NNEDI3 is already noticeable. Last edited by aufkrawall; 10th July 2015 at 18:50. |
10th July 2015, 18:57 | #31638 | Link |
Kid for Today
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
|
Oh you nail it, indeed sxbr rings a lot....I was hoping that lowering its strength and increasing the SR sharpness could be helpful but maybe not, I still wish I could try sxbr37(25 is too soft and 50 rings a lot) on untouched DVD material though as temperature is seriously too hot around here these days to run NNEDI3 anyway. For now I slightly increase the SR softness in .15 in order to somewhat tame down the sxbr50 ringing.
Last edited by leeperry; 10th July 2015 at 19:28. |
10th July 2015, 19:24 | #31639 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
|
Too hot for NNEDI3?
I remember my 780 Ti getting loud with NNEDI3, the MSI Gaming design was too weak for the power consumption to remain silent. With a MSI Gaming 970, you can set a manual fan curve so that it remains close to totally silent, if you don't mind high VRM temperatures and some coil whine. |
Tags |
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|