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. |
21st February 2017, 09:57 | #42641 | Link | |||||||||||
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It's true that the original pixart had a great anti-aliasing capability, but overall I believe pixart 2/3 are clearly better. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Hardware DVD/Blu-Ray players have a processing chip built in which does the deinterlacing. Depending on the chip, deinterlacing quality can vary between good and bad. Better chips are often able to deinterlacing film content correctly, some can even IVTC for 24fps output. How good that works will vary from player to player. Generally, applying IVTC can be very easy, or it can be very tricky, depending on the content. Some content is really 24fps, but just with flags for 60i output. Such content is extremely easy to output in 24fps. Other content is encoded as 60 different fields, either with or without flags that indicate which fields belong together. Yet other content might constantly switch between different encoding modes. madVR's film mode understands every of these variants and tries to produce perfect 24fps. It usually works pretty well. Hardware DVD/Blu-Ray players usually have no problem with the easier encoding variants, but might stumble with more difficult situations. DXVA deinterlacing is implemented by the GPU manufacturer. So it will vary, depending on whether your GPU is Intel, AMD or NVidia. I think Intel used to have the worst deinterlacer, but I'm not sure if that's still true. In any case, DXVA can't decimate. So if you know that the source is telecined film, it's strongly recommended to use film mode. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As I said before, I'm going to redesign the settings once more in the next build, which should then hopefully make it easier for you to compare the algos in a fair way. Right now you need to take extra care that you're comparing apples to apples. Can you please try the following: 1) Either just double the image instead of scaling to 1920x1080. 2) Or alternatively: Double the image, make a screenshot, then load the screenshot into MPC to double another time, or this time to fit the screen. Only if you carefully double check that the processing chains are identical (except for switching NGU and NNEDI3), you're doing a true apples to apples comparison. Also you have to avoid NGU quadrupling right now because you'll not get the new tuned pixart algo for the 4x step right now. You can double check the processing chain by checking the OSD (Ctrl+J). The up and downscaling algos must be perfectly identical, and for NGU every time "very high" must be used. For NNEDI3 every time 256 taps should be used. Last edited by madshi; 21st February 2017 at 10:00. |
|||||||||||
21st February 2017, 10:19 | #42643 | Link | |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
Quote:
NNEDI3-256 > Jinc AR NGU-veryHigh > NGU-high < SSIM1D100 AR So basically you're comparing apples to oranges. |
|
21st February 2017, 15:13 | #42646 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 137
|
Quote:
But I find it very tricky to choose between pixart2 and 3... Pixart 2 has better anti-aliasing capabilities and pixart 3 is sharper and a little bit more natural sometimes. On some scenes I prefer 2 and on other scenes I prefer 3... I don't really know which one to choose honestly.
__________________
Windows 8.1 and 10 x64 - Intel Core i5-4670K (4.2 GHz) - 8 GB DDR3 - MSI Geforce GTX 1080 8 GB - Sony KD-55A1 - Denon AVR-X3600H |
|
21st February 2017, 15:36 | #42647 | Link |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
That's what I like to hear! I've had a hard time myself deciding between pixart 2 and 3, that's why I've asked for feedback. FWIW, I may have found a way to create a hybrid which gets near to the best of both pixart 2 and 3. Not sure yet, though.
|
22nd February 2017, 02:54 | #42649 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,127
|
Have you tried using a lower value of anti-bloating (e.g. 25%)?
__________________
HOW TO - Set up madVR for Kodi DSPlayer & External Media Players |
22nd February 2017, 03:23 | #42650 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 212
|
madshi, does mVR work more efficient and/or use less gpu load/resources if aero is on or off on a Win7 64 bit system with a low powered laptop gpu (Nvidia 650M)? I have been using mVR for years & years with aero turned off but would like to know if turning aero on would help out mVR. Thanks
|
22nd February 2017, 03:57 | #42651 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,646
|
Apples to apples what I've said still holds at least on the Suzuimya image. When checking the FMP image there's almost nothing in it vs NNEDI 64 neurons, a slight sharpness edge is there with NGU newpix3 which was a little surprising, it would still lose out to 256 neurons though. With Suzumiya though, NNEDI3 64 neurons is sharper and by a decent margin too and of course 256 neurons slightly more so. Here I've cut the face away and pixel enlarged by 3x. Newpix's Lines are looking pretty good to me at least.
NGU newpix 3 vs NNEDI3 64 neurons NGU newpix 3 vs NNEDI3 256 neurons. On another video I'm looking at (Rurouni Kenshin encode off DVD) NGU newpix 3 is ever so slightly sharper than NNEDI3 64 neurons, the images are very close in appearance to each other as well. Kinda strange how NGU's sharpness seems to be all over the place in comparison to NNEDI3. Didn't some say it's sharper than NNEDI3 256 in some situations? Last edited by ryrynz; 22nd February 2017 at 05:01. |
22nd February 2017, 05:10 | #42653 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,646
|
I'm guessing preferences could vary depending on the material. I just tested 640x480 content and it looks near identical to NNEDI3 64 neurons but with much better performance..
I'd rather evaluate whatever madshi cooks up next with this mix of 2/3 or whatever..ATM I still prefer NNEDI3's over all sharper image. Having sharper fainter lines is important to me, otherwise you get sharp edges with everything else inside looking rather soft & dull. I think at this point I may end up switching between NNEDI3 and NGU newpix on the fly and observe the differences.. I'm not sure stills will be enough to make a decision. Still I'd rather not sink time into something that's going to change soon. Last edited by ryrynz; 22nd February 2017 at 05:16. |
22nd February 2017, 05:30 | #42654 | Link |
X Cinema Projectionist NZ
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Auckland NZ
Posts: 310
|
I suppose it also depends on the size of the screen one uses....
Everything we show on these pages on a monitor to me can look great, blow them up to my 150" diag scope screen is a very different story. Here is where I want sharp without showing artefacts and noise. I love NNEDI but some material can look soft. Im my experiments with NGU I have to be very careful as its easy to introduce noise to the image if I push sharpness settings... I have no idea what pixart looks like yet as I havent added it. But my movies look a 100% better with madvr and they ever did with my Oppos, thanks to madshi! |
22nd February 2017, 10:22 | #42655 | Link | |||
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If I look at your screenshot comparison I can agree that NNEDI3 is ever so slightly sharper with this particular image, which of course becomes more noticeable if you stack 2 doublings on top of each other. However, is a tiny difference in sharpness now the one and only thing that is of interest to you? How about good quality lines and natural look? If you look at the two white dots/circles in the left eye, in the NNEDI3 image the smaller circle seems to be more rectangular shaped compared to the NGU image. This is more obvious when you view the images in 100% instead of zoomed in with nearest neighbor. Or if you look at the left border of the face: There is a faint vertical shadow right next to the left face border in the bottom 3rd of the image. This shadow looks clearly better with NGU than with NNEDI3-256. With NNEDI3-64 this shadow is totally terrible. Or the hair which "meets" the top left corner of the left eye brow is also much better in the NGU image. It seems to me that the NGU pixart result, while overall being ever so slightly softer in this image, overall has the better looking and more natural lines. Try adding 0.1 AdaptiveSharpen Upscaling Refinement after NGU pixart (after both doubling and quadrupling). The result will look noticeably sharper than NNEDI3-256 while still looking more natural to my eyes. I don't think a tiny sharpness difference should be the one and only factor you're looking at, when judging which algo does better. What do you think? NGU pixart and NNEDI3 are very very similar to each other. Standard/classic NGU is totally different. Generally, NNEDI3 and NGU pixart are very good at removing aliasing from the source, while being rather soft. Standard/classic NGU is much sharper, but doesn't handle source artifacts well. |
|||
22nd February 2017, 10:34 | #42656 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,229
|
Quote:
At least, that's the principle described on Gimp where I believe unsharp originated https://docs.gimp.org/en/plug-in-unsharp-mask.html Of course the user can still add adaptive sharpen etc after, the whole point is just to overcome the softness more than actively sharpening the image. Of course anyone can add sharpening after, but the additional step is seen as a fallacy of the algorithm, whereas if the simple (but very effective in this case) sharpening was applied within the algorithm itself, perceptively it would be superior to other options, including NNEDI3 256. I add a comparison of American Dad, Castle, and the Potatoes of PixartNew3 with Unsharp and NNEDI. American Dad (accidentally called it Potatoes ) http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/201374 Castle: http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/201375 Real Potatoes: http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/201377 Last edited by burfadel; 22nd February 2017 at 10:59. |
|
22nd February 2017, 10:45 | #42657 | Link |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
You want extra sharpening? Simply activate sharpening in Upscaling Refinement. There's no need to complicate things by adding an extra option/pass to NGU pixart when it's already available right now via Upscaling Refinement.
|
22nd February 2017, 11:16 | #42658 | Link | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,646
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Wasn't really judging what was better as such, just my preference and I wanted to focus on what I felt was the most important considering NGU newpix had closed the gap in all the other areas. |
|||
22nd February 2017, 12:56 | #42659 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 380
|
@ Madshi
Can you do something with the black screen and HEVC in dxva(native)?User is gonna install mpc hc,madvr and is gonna be looking what's goin' on with the black screen as it is the default. I had hardware decoder to none as suggested but I found problem with high bitrate HEVC in 4k.My pc couldn't handle it(cpu load,dropped frames) and I lowered chroma even to Bilinear. I can run low bitrate HEVC in 4k with NGU med chroma but for high bitrate it's a no go.It seems that dxva(native) could solve that. At the current state with high bitrate HEVC and hardware decoder to none it's not worth it to use Madvr at 4k.For everything else it's ''godlike'' but I found this small ''hole''. I know that your priorities are different now but keep it in mind please. EDIT: Madvr with bilinear chroma and hardware decoder to none. EVR(custom presenter) with YV12 chroma upsampling shader and hardware decoder to dxva(native). You get this ridiculously high cpu load leading to dropped frames with no real life image quality benefits. Last edited by Damien147; 22nd February 2017 at 13:50. |
22nd February 2017, 15:29 | #42660 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,926
|
Even on older Mid Range 4 Core Systems you can reach acceptable 4K decoding results (if you arent afraid of heating your room with decoding already) and benefit from the overall efficiency improvements depending on the overall bitstream complexity 25Mbits is a good overall bitrate but you shouldn't go higher then lanczos3/4 then if you want additional quality through post.
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :) It is about Time Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late ! http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004 Last edited by CruNcher; 22nd February 2017 at 15:35. |
Tags |
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|