madVR - high quality video renderer (GPU assisted)

[turbojet]

madshi: The frc framedrop issue was reduced from 100's per hour to <50 changing to all flush, still an issue but much less of an issue. This was with a GTS250, i3/HD3000 drops many frames no matter what flush settings or separate device or resize options are, no frame drops after disabling frc. GPU usage can be as low as <10% with CPU usage <20%. The logs you asked for the display changer are on the bugtracker. I disabled frc and use display changer on primary display, there's a minor issue with it changing to 47.952hz even if it already is but I think it has to do with not changing for awhile, will try to get a log. For the secondary display stuck at 60hz I'd like to use frc and probably will once the issue with the display changer is fixed but for now I'm reducing the judder by enabling triple buffer in the nvidia control panel, it's pretty much free performance wise. Here's a sample that looks not so great without frc but looks worse with frc at 60hz, look at the left side of the face of the guy on the left.

Another thing mentioned in the nvidia control panel is AA which is more effective for me than AR probably because of the postresize LumaSharpen which results in a sharper image then preresize but introduces an occasional problem with high contrast edges. Which AA deals with afterwards but AR doesn't have a chance too. AA is also very cheap performance wise while AR can't be used on some things I watch without dropping frames. FXAA is shader based that's very aggressive but also blurs image quite a bit. I prefer 4x SuperSampling (SSAA) which doesn't blur anymore than AR and still pretty effective AA. Could be an AR alternative if you have an nvidia and postsharpening or gpu is too weak to run AR. Intel doesn't have these options, unsure about ATI. Nevermind antialiasing doesn't make a difference in the image.

MPC-BE had an issue moving to secondary display after adding flybar and madvr adding dxva resizing but that's been fixed. Don't know of any other issues between mpc-be and madvr or lavf.

[Dodgexander]

Why would you use settings for gaming in video playback when you can just keep with the custom shaders that are built into madVR or if you need more, use custom pixel shaders in your player.

I'm sure it has been explained already that it's much more efficient to use the specific algorithms.

[6233638]

Originally Posted by Dodgexander

Why would you use settings for gaming in video playback when you can just keep with the custom shaders that are built into madVR or if you need more, use custom pixel shaders in your player.

FXAA (and MLAA, SMAA) is an algorithm that basically looks for aliasing in images and tries to remove it. While it's mostly used in games, I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work for video. Supersampling or any other kind of antialiasing won't do a thing for video though. (except possibly harm performance)

FXAA typically gives terrible results in games though, blurring the image significantly (to the point that it may as well be an upscaled image) and doesn't help with temporal aliasing, so I'm not sure that I would want to be using it with video.
SMAA can give good results though, and I do wonder how that would look with some problematic video files if it were applied before upscaling in madVR.

But Madshi has already expressed that he has no interest in looking into that sort of image processing.

[Dodgexander]

I thought anti aliasing was to remove jagged edges?

Besides, unless you have a monster gpu can you even run this?

With my hd6870 I can't only just about run jinc4 image and chroma with frc on.

Perhaps the same, or better can be achieved with custom pixel shaders?

[truexfan81]

Originally Posted by Niyawa

Ohohoho. You're right, I forgot madVR uses shaders to render the video! I should review my data on GPUs again.


Hm, I have some trailers and I've watched some game walkthroughs that use 30fps natively.


It's like I said, it's an old bug. nev did the test of that. MPC-BE never had that issue AFAIK.

ok just tested mpc-be, seems to work just fine with lav and madvr

[turbojet]

Of course supersampling (SSAA) and multisampling (MSAA) do something with video. Whether it's preferred over FXAA or AR is subjective, some comparisons. I'm not a gamer but it looks like some games are optimized to certain AA methods, eg. FXAA is great in some but bad in most. Custom pixel shaders could potentially be more effective then AA and AR (the only one I know of) might already be but it comes with disadvantages for me, it's very heavy AA is 1-2% gpu load increase, AR is 30-40% increase, 720p30 drops all sorts of frames. AR also does nothing for postresize shaders but AA does, based on the order of things. Any modern nvidia gpu be able to use AA, it's very light. I tried SMAAinject with mpc-be and madvr but didn't have any luck but it looks like nvidia 6xx gpus has SMAA among other more advanced AA methods. LumaSharpen also leaks from the gaming world but the few that have used it seem to prefer it over other sharpeners.

MadVR doesn't really play a part in any of this, and I don't mean to go off subject here. I just mentioned it as an alternative but not a replacement for AR. It's not of much use to people running AR fine with every video and don't use postresize sharpeners.

[6233638]

Originally Posted by Dodgexander

I thought anti aliasing was to remove jagged edges?

Besides, unless you have a monster gpu can you even run this?

That's exactly what anti-aliasing is supposed to do. Regular anti-aliasing won't do anything for video, but FXAA, MLAA, and SMAA are post-processing filters that analyse the final image rather than being tied to 3D rendering, so you could theoretically use them for video. (actually, PtBi does use FXAA for video)

FXAA is built into Nvidia's drivers, so it seems that you can apparently create a profile for your media player (or MPC-HC at least) and force it on. I haven't tried it though.

EDIT:

Originally Posted by turbojet

Of course supersampling (SSAA) and multisampling (MSAA) do something with video. Whether it's preferred over FXAA or AR is subjective, some comparisons.

There's no difference between any of these images, except for the one with anti-ringing enabled. Not even FXAA is doing anything, and there's no way for MSAA/SSAA to do anything to video.

That being said, some screenshot utilities are not able to capture post-process AA, so FXAA might be doing something locally that is not being captured in your screenshots.

[turbojet]

You need to look closer than check the car's trim, headlights, grill, rim, or even the BBC America logo, also different sizes means difference. Moving picture would show the difference a lot more but don't think that's possible. How did you come to the conclusion that SSAA and MSAA can't do anything when it's forced on and showing a difference in the pics?

[6233638]

Originally Posted by turbojet

You need to look closer than check the car's trim, headlights, grill, or even the BBC America logo, also different sizes means difference. Moving picture would show the difference a lot more but don't think that's possible. How did you come to the conclusion that SSAA and MSAA can't do anything when it's forced on and showing a difference in the pics?

There's no difference between any of them, other than the one with anti-ringing enabled. (and slight changes in the dither pattern)
If I layer them on top of each other and use the "Difference" filter in Photoshop, you just get a black image. (i.e. no difference)

EDIT:
AR Difference
FXAA Difference
16xSSAA Difference

I am not doubting that FXAA may be making a difference for you though - I haven't tried it here yet (frankly I don't want to mess around with it - I hate how FXAA looks and have it forced off in the driver right now) but depending on what you are using to take screenshots, post-process AA often won't show up in them.

[turbojet]

There's a difference in the 16xSSAA pic you posted, also difference with avisynth subtract.

[6233638]

Originally Posted by turbojet

There's a difference in the 16xSSAA pic you posted, also difference with avisynth subtract.

The only difference there is noise from madVR's dithering. (it is not static) If you were to disable dithering and take those screenshots again, they would be identical. If it was actually showing a difference, it would be as obvious as it is in the anti-ringing screenshot.

[turbojet]

FXAA and SSAA diff's look pretty similar, can see an outline of the car, frame count and bbca logo pretty well.

I stand corrected, after disabling dither the screenshots are bit identical and subtract shows nothing but a gray screen. Nevermind the antialiasing stuff it doesn't make a difference. Thanks 6233638 for informing of this so I don't waste more hours of messing with those settings to find out it's only placebo and madvr never shows the same image identical twice when dithering.

[madshi]

Originally Posted by turbojet

Here's a sample that looks not so great without frc but looks worse with frc at 60hz, look at the left side of the face of the guy on the left.

Hmmmm... First of all I've remuxed your sample by doing (1) "eac3to blending.mkv 1: test.h264" and (2) "eac3to test.h264 test.mkv". The resulting MKV played better for me than the original. Then I've switched back and forth between FRC on/off. The face of the guy on the left moves with visible judder in both cases, because the scene was filmed too sharp for 24fps to be fluid. But to my eyes FRC on still looks overall smoother, and I can't see the left side of the face looking worse that way. I've tried but it looks better or equal than with FRC off to my eyes, at least when using the remuxed version of the sample.

Originally Posted by turbojet

Another thing mentioned in the nvidia control panel is AA which is more effective for me than AR probably because of the postresize LumaSharpen which results in a sharper image then preresize but introduces an occasional problem with high contrast edges. Which AA deals with afterwards but AR doesn't have a chance too. AA is also very cheap performance wise while AR can't be used on some things I watch without dropping frames. FXAA is shader based that's very aggressive but also blurs image quite a bit. I prefer 4x SuperSampling (SSAA) which doesn't blur anymore than AR and still pretty effective AA. Could be an AR alternative if you have an nvidia and postsharpening or gpu is too weak to run AR. Intel doesn't have these options, unsure about ATI.

Can you please retest with dithering turned off, just to be safe? The reason I'm asking is that I have a hard time understanding how AA could have much of an impact. Multisampling AA depends on knowing which lines have which direction, and this information isn't available with madVR. I'm not sure if supersampling can make a visible difference with madVR, but if it does, the effect should be similar to up- and downscaling with Bilinear. Supersampling makes sense for 3D rendering because it lets the GPU render everything in higher resolution. But that's not what madVR is doing. madVR is rendering the video frames in internal buffers which are not being AA'ed. I think only the final frame presentation could be AA'ed, and for that madVR just feeds the GPU one big 2D texture, in the exact size of the output window. So that means that all supersampling could do is scale madVR's output up to higher resolution and then scale it down again. And I somehow doubt it even does that, but I guess it's possible, not sure. Anyway, even if it does, it's IMHO not a good thing to do, especially not with Bilinear algorithm which the GPU is likely to use for this.

I can imagine shader post processing AA (FXAA?) to have an effect. It might be useful if you have very strongly aliased content. But it might also blur things, so I have my doubts whether it's really useful for the majority of content.

None of these can possibly be a replacement for the AR filter because the AR filter does something completely different to any AA algorithm. E.g. look at the frame counter. In all images except the AR image there's a very clear blue outline around the green frame counter. No AA algorithm reduces this. Only AR does.

[leeperry]

Originally Posted by madshi

That sounds weird. You're not supposed to see any ghosting - especially not at such a high refresh rate, where each blended frame should only be visible for ~11ms! Did you test this in FSE mode? Did the OSD mention any repeated, dropped or delayed frames? I can only imagine that something went wrong somewhere which must have resulted in the blended frames being shown longer than they should have...

Did you try FRC with a 89.91/120Hz display? Maybe it boils down to the way CRT's internally work but I do see very noticeable ghosting as previously reported. To be perfectly clear, I see those blended frames that don't follow the original camera shutter speed whatsoever, so things look blurry(even worse with linear light enabled) and pretty darn hiccupy/unnatural to me

I just tried a 24fps movie in 89.91Hz and there was no dropped/delayed frames reported(using the old rendering path on XPSP3).

Either way, I believe you implemented this feature as a "last resort" solution to the poor souls using 60Hz-only displays and I would presume that this feature fits the job nicely. You even said that a 24Hz multiple refresh rate would be preferable, so be it.

Originally Posted by madshi

madVR can do (1) and (2), but not (3). Doing (3) well is extremely difficult. Doing (2) is like eating cake in comparison. I've said many times in the past that I have no plans to do (3), at least not any time soon. And that has not changed. I don't know what that Sammy does, and to be honest, I don't really care. I don't think you can do (2) better than madVR. So if the Sammy looks better to your eyes compared to what madVR does then the Sammy is likely doing some sort of (3). Or maybe it's (2) and madVR's FRC doesn't work correctly in your setup, for some funny reason...

It would appear that Sammy's FI in "crisp" mode works nicely on 29.97fps@60Hz but rather poorly on 24p@24Hz, boiling down to a matter of hiccupy camera shutter speed I presume...anyway, they also provide a 200Hz BFI that looks great and doesn't come with any visible drawback AFAICS

Originally Posted by madshi

I owned a Panasonic Plasma many years ago

Don't mean to get OT, but I tried really hard to follow your recommandation on plasma....I found the current offerings of LG/Sammy to really lack native CR(2K:1'ish) and seriously considered ordering a 50ST60.......but then I saw a 50VT30 in a pitch black room and that looked just as flickery as those two other brands

Apparently, plasma's use a lot of dirty tricks and as much as I'm barely sensitive to RBE's, plasma's look like a 25Hz CRT to my brain =/

http://www.avsforum.com/t/945089/

Unlike LCD TVs, Plasma TVs flicker. This is the end-product of a design choice to create shading of colors. To do this Plasma panels use a method of strobing the pixels on and off to create the perception of shading of colors to the view.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1119016/

Now I'm considering a return due to this

http://www.tested.com/forums/home-th...lasma-flicker/

I looked around the store when I returned the set, and could see flicker on all their plasmas, all brands and models

Ditto! They all flicker like hell to me.....I now can imagine the kind of trouble people who cannot stand DLP have to go through.

All this said, I finally found an affordable LED LCD from Sammy that comes with 200Hz BFI, 24p support, full-fledged colorimetry settings and not the usual clouding-prone edge led backlit...so all is well

I don't see any bright green RBE's(or anything else nasty for that matter), it's only channel logos that look a tad flickery due to the 200Hz BFI.....but I mostly bought it for mVR Jinc3AR goodness, so no biggy =)

And I rest my case that DNIE looks amazing, especially on a 46" in combo with 200Hz BFI. Many ppl claim that Sammy are the market leaders for flat TV's and that apart from Panasonic the competition lags behind.....that would be my experience as well, providing outrageous bang/bucks value IME.

Originally Posted by madshi

Yes, DFI would be something interesting to play with. However, I'd first need to have a display which supports 120Hz+ and I currently don't. Unfortunately it's usually only ugly TN displays which can handle such high refresh rates. And I hate TN. [..] good displays seem to use even higher refresh rates for BFI/DFI than 120Hz, and they do this internally. So I wonder if this even makes sense to build into madVR.

Well, apparently some/most of those 120Hz LCD's would only add a BF between each 60Hz source frame et voilà...but that would indeed seem low, so maybe they actually run at 240Hz after all.

Anyway, I agree that FRC was meant as a dirty fix but that BFI should be done within the display itself.

Originally Posted by madshi

Both... Jinc needs more memory bandwidth, AR needs more shader power.

Ah! Alright, I'll wait for the 1GB 650Ti-Boost to show up then as I'd love to be able to process 59.94fps content in Jinc3AR as well.

Anyone running a regular 650Ti around here please? What kind of load on SD/720p@1080p with Jinc3AR chroma/luma?

Originally Posted by madshi

Support for MPEG1 chroma placement is on my to do list.

Oh, that'd be sweet! Especially as nev did his part of the magic, your turn now

[6233638]

Originally Posted by turbojet

I stand corrected, after disabling dither the screenshots are bit identical and subtract shows nothing but a gray screen. Nevermind the antialiasing stuff it doesn't make a difference. Thanks 6233638 for informing of this so I don't waste more hours of messing with those settings to find out it's only placebo and madvr never shows the same image identical when dithering.

Well as I said, FXAA might be making a difference, but depending on what you are using to take the screenshots, it might not be getting captured. MSAA or SSAA shouldn't be able to have any impact on videos though.

---

Changing the subject, is there a list of what tags are supported?

In the change log, these are mentioned - is this the full list?

• "matrix=709|601|NTSC|PAL|YCgCo|240M"
• "primaries=709|SmpteC|EBU|sRGB|NTSC|PAL|470M|240M|170M"
• "levels=PC|TV|fullrange|limited|doubleExp|tripleExp"
• "deint=On|Off|Video|Film"
• "blacklevel=%value%", value range [-50, +50]
• "whitelevel=%value%", value range [-50, +50]
• "contrast=%value%", value range [-100, +100]
• "brightness=%value%", value range [-100, +100]
• "saturation=%value%", value range [-100, +100]
• "hue=%value%", value range [-180, +180]
• "frameRate=%value%", e.g. 23.976, 24.000, 23, 24, ...
• "refreshRate=%value%", e.g. 23.976, 24.000, 23, 24, ...

If it is, I would like to request a gamma tag as well. Normally I leave madVR at 2.40 gamma for films, but I've just ripped some discs from a TV series, and it's clearly mastered to be viewed at 2.20 (this is also what has had me using tags in the first place, as I needed to force Video deinterlacing)
I think brightness ended up being some kind of gamma correction, but I would like to actually be able to specify 2.20 rather than +20 brightness etc.

I haven't used tags before - is the only way to use them to put them in the filename rather than some kind of metadata?
Not that it really matters I suppose. Now that I'm using JRiver Media Center, I don't have to look at the filename anyway.

[madshi]

Originally Posted by leeperry

Did you try FRC with a 89.91/120Hz display? Maybe it boils down to the way CRT's internally work but I do see very noticeable ghosting as previously reported. To be perfectly clear, I see those blended frames that don't follow the original camera shutter speed whatsoever, so things look blurry(even worse with linear light enabled) and pretty darn hiccupy/unnatural to me

I've not tried it, I don't have a CRT. But cyberbeing has tried it on his CRT and he reports that he doesn't see *any* FRC artifacts whatsoever at ~90Hz or something like that.

Originally Posted by leeperry

I just tried a 24fps movie in 89.91Hz and there was no dropped/delayed frames reported(using the old rendering path on XPSP3).

So you're using the old rendering path on XPSP3? That might be an explanation. FRC with high refresh rates really needs perfect presentation precision and XPSP3 doesn't allow more than 3 frames to be pre-presented at any time. The old FSE mode even only pre-presents 1 frame in advance. I would strongly suggest that your FRC experience is so bad because the old FSE mode in XPSP3 is just not exact/reliable enough. Try with the new FSE mode in win7 with rendering queues of at least 8 and with also at least 8 pre-presented frames. Really, XP needs to be retired, IMHO. win7 is the better XP now. At least that's my opinion/experience...

Originally Posted by leeperry

Don't meant to get OT, but I tried really hard to follow your recommandation on plasma....I found the current offerings of LG/Sammy to really lack native CR(2K:1'ish) and seriously considered ordering a 50ST60.......but then I saw a 50VT30 in a pitch black room and that looked just as flickery as those two other brands

From what I remember, my plasma flickered when being fed with 24Hz, too. But IIRC (not 100% sure, though) the better Panasonic plasmas accept 72Hz and don't flicker at that refresh rate?

Anyway, please let's not dive into another plasma vs LCD vs OLED discussion. The last one already took several pages and was totally OT. If some Panasonic plasma owner can confirm/deny that 72Hz is possible and doesn't flicker, that would be nice. Other than that please no further discussion on plasma, LCD, whatever. I appreciate it, thanks!

[turbojet]

Originally Posted by madshi

Hmmmm... First of all I've remuxed your sample by doing (1) "eac3to blending.mkv 1: test.h264" and (2) "eac3to test.h264 test.mkv". The resulting MKV played better for me than the original. Then I've switched back and forth between FRC on/off. The face of the guy on the left moves with visible judder in both cases, because the scene was filmed too sharp for 24fps to be fluid. But to my eyes FRC on still looks overall smoother, and I can't see the left side of the face looking worse that way. I've tried but it looks better or equal than with FRC off to my eyes, at least when using the remuxed version of the sample.

I don't have haali instead so can't mux with eac3to but I do notice seeking is slow on the original that was cut with latest mkvmerge. I see problems at 47.952hz as well but it's emphasized with frc, on crt frc improves it quite a bit Could it be my cheap TN panel (with unlocked refresh rates) that's causing the problem?

Once frc disables at 48 or 72 hz this won't be an issue because it'll be disabled on lcd where it looks worse and enabled on crt where it looks better. I also think lcd's are a premature technology and waiting for oled's before replacing the crt's I still have (if possible). Plasma looks better to my eyes but they have a very short life for the price you pay for them.

Can you please retest with dithering turned off, just to be safe? The reason I'm asking is that I have a hard time understanding how AA could have much of an impact. Multisampling AA depends on knowing which lines have which direction, and this information isn't available with madVR. I'm not sure if supersampling can make a visible difference with madVR, but if it does, the effect should be similar to up- and downscaling with Bilinear. Supersampling makes sense for 3D rendering because it lets the GPU render everything in higher resolution. But that's not what madVR is doing. madVR is rendering the video frames in internal buffers which are not being AA'ed. I think only the final frame presentation could be AA'ed, and for that madVR just feeds the GPU one big 2D texture, in the exact size of the output window. So that means that all supersampling could do is scale madVR's output up to higher resolution and then scale it down again. And I somehow doubt it even does that, but I guess it's possible, not sure. Anyway, even if it does, it's IMHO not a good thing to do, especially not with Bilinear algorithm which the GPU is likely to use for this.

I can imagine shader post processing AA (FXAA?) to have an effect. It might be useful if you have very strongly aliased content. But it might also blur things, so I have my doubts whether it's really useful for the majority of content.

None of these can possibly be a replacement for the AR filter because the AR filter does something completely different to any AA algorithm. E.g. look at the frame counter. In all images except the AR image there's a very clear blue outline around the green frame counter. No AA algorithm reduces this. Only AR does.

I was testing this while you were typing, edited my previous post.

I've encountered madvr trying to change refresh rates for a 23.976 source from 47.952 to 47.952 twice but didn't have logging on and C: only has 5GB free and the log grows fast when playing video c: would run out of space. Is there any way to log to a different drive or only log for a few seconds? Couldn't think of a way to do it with batch scripts.

[madshi]

Originally Posted by 6233638

Changing the subject, is there a list of what tags are supported?

In the change log, these are mentioned - is this the full list?

Yes, that's the full list.

Originally Posted by 6233638

If it is, I would like to request a gamma tag as well. Normally I leave madVR at 2.40 gamma for films, but I've just ripped some discs from a TV series, and it's clearly mastered to be viewed at 2.20 (this is also what has had me using tags in the first place, as I needed to force Video deinterlacing)
I think brightness ended up being some kind of gamma correction, but I would like to actually be able to specify 2.20 rather than +20 brightness etc.

Adding a gamma tag might not be totally clear: Do you want to specify the gamma curve the video file was encoded with? Or do you want to specify the gamma curve you would the video to be modified to, respectively displayed at? Setting the first to 2.40 would make the image "brighter", setting the second to 2.40 would make it darker. Also, ideally the display gamma curve should have a higher value when ambient light levels are low and a lower value when there are high ambient light levels. So does it make sense to choose a fixed display gamma value for a specific video file? I think modifying the brightness is the better approach. It would allow you to adjust the display gamma curve to the ambient light level and still see both this special video file and all other files with the right gamma curve without having to change anything manually...

Originally Posted by 6233638

I haven't used tags before - is the only way to use them to put them in the filename rather than some kind of metadata?

Yes, tags are currently only supported in the filename.

Originally Posted by turbojet

I see problems at 47.952hz as well but it's emphasized with frc, on crt frc improves it quite a bit Could it be my cheap TN panel (with unlocked refresh rates) that's causing the problem?

I'm not sure. I wouldn't expect much differences between different display technologies, but what do I know...

Originally Posted by turbojet

I've encountered madvr trying to change refresh rates for a 23.976 source from 47.952 to 47.952 twice but didn't have logging on and C: only has 5GB free and the log grows fast when playing video c: would run out of space. Is there any way to log to a different drive or only log for a few seconds? Couldn't think of a way to do it with batch scripts.

You can start the video and stop it almost immediately. That should keep the log file size down and the refresh rate switching should still be in the log. There's no easy way to move the log file to a different place atm...

[6233638]

Originally Posted by madshi

Adding a gamma tag might not be totally clear: Do you want to specify the gamma curve the video file was encoded with? Or do you want to specify the gamma curve you would the video to be modified to, respectively displayed at? Setting the first to 2.40 would make the image "brighter", setting the second to 2.40 would make it darker. Also, ideally the display gamma curve should have a higher value when ambient light levels are low and a lower value when there are high ambient light levels. So does it make sense to choose a fixed display gamma value for a specific video file? I think modifying the brightness is the better approach. It would allow you to adjust the display gamma curve to the ambient light level and still see both this special video file and all other files with the right gamma curve without having to change anything manually...

I was wanting to override the value for gamma correction, which seemed to make the most sense if you are tagging files with a number:


I have my display calibrated so that whatever value is set there, is what you will get when you measure it.

It is normally left at 2.40 because my viewing conditions rarely change (mostly films in a dark room, and display reference gamma is 2.40) and if they do, I switch between presets on my display rather than changing settings on the PC.
Those presets account for various levels of ambient light by adjusting the backlight and gamma on the display, so they aren't really suited to fix content that has been mastered too dark. (otherwise you have a really bright display in a dark room)

In this case, the show is obviously mastered differently from typical films, and is too dark when displayed at 2.40 gamma. I can change it to 2.20 manually, but was hoping that I could batch rename all my files to set that via tags, rather than changing it every time I watch an episode. (just like I added deint=video to them all, so I wouldn't have to change from my default of forcing film type deinterlacing)

[turbojet]

Originally Posted by madshi

You can start the video and stop it almost immediately. That should keep the log file size down and the refresh rate switching should still be in the log. There's no easy way to move the log file to a different place atm...

Moved it to another hard drive with a symbolic link hopefully it happens again before it grows to 348 GB. Would you be able to find refresh rate change in that big of a log?