madVR - high quality video renderer (GPU assisted)

[Manni]

Originally Posted by nevcairiel

That software is indeed a bit silly if it can't even access individual channel through any other audio API. Its not exactly rocket science. So my statement stands.
I have actually used REW before though, but its just not something you use every day, or even every week, so its not installed for testing right now. Although they say you should re-measure occasionally, but who got time for that.

As I said, I'm installing a new AVR, I haven't used REW in the last two years, since I installed the last one. Silly or not, Asio4All is the only way to access all the channels independently in REW, so it does bring something that other drivers don't for that software. If you think REW is silly, please recommend another software with the same feature set or better that doesn't need Asio4All, I'll be very happy to consider it.

REW may have some silly limitations, yet I use it because it's the best at what it does (and I'm forever grateful for what his author does). I feel the same towards LAV and you by the way, or MadVR and Madshi, and I never call a well-designed bit of software silly, especially when it's free and it's the best at what it does

Any chance you could answer the question about which windows build you use so we can close this OT conversation? Thanks!

[Siso]

Which one of these 2 options is best to use? http://imgbox.com/epee9wJQ

[foozoor]

Are you going to release a new madvr?

[Sunset1982]

I think there will be a new Version soon. the new displaycal changelog showed a feature which requires madvr 0.92.13 or higher. so i think a new version will be released soon, maybe this weekend or next, but thats just my thoughts...

[steakhutzeee]

Originally Posted by huhn

deinterlacing is not that complicate.

if you take a PAL DVD and you can disable deinterlacing(PsF source...) and get normal results that doesn't mean you can do it with all pal dvd...

maybe i didn't make my self clear but automatic detection does NOT work.

I read [SPOILER] Interlaced video can carry progressive scan signal, and deinterlacing process should consider this as well.

Typical movie material is shot on 24 frames/s film; when converting film to interlaced video using telecine, each film frame can be presented by two progressive segmented frames (PsF). This format does not require complex deinterlacing algorithm because each field contains a part of the very same progressive frame. However to match 50 field interlaced PAL/SECAM or 59.94/60 field interlaced NTSC signal, frame rate conversion should be performed using various "pulldown" techniques; most advanced TV sets can restore the original 24 frame/s signal using an inverse telecine process. Another option is to speed up 24-frame film by 4% (to 25 frames/s) for PAL/SECAM conversion; this method is still vastly used for DVDs, as well as television broadcasts (SD & HD) in the PAL MARKETS. [/SPOILER]

So with Psf material no deinterlacing is needed. So is madvr to perform the pulldown at this point? Speeding the source up to 25 frames?

And can you go deeper in the source detection not working argument?

[nussman]

No madVR is not doing pulldown or speed up.
NTSC has 59,xx fields/s and Pal DVD has 50 fields/s, so for sources with 24 frames/s pulldown or speedup is already done ...

[steakhutzeee]

Originally Posted by nussman

No madVR is not doing pulldown or speed up.
NTSC has 59,xx fields/s and Pal DVD has 50 fields/s, so for sources with 24 frames/s pulldown or speedup is already done ...

Understood, thanks!

[e-t172]

Originally Posted by Manni

Unfortunately I just found one... 390.77 isn't compatible with Asio4All, which is a problem for those of us using REW (Room EQ Wizard). The HDMI Audio out isn't detected.

Originally Posted by Manni

Asio4All is the only way to access all the channels independently in REW, so it does bring something that other drivers don't for that software. If you think REW is silly, please recommend another software with the same feature set or better that doesn't need Asio4All, I'll be very happy to consider it.

ASIO4ALL is not the only "virtual" ASIO driver available. There is also FlexASIO, ASIO2WASAPI and ASIO2KS. You might have better luck with those. Especially the first one, since, well, I wrote it

[bkrieger]

Should “Activate SuperRes filter be used for 1080P movies, and should the Anti Bloating filter be used in downlcaling?

[sauma144]

@madshi
There were a lot of improvements/changes for NGU and HDR recently.

What about image refinements or smoothmotion?
Are there some possible improvements to do?

What about a reclock alternative since custom resolutions are still problematic with old and current hardware?

[nussman]

Originally Posted by sauma144

What about image refinements or smoothmotion?
Are there some possible improvements to do?

What are your problems with image refinements or smoothmotion?

[cork_OS]

Originally Posted by nussman

What are your problems with image refinements or smoothmotion?

Motion compensated frame rate conversion is better than smoothmotion's frame blending.

[Manni]

Originally Posted by e-t172

ASIO4ALL is not the only "virtual" ASIO driver available. There is also FlexASIO, ASIO2WASAPI and ASIO2KS. You might have better luck with those. Especially the first one, since, well, I wrote it

Thanks, REW's documentation (101 guide) only mentions ASIO4ALL. If FlexAsio is known to work with REW, I'll give it a try when I go back to 390.77 if Asio4All still doesn't work.

[Asmodian]

Originally Posted by cork_OS

Motion compensated frame rate conversion is better than smoothmotion's frame blending.

No, smooth motion's frame blending is better than motion compensated frame rate conversion.

Trying to do motion compensation results in artifacts, there are simply too many kinds of motion you cannot predict well. I only want the source displayed as perfectly as possible. Also, trying to use motion compensation to do the same job as smooth motion results in many original frames needing to be thrown away so you end up mostly viewing the new frames with motion prediction errors.

[brazen1]

Originally Posted by cork_OS

Motion compensated frame rate conversion is better than smoothmotion's frame blending.

I agree. I tried smooth motion at 60Hz instead of native 23/24hz to see what I was told I'm missing. The picture resulted slightly like a machine gun was firing the frames. I say slightly because without smooth motion, the machine gun effect is worse. Maybe it isn't noticeable to some but I find it unwatchable compared to what I'm used to.

I don't know how it would affect a 60Hz display? I use a 120Hz and when I turn on interpolation, that creates 240Hz, I get no machine gun effect at all. Smooth as butter. Nor do I get any bad motion predicted frames inserted I'm told I should be getting and certainly not a majority of them or the picture would be blemished and unwatchable to me.

Perhaps some displays use better interpolation processing than others? Perhaps it's a major difference between a 60Hz display and a 120Hz since pulldown never comes into play?

[pirlouy]

Originally Posted by Asmodian

No, smooth motion's frame blending is better than motion compensated frame rate conversion.

I really enjoy the motion interpolation from my Samsung TV. They manage to add better motion without giving soap opera effect (ok there is some judder -not even artifacts- sometimes). I prefer to use 4:2:2 + 24Hz + motion interpolation instead of 4:4:4 + 60Hz + madVR's smooth motion.

[Asmodian]

To each their own I suppose. I use 4:4:4 + 24 Hz without interpolation. Using motion interpolation to take 24 Hz to 60 Hz, with SVP or similar, is the worst situation. As always, smooth motion is only useful if you cannot get a well matched refresh rate. Doing it in the TV is a better place than in madVR.

[cork_OS]

Originally Posted by brazen1

Perhaps some displays use better interpolation processing than others? Perhaps it's a major difference between a 60Hz display and a 120Hz since pulldown never comes into play?

Originally Posted by Asmodian

Trying to do motion compensation results in artifacts, there are simply too many kinds of motion you cannot predict well. I only want the source displayed as perfectly as possible. Also, trying to use motion compensation to do the same job as smooth motion results in many original frames needing to be thrown away so you end up mostly viewing the new frames with motion prediction errors.

Artifacts is a part of ancient MVTools/SVPflow. AFAIK modern TVs has much more advanced interpolation engines with much less artifacts. Additionally, 120/144Hz displays allows to keep original frames while interpolating (60x2, 23.976x6).
madVR is already doing more than just "rendering source as best as possible", so I hope someday madshi will consider implementing motion detection/compensation engine. I think it will also allow to increase deinterlacing and sharpening quality.

[foozoor]

Probably in the 0.93 release.

[cork_OS]

Rather in 0.95.
Well, since I began of dreaming I would also ask madshi what he think about upscale detection and about upscale reversion possibility.