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 5th June 2015, 23:20   #30781  |  Link
krille
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS-DOS View Post
Do you have a trade option "don't render frames when fade in\out is detected" checked ?
Oh, great, that solved the problem! Thanks a lot MS-DOS!
krille is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 00:02   #30782  |  Link
XMonarchY
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Now that we moved on to Image Refinement, may I ask - what exactly is the different between LumaSharpen, FineSharp, and SuperRes? I assume they deal with increasing sharpness, which is a bit odd because AFAIK madVR was all about making the image as soft as possible. I guess overwhelming popular requests for these options made them possible, especially the LumaSharpen option.

I tested default settings LumaSharpen (Image Enhancement) and default settings FineSharp (Image Enhancement) with both HQ and MQ content, but I did not like either at all. Both features made dithering, noise, blockiness, banding, or artifacts more obvious/visible/emphasized in MQ, LQ, and even moderately HQ content. Its like these settings canceled all the madVR's image improvement through softness. LumaSharpen and FineSharp were only helpful in absolute best HQ content (full BD's, not rips). I have not tested LumaSharpen and FineSharp Upscaling Refinement.

SuperRes as a Chroma Upscaling filter and as Image Refinement option seem to improve overall image quality, making it slightly sharper, but without emphasizing the blockiness, noise, dithering, artifacts, or banding in LQ, MQ, and HQ content. I wish I knew exactly what SuperRes was doing (without getting too technical) so I could look for those specific effects.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 00:09   #30783  |  Link
Shiandow
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by XMonarchY View Post
SuperRes as a Chroma Upscaling filter and as Image Refinement option seem to improve overall image quality, making it slightly sharper, but without emphasizing the blockiness, noise, dithering, artifacts, or banding in LQ, MQ, and HQ content. I wish I knew exactly what SuperRes was doing (without getting too technical) so I could look for those specific effects.
I commented on that a while back, but it might be a good idea to repeat it here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiandow View Post
There have been some changes to the algorithm, although the general idea has remained more or less the same. The steps now look more like the following:
  1. Calculate an initial guess (using a different upscaler)
  2. Downscale and calculate differences with original image.
  3. Scale those differences to the final size
  4. Improve guess by:
    • Softening the image
    • Subtracting differences with the original image
    • Sharpening (optional)
    • Removing aliasing (optional)
    • Removing ringing (optional)
  5. Repeat steps 2-4 several times.
It basically tries to bring the upscaled image closer to some "ideal" image with no aliasing / ringing / blurriness, while remaining faithful to the original image.
Shiandow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 01:33   #30784  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiandow View Post
It basically tries to bring the upscaled image closer to some "ideal" image with no aliasing / ringing / blurriness, while remaining faithful to the original image.
and that works pretty awesome.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 05:05   #30785  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,559
SuperRes is very expensive on the GPU so I definitely can't run it more than once. For me, it's only working on 288p videos with 1 pass, and I have to say I love the result. it greatly enhances the image of low-quality videos. If quadrupling resolution, would it be better to run SuperRes twice with 1 pass or once with 2 passes?

The TV already has image enhancing features so I'm disabling those when the output is the TV, except SuperRes for 288p videos.

When displaying on the laptop screen, I like LumaSharpen but find FineSharp too strong. This is useful for low quality videos and low quality videos often have bad artifacts. Sharpening amplifies the artifacts.

Again, I love SuperRes but it is expensive to run, and somehow it is much more expensive than it should on 480p videos.

Last edited by MysteryX; 24th June 2015 at 06:06.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 06:09   #30786  |  Link
James Freeman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 919
With 88.11 mpc-hc the queues emptying and will NOT filling back up after I seek, thus the videos stuttering after seeking.
I need to pause or exit full screen (not FSE) to "refresh" the queues.

EDIT:
Sometimes it happen all by itself without seeking.

EDIT2:
*On secondary screen only!
__________________
System: i7 3770K, GTX660, Win7 64bit, Panasonic ST60, Dell U2410.

Last edited by James Freeman; 7th June 2015 at 04:09.
James Freeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 06:40   #30787  |  Link
mogli
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogli View Post
[...] However since v0.88.x with D3D11 activated (and frame for every VSync off) very rarely randomly in a movie drops and glitches start to occur at about 20 per second [...]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogli View Post
Some more with 'present a frame for every VSync' turned off:
Found a NTSC file which reliably causes constant glitches only in FSE mode [...]
As of v0.88.11 this doesn't happen anymore both with 'present a frame for every VSync' on or off. This applies both to the mentioned NTSC file and also to it happening seemingly randomly on other material.
So whatever you did mashi, thanks for that!
mogli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 13:38   #30788  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
here my founds about superres so far.

superres can make bilinear into a ok resizer.

i never saw a picture where anti ring even at 1.0 would harm the picture. i totally love it!

anti aliasing can create out of place pixels when set over 0.30. i'm not a huge fan of it.

finesharp:

i don't like the results of it. it is simply not neutral on my test even at weak strength.

lumasharpen:

lumasharpen can create ringing/holoing when the radius is over 1.0. but i think it is very useful at radius 1.0.

i currently use these settings upscale refinement:

LumaSharpen:

S=0.70 C=0.035 R=1.0 no limiter

SuperRes
passes 1 quality medium (i never saw any benefits from high)
strenght 0.40 sharpness 0.25 softness 0.25 anti-aliasing 0.20 anti-ringing 1.00

upscaler is currently jinc 3 LL AR.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 16:14   #30789  |  Link
cyberscott
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 92
My thoughts about SuperRes and LumaSharpen under upscaling refinement.
LumaSharpen at default setting works real well , gives video a bit more pop.
SuperRes works well, especially with upscaled standard definition vidoes and I currently have it set to medium with the following...:
passes 2, strength .40, sharpenss, .25, anti-aliasing .25 and anti-ringing at 1.0
Setting SuperRes to high shows a slight improvement in picture quality but at a high cost of around 10-12 milliseconds in rendering time so I just keep it at medium.
cyberscott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 16:28   #30790  |  Link
XMonarchY
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
here my founds about superres so far.

superres can make bilinear into a ok resizer.

i never saw a picture where anti ring even at 1.0 would harm the picture. i totally love it!

anti aliasing can create out of place pixels when set over 0.30. i'm not a huge fan of it.

finesharp:

i don't like the results of it. it is simply not neutral on my test even at weak strength.

lumasharpen:

lumasharpen can create ringing/holoing when the radius is over 1.0. but i think it is very useful at radius 1.0.

i currently use these settings upscale refinement:

LumaSharpen:

S=0.70 C=0.035 R=1.0 no limiter

SuperRes
passes 1 quality medium (i never saw any benefits from high)
strenght 0.40 sharpness 0.25 softness 0.25 anti-aliasing 0.20 anti-ringing 1.00

upscaler is currently jinc 3 LL AR.
Is that for LQ, MQ, HQ, or full BD-quality content? LumaSharpen with LQ and MQ content makes blockiness more obvious to me, so I thought it would be useful if we provided feedback for different quality content.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 16:55   #30791  |  Link
MS-DOS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 77
For AMD users who have slower NNEDI3 with the drivers newer than 13.12, put these two dlls in your MPC-HC x64 folder and see. They're from 13.12 package I stored before moving from it to 15.5 beta.
MS-DOS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 17:25   #30792  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by XMonarchY View Post
Is that for LQ, MQ, HQ, or full BD-quality content? LumaSharpen with LQ and MQ content makes blockiness more obvious to me, so I thought it would be useful if we provided feedback for different quality content.
i'm currently looking for general issues like anti aliasing at 1.5 or things like that.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 18:05   #30793  |  Link
QBhd
QB the Slayer
 
QBhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS-DOS View Post
For AMD users who have slower NNEDI3 with the drivers newer than 13.12, put these two dlls in your MPC-HC x64 folder and see. They're from 13.12 package I stored before moving from it to 15.5 beta.
Could you just list the dll's so I can test on my own... I don't download such files

QB
__________________
QBhd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 18:25   #30794  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,559
I honestly am not noticing much debanding in the videos.

Shiandow's debanding algorithm seemed more to be an image enhancement than a debanding algorithm. It was doing a pretty good job without being expensive, but I'm not sure what it was actually doing.

Shiandow produces a slightly sharper image in a way that looks more natural and neutral than FineSharp.

Last edited by MysteryX; 24th June 2015 at 06:05.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 18:30   #30795  |  Link
noee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 530
Quote:
Originally Posted by QBhd View Post
Could you just list the dll's so I can test on my own... I don't download such files

QB
amdocl64.dll
opencl.dll
__________________
Win7Ult || RX560/4G || Ryzen 5
noee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 18:51   #30796  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryX View Post
I honestly am not noticing much debanding in the videos.

Shiandow's debanding algorithm seemed more to be an image enhancement than a debanding algorithm. It was doing a pretty good job without being expensive, but I'm not sure what it was actually doing.

Shiandow produces a slightly sharper image in a way that looks more natural and neutral than FineSharp.
debanding algo doesn't sharp anything. the image doesn't get any sharper.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 19:37   #30797  |  Link
krille
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 24
If I choose to double luma resolution with NNEDI3 the render queue doesnt fill up. It says 6-7/8. Does that matter at all?
krille is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 20:02   #30798  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by krille View Post
If I choose to double luma resolution with NNEDI3 the render queue doesnt fill up. It says 6-7/8. Does that matter at all?
if no frames drop you should be fine it is still strange.

Last edited by huhn; 6th June 2015 at 21:29.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 22:46   #30799  |  Link
AngelGraves13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 255
We need a deblocking option sometime in the future. The debanding works well enough.
AngelGraves13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th June 2015, 23:15   #30800  |  Link
XRyche
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryX View Post
SuperRes is very expensive on the GPU so I definitely can't run it more than once. For me, it's only working on 288p videos with 1 pass, and I have to say I love the result. it greatly enhances the image of low-quality videos. If quadrupling resolution, would it be better to run SuperRes twice with 1 pass or once with 2 passes?


Again, I love SuperRes but it is expensive to run, and somehow it is much more expensive than it should on 480p videos.
That's weird. I found SuperRes to make quality considerably worse with super lo-res material (240-360p) . The more passes I have it do the worse the effect. Most of my super lo-res material is DVR/TIVO/VHS/Capture card rips from late 90's to mid 2000's. Needless to say they aren't pristine, tbh though, I don't think you will get pristine image quality at those resolution anyways. If there is any type of blocking or aliasing it makes matters worse. When I try to compensate with increasing softness or anti-alaising it creates very weird artifacts. I lack the knowledge to properly describe it but, it looks like I put plastic wrap over my screen. Strange distortions on edges and such. This is leaving the settings at default. It gets much worse when increasing softness or anti-alaising to compensate.

That being said SuperRes works quite well with good 480p and up material. With a good DVD (Friends Box Set) it can improve the image quality rather nicely even at default settings.

(EDIT)I forgot to add that SuperRes works quite well for Chroma with Jinc. It makes the colors crisp and distinctive without adding any artifacts I can see regardless of the resolution. Also when upscaling I actually prefer using SuperRes each time the image is doubled. It seems to improve perceived sharpness better that way.(EDIT)


I've pretty much stay away from LumaSharp because for me it tends to introduce too much aliasing at strengths it looks like it is doing any good to me. MadVR's version is no exception. Not to say LumaSharpen is bad by any means. I use it a lot for video games . It just doesn't do it for me with video.

Finesharpen is actually pretty nice for me with scaling 720p to 1080p. It adds just enough subtle sharpening to make a difference.

This is all for upscaling. I prefer not to use any sharpening for downscaling on the rare occasions I have to downscale.
__________________
Intel i5 3470, EVGA GTX 1050Ti SC ACX 2.0, Windows 10 Pro 64 bit, 16 GB 1600 mhz DDR3 RAM

Last edited by XRyche; 6th June 2015 at 23:32.
XRyche 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 00:38.


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