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 15th June 2015, 13:15   #31081  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
It's definitely LL that makes contoures look too thick and dark with FS.
not LL:


LL:


Sample (1 frame):
http://www52.zippyshare.com/v/lTUNZizZ/file.html

So I vote to make not LL the new default option. In fact, I don't see any reason for having a LL option if it distorts images as shown.

LL is devilish. Always, it seems.

As for thinning: With low values I don't see any effect (at least no positive). Combined with SuperRes, it can even look worse because it already seems to introduce tiny bits of aliasing which then get stronger. With higher values, this aliasing also becomes visible without SuperRes. So I don't see any point in this parameter, thus I vote to set it to 0 by default and probably even remove this option.

Last edited by aufkrawall; 15th June 2015 at 13:23.
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 13:24   #31082  |  Link
RyuzakiL
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meulen92 View Post
AFAIK you could just create a custom game profile in CCC for Madvr, then scroll all the way down and select Disabled as Crossfire mode. Enjoy regular MadVR use without crossfire and without restricting your options.

thanks! Now that is much simpler. i hope this kind of configuration or procedure should be posted on the 1st page. So new users wouldn't have to ask again or search their eye balls out.

Just my two cents.
RyuzakiL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 13:28   #31083  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
So I vote to make not LL the new default option. In fact, I don't see any reason for having a LL option if it distorts images as shown.

LL is devilish. Always, it seems.
That is just false. Both LL on and LL off will cause problems in certain content.
How do you think we arrived on the decision for LL on at the first place (and incidentally noone objecting)? Because someone thought LL on looked better? Exactly!

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyuzakiL View Post
thanks! Now that is much simpler. i hope this kind of configuration or procedure should be posted on the 1st page. So new users wouldn't have to ask again or search their eye balls out.
If you run a CrossFire or SLI setup, you better know how to setup a profile to disable it, since its not going to work with everything.
Because if you don't, your in for a world of hurt.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 13:37   #31084  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
AMD was/is still better at nnedi3 than NVIDIA for the same price even with the interop copyback.

but no real issue for both AMD and NVIDIA they both aim at gaming performance not openCL.
I was not able to use NNEDI3 at all with Hawaii GPU, while it was never an issue on GK110 (PCIe 2.0). With a GTX 980, NNEDI3 64 even can be used for 1080p24 (or even p30) -> WQHD, although it is only specified with 5TFLOPs while Hawaii XT is with 5.6TFLOPs. I have never read that Hawaii can do 1080p24 -> WQHD with 64 neurons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
That is just false. Both LL on and LL off will cause problems in certain content.
How do you think we arrived on the decision for LL on at the first place (and incidentally noone objecting)? Because someone thought LL on looked better? Exactly!
"Better" is not objective. LL scaling seems to always manipulate brightness in a way that leads to an inaccurate result compared to the source. At least from what I've seen.
Well, I don't know if it's actually comparable, but I'll post an example regarding C-R DS in the next few days (could be a bit time consuming to reproduce) which shows this clearly too.

Even if LL can look "better" in some cases, it can be hardly worth it when it totally fails in some other cases (while gamma corrected hardly ever seems to completely fail).
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 13:40   #31085  |  Link
ryrynz
Registered User
 
ryrynz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,646
Madshi, are there any knobs to turn for Super-xbr with regards to sharpness outside of SuperRes?
ryrynz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 13:43   #31086  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
"Better" is not objective. LL scaling seems to always manipulate brightness in a way that leads to an inaccurate result compared to the source. At least from what I've seen.
Well, I don't know if it's actually comparable, but I'll post an example regarding C-R DS in the next few days (could be a bit time consuming to reproduce) which shows this clearly too.

Even if LL can look "better" in some cases, it can be hardly worth it when it totally fails in some other cases (while gamma corrected hardly ever seems to completely fail).
I could link you an example right now where not using LL downscaling distorts the brightness quite badly, too. It always depends a bit on the source. Both variants are not perfect. In my experience, on Live-Action content LL downscaling will usually look more natural. On animation it may be another matter entirely.
Maybe the same categories apply to FS as well. LL may look better on live-action, but have problems with animation or other content with artificial hard borders (like zoomed macro images).
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders

Last edited by nevcairiel; 15th June 2015 at 13:46.
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 13:43   #31087  |  Link
tobindac
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 115
For those of us valuing sharpness above all else, all other algorithms seem useless compared to super xbr based on the example pictures. Though to be honest I don't seem to be able to show such differences here on common sources. Do you use it on image upscaling or something, because here I only see a chroma upscaling option for it, for which I always had a hard time seeing differences between algorithms on 1080p sources.
tobindac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 13:47   #31088  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
I could link you an example right now where not using LL downscaling distorts the brightness quite badly, too. It always depends a bit on the source. Both variants are not perfect. On Live-Action content LL downscaling will usually look more natural. On animation it may be another matter antirely.
Ok. However, I for myself have already stumbled over three (with FS now four) more or less "real world" examples in which LL was clearly worse.
Well, then I suppose it might be best if madshi leaves us the option to choose, like with scaling.
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 14:36   #31089  |  Link
ThurstonX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by tobindac View Post
For those of us valuing sharpness above all else, all other algorithms seem useless compared to super xbr based on the example pictures. Though to be honest I don't seem to be able to show such differences here on common sources. Do you use it on image upscaling or something, because here I only see a chroma upscaling option for it, for which I always had a hard time seeing differences between algorithms on 1080p sources.
I had that problem last night when I finally got a few minutes to test. S-XBR is in the Image Doubling section, in the drop-down menus for Luma and Chroma (I like to Capitalize certain Words, cuz I ain't no e.e. cummings ;-) It's true that S-XBR is in the Chroma upscaling section, but not the Image upscaling section. I think that's where the confusion comes in. madshi's post set me straight.

@madshi:
FWIW, I just opened the Settings to confirm the above, and sure enough "Double Chroma Resolution" is checked. That must be the new default setting, as I've never checked that option in the past. I think that maybe "Double Luma Resolution" is also getting checked as a new default (both set to "NNEDI3, 16 neurons"), as I'm pretty sure I didn't check double luma on this laptop (it can't handle it).

Last edited by ThurstonX; 15th June 2015 at 14:55.
ThurstonX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 16:57   #31090  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
I was not able to use NNEDI3 at all with Hawaii GPU, while it was never an issue on GK110 (PCIe 2.0). With a GTX 980, NNEDI3 64 even can be used for 1080p24 (or even p30) -> WQHD, although it is only specified with 5TFLOPs while Hawaii XT is with 5.6TFLOPs. I have never read that Hawaii can do 1080p24 -> WQHD with 64 neurons.
now compare the prices of these cards and you will see what i mean.

and my r9 270 outperforms my gtx 760 when it comes down to madVR. of cause my AMD is in a very much needed PCIe 3.0 system and i know some AMD systems can't do nnedi3 at all but that's rare most people with the same cards have no issue.
my r9 270 can do 256 neuron 480p23 to 1080p23 easily my 760 GTX can't do more than 128 neurons in that case.
maybe the copyback issue gets out of hand at higher resolutions than 1080p.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 17:20   #31091  |  Link
Eyldebrandt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 26
I know madshi wants some report about FS first, but it will be more practical to me to make an overview of the lasts features.

Finesharp
I used it years ago when Didée released it on avisynth after an user of doom9 ask him what was the best sharpener for HD source.
So here we have a important point.
Finesharp is definitively not an option to considering if we talk about sources < 720p.
FS is a factory for aliasing, distorsions, and artifacts. He has to be used only with very HQ content. Linear Light or not, he's too strong for low quality sources, the result is always horrible.
At least in my opinion, and my opinion is the only thing i can provide here.

Thinning control seems to be the equivalent setting to "xstr" in the Didée's avisynth script.
In others words, xstr/thinning is the setting than you absolutely want to turn down the most, unless you're an aliasing fan.

Finesharp is a very destructive sharpener, and to be efficient, i think he will be only used with Blu-ray or 1080p content.

And even on these types of sources, i think the strength should not exceed 1.2, in upscaling refinement, and no more than 0.7/0.8 in image enhancement.

Repair was set at 1.0, and to be honest, i don't know what to think about that. By the fact, i have not succeed to rule if repair fonction is equivalent to the "cstr" factor in the avisynth script. I think is some of, but not completely, cos i suspect the madvr version is quite different in some ways than the original script.
For fact, if repair have some strong common point with cstr, so 1.0 seems to be too high for me.

LumaSharpen

I discovered this sharpener with a previous build of madVR.
I think it's an adaptation of a SweetFx option, and i welcome it with a sort of mistrust, because i hate SweetFX :d
Anyway, i tried to let him a chance, and after some tests, i have to say he can have some utility, on very HQ content, again.
With really moderate settings, and considering is just an eye candy toy, he adds some kind of pop effect wich is not unpleasant.

As he active on the luma, he brighter just some objects and pixels in a frame, and in some ways, i like it.

Maybe a lead for futures evolutions, add an usharp mask (like Unsharp HQ) to work with luma sharpen will open a new way for those who wants to build a very pop picture. If madshi let Luma Sharpen in madVR, and i'll like he will, this will be an option to hardly considerate.

An other opinion is if you're upscaling the content, you should definitively not turn on a sharpener in image enhancement, whatever it is.

SuperRes
I'm a great fan of the method. I bought it just on the principe.
But, as shiandow is currently working at improve it, i don't think it's the right time to forge a definitive opinion about.

Super-xbr

As i play almost only 1080p content on 3440x1440 monitor and 4K VP, and as i have the rigs to motorize anything, i was a faithful user of NNEDI3 in chroma upscaling and Double resolution.
But super-xbr have insinuate the doubt in me.
On some aspects, super-xbr outclasses NNEDI. Which are aliasing control, clarity and natural look. But he's beaten by NNEDI3 on cleanliness, ringing control and precision.
This is worth for almost all types of content.

Then, super-xbr is incredibly less greedy for a result which is different but fairly comparable in terms of quality to NNEDI3, event at 128 or 256 neurons.

And more than that, it seems to me than super-xbr produce fantastic result in chroma upsampling.

To be more accurate, here are my differents settings, if that can help for anything.

720p content on 1080p TV.
- Custom Res at 2560x1440 in Nvidia panel Control (no DSR)
- Chroma upscaling : super-xbr (without SuperRes)
- Luma/chroma doubling : super-xbr
- Upscaling refinement : Super Res (NNEDI3 defaults, 4 passes)

1080p content on 1080p TV
- Custom Res at 2560x1440 in Nvidia panel Control (no DSR)
- Chroma upscaling : super-xbr (without SuperRes)
- Luma/chroma doubling : super-xbr
- Upscaling refinement : Super Res (NNEDI3 defaults, 4 passes), FS (strength 0.4, thinning 0.007), LS (strength : 0.25, clamp : 0.045, radius 0.3)
- image downscaling : C-R AR LL

1080p content on 3440x1440 monitor
- Chroma upscaling : super-xbr (without SuperRes)
- Luma/chroma doubling : super-xbr
- Upscaling refinement : Super Res (NNEDI3 defaults, 4 passes), FS (strength 0.7, thinning 0.012), LS (strength : 0.35, clamp : 0.45, radius 0.4).
- image downscaling : C-R AR LL

1080p content on 4K VP
- Chroma upscaling : super-xbr (without SuperRes)
- Luma/chroma doubling : NNEDI 64
- Upscaling refinement : Super Res (NNEDI3 defaults, 4 passes), FS (strength 0.9, thinning 0.015), LS (strength : 0.45, clamp : 0.45, radius 0.6).

Edit: and for all settings, I refine the image after every ~2X upscaling step and i apply SuperRes first.

Last edited by Eyldebrandt; 15th June 2015 at 17:36.
Eyldebrandt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 17:20   #31092  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
now compare the prices of these cards and you will see what i mean.

and my r9 270 outperforms my gtx 760 when it comes down to madVR. of cause my AMD is in a very much needed PCIe 3.0 system and i know some AMD systems can't do nnedi3 at all but that's rare most people with the same cards have no issue.
my r9 270 can do 256 neuron 480p23 to 1080p23 easily my 760 GTX can't do more than 128 neurons in that case.
maybe the copyback issue gets out of hand at higher resolutions than 1080p.
No question, Radeons perform well in madVR apart from NNEDI3. But we were talking about NNEDI3, weren't we.
And yes, small Kepler GPUs can be awfully slow with Compute and often also lack shader power in general compared to GCN Radeons.
But Kepler is end of life, it is almost completely replaced by Maxwell GPUs, from low end (which is less low end than some years ago) to high end. And Maxwell often is much faster regarding Compute than Kepler (in some cases even faster than GCN, which is a highly Compute optimized architecture with many crossbars etc.).
The pricing is high, but an OCed 970 gives a lot of bang for bucks in madVR, and can be close to completely silent.
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 17:35   #31093  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
No question, Radeons perform well in madVR apart from NNEDI3. But we were talking about NNEDI3, weren't we.
but my way cheaper r9 270 outperforms my 760 in term of nnedi3 and that by a lot.
Quote:
And yes, small Kepler GPUs can be awfully slow with Compute and often also lack shader power in general compared to GCN Radeons.
But Kepler is end of life, it is almost completely replaced by Maxwell GPUs, from low end (which is less low end than some years ago) to high end. And Maxwell often is much faster regarding Compute than Kepler (in some cases even faster than GCN, which is a highly Compute optimized architecture with many crossbars etc.).
The pricing is high, but an OCed 970 gives a lot of bang for bucks in madVR, and can be close to completely silent.
i doubt the gtx 960 which is about 5% faster than my gtx 760 can beat my r9 270 in term of nnedi3 and general processing power when used for madVR.
but i will find this out my self soon enough i need a GTX 960 soon anyway.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 17:53   #31094  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
but my way cheaper r9 270 outperforms my 760 in term of nnedi3 and that by a lot.
This doesn't surprise me, as long as PCIe isn't limiting.
GTX 760 is a GK104 with 2 blocks of disabled ALUs/TMUs, and even a GTX 680 was rather infamous for its Compute abilities.

Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
i doubt the gtx 960 which is about 5% faster than my gtx 760 can beat my r9 270 in term of nnedi3 and general processing power when used for madVR.
With Compute, the 960 is much faster than the 760:
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-01/n...t_gpucomputing
(dunno what's wrong there with ComputeMark, probably a bug since 960 should be much faster than the 750 Ti).

Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
but i will find this out my self soon enough i need a GTX 960 soon anyway.
For madVR, I think a 970 would be much better.
HEVC 10 bit probably won't be important soon.
Well, of course with super-xbr, NNEDI3 is often a waste of resources now, so a 960 might be nice as well.

Last edited by aufkrawall; 15th June 2015 at 17:55.
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 18:05   #31095  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post

For madVR, I think a 970 would be much better.
HEVC 10 bit probably won't be important soon.
Well, of course with super-xbr, NNEDI3 is often a waste of resources now, so a 960 might be nice as well.
I have been hoping for a GTX 960 Ti, which would fill the quite large performance gap between 960 and 970, and (hopefully) also have full HEVC support ... but so far nothing in sight.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 18:28   #31096  |  Link
baii
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 180
the scaling factor profile rule bug is into tracker. In the mean time, any one can suggest a workaround?
All I need is 2 profile, a and b,
when the image/video is upscaled ->active profile,
not upscaled -> active b.

This is essentially for the image enhancement tab~
baii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 18:33   #31097  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
This doesn't surprise me, as long as PCIe isn't limiting.
GTX 760 is a GK104 with 2 blocks of disabled ALUs/TMUs, and even a GTX 680 was rather infamous for its Compute abilities.
GPU computing test are hard to judge. nearly all nvidia GPU are terrible with double precision which is not used in madVR

Quote:
With Compute, the 960 is much faster than the 760:
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-01/n...t_gpucomputing
(dunno what's wrong there with ComputeMark, probably a bug since 960 should be much faster than the 750 Ti).
it has to be at least double as fast as my gtx 760 in term of GPU openCL computing to beat my r9 270.

760 gtx 128 neurens ~31ms
r9 270 256 neurons ~33ms

not sure if i should use the computerbase benchmarks for nnedi3 performance.

Quote:
For madVR, I think a 970 would be much better.
HEVC 10 bit probably won't be important soon.
Well, of course with super-xbr, NNEDI3 is often a waste of resources now, so a 960 might be nice as well.
not going to put a 300+ euro GPU in my HTPC sorry.
and my r9 270 is passive cooled should be easily possible with a 960 GTX too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
I have been hoping for a GTX 960 Ti, which would fill the quite large performance gap between 960 and 970, and (hopefully) also have full HEVC support ... but so far nothing in sight.
i would like a 950 ti that's faster than the 750ti with HDMI 2.0 and HEVC decoder.

i guess a lot of cards where planned with the same limitation as the 970 which results in a pretty bad reputation for that feature so they are not released anymore.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 18:55   #31098  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,812
There is already a lot deactivated with GTX 970 GM204 and deactivating ROPs and segmenting VRAM doesn't make always sense. I think it might never have been planned to fill the gap between 960 and 970.
960 is already selling well for a high price and you can still pay even more for a 4GB version.
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 19:20   #31099  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
There is already a lot deactivated with GTX 970 GM204 and deactivating ROPs and segmenting VRAM doesn't make always sense. I think it might never have been planned to fill the gap between 960 and 970.
960 is already selling well for a high price and you can still pay even more for a 4GB version.
There were rumors about a 960 Ti at some point, but they never substantiated. Oh well.

If nothing else shows up, I'll probably build a new HTPC with Skylake and a 4GB 960 later this year.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th June 2015, 19:34   #31100  |  Link
James Freeman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi
Quote:
Originally Posted by me
It appears that my rendering time raised to 41ms thus the queues not filling up.
* I downclock my GPU to save power.
In version 88.11 the rendering was twice as fast, at about 20-25ms.
Nothing special, just Lanczos 3, Smooth Motion, Ordered Dithering.
That doesn't make a lot of sense. I haven't changed anything which would explain a performance difference. Are you sure the downclock works the same with v0.88.11 and v0.88.12? I'm rather thinking that maybe with one of those versions the clock of your GPU might be different or something. Nobody else has reported anything like this yet, either. So I think the problem is likely on your side somewhere. Sorry, I wish I could be more specific. But I don't have enough information to say anything more helpful...
I am terribly sorry.

I was running a Shader in MPC-HC which I forgot I enabled, it did not change the image, just take GPU power which raised my rendering times from 20ms to 40ms.
This downclocking (P8 state) of the GPU is intentional, at full throttle of my GTX660 I get around 4ms.
Same with CPU, I keep the "Minimum and Maximum processor state" at 0% so that I always get 1600Mhz with my i7.

Current test show my system takes around 20W when playing a movie, never needed more than that, plus, it helps to keep the heat and bills down...

ahem... back to topic please.
__________________
System: i7 3770K, GTX660, Win7 64bit, Panasonic ST60, Dell U2410.
James Freeman 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 06:38.


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