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 21st July 2015, 11:52   #32021  |  Link
omarank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
I've decided to make a big screenshot comparison post to compare the different upscaling and sharpening / post-processing options we have now....
Thank you madshi for taking time to write such a detailed post. It not only shows how good SuperRes is but also the ideal approach to do the testing. The confusion which I had about the absolute best upscaling method in madVR, given there are so many choices now, is cleared up.
omarank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 12:20   #32022  |  Link
David
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryrynz View Post

Ugh, that's horrible.
I think so too.

on another topic. Anyone knows if random dithering in madvr 86 was with coloured noise?

With madvr new versions if i untick colour noise i can see banding in the skin of a person in a scene. With madvr 86, evr and wd player that banding is not there.

Last edited by David; 21st July 2015 at 12:41. Reason: I dont remember right know if it was with evr +16 bit processing and i am not at home to check it
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 12:48   #32023  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
I think so too.

on another topic. Anyone knows if random dithering in madvr 86 was with coloured noise?

With madvr new versions if i untick colour noise i can see banding in the skin of a person in a scene. With madvr 86, evr and wd player that banding is not there.
can you make screens of this?
huhn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 13:12   #32024  |  Link
x7007
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 251
Anyone managed to run PotPlayer in windows 10 with CUVID without total player freeze ?
x7007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 13:26   #32025  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,730
do you get this problem only with madVR?

and why do people still use CUVID? DXVA copyback is just better.
huhn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 13:35   #32026  |  Link
x7007
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
do you get this problem only with madVR?

and why do people still use CUVID? DXVA copyback is just better.


hmm , I don't know, I prefer the CUVID, I am just used to it.

I have the issue when I use madvr+cuvid and only with madvr is the issue , EVR Custom present + Cuvid works fine
x7007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 13:42   #32027  |  Link
David
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
can you make screens of this?
Not right know because i am on holidays, but sure i will even if them are not neccesary for the answer to the question. I have curiouty about this since madvr 87.X
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 14:27   #32028  |  Link
Thunderbolt8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,171
which 3dlut files created by which program are currently supported by madvr? I need to create a 3dlut file in which I can modify the input range to modify the black levels and also to change the gamma value slightly
__________________
Laptop Acer Aspire V3-772g: i7-4202MQ, 8GB Ram, NVIDIA GTX 760M (+ Intel HD 4600), Windows 8.1 x64, madVR (x64), MPC-HC (x64), LAV Filter (x64), XySubfilter (x64)

Last edited by Thunderbolt8; 21st July 2015 at 14:35.
Thunderbolt8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 14:54   #32029  |  Link
mbordas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by x7007 View Post
Anyone is able to run CUVID Acceleration from LAV Video Filter with MADVR and not freeze and crash ? None and Write-Back works fine, just the mixed with Madvr + CUVID .
seems to be a bug in the driver. It only happens on certain content. Use DXVA native or CB in LAVvideo, and uncheck the two DXVA options in madVR under "trade quality for performance".
mbordas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 15:14   #32030  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderbolt8 View Post
which 3dlut files created by which program are currently supported by madvr? I need to create a 3dlut file in which I can modify the input range to modify the black levels and also to change the gamma value slightly

you can use madVR to change the "input" range by changing the output range in madVR and use argyllCMS after it. I do it this way too. to better counter my crushed blacks and white clipping on my screen.

of cause you can change the gamma curve in argyllCMS too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Not right know because i am on holidays, but sure i will even if them are not neccesary for the answer to the question. I have curiouty about this since madvr 87.X
madVR should never show banding when EVR isn't showing it so this could be a serious bug.

if i remember correctly color noise is checked by default. and it just has lower luma noise for more chroma noise it shouldn't be more smooth.
huhn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 15:31   #32031  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Yeah, I wasn't meaning to say that AdaptiveSharpen should never be used. It could be useful to sharpen overly soft sources, or simply to add some "pop". However, "Upscaling Refinement" was always planned by me to post-process an upscaled image in such a way that it gets nearer to the ground truth. So, I would say that for this specific purpose I would not recommend AdaptiveSharpen.
I have to totally disagree.
It's the only sharpen algorithm that you can set & forget with a low strength, while still having a perceivable effect.
I wouldn't use more than strength 0.2 and probably only us it as an UR.
A SR strength of 4 is very unrealistic, it e.g. looks very bad with my cartoon example (very destructive ringing) and with a low strength, SR often hardly sharpens the image in a perceivable way.
AS 0.2 still looks very nice with the cartoon example when I use NNEDI3 64 to double and super-xbr 50 to quadruple.

For example, SR has a very minimal effect on scaling 720p -> WQHD filmed content, while AS really makes the image look more detailed without being destructive.

I already posted that fence example where AS looks really nice. I'm gonna post another example with extreme scaling to demonstrate that AS is very useful.
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 16:50   #32032  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
What Didée said about Darbee: [...]
Yes, I remember seeing those spider images. And yes, he confirms it's some sort of unsharp mask stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryrynz View Post
Does an image that small really fit the bill as far as being comparable to typical use cases?
Maybe not. But look at recent posts from Eyldebrandt. He showed screenshots of typical use cases where SuperRes introduced aliasing. He hasn't replied to any of my recent posts, though. So I'm not sure whether increasing the radius setting would help in his case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryrynz View Post
I wonder if Shiandow could focus his attention on this particular area at all, a high radius SR utilized for edges only.. I dunno.
Maybe, I'm not sure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
on another topic. Anyone knows if random dithering in madvr 86 was with coloured noise?

With madvr new versions if i untick colour noise i can see banding in the skin of a person in a scene. With madvr 86, evr and wd player that banding is not there.
After a quick look at the source code of v0.86.11 it seems to be colored noise, but I'm not 100% sure right now. No time to analyze that. You could create a unicolored BMP with MS Paint and then take a screenshot of madVR and zoom it up and check if the dithering is colored or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderbolt8 View Post
which 3dlut files created by which program are currently supported by madvr?
http://madVR.com

Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
I have to totally disagree.
It's the only sharpen algorithm that you can set & forget with a low strength, while still having a perceivable effect.
I wouldn't use more than strength 0.2 and probably only us it as an UR.
A SR strength of 4 is very unrealistic, it e.g. looks very bad with my cartoon example (very destructive ringing) and with a low strength, SR often hardly sharpens the image in a perceivable way.
AS 0.2 still looks very nice with the cartoon example when I use NNEDI3 64 to double and super-xbr 50 to quadruple.

For example, SR has a very minimal effect on scaling 720p -> WQHD filmed content, while AS really makes the image look more detailed without being destructive.

I already posted that fence example where AS looks really nice. I'm gonna post another example with extreme scaling to demonstrate that AS is very useful.
But now we're pretty much back in subjective mumbo-jumbo land. If you take a random image / video frame and upscale it and try to judge which algorithm looks "good" on it, it's all very subjective, matter of taste, and everybody will have different preferences. Which is exactly why I tried to analyze all the algorithms using a more objective scientific approach in this post. Did you carefully read it and study the image comparisons? Do you disagree with anything in that post?

Again, that post is discussing the best algos to turn a low image resolution picture into the most likely truthful high resolution picture. The purpose of "upscaling refinement" is not to pimp up soft sources, but simply to provide accurate scaling which gets as near to the "ground truth" as possible.

If you want to add some pop to your sources, or fix overly soft sources, then once again it's a matter of taste which algorithm might look good to you. AdaptiveSharpen might be great for that. But that's a different usage area than trying to find a scientifically ideal algo combination for upscaling.

The reason why your cartoon example has destructive ringing with SuperRes is that the cartoon image already has strong ringing in the source. The proper way to handle this is to dering the image before upscaling it (and to improve the SuperRes anti-ringing filter, which is not optimal yet). Algorithms for that to come in a future madVR version. E.g. look here for a work-in-progress:

Cartoon example:
super-xbr-100 -|- dering + super-xbr-100 -|- dering + super-xbr-100 + SuperRes

If we had a ground truth for this image, I bet it would be *much* nearer to the SuperRes processed result than to the unprocessed result. There are still artifacts in the processed image, though, I'll give you that. I think the artifacts are mostly coming from the SuperRes AR filter needing some improvements. So there's still work to be done.
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 18:02   #32033  |  Link
nemoW
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
It reproduces some more details, but it also adds a lot of aliasing.

<...>

I fear we may have to increase the radius to a value *higher* than 0.66 to get rid of aliasing problems. Sad but probably necessary...
Maybe it's time to add some kind of shader AA filter like FXAA/SMAA?
It would be especially helpful for sources like this: https://yadi.sk/i/hp2iZS68hC554

Last edited by nemoW; 21st July 2015 at 18:19. Reason: added aliasing sample
nemoW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 18:32   #32034  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
But now we're pretty much back in subjective mumbo-jumbo land. If you take a random image / video frame and upscale it and try to judge which algorithm looks "good" on it, it's all very subjective, matter of taste, and everybody will have different preferences. Which is exactly why I tried to analyze all the algorithms using a more objective scientific approach in this post. Did you carefully read it and study the image comparisons? Do you disagree with anything in that post?
Yes. But what do we want to find out?
I think you have a very good point with that naturalistic image which should look as close as possible to the source.
But I also think we need a more comprehensive impression.

Upscaling naturally softens an image, and we're not always upscaling an image with the factor you have used for your example.
So, will SuperRes still "add" enough sharpness if the scaling factor is much higher? madVR offers to run a sharpening pass after each doubling, but you said that SuperRes has less work to do with each pass.
This covers with my following observation:
SuperRes either adds very little sharpness at a reasonable strength or the image looks very odd with higher strength.
I don't think we should be "too scientific" since it's a highly subjective or at least non-objective issue. Maybe if you run a computational analysis which compares each pixel to match the source the most, some algorithms may perform very well, but maybe the result is still not desirable for many or even most users users due to subjective discomfort?
Ok, here comes the example:
Original (yes, there are some weird ghosting artifacts in the source):


NNEDI3 64 quadrupling + Jinc AR:


+ FS 0.8 UR:


LS default UR:


SuperRes 3 (else default):


AS 0.2 UR:


FS & LS are ring feasts. SuperRes adds some details from the source, which is remarkable, but it fails to really make the image look sharp. It's impossible in this case that the sharpness of SuperRes could be closer to the source than AS. So maybe SuperRes is nearer to the source apart from sharpness in this example, but I doubt many people would describe the result of it better than AS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
The reason why your cartoon example has destructive ringing with SuperRes is that the cartoon image already has strong ringing in the source. The proper way to handle this is to dering the image before upscaling it (and to improve the SuperRes anti-ringing filter, which is not optimal yet). Algorithms for that to come in a future madVR version. E.g. look here for a work-in-progress:

Cartoon example:
super-xbr-100 -|- dering + super-xbr-100 -|- dering + super-xbr-100 + SuperRes

If we had a ground truth for this image, I bet it would be *much* nearer to the SuperRes processed result than to the unprocessed result. There are still artifacts in the processed image, though, I'll give you that. I think the artifacts are mostly coming from the SuperRes AR filter needing some improvements. So there's still work to be done.
Here's the original frame (with Jinc AR for chroma):

I think it's not mean to say that super-xbr + SuperRes looks totally cruel regarding ringing in this example.
Even upscaling the original 720p source to WQHD with NNEDI3 64 doesn't look great with SuperRes with a strength of 1. The ringing in the face of the woman with the red dress gets much more visible than e.g. with AS 0.2.

Of course SuperRes and AS can be combined to achieve more sharpness (which I think is "realistic"). But that ringing really needs to be fixed and the radius of 0.66 is definitely too low to prevent aliasing. Haven't tested yet which value I'd prefer.
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 19:03   #32035  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
No, it only looks at one frame at a time. It pretty much does what Shiandow explained in that post you quoted earlier. But Shiandow's explanation was for the old SuperRes algo (where we still had number options for anti-aliasing and anti-ringing etc). The new algorithm is based on some newer scientific papers. It works like this:

0) Let e.g. super-xbr upscale the OI (original image). Result: UI (upscaled image).
1) Downscale the UI back to the same size as the OI (using: LQ=Bilinear; HQ=Bicubic).
2) Substract the OI from the downscaled UI, which gives us a sort of "error" image (EI) in the size of the OI.
3) Modify the UI in a clever way, by making use of the EI, to reduce the error.

Steps 1) to 3) is one SuperRes pass. If you want 2 SuperRes passes, you simply perform 1,2,3) twice.

All the magic happens in 3). And this code totally changed from the old to the new SuperRes algorithm. The other parts mostly remained unchanged. The old SuperRes code introduced aliasing and ringing, which is why Shiandow had added extra anti-aliasing and anti-ringing algos. The new SuperRes algorithm doesn't (or shouldn't) produce aliasing, anymore, and not as much ringing as the old code, so that's why there's no anti-ringing and anti-aliasing code in the new algorithm, anymore. I did add my own anti-ringing code in, though.
OK thanks for the detailed explanation, so it's a smarter dithering algorithm but I take it that using infos from the previous frames would be impossible to do in realtime and would require rocket science in order to guess what to keep and what to ignore. I've always been impressed by the effect of SR on 24p motion blur, really great looking

So the only difference between LQ/HQ is going from bilinear to bicubic, I guess that does put things back into perspective but I would still like to run more fair comparisons with weak LQ in .15 and weaker NNEDI3.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
I've done all stuff in windowed mode. I've selected a ground truth image which in 100% view exactly fit in the media player in windowed mode, to make things easier for me. The ground truth is already a downscaled image from an even larger original image. So I could choose the exact size I wanted to have for the ground truth.

Please make sure you downscale using madVR with AR (anti-ringing). Don't downscale using an image/photo editor, unless it also has AR (I'm not aware of any that has).
How about dithering, can I leave monostatic ED2 engaged without tempering with the end results?

I would use another castle picture and a screenshot from a 4K mastered untouched BD.

I guess it would also make sense to use a noisy 1080p BD screenshot, because it would appear that SR likes to repair errors, some smart upscalers fail guessing and we are mostly using all this on low res noisy stuff to begin with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MistahBonzai View Post
If working with MPC-HC these procedures will enable you to capture specific frames.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braum View Post
It works that way, but you can also setup your own keybord shortcuts
OK thanks, sounds like a plan!

Last edited by leeperry; 21st July 2015 at 19:46.
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 20:35   #32036  |  Link
ikarad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 541
Why at 23.976 and 24Hz, in osd there is repeated frames line and at 30,50 or 60Hz, there is no repeated frames line?


24 Hz

60Hz
ikarad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 20:41   #32037  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,708
When there are obviously too many repeated frames or smooth motion is enabled, the information isn't shown (because it's of no use).
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 20:42   #32038  |  Link
Q-the-STORM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
I don't think we should be "too scientific" since it's a highly subjective or at least non-objective issue. Maybe if you run a computational analysis which compares each pixel to match the source the most, some algorithms may perform very well, but maybe the result is still not desirable for many or even most users users due to subjective discomfort?
Well that is *exactly* the reason madshi's comparisons were comparing against a "ground truth" image... with that we take away most of the subjectivity...
there is no "I like this image better because.." there is only "This image is closer to the ground truth"..
someone may want the image to be sharper but you can always sharpen... some want the image to be more colorful, you can always add saturation... that's stuff that can always be done to the users preference...
but the point here is a different one...
the point is not to make the image more appealing, the point is for madVR to upscale as accurate as possible to the ground truth...

there is no way to know if an upscale is accurate if we don't have a higher res image, that's why the ground truth image is so important....

if upscale1 is close to the ground truth, if upscale2 is close to the ground truth and upscale3 is close to the ground truth, then we can assume that images that don't have a ground truth image to compare to, are also accurately upscaled...

this is not about "fixing" an image to your viewing prefenrece... if it was shot slightly unsharp, we want madVR to upscale it to an unsharp image... you can always sharp the image afterwards if you want, but people that don't should be given the option not to...

and making the image more sharp because it *might* be more accurate without having a ground truth image to verify, is very subjective...
people will think the image is more accurate because they like it better...



Quote:
Originally Posted by ikarad View Post
Why at 23.976 and 24Hz, in osd there is repeated frames line and at 30,50 or 60Hz, there is no repeated frames line?
like aufkrawall said, there is no point in having it at 30 or 60Hz..... simply because 24 frames at 60Hz will have 36 repeated frames every second, so the counter would be over 1000 after 30 seconds... there is no value in having it in that case..

Last edited by Q-the-STORM; 21st July 2015 at 20:51.
Q-the-STORM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 20:59   #32039  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q-the-STORM View Post
if it was shot slightly unsharp, we want madVR to upscale it to an unsharp image
The source posted by me is very small, but if I get close enough, I think the foreground is not unsharp at all and thus the upscaled image shouldn't be blurry either.
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2015, 21:00   #32040  |  Link
ikarad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q-the-STORM View Post


like aufkrawall said, there is no point in having it at 30 or 60Hz..... simply because 24 frames at 60Hz will have 36 repeated frames every second, so the counter would be over 1000 after 30 seconds... there is no value in having it in that case..
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
When there are obviously too many repeated frames or smooth motion is enabled, the information isn't shown (because it's of no use).
Thanks but I don't understand why this line is not visible at 120hz. 120hz is a multiple of 24.

Last edited by ikarad; 21st July 2015 at 21:04.
ikarad 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 21:39.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.