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. |
15th September 2011, 20:20 | #1 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,405
|
MeGUI filter renewal
The AviSynth filters in MeGUI used for denoising/deinterlacing have not changed in years. Therefore new filters may be available which improve the quality or the workflow. As I am clearly no expert in that area I would like to have your feedback what can be improved in MeGUI regarding AviSynth.
Currently these filters are used: Denoise
Deinterlace / IVTC
The deinterlace/ivtc filters are selected based upon the detected source types. These types are detected by an script based on TIVTC.dll. The possible types are:
At the moment I am thinking about adding MCTemporalDenoise() (with the options "very low" to "very high") and removing all other denoisers. With MCTemporalDenoise() is it only a short step to TempGaussMC(). But I am unsure if it can replace all deinterlacers, reduce the necessary source type list or which settings should be used by default. Any feedback is welcome! |
16th September 2011, 07:37 | #2 | Link |
Practising Schemer
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 791
|
For denoising especially for light noise removal. I like vagudenoiser, it is quick, effective and on light and medium settings I have not had side effects. I rarely encode animation so I cannot comment to much on its effect n them.
links Avisnyth Vaguedenoiser http://avisynth.org.ru/vague/vaguedenoiser.html Fiziks Avisynth http://avisynth.org.ru/fizick.html A good brief guide here Scintilla's guide http://www.aquilinestudios.org/avsfi...ial.html#vague |
16th September 2011, 07:47 | #3 | Link |
Practising Schemer
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 791
|
Should have mentioned dfftest as well home page here http://bengal.missouri.edu/~kes25c/ and doom9 discussion thread http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=132194 It gives great results for me but on my computers it has a big impact on encoding speed, very slow for me.
Not sure if its in the scope of what you were thinking but "Sharpeners" LSFmod. Easy to set defaults and good results. http://avisynth.org/mediawiki/LSFmod and doom9 discussion thread http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=142706 |
16th September 2011, 12:17 | #4 | Link |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
MCTemporalDenoise() would be a great addition
You can replace Undot() with RemoveGrain(mode=1) since it runs faster and is the same algorithm ... So minimal noise = RemoveGrain(mode=1), little noise would be MCTemporalDenoise(settings="low", +/- GPU=true), medium noise would be MCTemporalDenoise(settings="medium", +/- GPU=true) and heavy noise would be MCTemporalDenoise(settings="heavy", +/- GPU=true) ... For the de-interlacers, you can't go past QTGMC and it's preset system (which effectively matches what you already have setup, just in a single script), it surpasses TGMC() in speed and quality and has a great selection of "speed vs quality" options already built in! 7ek |
16th September 2011, 13:20 | #6 | Link |
Practising Schemer
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 791
|
Have to put a vote down for MCtemporal denoise as its a compilation of multiple filters not just denoising I think its misleading to new users especially, and for me 14 filters is overkill in most cases.
MCtemporal Denoise is: Code:
MVTools (v2.5.10), MaskTools (v2.0a43), LSFmod (v1.9), FFT3Dgpu (v0.8.2.7) or FFT3Dfilter (v2.1.1), TTempsmooth (v0.9.4), RemoveGrain + Repair (v1.0PR), Deblock (v1.2), Deblock_QED (25.may.2010), DctFilter (v0.0.1.4), EEDI2 (v0.9.2), SangNom (v1.0beta), GradFun2DBmod (v1.5), GradFun2db (v1.0), AddGrainC (v1.5). |
16th September 2011, 22:20 | #10 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,867
|
Updated wiki (I wish more people would do this)
http://avisynth.org/mediawiki/Denoisers |
17th September 2011, 13:39 | #12 | Link |
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6,364
|
@All,
I don't like that wiki page: http://avisynth.org/mediawiki/Denoisers for several reasons: (1) Such comparisons are always subjective, (2) it depends very much on the type of source (life video, anime, analog caps, etc ...) you are denoising and (3) references (of the comparisons themselves) are completely lacking. At most (in my view) you can list some/all denoising methodes and compare them in 'an objective as much' possible way with various sources. But until then we should probably remove that page. Thoughts? |
17th September 2011, 15:23 | #13 | Link |
too much lurking
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Valhalla
Posts: 668
|
I had been using MCTD for a long while with MeGUI and an AVS profile and dreamt of the day it would be incorporated into MeGUI. I have since stopped this practice because I've been finding that it blurs the image too much. This is no doubt due to my poor understanding of how to use it. It does offer great flexibility though and if it could be set up properly I think it would work quite well.
|
17th September 2011, 19:10 | #14 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,867
|
@wil
I think someone made this comment to me before, if you don't like it improve it But sometimes I didn't like that answer, because I had to learn to code for some big open source project and didn't have the time or skills, so the concept fails. In this case, anyhow can make a few screenshots. As for the page, -People will search for comments/recommendations anyhow. Hiding the page isn't going to stop them. They want *something*. -One persons recommendation represents an evaluation of many alternatives. If it's ok for them, there's a better chance it's something you might like. The general question is, what is the value of recommendation systems in general? Well let me answer - it works for Amazon, and they make money from it.. remember the famous contest about it. -There are very valid comments like, plugin X does the same algorithm as plugin Y but it's faster -Many recommendations is an indication that an underlying statistical preference is being met -You *can* say what is best, subjectively, for most people, otherwise we'd never get progress in say codecs. You can read public codec tests for example. -Some old objective metrics are shown not to be well related to subjective impressions -Some errors everyone can agree on, though the value of how annoying it is varies. So a comment like, it never makes artefacts, could be a valid point. -If you don't like the page, improve it - post some screenshots to the page -For me, out of 50 plugins to try, at least narrowing the list of alternatives is worth it to me. I'm sure there's some kind of value in a tuned script like tempguassmc as compared to random settings on some old plugin... -Some algorithms have such good performance that there's no denying they are better. TNLmeans blows away previous limits in denoising. -I think the recommendations are filtering out the alternatives with obviously bad errors, leaving more preference-based errors behind. So you can say the recommendations have no obvious glithes, are about the same, but have a different "look" |
17th September 2011, 22:22 | #15 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: California
Posts: 2,691
|
Quote:
Speaking for myself (OK, who else would I be speaking for?), I find the listing useful, and the author's ranking intersting. I actually don't agree with the ranking, but I find VERY useful the author's reasoning for why he chooses the ranking. It is for this reason that I don't like the restriction on posting about what is best or better. I realize that discussions about "best" have led, and might again lead, to flame posts and other problems. But, having acknowledged that problem, we have some amazingly smart people posting here in this forum, and I would value having more direct access to their thinking, opinions, and recommendations. You asked for "thoughts." Those are mine, FWIW. |
|
18th September 2011, 01:13 | #16 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 83
|
I wish there was an improved version of tfm/tdeint. MT QTGMC ( Preset="Slower", noisepreset="slower", noiseprocess=1, grainrestore=0.0, noiserestore=0.0 ) + LSF is way too slow on my quadcore, too much time demanding for me. 12 hours for an awful 720x480 dvd source, what the hell.
|
18th September 2011, 01:15 | #17 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,867
|
wow, very well put! I couldn't have expressed it better. I've also always felt the same about that rule. I think the only problem is trying to make it into one "best" instead of just saying "one of the better alternatives, and these are the tradeoffs".
|
18th September 2011, 21:43 | #18 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,405
|
@all: Thank you very much for your feedback.
I do not want to start this "best" discussion. I am just searching for a good replacement for the old filters in MeGUI. I am therefore in search for filters which produce for most sources an (above) average result. I am dreaming of as less as possible filters which the user can select from e.g. 2-3 denoisers and the recommended main denoiser is fast and will not harm the result as the video beginner will very likely not change the selection and - also very likely - will complain about low speed As a result the RemoveGrain(mode=1) + MCTemporalDenoise() seems to be a good advice. I will check them out but feedback is of course still welcome! Quote:
If I understand you correctly QTGMC can handle all of the deinterlace cases in my first posting? But I assume that IVTC is still required? At least a quick search shows that QTGMC seems to have no IVTC part. |
|
18th September 2011, 22:21 | #19 | Link | |
Practising Schemer
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 791
|
Quote:
Why is it Overkill? Yes I have done encodes with multiple filters but never met an encode where I required 14 of them. With McTemporal you are not only denoising but line sharpening and god knows what else. A side effect in your encoded source from mctemporal denoise is hard to figure because which of the 14 filters did it or was it the result of more than one? Your going to struggle to find out. Its just total overkill on light to medium sources to me. |
|
18th September 2011, 22:53 | #20 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,867
|
Ok, it's possible to trace what exactly is happening, but not all 14 plugins are being used! Here is what you get with denoise and setting "very low"
fft3d(sigma=1), MVDegrain, MVTools(idx=40) From http://avisynth.org/mediawiki/MCTemporalDenoise So it looks like 3 filters are being used. I can't say for sure without going through the whole script myself. In fact in all the settings except high, those are the only 3 filters (high uses ttempsmooth). It's simple to test, call the denoising only and see what error messages you get, keep adding plugins until it works. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|