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 > Capturing and Editing Video > Avisynth Usage

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 13th September 2017, 17:14   #181  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,166
I'll see what I can do regarding memory when I can, most likely tomorrow. I think I know the cause and possible useful alternative options.

Last edited by burfadel; 13th September 2017 at 17:17.
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2017, 17:21   #182  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groucho2004 View Post
If the application that uses 32 Bit Avisynth is built with the LARGEADDRESSAWARE linker flag it can address up to 4 GB on a 64 Bit OS.
I'll have to test this some more

Without SetMemoryMax
Code:
FPS (min | max | average):      0.762 | 28.59 | 6.270
Memory usage (phys | virt):     1710 | 2022 MiB
Thread count:                   35
CPU usage (average):            77%
With SetMemoryMax
Code:
FPS (min | max | average):      0.264 | 61.48 | 6.238
Memory usage (phys | virt):     2201 | 2510 MiB
Thread count:                   35
CPU usage (average):            79%
I'm not seeing much of a difference here (8-bit)

Yes, I noticed that 16-bit is a LOT slower; it's either FFT3DFilter or MvTools2 that isn't well optimized. To know for sure, we'd have to test on a Y8 clip. If it's 2x slower in 16-bit, it's FF3DFilter. If it's 5x slower, it's MvTools2.

mClean crashes on a Y8 clip!

Last edited by MysteryX; 13th September 2017 at 17:25.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2017, 17:24   #183  |  Link
Groucho2004
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryX View Post
I'm not seeing much of a difference here (8-bit)
Try it with a 1080p 16 bit source.
Groucho2004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2017, 17:46   #184  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groucho2004 View Post
Try it with a 1080p 16 bit source.
Generally not much point in running MvTools2 in 16-bit anyway.

Unless your source is a 10-bit clip, this goes at the beginning and your source is 8-bit.

Unless you have a Deblocker (it doesn't support 16-bit yet) and you get that output in 16-bit; then perhaps it would be best to have that deblocking integrated within mClean.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2017, 18:30   #185  |  Link
Groucho2004
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by burfadel View Post
I'll see what I can do regarding memory when I can, most likely tomorrow. I think I know the cause and possible useful alternative options.
Considering the results I got, I don't think the memory consumption is excessive. MCTemporalDenoise for example uses a lot more memory from what I recall.

Of course, if you run 8 threads with a temporal filter you need plenty of memory.
Groucho2004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th September 2017, 12:51   #186  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,166
Well, no luck trimming the memory down, but on x64 systems it shouldn't be an issue at all! It's a limitation of MVTools2, I think there may be a way to trim it a bit (script wise) but I'll have to test it.

In terms of testing, I've posted an updated script for people to play with. Only 'minor' changes (this term is relative depending on what you are referring to!).

Last edited by burfadel; 15th September 2017 at 12:57.
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th September 2017, 17:24   #187  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,991
Have you made corrections to color distortions?

It would be useful to know what the changes are so we can know what to look for.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th September 2017, 23:03   #188  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,166
Difference is just heavy tweaking to the noise analysis for speed and quality. It's based on the latest MVTools2 and Avisynth by pinterf, not sure how it will perform using the old versions. The analysis is used for two different things, so the settings chosen are based on leveraging the most ideal settings for both. Fvec and bvec 2 through 4 is noise analysis purely, to a large extent at least the motion analysis is meaningless apart from determining what are moving objects and what is temporal noise. The quality of the motion therefore isn't overly important considering the temporal radius. The important motion analysis is either side of the current frame, which is why the analysis is more precise there. I believe slight colour issue is resolved, it was just an issue with tweaking in preparation for the next feature.

Last edited by burfadel; 15th September 2017 at 23:09.
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2017, 16:43   #189  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,991
Differences with v1.7 are very minor in most cases. This frame shows more differences.

no denoise / mClean 1.3c / mClean 1.7(enh=7) / mClean 1.7b



First, enh is now almost good with its default value. Just slightly too strong. However, because it's a value relative to the resolution, it's hard to tweak it manually. Let's say I want to always set it 10% weaker, I need to look at the script and calculate it based on the resolution every time.

Then, there are slight improvements over 1.7

However, I still get better results with v1.3c!

Finally, look at "Home Karaoke", it looks fine in v1.3 but appears ugly and distorted in both v1.7 and v1.7b

Does v1.7 work better in other clips such as the snowflakes clip?

There are still color distortions but it's slightly better than 1.7. It might be enough to cross the line where it's 'acceptable', although it is still an undesirable effect for a denoiser.

v1.3c is still the one that works best according to my tests. Perhaps there could be an option for an alternative mode (MDegrain2 or MDegrain4) when a clip doesn't react well.

Last edited by MysteryX; 16th September 2017 at 16:54.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2017, 03:59   #190  |  Link
lansing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 747
Ok here's a good all around sample clip with temporal and spatial grain for the OP to test. It's a pain to watch MysteryX testing a denoiser with videos that have no grain and vcd that has nothing but compression artifacts.
sample
lansing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2017, 16:28   #191  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,166
Thanks, I'll check that out as soon as I am able .
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2017, 16:37   #192  |  Link
manolito
Registered User
 
manolito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,027
Out of curiosity I applied my usual weapon of choice (DegrainMedian plus FineSharp) to lansing's sample. I had to convert the source to DVD compliant MPEG2, my computer does not do HD.

I liked the result quite a bit, and just for fun I made another conversion using Kassandro's old DenoiseSharpen plugin in mode 22. And even this conversion doesn't look too bad.

Needless to say that I cannot use mClean on my old machine, and even on a more capable Core i5 CPU the low speed is not worth the small improvement (which almost nobody will be able to detect when watching the clip - not stills).

Get the results here:
http://www101.zippyshare.com/v/v89ieI57/file.html
https://www.sendspace.com/file/kvtmts


Cheers
manolito

Last edited by manolito; 17th September 2017 at 16:45.
manolito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2017, 17:39   #193  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,166
I'm not doing mClean to support older systems, I'm trying to leverage the latest versions of the plugins used without compromise if possible. Temporal denoisers work differently to spatial denoisers. Spatial denoisers work on luma/choma differences over a given area for a given frame. They can remove noise but can also wipe out finer detail. They also don't work well on temporal changes as you can still see temporal noise in the video. As a result of the way spatial denoisers work, areas of difference such as lines etc also become less clear, so the result is effectively a lower spatial resolution image in terms of the detail. This is bound to happen due to the averaging over a given area of pixels that the spatial denoiser does. The stronger the spatial denoiser (like removegrain(mode=20), the lower the effective spatial resolution.

I just tried mClean against knlmeanscl(s=5,d=1,h=2.0), removegrain etc, I have to say I like the results of mClean best using just mClean() default settings... obviously you would expect me to say that, but it's true! I'll tweak some things a little more on the luma side of things, then go to work on the chroma adjustments. I've already made some minor adjustments that result in a tad better speed.

Last edited by burfadel; 17th September 2017 at 18:04.
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2017, 18:15   #194  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by lansing View Post
It's a pain to watch MysteryX testing a denoiser with videos that have no grain and vcd that has nothing but compression artifacts.
It's good to test on a variety of formats
- SD with encoding artifacts
- HD with grain only in limited areas
- grainy video

You're testing as a degrainer, but it's doing a pretty good job as a denoiser.

Burdafel... Burfadel, anything you can do to fix the image distortions pointed above? I'd want to move on from v1.3c

Last edited by MysteryX; 17th September 2017 at 18:21.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2017, 18:31   #195  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,166
I wasn't going to post it as there are only minor changes, but try 1.7c. I'm not claiming it will fix what you described, but the output may be slightly different.
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2017, 18:54   #196  |  Link
Taurus
Registered User
 
Taurus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Krautland
Posts: 781
@ lansing:
Thanks for the sample!
After all this illnoised stuff MysteryX posted, what a relief
I think the dancing grain is artificial generated?
Mad producers .
So far good ol TemporalDegrain seems to be the only script that can handle this stuff eyepleasing.
(Thanks to Sagekilla and Didee for this wonderful piece of work!)
I shranked your 55Mb file down to 5.05Mb downscaled with BicubicResizeMT(1280,720,-0.4,0.20) + Temporaldegrain
With mClean nearly the same (5.44Mb).
Warning! Temporaldegrain is deadslow, but worth the effort!
Sorry for being a little offtopic.
Taurus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th September 2017, 19:19   #197  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,166
It's not really off topic, it's an aim of mClean to not be too slow so that's good. The are still other minor improvements that can be done. There is something I can do that could be considered overkill, but if it doesn't affect speed too much and it is useful then why not .
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th September 2017, 02:23   #198  |  Link
lansing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 747
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteryX View Post
It's good to test on a variety of formats
- SD with encoding artifacts
- HD with grain only in limited areas
- grainy video

You're testing as a degrainer, but it's doing a pretty good job as a denoiser.
This just goes down to common sense, you don't test a vacuum cleaner on a clean floor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by burfadel View Post
then go to work on the chroma adjustments. I've already made some minor adjustments that result in a tad better speed.
Just take off the fft3dfilter filter on chroma, desaturation problem fixed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taurus View Post
@ lansing:
Thanks for the sample!
After all this illnoised stuff MysteryX posted, what a relief
I think the dancing grain is artificial generated?
Mad producers .
So far good ol TemporalDegrain seems to be the only script that can handle this stuff eyepleasing.
(Thanks to Sagekilla and Didee for this wonderful piece of work!)
MCTD surpassed it. And KNLMeansCL(s=4,h=3.0) did pretty good as well
lansing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th September 2017, 05:10   #199  |  Link
burfadel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,166
I found knlmeamscl to cause detail or edge sharpness loss. Denoising is ineffective if it also limits visual fidelity. The idea for mClean is to have something that's suitable for most situations, and be simple to use, and also not to be too slow. There's still a lot to do on it. As for chroma, it's just the sigma settings. There's a couple of things I haven't added for that yet also.

The texture like noise isn't removed so much in that anime image, also remember you can set renoise to 0. Noise removal doesn't have to be absolute, some noise can be visually pleasing watching at a normal distance, without those overly flat surfaces. This of course depends on the type and quality of noise. mClean is temporally stabilised which is why it is relatively bandwidth friendly with renoise.
burfadel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th September 2017, 07:15   #200  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by lansing View Post
This just goes down to common sense, you don't test a vacuum cleaner on a clean floor.
You have the pre-conceived idea that this is a degrainer that should be compared to TemporalDegrain and other degrainers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by burfadel View Post
The idea for mClean is to have something that's suitable for most situations, and be simple to use, and also not to be too slow.
This filter was never meant to be limited to grains. It is more meant as a replacement to KnlMeansCL denoising while preserving more details.

In fact, the tests so far show that it's giving better or more consistent results as a denoiser than as a degrainer.

Since it's meant to be suitable for most situations, it's good to test various scenarios. In my case, I'll test the videos I'm actually using it on (and the most difficult cases). I have very little videos with grain, except camera footage.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
denoise, denoiser, mclean

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 11:27.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.