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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
13th October 2006, 01:08 | #1 | Link |
Huh?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 3,103
|
Plain deinterlacing or Bob+SelectEvery: what do you prefer and why?
Is there an inherent advantage for each method on particular cases?
__________________
Read Decomb's readmes and tutorials, the IVTC tutorial and the capture guide in order to learn about combing and how to deal with it. |
13th October 2006, 01:24 | #2 | Link |
interlace this!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: i'm in ur transfers, addin noise
Posts: 4,555
|
bob.selecteven/odd can be useful for detecting if something's already been deinterlaced (the bad way ala final cut pro or premiere). if there's not-very-much difference between the source and the bob.selecteven then it's been deinterlaced and needs to be eedi2'ed up to a higher res.
but generally you can tell that just by looking at it
__________________
sucking the life out of your videos since 2004 |
13th October 2006, 01:33 | #3 | Link |
Huh?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 3,103
|
So Bob+SelectEvery is not a good deinterlacing method then? What about straight-up deinterlacing, is TDeint+EEDI2 still the preferred method?
__________________
Read Decomb's readmes and tutorials, the IVTC tutorial and the capture guide in order to learn about combing and how to deal with it. |
13th October 2006, 01:41 | #4 | Link |
interlace this!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: i'm in ur transfers, addin noise
Posts: 4,555
|
i think the preferred method is the one that gives the better visual quality vs speed tradeoff. depending on the situation that's usually somewhere between leakkerneldeint and tdeint.
[edit] of course, if you want a guarantee of no artefacts (except aliasing), then bob.selecteven is probably the way to go
__________________
sucking the life out of your videos since 2004 Last edited by Mug Funky; 13th October 2006 at 01:46. |
13th October 2006, 01:56 | #5 | Link |
Huh?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 3,103
|
I'm only interested in the best quality short of interlaced encoding. I guess that still means TDeint+EEDI2 then, thanks for the feedback .
__________________
Read Decomb's readmes and tutorials, the IVTC tutorial and the capture guide in order to learn about combing and how to deal with it. |
14th October 2006, 00:29 | #7 | Link |
Huh?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 3,103
|
MVBob and its variants are bobbers: they deinterlace to double the original framerate. What I'm asking about is same-framerate deinterlacers.
__________________
Read Decomb's readmes and tutorials, the IVTC tutorial and the capture guide in order to learn about combing and how to deal with it. |
14th October 2006, 02:42 | #8 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,391
|
Basically, quality-wise both methods are the same. The result depends on the used deinterlacing routine only. A same-framerate deinterlacer will ask you for a "field=top/or/bottom" parameter, defining which of both fields will be thrown away & interpolated: Same framerate = one field doomed.
A bobber does the same, but after each frame inserts another frame that is based on the previously thrown-away field: Framerate doubled by not dooming one field. Or, perhaps like this: Same-framerate-deinterlacing: > source.Deinterlace(field=[top or bottom]) Double-framerate-deinterlacing (Bobbing): > source.DoubleWeave().Deinterlace(field=[alternating]) So, obviously, decisive for the result is only the deinterlacing algo. And that's where MVbob is bringing an additional choice over TDeint, LeakKernel-XX, and Co. : all these are "only" motion-adaptive, i.e. in moving areas, they have to give up & can only do interpolation guesswork. MVBob currently is the only one taking the chance to search around for really-present image information that can be transported into those missing scanlines. I'd say that, in theory, MVBob.SelectEither() should deliver superior image quality compared to the other methods, simply because the technique used for deinterlacing is more advanced. Note that this doesnt say that the technique is already maxed-out ... MVBob does have its own problems just as well, so it's not necessarily "the best" of the available choices. The current implementation of the more advanced technique still has a few issues left over ... something should be done in that area.
__________________
- We´re at the beginning of the end of mankind´s childhood - My little flickr gallery. (Yes indeed, I do have hobbies other than digital video!) |
14th October 2006, 03:38 | #9 | Link |
Huh?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 3,103
|
Thanks for the explananation, Didée .
__________________
Read Decomb's readmes and tutorials, the IVTC tutorial and the capture guide in order to learn about combing and how to deal with it. |
14th October 2006, 07:37 | #10 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 48
|
Quote:
While on this interlaced material processing department, I am often affected by "highest-quality-itis syndrome", and uses mvBob, temporal or spatial-temporal denoising filters, SeparateFields, SelectEvery(4, 0, 3), Weave method for intermediate deinterlacing of interlaced footage. That is when I leave my PC running overnight |
|
21st October 2006, 01:46 | #11 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,391
|
Quote:
__________________
- We´re at the beginning of the end of mankind´s childhood - My little flickr gallery. (Yes indeed, I do have hobbies other than digital video!) |
|
21st October 2006, 02:57 | #12 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 209
|
Quote:
My first full-field capture device was an IOMega Buz (remember those?) from 1998 which was essentially a very high quality Zoran MJPEG capture device coupled with some truly sh*tty software drivers. The input was awesome but the drivers didn't pay attention to field order and some captures were BFF and others were TFF. To fix the problem, I attempted deinterlacing every single clip (both field duplication and field blending) but you could clearly see, on the Buz's video output hooked up to a television, that it destroyed the smooth motion I had just captured. I couldn't live with that, so I invested in a Pinnacle device (with the same chipset, heh) that had proper drivers that worked. So all this rambling has a point: What footage do you have where same-frame deinterlacing is the "best" option? |
|
21st October 2006, 03:00 | #13 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 209
|
Quote:
|
|
21st October 2006, 10:14 | #14 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 48
|
Quote:
BTW, I was also an ex-user of IOMega Buz . Yea, good hardware, bad driver and ugly support! Luckily 1n 1998 my required final output was VCD, and TMpegEnc did a nice job of deinterlacing and encoding. I later switched to a Philips SAA 7134 chipset capture card and never looked back. Indeed it is still my capture card via S-video input. |
|
21st October 2006, 14:52 | #17 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 48
|
The topic title keeps changing. i'm sorry to say that the current tilte "Plain deinterlacing or Bob+SelectEvery: what do you prefer and why" is not quite appropriate. TDeint (with or without EEDI2) is a very sophisticated deinterlacer and will do a much better job of deinterlacing than a dumb/not-so-smart bobber +SelectEvery
|
21st October 2006, 16:29 | #18 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,926
|
For me personaly i allways use Securebob it's a good Speed/Quality tradeof for me.
but the best Speed/Quality @ the moment wich sadly yet can't be used (at least no one wrote a custom allocator for it yet) is Nvidias Per Pixel Adaptive Motion Deinterlacer inside their Mpeg-2 Decoder (PureVideo) it has no problems to convert 1080i into double framerate progressive Video in Realtime (on the GPU) pretty exciting to see that in front of your eyes, quality isn't as good as tdeint tough Tdeint with GPU support that would be the revolution
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :) It is about Time Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late ! http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004 Last edited by CruNcher; 21st October 2006 at 16:41. |
21st October 2006, 17:13 | #19 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,391
|
IMO, SecureDeint is too anxious with its motion masking. Avoiding motion artefacts is good and all, but if it comes at the cost of many "in fact static" areas still keeping bobobobobbing, then it's not a good tradeoff.
Motion masking of the upcoming upproach is fully adaptive to local complexity, like my unheared proposal in the TDeint thread. Works like a charm, nonetheless. Wrapping it out ala SecureDeint won't be a problem.
__________________
- We´re at the beginning of the end of mankind´s childhood - My little flickr gallery. (Yes indeed, I do have hobbies other than digital video!) |
22nd October 2006, 13:37 | #20 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Here, there and everywhere
Posts: 1,197
|
Hi Didee,
In testing your ‘SoonToComeBob’, I thought you might be interested (as I would) in seeing how it fares with this clip, which I think is as good a ‘deinterlace stress test’ as any. http://rapidshare.com/files/229055/T..._YV12_3sec.avi It’s sample from one of the reference D1 576i25 sequences (src6_ref__625) at ftp://ftp.crc.ca/crc/vqeg/TestSequences/Reference/ I converted the original 8 bit YUV4:2:2 (UYVY or YUY2) sequence (Top Field First) toYV12 (FFDShow-HuffYuv) via RawSource and ConvertToYV12(interlaced=true) and used a 3 second sample as the source for testing: MVBob (latest public version 14.9.06) SecureBob TDeint-EEDI2 SmoothDeinterlace I intentionally sampled the clip to include a scene change. After deinterlacing I resized to 720x544 (Lancozos3). As expected, MVBob and SecureBob are rather more effective in avoiding residual interlacing artifacts, most noticeable with the white road line and around the captions in the areas of fast background motion. Here are grabs of frame 102: http://rapidshare.com/files/230193/F...ob_14.9.06.jpg http://rapidshare.com/files/230258/F...Secure_Bob.jpg http://rapidshare.com/files/230342/F...eint_EEDI2.jpg http://rapidshare.com/files/230416/F...ooth_Deint.jpg However, on stepping through the frames, it will be seen that MVBob and SecureBob are rather more susceptible to modulation (swelling) in the height of the captions with some bobbing of the strip margin. Of course, this is barely noticeable on normal playback, but is it what you are referring to by ‘bobbing of static areas’? Last edited by WorBry; 22nd October 2006 at 13:49. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|