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 10th June 2015, 13:46   #30921  |  Link
James Freeman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by nlnl View Post
But does Fine Sharp ON, Linear Ligt ON (image enhancement) options magically fix the problem?
Heh, No.
How can pre-processing fix a hardware trait? ... It can't.

Going to test the sharpening shaders as soon as I'll have some time.
__________________
System: i7 3770K, GTX660, Win7 64bit, Panasonic ST60, Dell U2410.
James Freeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 13:59   #30922  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 9,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by nlnl View Post
Yes, you are right. Pioneer 5090 TV (video mode) does have problem with 4:4:4 reproduction.


But does Fine Sharp ON, Linear Ligt ON (image enhancement) options magically fix the problem?
These patterns work by exploiting how subsampling works in the majority of PCs. If a post-processing algorithm changes the pattern, they stop working.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 14:27   #30923  |  Link
blindbox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Please use the advanced search for this thread, search for my user name and "FreeSync", and you should get all the answers you need.
I did. Many times. I've been following freesync on this thread for quite a while. And my question stands. Why not just set the output fps to 48 fps for a 24 fps video, and let the freesync drivers handle the rest? Maybe I'm just unable to comprehend that there's possibly a big difference between video frame delivery and game engine's frame delivery.

Unfortunately, I don't have a freesync monitor to try this myself, possibly by spoofing my refresh rate towards madvr.

Last edited by blindbox; 10th June 2015 at 14:34.
blindbox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 14:31   #30924  |  Link
nlnl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
These patterns work by exploiting how subsampling works in the majority of PCs. If a post-processing algorithm changes the pattern, they stop working.
Yes, get it, but post-processing (FS+LL) hides the problem very well.
4:2:2 side of the pattern masked very well, practically only 4:4:4 is visible.
nlnl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 14:54   #30925  |  Link
Barnahadnagy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindbox View Post
And my question stands.
Basically, it would require MadVR to deliver frames when they are needed to be displayed. This works for games (frame rendered then displayed instantly), but MadVR has a timing for the frame. However, MadVR cannot guarantee to send the frame when this time comes (No CPU time, and/or simply not precise enough timers).

This is why we have queues in FSE (apart from more stability), to let the GPU handle the presenting times of frames by using a HW circuit.

TL;DR: You need to present frames exactly when they need to be presented, with no queue. Current systems can't do this.
Barnahadnagy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 14:55   #30926  |  Link
vivan
/人 ◕ ‿‿ ◕ 人\
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Russia
Posts: 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by nlnl View Post
Yes, get it, but post-processing (FS+LL) hides the problem very well.
It doesn't hide the problem, because this image doesn't demonstrate a problem.

Again, this pattern was created for easy subsampling detection. If you change this pattern - then it stops working.

Read what color subsampling is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chroma_subsampling
vivan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 15:22   #30927  |  Link
kalston
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindbox View Post
I did. Many times. I've been following freesync on this thread for quite a while. And my question stands. Why not just set the output fps to 48 fps for a 24 fps video, and let the freesync drivers handle the rest? Maybe I'm just unable to comprehend that there's possibly a big difference between video frame delivery and game engine's frame delivery.

Unfortunately, I don't have a freesync monitor to try this myself, possibly by spoofing my refresh rate towards madvr.
madshi has clearly said he is not interested in working on FreeSync/G-Sync support for the time being (and since all the VRR monitors are purely gaming monitors, I think we should respect that and drop the subject for the time being). It can be made to work and it will certainly happen in the future (I read something about FreeSync and WMP in Windows 10) but right now it would most likely be a waste of time for madshi to bother with this.

VRR monitors like my Rog Swift have no issue running at a fixed refresh rate compatible with virtually any content anyway (100, 120, 144, 59, 60, 85...) and I could probably even make a custom resolution if I needed to.

Last edited by kalston; 10th June 2015 at 15:33.
kalston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 15:36   #30928  |  Link
webs0r
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 68
Barnahadnagy, blindbox already answered this. I'll just explain in different words in case it helps.

Game = don't know when next frame will come (e.g. could be 5ms later, or 60ms)
Video = know exactly the frame spacing (e.g. always 41.6ms for 24fps)

So for video, just match the monitor refresh to the video frame rate (or multiple). Gsync is useless in this case.

A case where it might be useful is if that monitor doesn't support a particular refresh rate. But then you run into that other problem, where if we drove it via software, the software is unlikely to be able to have it hit e.g. 48 Hz exactly. Games just present the next frame when its ready, it doesn't need to worry about "hang on wait until exactly 41.6ms from the last frame, then present". Computers aren't set up to time this precisely that well.

We'd really need those monitors to be able to switch to any arbitrary refresh rate - that would be more useful instead.
webs0r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 15:57   #30929  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by toniash View Post
" Superres is skipped in this situation if the overall upscaling factor is smaller than 1.125x"

Why?
SuperRes can be very useful as a sharpener even on not upscaled images.
The original purpose of SuperRes was to enhance/improve the image quality when doing upscaling. One integral part of the algorithm compares the upscaled image to the original image. Doing this doesn't make too much sense if the upscaling factor is very small.

But yes, SuperRes has some algorithms in it which "do something" even if you don't upscale at all. So yes, it could be an option to run SuperRes even if no scaling is performed at all, or even when downscaling. But this is really outside of what SuperRes was originally written for. I do wonder if running dedicated sharpening algorithms wouldn't produce better results when not scaling. Anyway, for now it is as it is. Once we've dumbed all the settings down to low/medium/high, we can discuss whether it might make sense to allow SuperRes also when not upscaling, but let's first reduce all those options, to make image quality comparisons easier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by toniash View Post
Another question: How processing changes when SuperRes is "applied first"?
It doesn't change much. This option only defines in which order FineSharp, LumaSharpen and SuperRes are applied, if you have enabled more than one of those 3 options in "upscaling refinement". That's all.
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 19:47   #30930  |  Link
Hyllian
Registered User
 
Hyllian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
If you could change that to (or dual license it as) MIT or BSD license, that would be most awesome! Of course I would give you proper credit in my readme file (and later in some credits window, if I ever add one, not sure yet). If you find MIT/BSD too generous, LGPL would also work, but if I could choose, I'd *strongly* prefer MIT/BSD.
There you have it --> https://github.com/libretro/common-s.../xbr/super-xbr

MIT license from now on! I was already willing to do it for some time.
Hyllian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 19:50   #30931  |  Link
sandro08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 2
Hello everyone

I am new to the forum and I am the last few years
I ask your help for madVR passage 10 bit
I made some screenshots for you to see my parametrage
my graphics card is a nvidia 970gtx and my diffuser is a w1070 benq I think to be consistent after the explanations given here
My problem is the following

I can not seem to have the 10-bit option in the control panel nvidia, I can only access 8 bits
I plug in hdmi







excuse me if the question was asked already

friendly
sandro08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 19:56   #30932  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,976
your screen doesn't support 10 bit.

maybe a limitation of your HDMI cable but very unlikely.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 20:03   #30933  |  Link
sandro08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
your screen doesn't support 10 bit.

maybe a limitation of your HDMI cable but very unlikely.
ok though when I did the test ca looks ok
cacle my hdmi is 1.3

thank you
sandro08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 20:30   #30934  |  Link
yok833
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandro08 View Post
ok though when I did the test ca looks ok
cacle my hdmi is 1.3

thank you
I have the same issue with my Panasonic plasma St50 which is quite recent too... It can only support 12bit with 23hz but no option available with 60hz (I tried with an hdmi cable highspeed 2.0)... So I guess my TV cannot support it...
yok833 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 20:34   #30935  |  Link
Della
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
your screen doesn't support 10 bit.

maybe a limitation of your HDMI cable but very unlikely.
Just curious, how can you tell that from the information he provided?
Simply because the CP doesn't present the option?
Thanks
Della is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 20:37   #30936  |  Link
Shiandow
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 752
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
In some image areas ringing is beneficial, in others not. I think we would get better results by using your algo once, then sharpening the result in a clever way, then run your algo again, then sharpen it again. The sharpening should have a similar effect to running jinc. Of course the sharpening would need to have some anti-ringing incorporated, too. A combination of LimitedSharpenFaster (AviSynth script) and FineSharp should work well.
Might be interesting to combine super-xBR with SuperRes (or one of it's variations), I suspect that those two will combine especially well.
Shiandow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 20:57   #30937  |  Link
Hyllian
Registered User
 
Hyllian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiandow View Post
Might be interesting to combine super-xBR with SuperRes (or one of it's variations), I suspect that those two will combine especially well.
super-xbr has a internal param that let you control the level of edge detection. In those images it's set to 1.0. If I had set it to 0.0, it would try to find edge even in grass and other textures. I think it has the same objective of SuperRes, right?
Hyllian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 21:35   #30938  |  Link
Shiandow
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyllian View Post
super-xbr has a internal param that let you control the level of edge detection. In those images it's set to 1.0. If I had set it to 0.0, it would try to find edge even in grass and other textures. I think it has the same objective of SuperRes, right?
Not exactly, the objective of SuperRes is to upscale an image such that downscaling it will give the original image. It then imposes some constraints on the image to make this process well defined and numerically stable.

So far one of the biggest problems has been that this process doesn't necessarily remove aliasing. If done well it doesn't add any, but removing it still seems a bit difficult. However it is pretty good at recovering detail. So the idea is that if you combine it with an algorithm which is good at removing aliasing, you get an image with low aliasing and good sharpness.
Shiandow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 21:56   #30939  |  Link
Hyllian
Registered User
 
Hyllian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiandow View Post
Not exactly, the objective of SuperRes is to upscale an image such that downscaling it will give the original image. It then imposes some constraints on the image to make this process well defined and numerically stable.
Interesting. Though I think it's a strange objective, because I don't know if it can guarantee you'll get a good result. Depending on the downscale method, a nearest neightbor upscaled image would be a perfect result for SuperRes.
Hyllian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th June 2015, 23:30   #30940  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyllian View Post
Interesting. Though I think it's a strange objective, because I don't know if it can guarantee you'll get a good result. Depending on the downscale method, a nearest neightbor upscaled image would be a perfect result for SuperRes.
It does sound a bit strange, but as you say it depends a lot on the algorithm used for downscaling, and on the algorithm used to upscale the difference/error comparison result back to the upscaled image size. If you use linear sampling for downscaling and nearest neighbor for upscaling the difference/error, then probably the perfect SuperRes result would be nearest neighbor. But if you use better downscaling/error upscaling algorithms, that is no longer true. E.g. imagine you downscale the NNEDI3 (or your) image back to the original image size, using a decent downscaling algorithm. The difference to the original image will be very *very* small. So you take that very small difference, scale it back up to the upscaled image and apply it to the upscaled image. It does not really result in nearest neighbor at all, if you upscale the error/difference with a good algorithm. E.g. using Jinc upscaling, the upscaled difference should be pretty much free of aliasing. The only situation where the difference gets bigger is if the original upscaling algorithm made some really bad decisions somewhere. E.g. this whole concept works quite well to remove some of the directional artifacts of the NEDI algorithm (not NNEDI3, but NEDI).

That said, I'm not totally convinced yet that SuperRes is better than "simple" good sharpening, when starting with a good artifact-free upscaling algorithm. Still need to do some more investigation into the matter. SuperRes is a relatively "young" algorithm.

@Shiandow, what I've found is that the SuperRes downscaling/difference/upscaling sequence has somewhat similar effects to an unsharp mask. The downscaling/upscaling is somewhat comparable to the gaussian blur in the unsharp mask. Which means that the upscaled image is sharpened by SuperRes, even if you set sharpness to 0.0, and also gets some ringing. It might make sense to include some anti-ringing surpression right when applying the difference to the upscaled image, instead of relying on the extra anti-ringing pass. It's usually better for image quality to avoid adding ringing instead of trying to remove it afterwards. Just a thought, though...
madshi 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 04:35.


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