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 December 2012, 13:09   #16141  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 9,759
You should check "My display is already calibrated" and select for what colorspace it was calibrated, most likely BT709
Of course this means your device was properly calibrated against a standard test signal, and not the output of some broken cablebox or something.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 14:02   #16142  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sneals2000 View Post
I'd say that you should always assume 720x576 video is ITU 601 compliant. It's the only proper standard for 720x576 video that I know of...

That means the 4:3 or 16:9 video is within the 702x576 central area. There is no other offical standard.

Of course some mastering may not follow ITU 601 and not follow any official standard and instead map the 720x576 image to be 4:3 or 16:9. That is non-standard.

I guess there's no real way of knowing...
TBH, I usually get a FS picture with 25fps FS DVD content using a 4:3 DAR but sometimes(mainly NTSC IIRC) it did have tiny vertical black bars so yeah OK, I will leave the AR at 4:3 but will slightly stretch the picture horizontally until it'll become FS if need be

anyway, after the story of HD being encoded to BD with non-specs-compliant primaries, yet another uncertain spec to deal with

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
I think it would be a bad idea if I just scaled all 720x576 content to 1050x576 now because my impression is that it would produce stretched images for many newer DVDs. But then simply ignoring the whole issue might not be such a good idea, either. Oh well. Not really sure what to do now...
add an "ITU-compliant scaling" hotkey that would stretch horizontally by a few percents? ^^

Last edited by leeperry; 10th December 2012 at 14:55.
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 14:49   #16143  |  Link
pandy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,044
Guys if You All trying to be so precise, pro and accurate then please check BT.1700 and BT.801 test signal No. 3. - there is 706 pixels in active video line.
pandy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 17:21   #16144  |  Link
Sneals2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by pandy View Post
Guys if You All trying to be so precise, pro and accurate then please check BT.1700 and BT.801 test signal No. 3. - there is 706 pixels in active video line.
Isn't BT 801 testing both the full 720 sample line and the 702 active line? I thought it was there to check whether full and 4:3/16:9 active were both being passed or not?

There are black/white/black transitions at the edge of the 720 line 601 frame, and again at the edge of the 702 line active line area?

If you see two pulses at the edge of frame, the full 720 line payload is surviving, if you only see the inner pulses, you're only seeing the 702 central section surviving? Or am I misreading this? Isn't the first pulse sample 0-5, black from 6 to 9 (with active 702 samples starting at sample 8?) and then another pulse sample 10-15 ?

I don't think that test signal defines 4:3/16:9 active as 706 lines does it?

Last edited by Sneals2000; 10th December 2012 at 17:24.
Sneals2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 17:28   #16145  |  Link
Sneals2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonQ View Post
That may be what should happen with regards to the broadcast, but the software isn't treating it properly.

Maybe it should be an auto-detection thing - if the outer x number of columns are blank, assume it's ITU 601 and scale accordingly. If they're not blank, assume the whole frame is meant to be 16:9 and scale accordingly.
That won't work in all cases. There's no requirement for correctly scaled ITU 601 to have black samples in the 9 samples either side of the 702x576 "4:3/16:9" frame. As more and more content is originated HD, then this is increasingly likely to be the case (16:9 1920x1080 or 1280x720 HD should be downconverted to fill the 702x576 centre section), however SD originated content can have content in the edges of frame (such as vision mixer mattes, DVE borders etc.)

Assuming that the presence of picture content outside the 702x576 central section implies non-ITU 601 compliance is not a safe assumption.
Sneals2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 17:30   #16146  |  Link
DragonQ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sneals2000 View Post
Assuming that the presence of picture content outside the 702x576 central section implies non-ITU 601 compliance is not a safe assumption.
OK but is there a better way?
__________________
HTPC Hardware: Intel Celeron G530; nVidia GT 430
HTPC Software: Windows 7; MediaPortal 1.19.0; Kodi DSPlayer 17.6; LAV Filters (DXVA2); MadVR
TV Setup: LG OLED55B7V; Onkyo TX-NR515; Minix U9-H
DragonQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 17:37   #16147  |  Link
Sneals2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
It's not pedantic at all. I'm very interested in such things.
Phew! Don't want to offend. Love MadVR!

Quote:
From my point of view, following the standards is very important. However, making the majority of content look right is even more important. So for me the key questions are:

(1) Do users today play more content which needs 720x576 -> 1024x576 scaling, or do they play more content which needs 720x576 -> 1050x576 scaling?
(2) What do the majority of DVD studios do today?
Can't really comment - and to be honest it's tricky to know.
Quote:
(3) What do the majority of broadcasters do today?
Assuming they're using reasonably standard SD broadcast kit I'd expect 702x576->1024x576 (or 720x576->1050x576) scaling is the right approach - as broadcasters are likely to closely follow ITU 601 - or try to.

Of course some kit and software may not be fully compliant - but I would expect compliance to be an aim.

However as more and more channels are originated in HD, with their SD variants just a straight downconvert at the end of the playout chain, the only device that will dictate their compliance (or non-compliance) will be the HD->SD downconverter, which actually makes things a lot simpler as this becomes the only real place (apart from distribution/emission encoding) where things could get scaled incorrectly.

I would expect all mainstream broadcast downconversion products to be fully ITU 601 compliant - so the HD to SD downconversion will be to the central 702x576 area in a 720x576 frame.
Quote:
(these are not questions I expect you to be able to answer)

It seems to me that probably the majority of newly released DVDs these day probably need 720x576 -> 1024x576 scaling. This is an educated guess, though, and would need to be confirmed first. I've not sure about (3). There's a good chance that the majority of broadcast material might need 720x576 -> 1050x576 scaling. But it's hard to know for sure.

So what all this leaves us in is a total mess... I think it would be a bad idea if I just scaled all 720x576 content to 1050x576 now because my impression is that it would produce stretched images for many newer DVDs. But then simply ignoring the whole issue might not be such a good idea, either. Oh well. Not really sure what to do now...
Not sure there is an answer. Make it an option? If people mainly use MadVR for TV viewing then 702x576 scaling is likely to be the correct assumption?

Be interesting to know what real DVD and Blu-ray players do when they upconvert.
Sneals2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 17:40   #16148  |  Link
Sneals2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonQ View Post
OK but is there a better way?
No - I don't think there is a way. It appears that some non-ITU 601 scaled content has black samples either side as well, and ITU 601 content can legitimately have content outside the edges AIUI.
Sneals2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 18:05   #16149  |  Link
mandarinka
Registered User
 
mandarinka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
From my point of view, following the standards is very important. However, making the majority of content look right is even more important. So for me the key questions are:

(1) Do users today play more content which needs 720x576 -> 1024x576 scaling, or do they play more content which needs 720x576 -> 1050x576 scaling?
(2) What do the majority of DVD studios do today?
(3) What do the majority of broadcasters do today?

(these are not questions I expect you to be able to answer)

It seems to me that probably the majority of newly released DVDs these day probably need 720x576 -> 1024x576 scaling. This is an educated guess, though, and would need to be confirmed first. I've not sure about (3). There's a good chance that the majority of broadcast material might need 720x576 -> 1050x576 scaling. But it's hard to know for sure.
Hmm, hard to say conclusively, but as you can see, the pecularities of ITU scaling are largely unknown to people, including really experienced persons - for example, all PC players ignore it and "do it wrong" (853x480, 720x540 for ntsc, etc...). I think that the closer the DVD authoring was to amateur territory, the more likely it is that ITU scaling was not used. Friends told me that they saw anime dvds (series form 2000s, made on computers) that didn't use ITU scaling. Said friends tried to find shapes that were supposed to be circular and to check both scaling approaches to see which will produce more precise circle.

I tried this myself several times (but in my case, I used NTSC DVDs of older anime). In my experiments, in all DVDs I tried (and where I found usable frames for checking) I discovered that they were most likely to have been created assuming ITU scaling. (Edit: Actually I think I found one case where it was inconclusive, too. I couldn't tell which was the right way there).

That is, for NTSC a 4/3 source looked right at 720x527, not at 720x540. A 16/9 source looked correctly at 875x480 and not at 853x480. Of course, it is still just anecdotal evidence, but I think that professional authoring teams do use ITU.
(The dvds were old anime material, but included both older releases from early 2000s and more recent remaster releases). Anyway, now I always assume that DVDs use ITU scaling. it might be an opinion, but I chose to err on the side of specifications

Last edited by mandarinka; 10th December 2012 at 18:17.
mandarinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 18:32   #16150  |  Link
DarkSpace
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sneals2000 View Post
Not sure there is an answer. Make it an option? If people mainly use MadVR for TV viewing then 702x576 scaling is likely to be the correct assumption?
I agree that an option on whether or not to use ITU scaling might be the best alternative. I sometimes encode movies myself (for example, I once converted an swf animation to an image sequence and then encoded that into a video; I don't have either the animation or the final video any more, though), and when I do, I take great care to use the mathematically correct (non-ITU compensated) Pixel Aspect Ratio. So, understandably, I wouldn't want anyone or anything to mess with those values I calculated.
However, I also have some (not too many, enough) DVD movies that definitely do not use the full frame (looks like they crop 2.5 pixels from both left and right), so I'd assume ITU scaling should be used for them. I don't have the BDs for comparison.
Also, I don't know how BluRays handle SD content, is it encoded with ITU scaling instead of "pure Pixel Aspect Ratio" at all? Personally, I'd assume that since BD was created with Digital Video in mind, the SD content on BDs might just as well use "simple", non-ITU scaling.
Maybe (I doubt it, though), there could also be rules that only apply when the input is MPEG-2 and one of the 2 standard resolutions. Though, I believe that Aspect Ratio correction should actually be the Splitter's work...
DarkSpace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 18:34   #16151  |  Link
rack04
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,528
I'm planning to upgrade my current 8800GT video card with a GTX650ti after the holidays. They have 2 variants of this card, 1GB and 2GB. Will I see any benefit going with the 2GB version of card if I strictly use it for HTPC (madVR, LAV Filters, Reclock)?
rack04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 18:56   #16152  |  Link
dansrfe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by rack04 View Post
I'm planning to upgrade my current 8800GT video card with a GTX650ti after the holidays. They have 2 variants of this card, 1GB and 2GB. Will I see any benefit going with the 2GB version of card if I strictly use it for HTPC (madVR, LAV Filters, Reclock)?
The more the better. Go for the 2GB, definitely.
dansrfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 19:15   #16153  |  Link
Heuer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 15
I have a GTX650Ti with 1GB GDDR5 and it handles everything I can throw at it with LAV+madVR+Re-clock running. Jinc and anti-ringing are set and GPU load rarely goes above 10% and temperatures, on the hybrid active/passive cooled MSI card, are never higher than 45C with the most challenging of upscaling. With 1080p it is just ticking over. Can't think why you wopuld need 2Gb unless you are gaming, in which case a GTX660 would be more appropriate.
Heuer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 20:27   #16154  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heuer View Post
I have a GTX650Ti with 1GB GDDR5 and it handles everything I can throw at it with LAV+madVR+Re-clock running. Jinc and anti-ringing are set and GPU load rarely goes above 10%
what kind of load do you get with Jinc3 AR for both luma and chroma when upscaling 30fps SD to 1080p please?

2GB is already overkill for most games FWIR..

Last edited by leeperry; 10th December 2012 at 20:45.
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 21:47   #16155  |  Link
JEEB
もこたんインしたお!
 
JEEB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Finland / Japan
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkSpace View Post
Also, I don't know how BluRays handle SD content, is it encoded with ITU scaling instead of "pure Pixel Aspect Ratio" at all? Personally, I'd assume that since BD was created with Digital Video in mind, the SD content on BDs might just as well use "simple", non-ITU scaling.
Maybe (I doubt it, though), there could also be rules that only apply when the input is MPEG-2 and one of the 2 standard resolutions. Though, I believe that Aspect Ratio correction should actually be the Splitter's work...
As noted both in the blu-ray specification as well as at the SD parts of x264bluray.com, the simplified ITU aspect ratios (40:33/10:11 and 16:11/12:11) are to be used. Just like with DVDs as far as I know.
__________________
[I'm human, no debug]
JEEB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 22:12   #16156  |  Link
Hwasin
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6
Can someone explain what is this new subtitle interface?
Hwasin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 22:18   #16157  |  Link
sneaker_ger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,417
It allows subtitle filters to draw the subtitles with the full display resolution (and in 4:4:4) instead of just with the source video resolution (mostly 4:2:0). madVR will then overlay the subtitles itself onto the video image before output. This potentially increases quality and is compatible with native DXVA2 decoding. MPC-HCs internal subtitle filter already uses a similar interface.
Currently no subtitle filter supports this, but the xy-vsfilter team is working on it.

Last edited by sneaker_ger; 10th December 2012 at 22:22.
sneaker_ger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 22:18   #16158  |  Link
jmonier
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 183
It's covered in these two threads:

http://code.google.com/p/xy-vsfilter/issues/detail?id=40

http://code.google.com/p/xy-vsfilter/issues/detail?id=91
jmonier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2012, 22:33   #16159  |  Link
DragonQ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 930
What is the point of 720x576 if only the 702x576 portion is meant to be the 16:9 area? Why not just use 704x576 for SD?
__________________
HTPC Hardware: Intel Celeron G530; nVidia GT 430
HTPC Software: Windows 7; MediaPortal 1.19.0; Kodi DSPlayer 17.6; LAV Filters (DXVA2); MadVR
TV Setup: LG OLED55B7V; Onkyo TX-NR515; Minix U9-H
DragonQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th December 2012, 00:04   #16160  |  Link
Sneals2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonQ View Post
What is the point of 720x576 if only the 702x576 portion is meant to be the 16:9 area? Why not just use 704x576 for SD?
A couple of reasons. It allowed a common total digital line length for both 50 and 60Hz standards, and allowed some wiggle room for analogue sourced content (which back in the early 80s was almost all content)

If you A/D and D/A sampled the analogue output of an analogue 1" VTR in 1985 you wouldn't want just 1 sample of latitude either side...

ITU 601 pre-dates modern digital compression and transmission systems by many, many years.

If you're asking why bother now - many do in fact use 704x576 for broadcast. However intermediate kit should pass the 18 samples outside 702x576 (for the same reason they are sampled in the first place)

Last edited by Sneals2000; 11th December 2012 at 00:06.
Sneals2000 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 09:44.


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