jmac's other plugins support page

[jmac698]

If you have questions about anything except TBC, don't be shy.

My plugins start here
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...13#post1581813

Decomet - remove 'comets' from video tapes
taverage - temporal average of all frames
findpos - find pixels and return their position, by line
dejitter/jdejitter - crop/resize differently by line
jcorr - correlation between two frames
corrbyline - correlation between two lines
slicer - decode digital codes embedded in video
addcode - add digital codes to video
mandelbrot - make a fractal animation video in Avisynth

Update: all my plugins are under the New Plugins thread now.

[StainlessS]

Well done, I was hoping that you would get yourself a plug page.

Thankyou, will be a regular visitor.

[jmac698]

These don't make anyone's encodes better, I think they will hardly be used, but they are more to support my larger scripts which will get updated in due time. Anyhow I was just wondering if you tried any, if the included demo scripts worked, and what version of Avisynth you used, and what OS. I think they should all work on 2.58 and 2.62, in xp and win7 x64. I'm not sure about the MT version, I had this installed before but got a lot of crashes so I've gotten rid of it for now.

[jmac698]

If you've got 2 minutes, you should try out my Mandelbrot filter. It's just pretty

[Groucho2004]

@jmac698
Is there a reason you're not releasing the source code? I would like to compile the Mandelbrot DLL myself statically so I don't have to deal with the MS runtime mess.

[jmac698]

That's one I especially wanted to release source for, however it doesn't work right now (if you check the relase notes).
But I can make static versions, I guess I should do that always now!

Update: static version posted.

[jmac698]

Updated decomet, slicer.

[jmac698]

Updated addcode.

[Emulgator]

jmac698, just in case you want to tackle an universal dotcrawl remover:

I have some ideas for that (Dotcrawl) that have never been used before.
It is ntsc or pal? Can we have a short clip?

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Dotcrawl description for evaluation of a forward compensation:

In stronger saturated parts of encoded NTSC (and probably PAL as well) 4:2:0 YV12 frames (pulldown ignored)
a scrolling 2x2 pixel checkerboard moiré becomes visible.

The fault lies in Y plane only !
Greyscale() (forcing U,V to 127) keeps the fault, Forcing Y to 0 or 127 shows clean U,V planes.

This fault is moving vertically through the lines stepping height down by 1-2-1, so pattern is repeating every 4 frames:

Frame 0:
Y of lines 0+1 modulated into positive direction
AND Y of lines 2+3 modulated into negative direction
Frame 1: (Fault steps 1 line down):
Y of line 0 modulated into negative direction
AND Y of lines 1+2 modulated into positive direction
AND Y of Line 3 modulated into negative direction
Frame 2: (Fault steps 2 lines down, so pattern is reversed to Frame 1):
Y of line 0 modulated into positive direction
AND Y of lines 1+2 modulated into negative direction
AND Y of Line 3 modulated into positive direction
Frame 3: (Fault steps 1 line down):
Y of lines 0+1 modulated into positive direction
AND Y of lines 2+3 modulated into negative direction.

I get the impression as if strong U,V gradients are leaking into Y
and modulate Y-values of neighboring 2x2 squares checkerboardwise in opposite directions under certain conditions.
Y values are modulated in 2x2 pixel squares, one square has its Y-value modulated to (Y+F),
the surrounding squares have their Y-values modulated to (Y-F).

For a vertical border at a given x the arithmetical mean value of Y-values in lines (n,n+1) and (n+2,n+3)
would give the correct Y-values,
the affected vicinity around the vertical border is +-3 to +-4 pixels wide.

The colour of the border element (blue/red) influences the phase !
At right border: skyblue and orange wings trigger different line pairs !

Local Condition: A contour where saturation (U,V) rises/falls more than a certain amount per pixel.
In vicinity of U,V deviating more than +-30(?) from 127(?) the fault occurs and the stronger the saturation, the stronger is F.

A purely saturated area does not exhibit this fault.

A strong chroma signal change is needed to watch this fault.
Strong vertical black/blue or black/red or black/orange or black/green borders will show best how it behaves.

Black/Grey/White changes do not trigger the fault.

A short sample is here:
http://www.dvd-manufactur.de/files/TC_VTS_01_3a.VOB

-----------------------------------------------------

For building an universal Dotcrawl remover I would suggest a 3-step approach:

Step 1: Forward compensation by manually finding of leaking thresholds, leaking radius and leaking coefficients (curves ?) for U,V.
While manually finding compensation coefficients Step 2 (spatial FFT Filtering) and 3 (temporal Filtering a la Didée) must be bypassed.

Step 2: Manually finding of FFT coefficients in F2Quiver/UV. While finding FFT coefficients Step 1 and Step 3 must be bypassed.

Step 3: Temporal compensation as in http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=165409

Then probably applying all 3 steps in sequence or independently, appropriate to the source.

[jmac698]

Mandelbrot updated.
This is funny:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...667#post799667

I'll get back to you.

[jmac698]

If you see error 0x7E it means ERROR_MOD_NOT_FOUND

Install all the modules (libraries) that the plugin relies on. In the case of my plugins, that would be the VC runtime. I'm trying to migrate to creating plugins in a such a way that nothing external is needed. The plugins have worked for me on a separate computer, however I don't have a 64bit OS to test on (as I have some special equipment that only works in older systems).

I had a report about decomet not working, what I can do is make a new version in C++ with the new process that doesn't require anything external.

[StainlessS]

Jmac, this is one of the reasons I suggested linking to this thread from "new plugins & utilities' thread:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...70#post1583470

Your actual links should be here on first page, all in one place.

You will continue to get user responses in new plugs thread so long as it remains the way it is.

[jmac698]

But then so would anyone else who announces there...

[StainlessS]

Nope, many/most (the savvy) posts links to the plugins support thread.
EDIT: Should at least point to support thread if keeping direct link.

[jmac698]

Something new in development, might turn into a script. http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=165462 how to sync noisy video captures of the same video.

[jmac698]

jcorr updated, much faster.

[jmac698]

New plugin, findampbyline.

I've used it to do a frequency measurement on a VHS.
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/137533

What you are seeing:
The first image is the frequency sweep. The first line is a single sinewave as luma. You can count the one bright spot in the middle.
Next it goes 2,6,10...a total of 35 frequencies, ending at 134 sines per line (or 2.5MHz). The approximate frequency in real terms is 18.75KHz * n.
The histogram to the right is not symmetrical; this means there was some clipping in the capture. The right side has been autocalibrated to 235 (max white), while the left side shows there was some clipping in the black. The lack of the symmetry about the middle shows some non-linearity (in fact the middle values are about +5 more than the input).

The next image shows the frequency response, as found by findampbyline(mode=1). Based on a levels calibration, where it hits luma=255 means the expected and flat frequency response. Instead there's a bit of a hump and it steadily declines.
When it passes the blue line in the histogram, that's the official cutoff for a bandwidth rating.
In this case, we're getting about .5MHz. The maximum frequency is about 2.75MHz (not shown). On the histogram area, the X axis is amplitude normalized to DC, the Y axis is frequency. Both scales are linear. Note that amplitude can be more than 1, if there's some peaking at a certain frequency. Accuracy is about 1% for the most part.

Ignore the two sudden drops, those are just glitches. It's a very experimental test. (They actually come from dropped frames - long story).

I'll do a much better calibration, and I'd like to measure all my devices this way, with an automated test.

I see so many people looking for test patterns and trying to come up with measurements with them. I think swept sines and resolution charts are useless! With my technique, all the measurements can be done automatically and plotted. I'd like to make a test DVD people can download to test all their equipment.

It looks like the tests will have to go in this order; capture window, levels/non-linearity, frequency response.
-
My plugins are just building a base right now, since there is sooo much missing from Avisynth. It will be after that that I can make some real progress in the filtering that everyone loves.

[jmac698]

Emulgator,
ok, I read your idea - I know exactly how dot crawl happens, and can create the exact formula for it. I could probably come up with something if I spent some time on it. Thanks for the explanation !

[jmac698]

Huhn - this is becoming a blog of sorts.

I think I learned something quite interesting today. I noticed the peak on my test of VCR frequency response. Next, I looked at the datasheet for a head amplifier. Three things I've learned;

1 I thought I could connect a digitzer straight to the heads and somehow get a better quality signal. In fact, the single chip head amplifier directly outputs the VCR signal, which means it demodulates the FM signal. So nothing as simple as touching a digital oscilloscope to a couple pins. Also, changing out this one chip for a better one might give less noise or different sharpness.
2 Some issues with layout can cause the peaking I've observed. So I know my VCR might not be good quality. I also know it can be fixed by soldering a single part. Or I can do this in software.
3 The head amplifier directly combines Y and C signals, so in fact having s-video in is pointless I want to check this with a few more chips. I've always wondered this; first I read that the "color-under" method means the signals are separate, but instead they are just separated by the amplifer. So I want to do more research.

[TheFluff]

Originally Posted by jmac698

New plugin, findampbyline.

What, exactly, are you trying to measure with this? It sounds like you're after properties of the analog signal itself and/or the analog recording equipment, and I really don't get why you'd try to measure that after the signal has been digitized.