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. |
31st December 2014, 12:48 | #27921 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 96
|
Quote:
I may be forced to not use madvr for 4k videos due to the optimus bug. I can get it to use the Nvidia chip but then I get black screen. |
|
31st December 2014, 13:13 | #27922 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,925
|
Quote:
just create a profile where nnedi3 is not used with UHD content. the hd 4600 shouldn't be able to use nnedi3 in realtime... |
|
31st December 2014, 13:26 | #27923 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 96
|
Quote:
the nvidia is deffo not being used. In 720P content I get 15 to 20 ms render times with NNEDi3 but gpu-z gtx860 clock speed is always 230mhz. |
|
31st December 2014, 16:59 | #27924 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 504
|
I remember there's a way to modify the registry to force madVR to use nVidia GPU with Optimus on some notebooks, but I cannot find it anymore.
Can someone give me a hint? Happy new year to everyone here in this forum. |
31st December 2014, 17:38 | #27925 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 96
|
Quote:
create new key under there called forceVendor and REG_SZ value of nVidia. |
|
1st January 2015, 12:42 | #27926 | Link | |
ॐ
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Seventh Dimension
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
Madvr will run on nvidia GPU. |
|
1st January 2015, 14:50 | #27927 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 96
|
Quote:
I have done that but getting the dreaded black screen whatever I do. Im not sure which driver version was confirmed to work with 860m optimus. |
|
1st January 2015, 18:01 | #27928 | Link |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I don't know if this is the best place to ask, but there is this new awesome Philips BDM4065UC 40" 4K UHD monitor with 5000:1 static contrast ratio, good response times, 24ms input lag, and excellent color accuracy after calibration. I already have my most-awesome Eizo Foris FG2421 (lucky unit, won VA panel lottery!) for games, but I want this Philips monitor for film playback. I, however, have never seen 1080p content upscaled to 4K through madVR, using the highest quality madVR settings (NNEDI3 chroma & image upscaling/doubling/quadrupling, dithering, etc). Would 1080p content rendered+upscaled to 4K with madVR on 4K monitor/HDTV look better or worse than 1080p content rendered with madVR on 1080p display with identical specs & similar settings? By how much? Would such a monitor be worth it as a TV for 1080p material with its 4K native resolution? I do realize its not true UHD because it is only capable of sRGB/Rec.709 as far as colorspace goes, but 4K is real and of course it uses 4:4:4 subsampling.
Side-question: Is FRC worth anything for an 8bit display (8bit+FRC) ? Can it actually display 10bit content more accurately than 8bit-only display? Is there a way to test whether a display is 8bit-only or 8bit+FRC? Last edited by XMonarchY; 1st January 2015 at 18:25. |
1st January 2015, 18:14 | #27929 | Link |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,346
|
Properly upscaled 1080p to 4K on a native 4K screen should look slightly better than on a native 1080p screen, assuming the screen is big enough and/or you sit close enough anyway.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders |
1st January 2015, 19:23 | #27930 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 107
|
Quote:
It's interesting that XMonarchY mentioned the Eizo. I was thinking about one of the upper end CG's for viewing SD and HD content (among other things). Well, as long as the hardware/software works as intended it should be able to present 10-bit transparently to the eye due to the nature of how Frame Rate Control works since it takes advantage of limitations in human visual perception. Because of those visual limitations testing whether a display is using FRC would probably require specialized equipment and the conclusion would be pretty much academic. At least I don't know of any way to test it. |
|
1st January 2015, 20:17 | #27931 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 589
|
Quote:
That said, for this to make a difference, you need to sit close to the screen, otherwise visual acuity is not enough to resolve the difference in high-frequency spatial information. If you're not convinced, I would encourage you to read Poynton's excellent explanation on the subject. If you're observing a loss of sharpness, you might want to adjust the parameters of your upscaling filter to compensate for it. Last edited by e-t172; 1st January 2015 at 20:21. |
|
1st January 2015, 20:19 | #27932 | Link |
Oz of the zOo
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 208
|
FRC status should be mentioned in the manufacturer's specs on panelook.com site (pdf scan), if you know the internal panel's model number - could be Innolux, anyway all the 40" 4K panels listed on panelook are 8bit+FRC.
Last edited by wOxxOm; 2nd January 2015 at 09:45. |
1st January 2015, 21:46 | #27934 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 107
|
Quote:
It should be possible then to come up with an objective way to gauge the relative benefit of moving from a smaller screen to a larger screen given that we know the screen sizes and resolutions. I'm thinking that a larger panel would negate the benefit of the higher resolution somewhat. Maybe taking the ratio of each panel's resolution to it's size in comparison would provide a better answer to XMonarchY's question. XMonarchY it may be wise to take into consideration the nature of the display you linked (that is a PV panel and perhaps more susceptible to gamma shift) as well as how close you will be to the screen. I would expect the gamma shift to be worse the closer you are. |
|
1st January 2015, 21:57 | #27935 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 753
|
Quote:
As far as I could find the article you linked didn't claim that Gaussian was best, just that it was better than a box filter. Last edited by Shiandow; 1st January 2015 at 22:15. |
|
1st January 2015, 22:26 | #27937 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 589
|
Quote:
For this reason, this stuff only makes a difference if you're sitting very close to the screen (especially in 4K!). Basically, if you sit too close to a box PSF screen (e.g. LCD at native resolution), it will appear pixelated; if you sit too close to a gaussian (or near-gaussian) PSF screen (e.g. 1080p upscaled to 4K), it will appear blurry. The latter is preferable to the former. Quote:
I'm not sure what you're doing, but if you want to compare 1:1 to upscaled in a meaningful way, you need to keep the image size the same. Which is impossible to do unless you have two similarly sized screens with different native resolutions. Or maybe you could try using one screen and moving back and forth to keep apparent size the same, but that doesn't sound very scientific! |
||
1st January 2015, 23:31 | #27938 | Link | |
AV heretic
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 422
|
Quote:
Personally I hate upscaling artifacts myself. But I can't stand to bigger pixels on 720 display even more. Thats why I always prefer 1080 if possible, even for WEB-DLs. But if I can't get 1080, I'm fine with upscale. |
|
1st January 2015, 23:55 | #27939 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 107
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
2nd January 2015, 09:29 | #27940 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 589
|
Quote:
Quote:
The benefit of larger screens (resolution being equal) is, you get to sit farther away from the screen and still enjoy the same level of detail. Last edited by e-t172; 2nd January 2015 at 09:31. |
||
Tags |
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling |
|
|