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 > Capturing and Editing Video > Avisynth Usage

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 24th February 2009, 18:52   #21  |  Link
Typhoon859
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sagekilla View Post
All of the Spline and Lanczos resizers are very sharp. The differences between Spline16, 36, and 64 are minute. Likewise, for Lanczos(taps=0-10). There's not much comparison to be done between Spline16 and Spline36, but vs the other resizers like Bicubic, Bilinear, etc there is a worthwhile comparison to be made.

IMO:
Spline64 > Spline36 > Spline 16 > Bicubic ~= Gauss >= Bilinear
Spline >= Blackman > Lanczos

Bilinear is the softest I know of, while Gauss* has adjustable sharpness. Bicubic is sort of like Gauss except you can make it absurdly sharp and ringy, or very blurry (by adjusting b and c). IIRC, at c=0.6 or higher, Bicubic rings too much and Lanczos does better. Spline is sharp like Lanczos, but doesn't ring from what I've seen. Blackman on the other hand, I haven't used much but it seems to be very similar to Spline.


*Gauss is interesting, if you use too low of a p the image is completed blurred. Otherwise, it's like a slightly softer bicubic to me.
"Spline64 > Spline36 > Spline 16 > Bicubic ~= Gauss >= Bilinear
Spline >= Blackman > Lanczos" - That's in terms of sharpness right?

Umm, in terms of sharpness, the default for Spline and Lanczos are pretty identical.. The differences I see are how it effects minor details, especially blurry details. That's actually why I prefer Spline16 over 36/64. It seems to preserve minor details better with almost identical sharpness.

-Thanks
Typhoon859 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2009, 19:34   #22  |  Link
Sagekilla
x264aholic
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,752
Yes, in terms of sharpness. Spline and Lanczos are pretty much identical for all intents and purposes. The biggest difference is spline tends to ring a lot less than lanczos. Also, Spline64 should retain more fine detail than Spline16 when downscaling, and do a better job when upscaling too.

4096x2304 -> 768x432 -> 1920x1080:

Lanczos4

Spline64


Both have ringing around the pole. But the spline is more controlled. (Zooming 200% or 300% helps a bit here)
__________________
You can't call your encoding speed slow until you start measuring in seconds per frame.

Last edited by Sagekilla; 24th February 2009 at 19:43.
Sagekilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th February 2009, 21:17   #23  |  Link
Typhoon859
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sagekilla View Post
Yes, in terms of sharpness. Spline and Lanczos are pretty much identical for all intents and purposes. The biggest difference is spline tends to ring a lot less than lanczos. Also, Spline64 should retain more fine detail than Spline16 when downscaling, and do a better job when upscaling too.

4096x2304 -> 768x432 -> 1920x1080:

Lanczos4

Spline64


Both have ringing around the pole. But the spline is more controlled. (Zooming 200% or 300% helps a bit here)
Hmmm, well actually, when I zoom in, I can see that Lanczos4 produces a bit sharper image. There's more ringing from the resize probably because of the extra sharpness. The ringing is sharpened as well XD

In the end, it just narrows down to what is your preference. Comparing such subtle differences can drive a person crazy, with your face all up in the screen, lol
Typhoon859 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2009, 01:29   #24  |  Link
Seraphic-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 698
How does Spline64 compare to Spline36 for upscaling (and some downscaling)?
Seraphic- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2009, 02:29   #25  |  Link
Typhoon859
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seraphic- View Post
How does Spline64 compare to Spline36 for upscaling (and some downscaling)?
These are upscales from 720x480 to 1280x720. Try to see the difference for yourself. What I see is that Spline64 is a bit sharper but at the same time, if you look at the roof on the bottom left corner of the picture (the one above the window), it removes a bit of details. On the top right section of that section of the roof XD Open the two pictures in two different tabs and switch between them after you maximized them. Scroll both to the bottom-left so that you can see that roof area first though. Maybe it'd be more apparent if I resized it even more.

Spline36


Spline64

Last edited by Typhoon859; 25th February 2009 at 02:34.
Typhoon859 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2009, 06:37   #26  |  Link
Sagekilla
x264aholic
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,752
Wait, did you upscale it then encode it? Because it looks like you did (and that's the wrong thing to do). Those two images should look nearly identical, but in the bottom left corner there's a lot of differences. If you're comparing resizers, don't encode. Just save the raw frame directly out of AvsP or your GUI of choice as a png.


What you just did is compare how whatever encoder handles spline36 vs spline64, not the actual sharpness.
__________________
You can't call your encoding speed slow until you start measuring in seconds per frame.
Sagekilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2009, 07:34   #27  |  Link
Typhoon859
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sagekilla View Post
Wait, did you upscale it then encode it? Because it looks like you did (and that's the wrong thing to do). Those two images should look nearly identical, but in the bottom left corner there's a lot of differences. If you're comparing resizers, don't encode. Just save the raw frame directly out of AvsP or your GUI of choice as a png.


What you just did is compare how whatever encoder handles spline36 vs spline64, not the actual sharpness.
Well, yeah. That's the point. I did the resize from 720x480 to 1280x720, then used the x264 codec to encode the clip @ 5000kbps. x264 is what I'm always going to use so this particular comparison I actually made for myself. I want to see how differently each one works with the codec. What's the point of testing it without the effect that the codec you're going to use has? You might get the exact opposite results in terms of what's better/worse..
Typhoon859 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2009, 07:47   #28  |  Link
Sagekilla
x264aholic
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,752
You're missing my point. If you're comparing the sharpness of one resizer to another, you need to do so based on the raw output from the resizers.

What if we decided to sharpen a 720p image with two different resizers, then compressed them as jpgs @ 100 KB for both files? How could you tell that one sharpener does a better job at sharpening? In this case, it would be the one that comes out the crappiest looking, because sharp images tend to take more bits than softer images. If you keep the bitrate the same, then the sharper one is going to lose sharpness and generally turn into a horrible mess compared to the soft one, which will compress nicer.


That's fine if you want to compare it when you're encoding, but if you're talking about the properties of the resizers themselves then you shouldn't be encoding them. Plus, if you take into account sharpness/complexity determines image size, the fact that Spline64 "has less details" is completely logical when you consider you're using a fixed bitrate.
__________________
You can't call your encoding speed slow until you start measuring in seconds per frame.
Sagekilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2009, 08:13   #29  |  Link
Typhoon859
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sagekilla View Post
You're missing my point. If you're comparing the sharpness of one resizer to another, you need to do so based on the raw output from the resizers.

What if we decided to sharpen a 720p image with two different resizers, then compressed them as jpgs @ 100 KB for both files? How could you tell that one sharpener does a better job at sharpening? In this case, it would be the one that comes out the crappiest looking, because sharp images tend to take more bits than softer images. If you keep the bitrate the same, then the sharper one is going to lose sharpness and generally turn into a horrible mess compared to the soft one, which will compress nicer.


That's fine if you want to compare it when you're encoding, but if you're talking about the properties of the resizers themselves then you shouldn't be encoding them. Plus, if you take into account sharpness/complexity determines image size, the fact that Spline64 "has less details" is completely logical when you consider you're using a fixed bitrate.
Wow. That made so much sense. Just from that, I feel like I know twice as much. Really, thanks. Good stuff, good stuff
Typhoon859 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2009, 15:43   #30  |  Link
Sagekilla
x264aholic
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,752
I mean, if you want to compare how well a resizer does when you're encoding, you're doing it absolutely the right way. I'm just saying that for sharpness comparisons you have to be careful how you do that
__________________
You can't call your encoding speed slow until you start measuring in seconds per frame.
Sagekilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th March 2009, 17:57   #31  |  Link
naughty21
Naughty boy
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 12
thanks for the info but i have a doubt that for below 720x320 which is good and for 480p and 720p which one is good

Last edited by Guest; 25th March 2009 at 21:45. Reason: rule 12: don't ask what's best!
naughty21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th March 2009, 14:09   #32  |  Link
JohannesL
AviSynth/x264 user
 
JohannesL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 149
www.sm64.org/div/Bilinear0.png
www.sm64.org/div/Spline360.png

640x480 to 320x240
Spline36 is sharper, but both look good to me.
JohannesL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2009, 19:56   #33  |  Link
unix_sansei
Wreaking havoc for years
 
unix_sansei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: LA
Posts: 125
why don't you try using wavelets for resizing? sometimes they ring a bit but they are fast to implement, easy up and downscaling.
unix_sansei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2009, 20:46   #34  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohannesL View Post
www.sm64.org/div/Bilinear0.png
www.sm64.org/div/Spline360.png

640x480 to 320x240
Spline36 is sharper, but both look good to me.
so whatever upscaling/downscaling, spline36 is your best option? I think that's what ffdshow is using?

w/ CoreAVC CUDA doing the decoding, I can spline anything I'd like now

mostly SD>720p and 1080p>720p
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2009, 05:31   #35  |  Link
*.mp4 guy
Registered User
 
*.mp4 guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by unix_sansei View Post
why don't you try using wavelets for resizing? sometimes they ring a bit but they are fast to implement, easy up and downscaling.
Unless you are using overcomplete wavelets and some sort of nonlinear coefficient filtering, the results are going to be equivelent to a FIR filter, just as lanczos/spline/etc. are equivelent to FIR filters.
*.mp4 guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th April 2009, 21:02   #36  |  Link
unix_sansei
Wreaking havoc for years
 
unix_sansei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: LA
Posts: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by *.mp4 guy View Post
Unless you are using overcomplete wavelets and some sort of nonlinear coefficient filtering, the results are going to be equivelent to a FIR filter, just as lanczos/spline/etc. are equivelent to FIR filters.
well yes, non-linear coefficients are the way to go. you can throw a myriad of different weightings and basis functions at the image with wavelet. you can also reuse similar code for resize as well as noise reduction, deblurring etc without the high frequency filtering of DCT.

i don't particularly like them because for big images 4k x 6k they get 'lost' in the complex wilderness but for small DVD images they seem to work well.
unix_sansei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2009, 09:56   #37  |  Link
halsboss
likes to tinker
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: girt by sea
Posts: 635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sagekilla View Post
Spline64 should retain more fine detail than Spline16 when downscaling, and do a better job when upscaling too.
Is Spline64 available in the current MT version of avisynth (2.5.7 I think) ? Blackman ? If not, is there a plugin ?
halsboss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2009, 11:53   #38  |  Link
buletti
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by halsboss View Post
Is Spline64 available in the current MT version of avisynth (2.5.7 I think) ? Blackman ? If not, is there a plugin ?
in 2.5.7 spline64 is not avaialble (also in the MT version). About blackman I'm not sure.
However, there is a modded 2.5.8 MT version now which is capable of both.
buletti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2009, 14:02   #39  |  Link
Betsy25
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Holland, Belgium
Posts: 324
I think Spline is recommended at downsizing resolution-wise.
but Lanczos is definatelly recommended at downsizing filesize-wise.
Betsy25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th April 2009, 20:20   #40  |  Link
cogman
The Crazy Idahoan
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Idaho
Posts: 233
I don't get it. Why would you upscale the image before encoding it? If it is to justify the large bitrate, well, tell the encoder to use more bits rather then throw more at the image.

Yeah, I could see it if you are targeting a specific device that doesn't support upscaling/does a crappy job at it. However, most are generally pretty good at it.
cogman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 10:36.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.