madVR - high quality video renderer (GPU assisted)

[clsid]

Guys is print screen better than the MPCHC jpg screenshot for madvr ?MPC-HC can also make screenshots in PNG format.

[SamuriHL]

It's only 10000 with single lcd layer

So... we'd need 20,000 with the panasonic light modulation layer + lcd layer

Then throw in blur reduction blinking, something like 30-40,000cd ?

I take it back...we WILL need madvr tone mapping after all. Even at 1000-2000 nits some of these displays are blinding! My 700 or so nits with my OLED is fine but I've seen some of these crazy high nit LCD's and I would think some people would want to tone map down so as not to need sunglasses! :D

[Alexkral]

The thing I don't understand all viewing distances aside, is that people say you need to spend X on a really good OLED TV with HDR and High Nits, yet everyone says the most common TVs still do not have a high enough brightness for HDR.

You see comments on TV threads saying well your TV is only 350 NITS, so you do not have proper HDR etc etc.

But yet you have madshi and others tweaking the heck out of HDR-SDR on projectors with even lower NITS and they are saying that they don't want to use HDR passthrough as it looks so much better.

So if HDR relies on brightness, how can you make SDR look better ?

That's because of the way HDR relies on brightness. HDR is supossed to be seen exactly the same in the range 0-100 as SDR in a 100 peak nits display, but with the added highlights above that up to the display limit (say 350 nits). But this same 0-100 range in SDR at full brightness becomes 0-350 in this example.

So the reasoning to determine whether or not a display has a proper HDR is based on the range it has to fit the highlights, which for HDR10 are in the range 100-1000 and for Dolby 100-4000, and that's very subjetive. I've seen comments like those you say but also reviews in Rtings giving an 8 score in HDR to displays with only 450 peak nits. The only serious paper I've seen is one from EBU about requirements for video monitors in TV production, which sets the lower limit to 600 nits.

And the problem to have a simple calibration setup is that not all the content is graded the same way. That's why they're using madVR measurements of different averages to set dynamically the most adequate exposure.

[DMU]

If it is telecined (Film => NTSC), use Inverse Telecine (IVTC); else - if it is interlaced, use a deinterlacer (preferably with bobber to double the frame rate).

PsF pal is technically telecine too and using ivtc instead of deinterlancing is usually better to or deactivating deinterlancing.

the "best" deinterlancer we currently have in madVR is video deinterlancing which is frame adaptive on all GPUs
Did I understand correctly that LAV Deinterlacing Algorithm need to set to "No software deinterlacing" for all cases basically?

[huhn]

if you want madVR IVTC or hardware deinterlancing yes.

[madjock]

And the problem to have a simple calibration setup is that not all the content is graded the same way. That's why they're using madVR measurements of different averages to set dynamically the most adequate exposure.

I agree with all that you say, but the part I do not understand, is if this is the case, there are multiple people comparing the same scenes but they will all have different settings to start off with.

I understand all HDR movies are not the same, but unless you start off with a base setting, I don't understand how you can setup madVR ?

The principal with SDR is set whites and blacks, but with HDR its not really talked about, so when we say about tone mapping of TVs, where is the starting point ? As surely we need one ?

Maybe I am missing something here as 99% of people will not be using madVR, so how do the rest of the users set up an HDR TV. :)

[tp4tissue]

I agree with all that you say, but the part I do not understand, is if this is the case, there are multiple people comparing the same scenes but they will all have different settings to start off with.

I understand all HDR movies are not the same, but unless you start off with a base setting, I don't understand how you can setup madVR ?

The principal with SDR is set whites and blacks, but with HDR its not really talked about, so when we say about tone mapping of TVs, where is the starting point ? As surely we need one ?

Maybe I am missing something here as 99% of people will not be using madVR, so how do the rest of the users set up an HDR TV. :)


The non-madvr plebs just use passthrough or equivalent, letting the TV do the tonemapping.

The TV uses the same style of tonemapping as madvr's tone mapping to get the hdr bluray content to FIT in the range of the tv set.

Madvr is just more pliable and NGU (holy aura, angel sings).

[Alexkral]

Sorry, I misread your post, I though you was refering to a setup for HDR -> SDR. HDR is an absolute format, so you don't have to do anything, the HDR mode of your display takes care of doing everything and it should look the same as in any other HDR display up to the peak limit. You only have to make sure to choose the normal HDR mode and maybe check that contrast and backlight are at 100% and dynamic contrast is disabled.

Anyway I don't use HDR passthrough and my HDR TV is from 2016 so I'm not the best to explain this.

[huhn]

no this is not even close to reality.

HDR display do what ever they what and there is no clear spec on how to put the higher range image into the lower range of the TV.

just clipping is not an option. clipping 4000 nits to 600 will not result in anything useful. heck what about sub 100 nit projector just clip at 100 nits?

[Alexkral]

They don't do whatever they want, they all have to decode the content with the same PQ EOTF up to some point, so the image up to this point is exactly the same in terms of luminance, with the only difference of the limitations of each display regarding black point. Above that point each display has his own tonemapping, but this doesn't affect very much the overall luminance.

HDR for 100 nits projectors? They can sell it but it's just a contradiction. So yes, clipping at 100 nits shoud be the only reasonable option.

[SamuriHL]

It's the tonemapping part that's the issue. If you have a display with a high enough max nit, then you'll not see a lot of tonemapping being done. The lower the max nit of the display, the more compressed the highlights need to become. How they do that can vary wildly between displays. Some are decent at it and you'll hardly notice. Others are...less so. NONE of them are as good as madvr has become. When you say there's not much overall luminance lost, that's not always entirely true. madshi spent some time doing luminance recovery but it's a trade off like most everything. In any case, people are able to fine tune the settings to their liking depending on their preference. Some like more dynamic. Others prefer more clipping. Fun times! :D

[Alexkral]

You can call it luminance recovery, but that's just detail management, more like sharpening if not exactly the same. That doesn't affect the overall luminance at all. The biggest difference could come from choosing a very different knee point, but that's no very likely, and even then the differences would be minimal.

[huhn]

HDR for 100 nits projectors? They can sell it but it's just a contradiction. So yes, clipping at 100 nits shoud be the only reasonable option.

did you ever try this?

[svengun]

HI SamuriHL, I also have GTX1060 and an LG OLED.

Do you use ToneMapping ? When applying ToneMapping for me, rendering for goes from 30ms to 55-60ms and makes it unwatchable

Only when I downscale a lot of settings (Chroma from NGU High to low, Image Upscaling to NGU low & downscaling to Spline, it is somewhat acceptable ( 30-35ms )

And strangely enough, I get the best values with 800 nits, while my 2015/16 OLED is rated at 540 nits

If you do use ToneMapping, would you mind sharing your settings ?


It's the tonemapping part that's the issue. If you have a display with a high enough max nit, then you'll not see a lot of tonemapping being done. The lower the max nit of the display, the more compressed the highlights need to become. How they do that can vary wildly between displays. Some are decent at it and you'll hardly notice. Others are...less so. NONE of them are as good as madvr has become. When you say there's not much overall luminance lost, that's not always entirely true. madshi spent some time doing luminance recovery but it's a trade off like most everything. In any case, people are able to fine tune the settings to their liking depending on their preference. Some like more dynamic. Others prefer more clipping. Fun times! :D

[Warner306]

The principal with SDR is set whites and blacks, but with HDR its not really talked about, so when we say about tone mapping of TVs, where is the starting point ? As surely we need one ?

Maybe I am missing something here as 99% of people will not be using madVR, so how do the rest of the users set up an HDR TV. :)

Setting up an HDR display for HDR content isn't really that different than setting up a display for SDR output. Only the transfer function has changed, but the white balance and white point function the same and can sometimes be shared with the SDR picture mode of some displays.

Some Rules:

- Brightness and Contrast on many displays shouldn't be touched because they are used by the display to set the bottom and top of the tone curve;
- You can adjust the white balance, but not all HDR displays will allow you to improve PQ EOTF tracking because it may again effect the tracking of the tone curve;
- On displays that don't allow for adjustment to the PQ EOTF, it is advised to use the 2-point RGB High and RGB Low controls to improve the white balance;
- On displays that do allow for adjustment to the PQ EOTF, you can use the full 10-20 point grayscale controls to dial-in both the white balance and PQ tracking;
- The peak brightness or backlight of the display should most often be set to its highest value;
- Based on the HDR picture mode selected, some displays will change the tone mapping method used (e.g. clipping vs. tone mapping);
- Color temperature and Tint should be selected in the same way as SDR content (e.g. Color 50, Tint 50, Warm2, etc.).

Bright HDR displays don't usually have a lot of work to do with tone mapping beyond the brightest specular highlights, but when tone mapping is applied, the display is supposed to tone map 0-100 nits as little as possible, and preferably not at all.

A projector will have to tone map much of 0-100 nits at all times because it needs likely double or triple the brightness to have enough headroom above 100 nits to avoid this. When HDR content is graded, heavy tone mapping of 0-100 nits likely isn't taken into consideration, which is why some HDR movies end up darker than others when projected. Consistent brightness across all sources is more challenging with protected HDR than flat panel TVs, especially when you are consistently lowering the APL of the source.

[Warner306]

HDR for 100 nits projectors? They can sell it but it's just a contradiction. So yes, clipping at 100 nits shoud be the only reasonable option.

As huhn said, clipping at 100 nits is impossible. The image would end up a washed out mess with far too many pixels clipping at the gamut edges. You have to apply a harsh tone curve to the entire range.

HDR at 100 nits is not really HDR, but a good tone curve, like the one used by madVR, can make it look attractive and provide visibly more contrast than SDR at the same brightness.

[el Filou]

a good tone curve, like the one used by madVR, can make it look attractive and provide visibly more contrast than SDR at the same brightness.Did you mean provide visibly more dynamic range?

[Asmodian]

Did you mean provide visibly more dynamic range?

Probably not, unless you are using a definition of dynamic range that also works for contrast. What is the difference, exactly? You never really increase the dynamic range or contrast of the screen, obviously, but the image looks like it has more contrast.

I don't quite understand the strong interest in HDR -> SDR myself. Colorists could have graded this way for a long time, but they didn't. I find that very compressed HDR usually looks worse than the SDR release most of the time, in the same way "vivid" modes do on displays. It pops more but it doesn't look as good. Real HDR (1000+ nits) is great, no complaints there.

I suppose standard SDR is mastered for 0-100 and this very compressed HDR should be better for 0-300? I use 100 nits for SDR so maybe that is why I don't like it. Or maybe it is just that most of my HDR content also includes an SDR version which is better mastered for an SDR display?

[SamuriHL]

If you do use ToneMapping, would you mind sharing your settings ?

I replied to your PM. Hopefully that helps!

[Warner306]

Probably not, unless you are using a definition of dynamic range that also works for contrast. What is the difference, exactly? You never really increase the dynamic range or contrast of the screen, obviously, but the image looks like it has more contrast.

There is actually a difference. You are consistently lowering the brightness of reference white, which creates contrast between bright and dark detail. Digital photography has mastered the art of tone mapping high dynamic range images to standard dynamic range images for years. HDR video is using many of the same techniques and formulas that are already known to work well.

You would be surprised how many projector owners at AVS Forums love the HDR -> SDR tone mapping of madVR when projected. At 150 nits, I do think a lot of content looks better than a very restricted SDR range of 100 nits, provided the tone curve holds up and properly represents the bottom and top of the range without crushing or washing out the image too much.

I still don't know if projector owners understand that 100 nit SDR content already maxed out the actual available dynamic range of a projector. I think the sentiment is towards replicating the Dolby Cinema approach to HDR that uses 107 nits. But you need a projector with a low black level and great contrast to make this limited range HDR work and have any impact.

Then it is more about improved contrast than dynamic range. But the current PQ HDR format is using far more steps than 107 nits, which will harm image quality no matter how you tone map the image. I think they fail to realize that range compression must represent the contrast of the entire 1,000 nit source and not just the 100 nits they have to work with. You can't get around squishing the source in places to make the image fit the frame. I like it, but you can't expect a perfect result at all times across all movies when applying that much range compression. There are local tone curves that allow you to tweak the shadows, midtones and highlights independently, but they are probably too slow for madVR and even they would require some compromise somewhere.

[Alexkral]

did you ever try this?

I can imagine the result, what I mean is what Warner306 says, anything else can't really be considered HDR (nor clipping at 100 nits).

[alexnt]

Is there any way to restore the settings.bin file That I backed up?

[IceB]

I have red several threads on the HDR to SDR / UHD 10 bit to FHD comparison threads and finally decided to give it a go as there is more and more UHD 10bit HDR content.
After some learning curv with the latest build of madVR and testing the "Mehanik HDR10 test patterns", I have tuned my settings and made a comparison of the several frames of different versions ( FHD / UHD 10bit HDR ) of the same great action movie " Mission: Impossible - Fallout " .
I have also tested another movies and my conclusion is unequivocal - I definitely like the compressed UHD 10bit HDR to SDR by madVR in comparison to the FHD 8bit version on my rig. I watch movies in the dedicated HT room, small but all black walls and ceiling on 96" CARADA screen with good old JVC DLA-X30 that provides a very good black levels. The lamp has made around 2500 hours run, but still good with 100nits target on madVR . The pj was calibrated a while ago with my old MONACO XR DTP94 colorimeter for REC. 709 2.2 curve and since then I am using the i1pro spectro but waiting till I order a new lamp to get it re calibrated.

Since I have been looking for any detailed A/B images on the web and could not fine anything detailed and interesting (sorry if I missed something), I made for you a single frame comparison and uploaded it on my web site with the before/after view including the madVR settings data running on GTX 1070ti. Some frames have more obvious differences the others have less, yet as mentioned the UHD content compressed by the madVR has more clarity as a result with more details in near whites ( low highlight recovery is applied ), deeper and punchier colors with much more detailes and contrast darks that adds more depth to the picture. The textures are a bit sharper as well.

Enjoy and let me know what you think.

here (https://www.vladimir.photography/MadVR-HDR-to-SDR/MadVR-HDR-to-SDR-test) :)

hover with the mouse over the screenshots

[Warner306]

I also prefer the HDR images. Even at 100 target nits, the improvement in contrast is noticeable. Maybe the only complaint I'd have is it looks like the gamma is ever so slightly raised in the HDR shots, which you can notice in some of the changes to some color tones. But none of the images look overbright.

[tp4tissue]

HI SamuriHL, I also have GTX1060 and an LG OLED.

Do you use ToneMapping ? When applying ToneMapping for me, rendering for goes from 30ms to 55-60ms and makes it unwatchable

Only when I downscale a lot of settings (Chroma from NGU High to low, Image Upscaling to NGU low & downscaling to Spline, it is somewhat acceptable ( 30-35ms )

And strangely enough, I get the best values with 800 nits, while my 2015/16 OLED is rated at 540 nits

If you do use ToneMapping, would you mind sharing your settings ?


you're upscaling 4k to 8k ngu then downscaling to 4k ? < you shouldn't do this >

Because ngu will only touch chroma upscaling on 4k to 4k, LUMA is 1:1, so whatever ngu setting you put for LUMA upscaling doesn't affect performance


On my 1060, for 4K HDR, I have it on NGU medium (Chroma), w/ Tone Mapping to SDR + highlight recovery, it runs ~22-30ms. Luma is 1:1 untouched.

My 1060 runs at 2088mhz, it can go to 2112mhz, but it doesn't always auto boost to that high because madvr is not a saturating load at 22-30ms


For 1920x1080 upscale, setting is NGU high chroma, NGU high luma.

[tp4tissue]

I also prefer the HDR images. Even at 100 target nits, the improvement in contrast is noticeable. Maybe the only complaint I'd have is it looks like the gamma is ever so slightly raised in the HDR shots, which you can notice in some of the changes to some color tones. But none of the images look overbright.


The contrast is static no ? So, whatever tone mapping we do at 100nit , it's trading crush for highlights ?

[tp4tissue]

I have red several threads on the HDR to SDR / UHD 10 bit to FHD comparison threads and finally decided to give it a go as there is more and more UHD 10bit HDR content.
After some learning curv with the latest build of madVR and testing the "Mehanik HDR10 test patterns", I have tuned my settings and made a comparison of the several frames of different versions ( FHD / UHD 10bit HDR ) of the same great action movie " Mission: Impossible - Fallout " .
I have also tested another movies and my conclusion is unequivocal - I definitely like the compressed UHD 10bit HDR to SDR by madVR in comparison to the FHD 8bit version on my rig. I watch movies in the dedicated HT room, small but all black walls and ceiling on 96" CARADA screen with good old JVC DLA-X30 that provides a very good black levels. The lamp has made around 2500 hours run, but still good with 100nits target on madVR . The pj was calibrated a while ago with my old MONACO XR DTP94 colorimeter for REC. 709 2.2 curve and since then I am using the i1pro spectro but waiting till I order a new lamp to get it re calibrated.

Since I have been looking for any detailed A/B images on the web and could not fine anything detailed and interesting (sorry if I missed something), I made for you a single frame comparison and uploaded it on my web site with the before/after view including the madVR settings data running on GTX 1070ti. Some frames have more obvious differences the others have less, yet as mentioned the UHD content compressed by the madVR has more clarity as a result with more details in near whites ( low highlight recovery is applied ), deeper and punchier colors with much more detailes and contrast darks that adds more depth to the picture. The textures are a bit sharper as well.

Enjoy and let me know what you think.

here (https://www.vladimir.photography/MadVR-HDR-to-SDR/MadVR-HDR-to-SDR-test) :)

hover with the mouse over the screenshots


Have you compared the lut between colorimeter only and spectro+ colorimeter ?

Is it a huge difference ? I'm hunting for a spectro atm.

[IceB]

Have you compared the lut between colorimeter only and spectro+ colorimeter ?

Is it a huge difference ? I'm hunting for a spectro atm.

Sure there is - different creature.
I got the spectro mostly for work. Will give the pj a go once I will get my hands on the new lamp. Profiling/calibration is time consuming.

[IceB]

I also prefer the HDR images. Even at 100 target nits, the improvement in contrast is noticeable. Maybe the only complaint I'd have is it looks like the gamma is ever so slightly raised in the HDR shots, which you can notice in some of the changes to some color tones. But none of the images look overbright.

I can definitely live with that. The benefits are obvious.

[Manni]

since then I am using the i1pro spectro but waiting till I order a new lamp to get it re calibrated.


Don't waste your money with an x-rite "recalibration" of your i1pro. It's not a re-calibration, it's a re-certification. They read it, and they certify it if it's still within specs (which it should be as they don't drift unlike filter based colorimeter). They don't correct or change anything. If it's out of specs, it's "defective" and they charge you more to correct it. But if it was defective, you would know it, no? so unless you suspect something to be wrong (and are ready to pay more than the initial recert), I'd just skip this.

I wasted the money once, and when I saw that the numbers on their new certificate were exactly the same as on my original certification (the one you get when you buy the thing), I asked them and that's how I found out. So personally I won't do it again.

I guess it's worth doing it if you do pro calibrations, but they people expect a better spectro than an i1pro in that case.

I've had my i1pro2 for years and I don't believe it has drifted one bit. My projectors, on the other hand, especially after a few thousand hours...

Just my .2 cents of course, it's your money :)

[tp4tissue]

Sure there is - different creature.
I got the spectro mostly for work. Will give the pj a go once I will get my hands on the new lamp. Profiling/calibration is time consuming.

I just meant by eye, did the spectro introduce a significantly different image vs colorimeter alone.

Not talking about measurement , since it's already known that spectro will improve delta-e greatly.


Also @ Manni, perhaps you could chime in on my question as well.

[huhn]

it depends on your end device and how far off your white point is with a colorimeter.

don'T forget this is mostly about the white point and if that white point is off doesn't matter that much as long as it is constantly off by the same margin so your eyes are fine and able fix the issue. one of the reasons you may not notice the drift.

the i1d3 drifts but not by much it also depends on how it is stored.
spectro meter drift like no one else business in comparison.

[Warner306]

The contrast is static no ? So, whatever tone mapping we do at 100nit , it's trading crush for highlights ?

Yes, but you are rolling off the brightest information, which should be handled more gracefully. Raising the target nits slightly will change the color saturation, but then the image would be darker relative to the SDR screenshots. So you are right that there is a tradeoff.

[alexnt]

Hi can some one explain me why cpu usage is so high?

[madjock]

Hi can some one explain me why cpu usage is so high?

Upload the image to an external image site and post a link, as it takes a while to be cleared on site.

You will need to give more information on your setup and settings as well ?

[alexnt]

Upload the image to an external image site and post a link, as it takes a while to be cleared on site.

You will need to give more information on your setup and settings as well ?

https://postimg.cc/JstcR1SP

i5 4690k stock
r9 290 4gb stock
16gb ram
settings in madvr?

[tp4tissue]

https://postimg.cc/JstcR1SP

i5 4690k stock
r9 290 4gb stock
16gb ram
settings in madvr?

that's not high cpu usage, the core is only running at 35x instead of full , so it just looks higher.

But if you enable dx11 accleration in lav filter, it may bring that down further assuming the gpu accleration works on the file you're using.


If you delid and overclock to 4.8ghz , it'll look even lower.
Keep in mind, if you run any 4k files on 64bit mpchc cpu decode, it will use an avx code path, which may require lowering memory frequency to reach 4.8ghz stable.

[alexnt]

that's not high cpu usage, the core is only running at 35x instead of full , so it just looks higher.

But if you enable dx11 accleration in lav filter, it may bring that down further assuming the gpu accleration works on the file you're using.


If you delid and overclock to 4.8ghz , it'll look even lower.
Keep in mind, if you run any 4k files on 64bit mpchc cpu decode, it will use an avx code path, which may require lowering memory frequency to reach 4.8ghz stable.

it goes from 35 to 38 and has some drops to around 20.
and render time is lower than I remember, it was around 18-20s.

https://postimg.cc/nXJ5cSvX
settings in lav filter

As i remember I had lower cpu usage and higher render time.
I had some time to watch a movie and yesterday when I switched to fullscreen monitor went black. It was fullscreen exclusive that had a problem(i never had it before). I use madvr for years with no problem.
So i uninstalled madvr, mpc before I figured out.
Then reinstalled and noticed those numbers.
Do you believe it ok?

[KoD]

Regarding the i1Pro re-certification, they measure 12 tiles or so to check if the measurement deviations are still inside a certain dE range, and do another check to see if repeated measurements of the white tile are within 0.1 dE. If it is, then that's all. If it isn't they can change the light source in the spectro with a new one. The "Certificate of Performance" is valid for only one year.

I have a request for madshi, regarding madVR: right now, madVR is able to passthrough the HDR metadata to the display. I would request to also be able to send the display the Dolby Vision metadata. This kind of metadata can now be preserved in the HEVC stream when using x265 3.0.

LG is providing mp4 video files for SDR / HDR / DolbyVision at these links, that can be used to test:
■ SDR - https://lgtca.box.com/v/SDR
■ HDR - https://lgtca.box.com/v/HDR
■ Dolby Vision - https://lgtca.box.com/v/DoVi

When using the files on a USB stick connected to one of the TV USB ports, the TV switches on HDR or DolbyVision as expected. I imagine the signaling in the video stream is all that's needed for that. PC games can also switch on Dolby Vision, so sending the metadata from a graphics card should also be possible.

As a side-note, for DolbyVision to work with Mass Effect Andromeda on the LG 65C8, the GPU needs to be configured to send RGB full range 8 bits, from my experiments. Using YcbCr will not work for enabling DolbyVision - you'll get a pink corrupted image.

These files are mentioned in the LG OLED 2019 AutoCal FAQ v2.0 (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/139-display-calibration/3042154-2019-lg-oled-calibration-user-settings-no-price-talk.html#post57417778) pdf file that Ted posted on avsforum, as a way for users to make the TV switch in HDR or DV mode in order to be able to perform display calibration of those modes.

[tp4tissue]

it goes from 35 to 38 and has some drops to around 20.
and render time is lower than I remember, it was around 18-20s.

https://postimg.cc/nXJ5cSvX
settings in lav filter

As i remember I had lower cpu usage and higher render time.
I had some time to watch a movie and yesterday when I switched to fullscreen monitor went black. It was fullscreen exclusive that had a problem(i never had it before). I use madvr for years with no problem.
So i uninstalled madvr, mpc before I figured out.
Then reinstalled and noticed those numbers.
Do you believe it ok?


I don't know what you saw before/after.

if the dxva says inactive "While the movie" is playing. That means the gpu acceleration is not compatible with the file you're trying to play.

-In which case- it will default to CPU decoding. Different files have different compatibility.

But overall, it does not look high to me.

Again, you have other options, such as overclocking, if you need more oomph for hard to decode files. (not this one obviously)

[el Filou]

Hi can some one explain me why cpu usage is so high?
https://postimg.cc/nXJ5cSvX
settings in lav filterCheck those LAV settings while playing a movie that gives high CPU load, and see which decoder is active. If it's avcodec then hardware decoding isn't active and that could explain it.
With hardware acceleration, CPU usage should be very low, definitely much lower than 66% @ 3,5 GHz
(Edit: do you have stuff like black bar detection enabled in madVR? That can use up some CPU, but I don't know how much exactly)

[70MM]

Does "dont render frames during fade in and fade out" do anything like add artifacts to the image?
If one doesnt need to use it if their rendering stats are low is it better to untick it?

[huhn]

do you mean "don't rerender frames when fade in/out is detected"?

that's for debanding only and an special check for fades to use higher banding in these situation because they are proven to have more debanding.

so it does nothing without debanding and may only drop frames when the GPU can't rerender the frames fast enough i never tested it but it shouldn't do anything when deband strength is the same for both settings.

[white1]

Hello guys,
I would like to add madVR to DVBDream 2.2 because it's not available in the Video Renderer list, can I do it?

[madjock]

Hello guys,
I would like to add madVR to DVBDream 2.2 because it's not available in the Video Renderer list, can I do it?

From a quick Google that app is at version 3.4 now, but surely this is a question for the DVB Dream forum ?

https://www.dvbdream.org/

[tp4tissue]

Guys, is there a way to upscale render the whole movie through madvr, THEN watch it ?

Could this possibly be a future feature, because it would allow for some super-demanding settings to be played on MUCH lower powered hardware.

[madjock]

Guys, is there a way to upscale render the whole movie through madvr, THEN watch it ?

Could this possibly be a future feature, because it would allow for some super-demanding settings to be played on MUCH lower powered hardware.

So if we forget that this is not possible at all, how would you re-encode a whole movie with "super-demanding settings to be played on MUCH lower powered hardware"

If you don't have the hardware to play a file, what is going to re-encode it.

[clsid]

A two hour 10bit 60 fps UHD movie would require 6.8 terabyte of storage space in uncompressed format. With lossless compression approximately a quarter of that. So still a very large amount of space.

Apart from the above, what you want is not possible yet.

[Alexkral]

you're upscaling 4k to 8k ngu then downscaling to 4k ? < you shouldn't do this >

For 1920 x 2160 to 4k what do you think is better?

- Doubling and then downscaling the height.
- Just upscaling the width.

[Klaus1189]

[...]1920 x 2160[...]

1080??