madVR - high quality video renderer (GPU assisted) [Archive] - Page 811

madshi

21st November 2016, 17:36

The power state of videocard is troublesome, I have to set mpc-be64.exe to maximum performance on NV control panel, otherwise I would get variable rendering time(it would become very high) and many dropped frames.
This is really annoying. Why can't get GPU manufacturers this right?

Acrodding to my test, for performance, NGL-high is between NNEDI3-64 and NNEDI3-128, NGL-med is as much as NNEDI3-32,
NGL-low is less than NNEDI3-16 but more than super-xbr 100.
In my opinion, NGL is amazing and useful, I think it is good for real-life content that I can raplace NNEDI3 and super-xbr, it brings the sharpness similar to NNEDI3+SR4 and less artifacts, and faster.
Good to hear. It's "NGU" (for "Next Generation Upscaling"), btw, not NGL.

But for anime content I still prefer NNEDI3(no SR) over NGL especially for low-res and high compression content. For anime, NNEDI3 did a good job of reducing aliasing, NGL is a little too sharp that aliasing and artifacts become more visible, NNEDI3 is more clean even though NGL might closer to original picture.(NGL-high has less artifacts than NGL-low, but still more than NNEDI3)
For anime, personally, I like NNEDI3 + thin edge1.0 + adaptive sharpen1.5(AB100%+AR).
Interesting. Your screenshot is already very aliased if you look at it in 100% resolution, without upscaling it at all. It seems NNEDI3 smooths out the aliasing, while NGU tries to be faithful to the source. I suppose I could try tweaking NGU more for this kind of content, but that might come at the cost of real-life content, so at this point I think I probably should not do that.

I suppose you can't use NNEDI3+SuperRes, can you? Because SuperRes will probably bring the aliasing back in full force, won't it?

With a 480p -> 1080p video, NGU High was a little sharper maybe, but it was hard to tell the differense for me. With a 720p -> 1440p video I could not tell a differense at all between NGU High and NNEDI3 128. (Double luma and chroma) All other settings the same.
In that case probably you were using rather soft videos. Try to find a really high quality source with detailed images. Or try with a high quality foto. That way differences between the various algorithms will be much more obvious.

markanini

21st November 2016, 17:41

Hi aufkrawall.

I did upload a comparison showing the differences a few posts ago.

This is the link: http://imgur.com/a/JSJBn

I compared: SXBR 100 AR, Recon Soft, NNEDI 256 and NGU High. From them all NGU is the worst to my eyes. NNEDI 256 is the best to my eyes but the performance cost is not acceptable for chroma, plus in motion is harder to see differences in chroma.

Where to look: http://imgur.com/SwKvVMg

In terms of sharpness and haloing NGU looks best to me followed by recon soft.

Betroz

21st November 2016, 17:43

In that case probably you were using rather soft videos. Try to find a really high quality source with detailed images. Or try with a high quality foto. That way differences between the various algorithms will be much more obvious.

You are probably right. I will have a look at it again later. Thanks again :)

huhn

21st November 2016, 17:47

RX480 users

I've received an email from a non-doom9 madVR user. He had big trouble with NGU performance with his AMD GPU, but found a way to fix it. Maybe it helps the RX480 users?

sorry but my memory clock has only two states

~350 mhz or something like that and 1750 mhz and it is clearly using 1750 mhz.

StinDaWg

21st November 2016, 17:49

In my opinion, NGL is amazing and useful, I think it is good for real-life content that I can raplace NNEDI3 and super-xbr, it brings the sharpness similar to NNEDI3+SR4 and less artifacts, and faster. But for anime content I still prefer NNEDI3(no SR) over NGL especially for low-res and high compression content. For anime, NNEDI3 did a good job of reducing aliasing, NGL is a little too sharp that aliasing and artifacts become more visible, NNEDI3 is more clean even though NGL might closer to original picture.(NGL-high has less artifacts than NGL-low, but still more than NNEDI3)
For anime, personally, I like NNEDI3 + thin edge1.0 + adaptive sharpen1.5(AB100%+AR).

A set of example:
originalhttp://i.imgur.com/D2y3ULU.png
NNEDI3 64http://i.imgur.com/obCswUn.jpg
NGL highhttp://i.imgur.com/GXZB2M7.jpg
NNEDI3 64+TE1.0+AS1.5 http://i.imgur.com/bRXAoKr.jpg
I agree NGU looks stellar with good content, but with a lot of marginal sources (even 720p) the artifacts really come out with this scaler, even more so than what appears to be in the original source at times (or at least it greatly exaggerates those artifacts).

clsid

21st November 2016, 17:56

In case of Nvidia it is probably only the "optimal power" mode that sometimes causes problems with madvr. Sadly it is the default setting. "Adaptive" mode (the old default) should work ok.

huhn

21st November 2016, 17:57

yeah they changed this a couple of month ago.

Neet009

21st November 2016, 18:01

Good to hear. It's "NGU" (for "Next Generation Upscaling"), btw, not NGL.

Sorry, I made a big mistake, I'll fix my post.

I suppose you can't use NNEDI3+SuperRes, can you? Because SuperRes will probably bring the aliasing back in full force, won't it?

I don't use NNEDI3+SuperRes for anime contend. But I used NNEDI3+SR2 for real-life contend before NGU coming.

Warner306

21st November 2016, 18:09

You mean a detailed image comparison, explaining the strengths and weaknesses etc?

Yes, a detailed account with images.

BetA13

21st November 2016, 18:11

just tried the LOW setting of NGU, but still no dice. my hardware is to weak i guess..(gtx670)
@ madshi

please dont remove NEDI, SXBR or nnedi3, these are the only HQ ones i can use with my hardware..I use nedi still for imagedoubling in some scenarios...

i dont get it, shouldnt NGU somewhere between NNEDI3 64 and NNEDI3 128? Even with the LOW setting of NGU, My GPU usage goes boom, the frames drop and the video is stuttering..

anyway, please dont remove sxbr or nedi..:)

greetz

HillieSan

21st November 2016, 18:12

RX480 users

I've received an email from a non-doom9 madVR user. He had big trouble with NGU performance with his AMD GPU, but found a way to fix it. Maybe it helps the RX480 users?

I do not experience this problem with my RX 480. Clock is 2000 MHz. Increasing clock to 2200 MHz does nothing.

madshi

21st November 2016, 18:27

Yes, a detailed account with images.
I plan to do something like that when I'm nearer to a "finished" NGU version. Atm I'm not there, yet.

just tried the LOW setting of NGU, but still no dice. my hardware is to weak i guess..(gtx670)
@ madshi

please dont remove NEDI, SXBR or nnedi3, these are the only HQ ones i can use with my hardware..I use nedi still for imagedoubling in some scenarios...

i dont get it, shouldnt NGU somewhere between NNEDI3 64 and NNEDI3 128? Even with the LOW setting of NGU, My GPU usage goes boom, the frames drop and the video is stuttering..
You've probably made one of the mistakes which were mentioned about a hundred times on the last couple of pages. So for the 101's time:

- enable NGU-Low for "luma doubling"
- disable "chroma doubling" completely
- set "image upscaling" to Catrom AR
- disable SuperRes

With these settings NGU-Low should be faster than NNEDI3-16 (unless you have a Polaris GPU), and a bit slower than super-xbr and Jinc AR.

fedpul

21st November 2016, 18:33

Hi, I have finished my algo comparison. It took me 3 hours to do it, but it is finished finally. It compares S-XBR, NNEDI and NGU both for Chroma and Doubling. The XLSX file is inside the zip.

MEGA Link: https://mega.nz/#!4w5ihCLS!7fFSqPM6o2oDPtNLuhiLNSza5MXnZ7xTO7O0eNqucpo

Please tell me if you can download it and see it.

aufkrawall

21st November 2016, 18:54

RX480 users

I've received an email from a non-doom9 madVR user. He had big trouble with NGU performance with his AMD GPU, but found a way to fix it. Maybe it helps the RX480 users?
Well, there should a an option in the driver called like "power efficiency" which should be turned to off (restart Windows) since it can severely affect performance.
I think huhn said that it was missing for him, which shouldn't be the case afaik.
There's also a tool to force full clock on Radeons, called ClockBlocker:
http://www.guru3d.com/files-details/clockblocker-download.html

huhn

21st November 2016, 18:55

You've probably made one of the mistakes which were mentioned about a hundred times on the last couple of pages. So for the 101's time:

- enable NGU-Low for "luma doubling"
- disable "chroma doubling" completely
- set "image upscaling" to Catrom AR
- disable SuperRes

With these settings NGU-Low should be faster than NNEDI3-16 (unless you have a Polaris GPU), and a bit slower than super-xbr and Jinc AR.

see removing chroma doubling was a good decision back in the time.

madshi

21st November 2016, 19:44

see removing chroma doubling was a good decision back in the time.
Yes. I'm seriously considering dumbing the whole upscaling/doubling logic down. I know some expert users will hate it. But looking through all the posts since v0.91.1 was released, almost every non-expert user got the settings wrong, even after I explained it multiple times.

Not only does the current logic allow for serious misconfiguration (which almost all non-expert users seem to fall for atm), but it also costs endless support and correction posts.

Maybe I'll find a way to make it all easier without losing too much functionality.

Sunset1982

21st November 2016, 20:01

Maybe I'll find a way to make it all easier without losing too much functionality.

Maybe some kind of presets?

RX480 users

I've received an email from a non-doom9 madVR user. He had big trouble with NGU performance with his AMD GPU, but found a way to fix it. Maybe it helps the RX480 users?

I'll test it, but I doubt it will be the solution...

JarrettH

21st November 2016, 20:10

madshi

21st November 2016, 20:14

I told you to name NGU something longer than three characters for forum searchability reasons too
Yes, you did. But what does that have to do with anything?

I liked the name "NGU" and I didn't want to use a name I liked less just to improve forum searchability.

theDongerr

21st November 2016, 20:24

Yes, you did. But what does that have to do with anything?

I liked the name "NGU" and I didn't want to use a name I liked less just to improve forum searchability.

Maybe NNGU - "New Next Generation Upscaler" which would allow for NNGU to be search ( letters > 3) and thus less questions on how to configure?

I'm happy with sxbr-100 doubling for the time being, but eventually I will be picking up a GTX 1080 and likely mess everything up :P

HillieSan

21st November 2016, 20:26

aufkrawall

21st November 2016, 20:28

Maybe I'll find a way to make it all easier without losing too much functionality.
Warning pop-up?
I personally wouldn't miss those options since the effect is pretty much non-existent after NGU upscaling, but it seems some other users don't want to use NGU for chroma upscaling and with other configurations, there still might be some arguments to keep them.

Sunset1982

21st November 2016, 20:31

I checked my rx480 driversettings. Memory is runnig as it should. Performance still is low. If I activate "energyefficiency" it is even lower, because gpu is not using highest performance state.

So NGU high still not possible.

Yesterday I tried a lot of dfferent madvr settings (8bi/10bit, D3D9/11, remove banding, dithering, ...) to see if there is a problem between a madvr setting and ngu with rx480, but nothing changed the bad perfomance.

Sunset1982

21st November 2016, 20:38

Just a thought.

Is a performance improvement possible with DXVA2 native hardware decoder for NGU, instead of DXVA2 copy-back for AMD?

native isnt working for me. Set it to "none" in LAV and got a performance boost of 4ms with NGU mid (20 instead of 24) and 2 with hihg (48ms insead of 50ms)

aufkrawall

21st November 2016, 21:18

Hm, doesn't seem to cost any performance for me at all on GTX 1070 with 720p 60fps -> 1440p H.264.
But a weird problem with the power profile "optimal performance" in conjunction with software decoding and opened Firefox occured, borderless fullscreen of madVR makes the card clock down then.
Doesn't happen with DXVA2 CB or setting power profile to adaptive/maximum performance for MPC BE.
I think I will leave it to optimal performance with DXVA2 CB unless any other issues occur, saving the planet ftw. :D

Patrik G

21st November 2016, 21:20

Does anyone have any comparision pictures of the difference between NGU and NNEDI3 for chroma upscaling ?

i used NNEDI3 128 before but now i have tried NGU at HIGH with my GTX780
the GPU usage is almost the same at 80% and rendering time around 30ms

its hard to tell but it seems that NGU give a more refined picture with more details and finer color gradings but im not sure if its placebo or not :)
but since NGU is the newest i will use it either way

fedpul

21st November 2016, 21:31

aufkrawall

21st November 2016, 21:35

Does anyone have any comparision pictures of the difference between NGU and NNEDI3 for chroma upscaling ?

Not vs. NNEDI3, but vs. super-xbr (should be similar):
http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1786216&postcount=40241
If the source is good quality, NGU outperforms every other scaler for chroma as well (reconstruction sharp can be better, but can also fail miserably [but ofc not as hard as bileteral]).

Patrik G

21st November 2016, 21:37

I did upload one, it is a few posts ago.

Enviado desde mi MI 4LTE mediante Tapatalk

is it this one?
http://imgur.com/a/JSJBn

after comparing them in PS i cant see any difference at all between NNEDI3 256 and NGU High
there is a slight difference in colors if you look at the histogram but its small

fedpul

21st November 2016, 21:50

is it this one?
http://imgur.com/a/JSJBn

then i need to do a new 3D LUT calibration i think :)
just look how washed out and muted the red color looks with NGU
can this be right?
does color saturation/luminance change that much from NNEDI3 to NGU?
and then you can ask which one is closest to reference rec709?
is NNEDI3 oversaturated or not?

you also have much higher contrast in the NNEDI3 image
colors goes deeper

aufkrawall:
sounds great
i allways use quality material for movies :)
95% is blu ray source

Edit: i think i need to take it back
im looking at the images on an LCD monitor that hasnt the greatest viewing angles lol
it seems that pictures looks more flat at the bottom than in the center.
i need to compare them side by side in PS
Yeah, it is that. Don't look at them scrolling in the browser, download them all and then compare them in full screen.

Enviado desde mi MI 4LTE mediante Tapatalk

plasma

21st November 2016, 22:02

BetA13

21st November 2016, 22:03

I plan to do something like that when I'm nearer to a "finished" NGU version. Atm I'm not there, yet.

You've probably made one of the mistakes which were mentioned about a hundred times on the last couple of pages. So for the 101's time:

- enable NGU-Low for "luma doubling"
- disable "chroma doubling" completely
- set "image upscaling" to Catrom AR
- disable SuperRes

With these settings NGU-Low should be faster than NNEDI3-16 (unless you have a Polaris GPU), and a bit slower than super-xbr and Jinc AR.

oO, i guess that was my bad then, sorry..argh..
i must overread that somehow.
With these settings:

http://666kb.com/i/debh2q04ex9v6gwj5.png

http://666kb.com/i/debh2q04ex9v6gwj5.png

it is all nice now, haha..well, im still learning ;)

i have around 22ms rendertime now and gpu usage nicely around 50% with low lever 3d..(850mhz)..

very happy now..

Thank you very much for that clearyfication.

greetz

HillieSan

21st November 2016, 22:10

How does bluesky frc compare to svp? Quality wise

Both work well for me. Similar quality. Bluesky frc is nicely integrated as an external filter plugin. Bluesky frc uses AMD's fluid motion which is very stable.

ispano

21st November 2016, 22:37

@Sunset1982

My RX 480 performs in line with what HillieSan posted below. Highly doubt the memory states have anything to do with it on the RX 480 since there are only 2 states.

I have done another test with my RX 480.

Image upscaling: Calmull-Rom
Chroma doubling: off
Luma doubling:
NGU low 11 ms
NGU med 19 ms
NGU high 42 ms
NNEDI3 16 12 ms
NNEDI3 32 16 ms
NNEDI3 64 22 ms
NNEDI3 128 34 ms
NNEDI3 256 59 ms

Image upscaling to DXVA2 disables doubling and performs at 3-8 ms.

Enabling “run custom pixel shades in video levels instead of PC levels” saves 1-2 ms.

MPC-BE saves 1-2 ms compared to MPC-HC. (latest versions)

The strange thing is that I see just minor differences between DXVA2 and NGU low (and other scalers). The smoothness of DXVA2 (8 ms) makes the image better. Perhaps it is the noise in the movie that kills the improvements of the scalers. Or perhaps this is caused by the e-shift of the JVC X5000. Dunno.

BTW. The fan goes to high when using NGU low-high.

Try exporting your settings.bin file somewhere as a backup and restore default settings with the madvr batch file. At least in my case, that usually fixes any odd issues whenever there is a major update with new features. Usually don't need to do it for minor updates. It's worth a shot and hopefully that solves the rendertimes for you and huhn.

pirlouy

21st November 2016, 22:47

I don't know if you're still interested in stats but here is mine with random video (Simpsons episode SD), Geforce GTX 750 (not TI) and maximum power in GPU setting (drivers 368.xx). These numbers are just for comparison between algorithms.
"chroma doubling" is disabled. I put Lanczos 3 AR for Chroma upscaling and image upscaling.
The only setting I changed was "double Luma resolution". Let's hope I did not fail something.
Results in ms (GPU core at 1058 Mhz except when specified)

Double Luma resolution disabled: 2
Super-XBR Sharpness 100: 4,30
NEDI: 3,70
NNEDI3 16 Neurons: 7,50
NNEDI3 32 Neurons: 10
NNEDI3 64 Neurons: 14
NNEDI3 128 Neurons: 22
NNEDI3 256 Neurons: 35,50 (GPU Core at 1215 MHz)
NGU Low: 6
NGU Medium: 8,50
NGU High: 16 (but unlike others, it is not stable ~15-17, surely the New Generation algorithm xD, also sometimes GPU Core goes higher -13 ms- whereas it should not since we have some room left)

Edit: I tried with a 720p files and results are similar:
Double Luma disabled > NEDI > Super-XBR 100 > NGU Low > NNEDI3 16 > NGU Medium > NNEDI3 32 > NNEDI3 64 > NGU High >> NNEDI3 128 >> NNEDI3 256

Q-the-STORM

21st November 2016, 22:57

Yes. I'm seriously considering dumbing the whole upscaling/doubling logic down.
[...]
Maybe I'll find a way to make it all easier without losing too much functionality.
maybe have a secret expert mode that you can access by creating an empty "expertoptions" file, like showrendersteps...

Don't show "expert" options by default, hide them and set them automatically depending on what users set in the available "regular" options... and if there is a "expertoptions" file then show all options, like it is now... If you just put in a radiobutton to choose between regular and expert mode, I think most people will choose expert mode, even if they don't know what they are doing, which defeats the purpose...

I told you to name NGU something longer than three characters for forum searchability reasons too :D:p

people can just google
site:http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=146228 NGU

and they'll find everything they need... can't remember the last time I used the forums internal search function, most of the time google gets better results...

mzso

21st November 2016, 23:09

Hi!

Quick question: can I save a "source white level" setting as default? It doesn't offer F2 to save as other options such as the "source levels" setting.

HillieSan

22nd November 2016, 00:06

Just a thought.

Is a performance improvement possible with DXVA2 native hardware decoder for NGU, instead of DXVA2 copy-back for AMD?
I use Bluesky FRC and I wonder if this consumes a lot? I can’t test this at the moment. The internal smoothening doesn’t work well on the RX 480. Can this be fixed? Can this somehow improve performance?

I did some tests.

Hardware decoder to 'none' is a little bit faster than DXVA2 copy-back. And I can play 4K and HDR now. I got DXVA2 native working, by disabling all options in 'trade quality for performance'. No significant performance boosts between the options.
Turning Bluesky FRC off boosts by 1 ms. This isn't much.

Patrik G

22nd November 2016, 01:22

i think this is a question for madshi
why is NGU "next generation" ? and what benefits does it have over NNEDI3 ?
what can NGU do that NNEDI3 cant?

i use NGU for chroma upscaling now and i can see an improvement in picture quality over NNEDI3 but it would be interesting to know what it is exactly
more refined picture with NGU no doubt
its probably not as sharp as NNEDI3 but it still has more details i think.
it feels more that sharpness now is back to normal while NNEDI3 had a few % of artificial sharpness that isnt there from the source?
like comparing 8bit to 10bit

har3inger

22nd November 2016, 01:50

There are quite a few comparison images madshi released back when he was posting teasers for the new algorithm. They are for luma channel more than chroma, but it should give you an idea of what it's doing and its image characteristics.

To say that it's not as sharp as nnedi3 is pretty much flat out wrong though.

In terms of performance, I'm on a laptop with an OC'd R9 270x. NGU low runs substantially faster than SXBR 100 with SR2. Render time is 30 ms vs 40+ms. Image quality for the performance is astounding. It reminds me of when I first tried madvr and saw the difference between bilinear (ew, wtf) and lanczos image upscaling for the first time.

For chroma, NGU is also pretty good. However, I still like bilateral soft SR2 over it for cartoon content, because bilateral is really effective at removing source ringing.

Ver Greeneyes

22nd November 2016, 01:58

Alright, I redid all my profiles for 720p and 1080p content (and 1080p and 2160p displays) to incorporate NGU, and I like it. It's indeed very sharp, and leaves little to the imagination, but especially from a distance I think that just gives everything more definition. The addition of 'low' is very helpful - medium is still too much for my GTX 1060 3G in many cases, but I think low still looks great (I did use medium and high where I could though).

I even like it for Chroma - sure it doesn't give the sharpness of Reconstruction, but the performance is good and it doesn't look nearly as artificial (when looking only at the Chroma channels). I honestly can't see the difference in the full image anyway, but NGU low is cheap enough that it fit into my profiles nicely (with one exception where I had to fall back to Super-XBR).

Warner306

22nd November 2016, 02:05

The in-app performance meter says super-xbr is sharper than NGU. Is this true?

Patrik G

22nd November 2016, 02:08

To say that it's not as sharp as nnedi3 is pretty much flat out wrong though.

your using a shitty laptop with an LCD panel with 300 lines of motion resolution LOL
im using a reference Kuro the 500M which is 3D LUT calibrated.
leave your comments about sharpness man until you get a decent display

Unr3aL

22nd November 2016, 02:14

What's consensus now on which options have to be disabled in conjunction with NGU?
There have been quite a few posts mentioning different things and as there's multiple similarly named "enhancements" in different tabs I'd like that to be specified a bit more precisely...

From what I gathered, the following HAS to be disabled:
Under artifact removal:

reduce dark halos around bright edges, too
Under image enhancements nothing seems to be needed or broadly in use anyways.

Under chroma upscaling:

activate SuperRes (do people even use this? I use the one in upscaling refinement with NNEDI3)
Under image doubling:

double chroma resolution (most say, there's no visible benefit with any algo)
Under upscaling refinement:

sharpen, crispen, thin, enhance, LumaSharpen and AdaptiveSharpen not needed (I used only crispen and enhance)?
SuperRes
And finally, Anti-Ringing is said to be included in NGU, but which of the ARs is/are the one/s to be disabled?
Reduce ringing artifacts can stay, I guess (different to anti-ringing)?
AR in image downscaling?
AR in image upscaling?
AR in upscaling refinement?
Any other AR?

Honestly, there are so many anti-ringing checkboxes, that I don't know, which are redundant, which are overkill or which are plain useless...
I mean, how much ringing can one possibly remove? Madshi I think this would be one thing to consider weeding out, if you ever come to simplifying madVR...

Soften edges and add grain "should" be used. What values do you people like?
Catmull-ROM upscaling was only a low performance recommendation i guess, madshi?
And last, but not least: Has anyone seen any benefit in quadrupling (e.g. double medium + quadruple low).

Hope that's not too much... But maybe we can get some of this answered, so madshi can maybe auto-disable some of those options on NGU use...
Feel free to add, what I forgot.

Greetz, Unr3aL

EpsilonX

22nd November 2016, 02:14

@madshi
Is this behaviour normal..?

http://i67.tinypic.com/992rfr.png

I don't know your settings, so I can't say for sure. I see nothing wrong with the screenshot, though.

Chroma Upscaling : Bicubic 75 AR
Image Downscaling : Bicubic 150 AR
Image Doubling : Luma NGU Low
Image Upscaling : Catmull AR

In the OSD, there's 2 Chroma...

chroma > Bicubic 75 AR
chroma > Catmull-Rom AR

har3inger

22nd November 2016, 02:39

Yeah, that's normal.

First, bicubic 75 AR is used to upscale base chroma to the source resolution to produce 4:4:4. Next, when madvr calls for image to be doubled, NGU is used for luma, but CR ar is used for the chroma channel to upscale the 4:4:4 source to whatever output resolution you wanted.

For me, the only confusing thing is that NGU uses image upscaling settings to determine how to double the chroma, which is a bit counter-intuitive.

Q-the-STORM

22nd November 2016, 02:43

Chroma Upscaling : Bicubic 75 AR
Image Downscaling : Bicubic 150 AR
Image Doubling : Luma NGU Low
Image Upscaling : Catmull AR

In the OSD, there's 2 Chroma...

chroma > Bicubic 75 AR
chroma > Catmull-Rom AR
this is all correct...

chroma upscaling only upscales chroma to luma resolution... if there is additional scaling it's gonna use the image doubling and image upscaling options...

so what you got there is a 720p video on a 1080p screen...
luma is 1280x720 which is doubled to 2560x1440 with NGU Low and then downscaled to 1920x1080 with Bicubic 150 AR

chroma is 640x360 which is upscaled to 1280x720 with Bicubic 75 AR and then upscaled to 1920x1080 with Catmull AR

your using a shitty laptop with an LCD panel with 300 lines of motion resolution LOL
im using a reference Kuro the 500M which is 3D LUT calibrated.
leave your comments about sharpness man until you get a decent display
nice speech and all, but not only do most users say that NGU is very sharp, some even complaining that they think it's too sharp, but madshi himself has said multiple times that NGU is sharper than NNEDI3...

NGU is *significantly* sharper than NNEDI3 64/128.
[...]

A comparison to "straight NNEDI3" (without SuperRes) doesn't make too much sense because it's a completely different world of sharpness.
[...]

if you want to compare NNEDI3 to NGU, you almost have no other choice than to use combine NNEDI3+SuperRes, because otherwise the difference in sharpness is simply too big to do any useful comparisons. So IMHO the proper comparison would be "NGU without SuperRes" and "NNEDI3 with SuperRes".
[...]

Telion

22nd November 2016, 02:43

Yes. I'm seriously considering dumbing the whole upscaling/doubling logic down. I know some expert users will hate it. But looking through all the posts since v0.91.1 was released, almost every non-expert user got the settings wrong, even after I explained it multiple times.

Not only does the current logic allow for serious misconfiguration (which almost all non-expert users seem to fall for atm), but it also costs endless support and correction posts.

Maybe I'll find a way to make it all easier without losing too much functionality.

I think that the main reason of all these misunderstandings is the fact that when the chroma doubling is unchecked in the "image doubling" page, the chroma doubling is handled by an algorithm selected in the "image upscaling" page. Moreover, there is the "chroma upscaling" page which is unrelated in this case. This is totally confusing and not explained anywhere except the depths of this forum.

I suggest the following rather simple reorganization of the "image doubling" page without the need to dumb it down:

Turn the algorithms drop-down lists into the set of radio buttons (super-xbr and super-xbr AB should have their own entries). Set their parameters through a drop-down list. One would be enough for all of them, named and filled accordingly (sharpness for super-xbr, AB strength for super-xbr AB, neurons for NNEDI3, quality for NGU). Thus it would be consistent with the "image upscaling" page.
On the contrary, turn the activation condition radio buttons into the drop-down lists. An activation condition is rarely changed compared to algorithms, so radio buttons for swiftness and drop-down lists for compactness.
For the luma, replace the activating checkboxes with additional "never" item in these drop-down lists which would turn them off.
For the chroma, rename the activating checkboxes to "process chroma differently" (greyed out for super-xbr and NEDI). If unchecked, the same settings as for the luma would be applied. And I doubt that separate activation options for the chroma are even needed.
For the chroma, add all possible algorithms, not only doublers (it's okay if this would require to leave them as drop-down lists). This is a must thing to do. The choice for the chroma doubling should definitely be unlinked from the algorithm selected in the "image upscaling" page as it is not only unintuitive, but also limits the choice for non-doubling image upscaling itself.
If you want to make it even more intuitive, consider moving these "activate" drop-down lists to the "image upscaling" page (and maybe add a special "parameters" button which would switch to the "image doubling" page). And/or make the whole "image doubling" page an additional tab in the "image upscaling" page (or make it a subnode in the tree). So it would be clear that image doubling is just a special case of image upscaling and not independent from its settings, while "chroma upscaling" page is a totally different thing unrelated to them.

plasma

22nd November 2016, 02:48

Hope I am not offtopic spamming but I found this. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.05250v1.pdf (Real-Time Video Super-Resolution with Spatio-Temporal Networks and Motion
Compensation) Very intereting and promising.

I was wondering if any upscaler in madvr is using future or past frames for more detail or if all real time scaler have to be spatial scalers only.

As for NGU I am happy, altho I was too hyped after the initial teaser expecting quality near waifu2x. It still is good for low res anime, since its output is sharp and the cartoony effect is not disturbing with little aliasing.

Only problem I see is that many low res(anime) are low quality or old encodes from dvds with blocking or other artefacts, which can exaggerate with ngu.