Convolution3D

[-h]

I love it. It's the best. The greatest. Brilliant. Amazing.

That is all.

-h

[ACClarke]

It's french :D

[TheUnforgiven]

i love it too, thanx vlad

[Bulletproof]

It's got me a bit confused ;)

Convolution3D does Spatial and Temporal smoothing together right?

But how does that make it different from just manually adding a seperate Spatial filter into the chain and then a Temporal one?

Does it do special Dynamic things that make it benefit from doing both at once?

[vlad59]

@all

Wahoooo, too much thanks, I should be dreaming ;) ;) ;)
Let's wake up :D :D

@ACClarke

In fact, it's more an international project :
idea comes from Germany (bb)
coding comes from France (I don't know who ;) )
testing comes from Turkey, Germany, ... (iago, Koepi, ...)
hosting comes from USA (Defiler)

@-h
I hope all the Xvid problems will stop as soon as possible.

I hope this weekend I could add some buffering to release v1.0.

Thanks again.

[-h]

vlad, I just noticed the Tao avatar! I take it you're a MCoG fan?

I wish they'd play the english run of it again in the USA. Someone. On any station. Or just release the damn tapes. Ah well, can't have everything.

Oh and yes, I'm hoping for the XviD problems to stop ASAP as well ;)

-h

[vlad59]

Originally posted by Bulletproof
It's got me a bit confused ;)

Convolution3D does Spatial and Temporal smoothing together right?

But how does that make it different from just manually adding a seperate Spatial filter into the chain and then a Temporal one?

Does it do special Dynamic things that make it benefit from doing both at once?

I'm afraid I have no 100% sure answer to make.

I think the point is here :
if you use the following script :
Temporal (...)
Spacial (...)

Spacial will always process already filtered frames so if the scene has no motion at all :
-> Temporal will smooth a little
-> Spacial will smooth a little more causing maybe some blurring.

if there has heavy motion :
-> Temporal can cause ghosting
-> Spacial will smooth the ghosting

The problem is that one of the filter will work with already filtered frame.

That's why Marc FD created MAM to apply Temporal to the source, apply Spacial to the source. And mix them to produce the result.

Convolution3D work with unfiltered source, apply the treshold check to ALL surrounding pixels (spacial and temporal) and calc the new pixel value.

That's maybe why, but I'm afraid I can be wrong or unclear.

@-h

Yes I'm a fan of MCoG.
We are more lucky than you in France. We have tapes and DVD. But the DVDs are crap : only french audio, no bonus, macroblock on the video.

[bb]

Just wanted to add that Convolution3D is the best filter I ever tried for noisy TV captures or noisy low-light DV shots. Best noise removal while keeping detail as much as possible. And believe me - I tried a lot of different filters, and none of them could reach Convolution3D's quality.

bb

P.S.: I like the full 1 matrix best.

[Antti]

I agree! I mostly deal with DV material (I rip dvd:s very rarely), and new cameras produce quite detailed but very noisy picture in low-light conditions. So far I have got best results with C3D. Sometimes I even add a light temporalsmoother filtering after it. But I wonder if just tweaking C3D parameters would do the same (maybe even better).

[wotef]

hear, hear! the mother of all noise filters for analogue caps -

thank you vlad and bb

- hmm, as i said previously, i think it's ready to go on doom9's download page - those folks in the "capturing video" forum would be all over it, if they knew it existed

[iago]

@vlad59 and everybody

I can say nothing else than I really appreciate this great work of vlad59 too. However, I'm trying it on only DVD rips ;), hoping to find some reasonable settings to use, especially in cases of long and really hard-to-compress movies, in order to fit them on 1CD or 1XCD with better compressibility and without losing many details.

Maybe the settings (1,3,4,2,3,2.8,0) and (1,4,5,3,4,2.8,0)
discussed by wing1 and bb in the other thread, which I will try asap, help to achieve this.

kind regards to all,
iago

[-h]

I guess I should say I've been using it for dark DV footage too.. somtimes up to Convolution3d(1, 18, 250, 20, 80, 40, 0) (!).

The results are far better than any combination of spatial/temporal I found previously. How do people think it compares to "commercial quality" filters, like you'd see in Premiere/Ulead/MC Pro?

-h

[vlad59]

Originally posted by -h
I guess I should say I've been using it for dark DV footage too.. somtimes up to Convolution3d(1, 18, 250, 20, 80, 40, 0) (!).

-h

Wahoo, That's strong settings.
I personnaly never exceeded :
Convolution3d(1, 12, 30, 10, 10, 10, 0)
But I only used it on DVD sources wich will never be noisier than DV or analog sources.

[ACClarke]

Originally posted by vlad59

@-h

Yes I'm a fan of MCoG.
We are more lucky than you in France. We have tapes and DVD. But the DVDs are crap : only french audio, no bonus, macroblock on the video.
there is two version, one expensive and very bad (macroblocks....)made by sony if i remenber well.....
and a cheap one, 21 euros (22 dollars) for the 4 dvd, this release is better.

[bill_baroud]

if i remember well, the cheapest ones, which are better, were only in half-Pal ... 352x576 , what a _great_ resolution for a DVD.


but the first release was worse :/ ... keep with the WHS ^^

[vidiot]

Originally posted by -h
I guess I should say I've been using it for dark DV footage too.. somtimes up to Convolution3d(1, 18, 250, 20, 80, 40, 0) (!).

The results are far better than any combination of spatial/temporal I found previously. How do people think it compares to "commercial quality" filters, like you'd see in Premiere/Ulead/MC Pro?

-h

Yes, depending on the quality of your camcorder.
If you try to capture dark scenes it often looks like salt and pepper.

So I think I´ve to try Conv3D for some of my DV footage, too.

Thanx

Harald

[HarryM]

Convolution3d is great filter (I use it), but I am looking specially for filter, which

a) for unmoving parts of frame using temporal filtering
b) for moving parts of frame using spacial filtering

Do you know something, please?

[ronnylov]

MAM can be used to apply temporal filter on low motion parts and spatial filter on high motion parts.

[iago]

@Acaila and drizztcanrender,

Any fresh news about your filtering/convolution3d tests with your "DVD rips"? ;)

best regards,
iago

[^^-+I4004+-^^]

>hear, hear! the mother of all noise filters for analogue caps -

thank you vlad and bb

- hmm, as i said previously, i think it's ready to go on doom9's download page - those folks in the "capturing video" forum would be all over it, if they knew it existed

_have you all lost your mind??????????[here goes one "folk" from capturing video forum]

this filter is nothing but ANOTHER DNR....(by results it gives..)
& boy ohh boy did i tried it!
i've tried about 20(!) different combinations(especially for temporal part) & found that IT CANNOT REMOVE NOISE IN NON-MOVING-CAMERA scenes
(i've come up to "200"(!!!)& more for temporal part of the filter:noise was still there!!!just as with any other vdub's DNR filter....)

video was noisy,but no more than i ecounter every day& filter it nice with temp.smoother:still scenes on output have NO NOISE with t.s_.....convolution(what's this name anyway????) CANNOT stack to vdub's tsmoother!

HarryM said this:"Convolution3d is great filter (I use it), but I am looking specially for filter, which

a) for unmoving parts of frame using temporal filtering
b) for moving parts of frame using spacial filtering

Do you know something, please?"


_&wasn't this objective for c3d?to merge 2 filters in one?
also someone else mentioned "why not use 2 separate filters"-->it seems we'll have to until someone does real hard-core t/s smoothing filter!
but again_nothing wrong with using 2 filters is it...?

or is it just that ALL the poeple on this forum take dvd as a source /which already doesn't have any noise to start with/ & then denoise that....(this is NOT what denoiser's are ment to be used with!)-what's the point in sending "TESTS" with "SCREENSHOTS" when
dvd was the source???(i've dloaded 2 of these:nothing to see on them_nothing that would interest capturers...DENOISERS should BE for capturers...)

by your results i see that no one of you dealt with noisy vhs source,so this filter cannot be even mentioned in capturing context!
[so please mention it NOT in that context no more!]

[bb]

@^^-+I4004+-^^:
I use Convolution3D for TV caps and low light DV footage with excellent results.

Could you please post your AviSynth script and some screenshots to prove what you said?

bb

[vlad59]

Originally posted by ^^-+I4004+-^^
>this filter is nothing but ANOTHER DNR....(by results it gives..)
& boy ohh boy did i tried it!
i've tried about 20(!) different combinations(especially for temporal part) & found that IT CANNOT REMOVE NOISE IN NON-MOVING-CAMERA scenes
(i've come up to "200"(!!!)& more for temporal part of the filter:noise was still there!!!just as with any other vdub's DNR filter....)

Wahoo please don't rush me. Let's talk first.
Of course there is no miracle solution to remove noise and I didn't build a wavelet noise reducer so Convolution3D can be DNR : i agree on that.
I build this filter with lots of parameters so you can tweak to have the output you want.
If you want ghosting and blur on edges just put 255 at both temporal and spacial tresholds and 10 at temporal influence : you'll get pure 3x3x3 convolution with no treshold but with ghosting and blurring.
If your video is very noisy : it can be better.


video was noisy,but no more than i ecounter every day& filter it nice with temp.smoother:still scenes on output have NO NOISE with t.s_.....convolution(what's this name anyway????) CANNOT stack to vdub's tsmoother!


I agree that Temporal smoother make a better job on still scene but you forgot to say that TemporalSmoother (5) for example lose a lot of details, does a bad job in scene change (ghosting) and a very bad job in fadein or fade out.
That's a matter of taste : with Convolution3d you can tweak better.



_&wasn't this objective for c3d?to merge 2 filters in one?
also someone else mentioned "why not use 2 separate filters"-->it seems we'll have to until someone does real hard-core t/s smoothing filter!
but again_nothing wrong with using 2 filters is it...?


The objective of Convolution3d was to apply a 3x3x3 convolution to a video.
So I only use 3 frames (previous, current and next) : TemporalSmoother use more frames.
And use a max of 3x3 spacial matrix (SmoothHiq can use more).
So we are not speaking of the same thing.
Use MAM you want to use TemporalSmoother & SmoothHiq, it does a very good job.


or is it just that ALL the poeple on this forum take dvd as a source /which already doesn't have any noise to start with/ & then denoise that....(this is NOT what denoiser's are ment to be used with!)-what's the point in sending "TESTS" with "SCREENSHOTS" when
dvd was the source???(i've dloaded 2 of these:nothing to see on them_nothing that would interest capturers...DENOISERS should BE for capturers...)

by your results i see that no one of you dealt with noisy vhs source,so this filter cannot be even mentioned in capturing context!
[so please mention it NOT in that context no more!]

My first test was on a DVD (so you're right) but with really bad quality (bad VHS quality with noise and scratch).
With this video I've used high tresholds.
For normal DVD quality, Convolution3d can be used with very low tresholds to increase compressability. Personnaly I prefer no filtering at all in this case but everybody can use it freely.

You make a search and you'll find that the very first tests of bb and Wilbert were from analog sources.

[^^-+I4004+-^^]

>Use MAM you want to use TemporalSmoother & SmoothHiq, it does a very good job.

ok,but then what's the use your (poor) DNR replica????
i guess you guys angered me very much:i'm in RAGE!!!

take lousy vhs,capture it,test it,test it,test it again-->then release it
DON'T release it for the dvd-conversion scene:they shouldn't need it anyhow(neither do we capturers need filters of such poor noise removal)

i JUST can't see what's the HYPE???
&i'm here to put you back to the ground (vlad59)you've floated away a bit on this "success".....
no justifications(use MAM,use this,use that) are needed!
you've made denoise filter,i doesn't work for real hardcore denoising&
that's just IT!if the denoise filter doesn't denoise than why all this?

however:it's not my intention to bury any such (filter) project,just it seemed to me that everyone took this over-overwhelmingly...
[but i can understand asynth users:they didn't had any good denoising filters anyhow_except for those copied from vdub counterparts.....also:asynth's built in softeners are much slower&worse than vdub's smoothers....]

i'm sending you all some examples(YES they do have NOISE!!!especially c3d ones...hehehe) judge for yourself!
additional notes in the archive itself....
notice the curtains in the back of scene.....c3d cannot cope with it!

sorry if i offended anyone,but still:it's NOT ok to say "REVOLUTION" when we've already seen this(& few times....)

[Koepi]

^^^6487487^24387^^^^^^:

Play nice.

Just because YOU are incapable of using the filter correctly doesn't mean you can insult the people who spend their time in coding such nie stuff.

Striked for rudeness.

[dividee]

@ 404

You have the right to disagree but your tone is just insulting.
Calm down please.

edit: Koepi was faster...

[wotef]

"by your results i see that no one of you dealt with noisy vhs source,so this filter cannot be even mentioned in capturing context"

ahem, matey, i'm doing nothing but vhs caps; i completely disagree with your view that convolution3d <= dnr

P.M. me if you want me to show you the results I got denoising non-moving areas using convolution3d - it spanks everything else I've tried

[vlad59]

First I don't understand why you are in RAGE. if this filter don't work correctly for your analog captures then simply don't use it.
I should be in RAGE because you're flaming me and I stay cool so let's continue like gentlemen.

I'll explain you the story of this filter :
I've bought a old anime DVD : it should have been remastered but in fact it's not at all (noise, scratch and so on).
Then I read bb post about smoothing in time and space (3x3x3 matrix).
It's was a great idea, I had time so I coded it and I was impressed by the results : it was slow but good.
As the idea was not mine and I wanted to share it (I'm not egoist), I answered to bb and attached the first Convolution3d.
Due to the feedbacks I've been updating and optimizing it during the last weeks.

So say me where I was wrong ?

You say I'm floating on this success : just find a single post when I say Convolution3d is the best and I'll make public apologize.

About MAM, I just say that
Convolution3d was not a mix between TemporalMsoother and SmoothHIQ and if you wanted that : MAM can help you.

I'm waiting for your examples.

EDIT : got your attachment, I'll test and report here

[HarryM]

I think, that the best filtering method is method combinated with MPEG-4 encoding process ('smart' preprocessing)...

[ronnylov]

I agree with vlad59 that if you don't like the filter then don't use it. I am happy that there is a free choice to use whatever I find useful and sometimes one filter suits your needs better than another and it's also possible to combine parameters and filters in (almost) unlimited combinations. I am very thankful that people take their time to create tools that we can use free! Why get angry when you don't need to pay for it and don't must use it either.

I find the Convolution3D filter very useful as a basic good quality cleaning filter. If I need heavier filtering I combine it with other filters. To clean up interlaced DV and TV captures I use something like this after converting to 50 fps with TomsMoComp.

cnr2().temporalsoften(3,8,0)
Convolution3D(1,10,20,10,10,6,0)

It's a little bit slow combined with TMPGEnc but I like the results!
There's not that much ghosting after increasing the framerate to 50 fps so that's why I use a little bit stronger temporal filters. Afterwards I convert it back to 25 fps (PAL) interlaced and encode to interlaced DVD-format. I think I would use the same method also if I am deinterlacing because of the possibility to use stronger temporal filters with less ghosting. I can use SelectEven to get 25 fps progressive. But this method is slower than normal filtering at 25 fps.

[baz00ie]

I've been following the progress of the "C3D" filter since Vlad59 first introduced it and I can say that it can do wonders for a noisy video... (thanks Vlad59)

However, it's not the only filter I use when de-noising a video capture (live-action, VHS). I use "C3D" as a starting point, then finish up with MAM6 + my favourite smoothers... (thanks MarkFD)

Both of these filters are quite good, each in their own right, but when combined, they can produce astonishing results. I have come across no filter or combination of filters that can compare to the above.

(My next hope is for a VERY kind person to work on optimizing "SmoothHiQ") :)

Anyway, Vlad59, i'm here to encourage you and anyone else who offers such fine and useful tools.

And for ^^-+I4004+-^^, this is for you:
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~rdf7d/banana.swf

Later all
baz

[sh0dan]

@baz00ie:

(My next hope is for a VERY kind person to work on optimizing "SmoothHiQ") :)

Don't pick on my bad conscience - I'm on it, but it just got heavily tired of it - it's immensely complex, and I'm only half-way through ;)

Hope to finish it within a month, but I'd much rather work on AviSynth itself.

'Nuff hijacking for now. Back to work ;)



PS. the banana rocks!!! <It's peanut butter jelly time><It's peanut butter jelly time>

[vidiot]

@^^-+I4004+-^^:
Sorry for you:
You´re right about heavy "noised" VHS Video.
I tried by myself to capture an vhs video (Rudolf the red-nosed reindeer) which has been watched > 30 times (!) (don´t count me on that).
It is kind of disorted now, but since it is a nice movie, which will be watched around christmas several... (don´t want to bore you)

Definetley C3D removes some noise, but even with very hard setting
(Convolution3d (1, 10, 22, 8, 8, 3, 0))
it is not enough to get a visable cleaner video.
(But i must admitt - I haven´t tried real hard)

On the other hand, my tv caps looks much better with it (although without much tweaking, just suggested settings from this thread).

So all I can say is:
Thankyou "Buffy Slayer" for that piece of work.

Now I´m going to learn to tweak it a little more...

Harald

[Metalazzo]

all i have to say is thx vlad for this filter :)
and thx also to Tom and neuron and the others :)
you all make my life easier with your filters ;)

[Marc FD]

Originally posted by HarryM
I think, that the best filtering method is method combinated with MPEG-4 encoding process ('smart' preprocessing)...

that exactly what i was thinking before.
but MPEG encoding use fdct-quant-idct relative frames.
(it's why XviD is not 100% effective with CopySame)
so the "smart" preprocessing is somehow blind.

it is of course the best way to do _hard_ denoising, but for soft HQ denoising, it wouldn't match a avisynth filter.

[Guest]

@Metalazzo

I edited your post to remove a gratuitous personal attack. We do not want that tone here. Thank you for your understanding, and please let's not start any debates. :)

Oh, I also want to thank you for your kind words to the filter developers.

[Gant]

well i agree with neuron... this is not a battle forum... we're all friends here... and this is the way it shold continue... when i say friends.. i mean friendly people :D

Well.. now my question... where can i leech that beauty filter?

Domo.

[Belgabor]

Its somewhere hidden in the 'Smooth in Time and Space' (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29829) thread.

Cheers
Belgabor

[WarpEnterprises]

It is available at

http://hellninjacommando.com/con3d

[ohliuv]

can anyone please summarize the difference between using the '1'-matrix, and the original one? I mean the first parameter - Convolution3d(X,x,x,x,x,x,x)
Any gain in speed and/or loss of quality in the resulting frame?

[Dali Lama]

@ohliuv

Hi, I have noticed that a setting of 1 produces more artifact removing at the cost of more blurring. I find that more useful in Anime (cartoon) encoding. A setting of 0 is IMO better suited towards movies.

Also, if you are trying to clean a movie try these settings:

Convolution3d(0,4,4,8,8,3,0)

That followed by a Neutral Bicubic Resize works very well for me encoding a noisy Hong Kong Jackie Chan Film: Young Master.

@all

I have found that Convolution3d(0,8,8,8,8,3,0) suggested by Iago and others to remove too much detail on faces in regular movies (so I agree with Koepi). However, if the quality of the film is poor to some extent, I feel that lowering the spatial thresholds to 4 doesn't produce that problem.

Take Care,

Dali

[iago]

I have found that Convolution3d(0,8,8,8,8,3,0) suggested by Iago and others to remove too much detail on faces in regular movies (so I agree with Koepi). @Dali Lama

"Iago and others" didn't "suggest" this setting but only "tried and tested" it to reach a conclusion on whether it can be used for regular movies or not ;).

And, based on these test results, it had already been generally agreed upon (for a long while) that Convolution3d(0,8,8,8,8,3,0) is too strong for normal movies and sweeps off too many details.

So currently I'm "testing", not "suggesting", (1,4,5,3,4,2.8,0) on a rather long movie (3hr-10min) to increase compressibility without removing too many details (seeking a sort of acceptable/decent compromise between these two) aiming for 1 XCD.

But as I said before, these are only "test settings" and not suggested values.

best regards,
iago

[MaTTeR]

I just tested C3D with one of the noisest movies on the planet:D The movie is True Blue and has an unbelieveable amount of grainy FX. Just for the heck of it I tried using Convolution3d(0,8,8,8,8,3,0) which was mentioned as being to strong for general movies. Well for this movie the results was great compared to my tests with TemporalSoften, TemporalSmoother and SmoothHiQ. This movie wouldnt be the "norm" that we usually see but C3D really does it great. Going to try lowering the values now and continue testing. Thx for the nice work Vlad:)

[Shayne]

Thanks for this work, for me it has replaced vdub DNR2 and put me back to fast recompress ,,,,,,,,,,,,, dam logos

good work Vlad

[iago]

Hello everybody,

In terms of testing the advantage it would provide with compressibility, I tested convolution3d(1,4,5,3,4,2.8,0) -before resizing and using SimpleResize- on a "normal" but rather long movie (3hr-8min), with XviD Koepi's build 30082002-1.

Below are the firstpass results (aiming for 730000kb video size):

normal encode:
1stPass file size: 2183mb -> compression ratio: 3.093:1

convolution3d(1,4,5,3,4,2.8,0):
1stPass file size: 2029mb -> compression ratio: 2.875:1

speed: normal encode is ~3x faster than convolution3d(1,4,5,3,4,2.8,0) applied before resizing.

best regards,
iago

EDIT: Clearly, the above setting provided only a "minor" increase in compressibility, which suggests that for DVD rips of normal movies a bit higher values can be tried with matrix 1 too.

[Metalazzo]

Originally posted by neuron2
@Metalazzo

I edited your post to remove a gratuitous personal attack. We do not want that tone here. Thank you for your understanding, and please let's not start any debates. :)

Oh, I also want to thank you for your kind words to the filter developers.

np for the edit
i am sorry but i was quite angry against the croatia guy to flame up(?) vlad's work
that's all :)
and no needs to thank me (it's only natural ;))

[vlad59]

I'm back (I've been during the last two days away from Internet because of work)

first, thanks all for all your kind words.

@Dali Lama
You're right about the difference of the weigthed matrix and the full-1 matrix :
Matrix 1 shouldn't be used in normal movie (or only noisy movies with low tresholds, I have no such samples).
Matrix 1 is better for anime to smooth a little more.


@^^-+I4004+-^^
I tested with your samples and have some good values for you to test.
As the sample have no scene change, I used high temporal tresholds. If you have ghosting problems, I will help you if you provide me some more samples.

So my suggested settings are
Convolution3D (0, 32, 128, 32, 128, 10, 0) : smoother
or
Convolution3D (0, 28, 100, 28, 100, 10, 0) : with a little more details

Let's explain the parameters :
Matrix 0 is used because the full-1 matrix blur a little more the video.
I used the same values for temporal and spacial tresholds to deal with coherent informations (If you give me scene change sample with the Vdub (with DNR + SmoothHiq) version, I can do more tests).
In your test you have only increased the temporal tresholds : that's why noise was still very important.
And finally : a temporal inflence of 10 to be sure to use the 3x3x3 matrix everytime to keep quality.

I'll update the readme this weekend to explain that a little better.

[^^-+I4004+-^^]

vlad59>I tested with your samples and have some good values for you to test.
As the sample have no scene change, I used high temporal tresholds. If you have ghosting problems, I will help you if you provide me some more samples.

So my suggested settings are
Convolution3D (0, 32, 128, 32, 128, 10, 0) : smoother
or
Convolution3D (0, 28, 100, 28, 100, 10, 0) : with a little more details

_ok,i'll test this(seems you emphasized spatial component (chroma)
i tend to avoid this(don't like too much bluring in space)-but for chroma alone it might work.......)
but off course:not all(or bettter:two?) filters are the same so what i came to expect from "smshiq" cannot be expected here...

i'll report here...(will edit my previous post to rectify if need be)

btw.anyone there willing to send me a copy of MAM,to test that too?
seems that on marc's site it's the only UNdownloadable filter....
(or just point me to thread if there's one in forums....)

cheers_

ps.off course i can provide you with the samples(or PM you for details...)if problems occur:yes ,after the "no scene change" detail comes one with moving camera

pitty though admins lowered allowed att's size...
(but i think screenshots woudn't be enough for this case)

[ohliuv]

I wonder, anyone tried Convolution3D on SPR or Waterworld already? Remember long discussions in the Doom9 forums on the first one ...

[MaTTeR]

Originally posted by ohliuv
I wonder, anyone tried Convolution3D on SPR or Waterworld already?
I just finally broke down and bought the DTS version of SPR yesterday and already ripped the first 2 chapters for some testing. I'll play around a bit and post results later on.

[theReal]

I tested C3D(1,8,8,8,8,0) and C3D(0,8,8,8,8,0) on "Kundun" (the Scorsese movie about the Dalai Lama's life).
I used the filter before neutral bicubic resizing and I made a 2CD rip with Divx5 pro (bitrate around 1400)

I found matrix 1 was better than matrix 0, but that was probably because the film is relatively noisy and the DVD already shows some little filtering artefacts (=very smooth faces, for example) and sometimes even a little blockieness with chroma-shifts around the edges.
(Interestingly the DVD doesn't look that bad on the first glance, but you'll notice when you look closer).

I found that matrix 1 was able to remove some of the chroma-irregularities better than matrix 0. A reduction of details wasn't much noticeable with both matrices because as I said, the DVD already shows exactly such remainders of filtering. C3D didn't make this any worse (but it improved compressibility and made the result look more pleasant!)