Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiDragon
Your second image nuked the detail on the rope that's hanging near 45 degrees.
|
I think that's a QTGMC side effect. I'd have to test with a different denoiser to be sure, but that rope "detail" kind of resembles combing from interlaced video, and given the angle of the rope and QTGMC being a de-interlacer...... so I'm thinking that's probably not a typical side effect. It didn't remove the detail from the rope anywhere else.
But yeah, any denoiser is going to have some negative effect. Blurring where there's motion seems to be the worst problem and QTGMC's noise removal to blurring ratio is pretty good. Plus it helps stabilise the picture and reduce compression artefacts such as blocking. In this case it removed some detail from 2% of the video while improving the other 98%, and it's nothing I imagine I would have noticed while watching it, as opposed to the noise which I can't help but notice, so I'm not complaining.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiDragon
Film grain is not your enemy.  |
Yes it is. Unless there's so little of it I can't see it without putting my nose on the screen. Do you actually like looking at noise? Re-encoded noise tends to become more distracting as it looks less natural (noise turned into "dancing blocks" drives me nutty), it requires a higher bitrate for a given quality, and if I do want to apply a little bit of sharpening, ideally I'd prefer not to sharpen noise. Imagine if film had been invented as a completely noise free medium, and someone came along and said "I've got an idea, lets cover the picture with all this grainy stuff"......
Roll on digital.... where I suppose initially noise will be added artificially for backwards compatibility.
It helps to reduce banding, but what other redeeming features does noise have?
I do get your point, but myself, I don't like noise.