Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
9th February 2014, 03:36 | #22821 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1
|
Hi, I have a question, Advise me anybody please.
I use 60Hz monitor. madVR Smooth Motion is off. When I enter the Full Screen Exclusive Mode, fps is changed to 60fps with Smooth Motion off. Is it a normal situation? Full Screen Exclusive Mode always changes fps? Please help me anybody, Thanks a lot! |
9th February 2014, 04:11 | #22822 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 753
|
Quote:
|
|
9th February 2014, 04:15 | #22823 | Link | ||
Broadband Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,859
|
Quote:
Quote:
I also don't believe it is possible for any of these algorithms to be 'lucky', since madshi stated he designed the random elements to produce identical results on identical content so there wouldn't be any temporal noise. All the algorithms seem to behave rather consistently. Those which show a high percentage of patterns like ED9 & ED10, always have a high distribution of patterns wherever dithering occurs. On low motion content like anime, these patterns can be noticeable. With ED3, the quantity and size of the patterns was small enough to be almost undetectable. The fact that I could detect patterns at all with ED3 is why I bumped it down below patternless ED5 & ED7 in my anime test. So far, my top two are ED7 (patternless, medium-low noise, very low crosstalk) & ED3 (low pattens, very low noise, low crosstalk) for the 'error-diffusion + random' slot. ED5 (patternless, medium-low noise, low crosstalk) sits in a middle, as it's not very memorable being similar yet worse than ED7. The worst two are ED9 & ED10 (medium patterns, low noise, medium crosstalk), with ED10 seemingly producing more 'strange' artifacts then ED9. (ED1 I'm no longer testing since it's too noisy.) Last edited by cyberbeing; 9th February 2014 at 06:14. |
||
9th February 2014, 05:56 | #22824 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 12
|
are we comparing "quality" or PSNR?
the point of dithering is to make image "look" better at the cost of introducing noise...if I can't notice the noise in normal viewing conditions I'm all in for better color reproduction sharper image etc |
9th February 2014, 08:08 | #22825 | Link |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
Well, it should be said that the noise on black when using a 3dlut is not actually a "bug". The 3dlut black output seems to be a very very dark shade of gray. Almost black, but not completely. So proper error diffusion *should* throw in some stray dots. The reason why some algorithms do that more than others is that some of the algorithms don't spread 100% of the error to the surrounding pixels, but only ~97%. So if the gray is so near to black that the difference to black is smaller than those 3%, then there's a chance that there are no stray dots in the black, but it also depends on the exact weight configuration. I think we should mostly ignore this, and look for a different solution to the 3dlut problem.
So if we totally ignore stray dots on black, which algorithms do you prefer? And do you think I should only offer one algorithm? Or do you think I should offer two (one low noise, one higher noise)? Which two? FWIW, algorithms 9, 10 are somewhere between the low-noise and medium-noise algorithms, and 3 is somewhere between 9/10 and the medium-noise algorithms, in terms of noise level. |
9th February 2014, 08:11 | #22826 | Link | |||
Broadband Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,859
|
Quote:
As a simple test, can you see the single color channel noise on these images with your display? Red (R1-G0-B0) uniform noise over black Green (R0-G1-B0) uniform noise over black Blue (R0-G0-B1) uniform noise over black Quote:
I'm one of those people who always notice dither patterns, while minor +/- 0.33% low level random noise is undetectable during playback. Considering I've never seen a dithering pattern on an untouched HDTV broadcast or Blu-ray release, I'd assume most professional post-production studios have come to a similar conclusion and also favor patternless dithers at the expense of noise and accuracy. IMHO, a dither needs to be impossible to identify from random noise to achieve peak subjective image quality. The other view in this thread is from those who do not notice most dither patterns, and prefer noiseless with minimum error and peak accuracy via PSNR or similar metrics. Quote:
Completely Patternless Patterns Artifacts only Patterns Artifacts + Worms I'm of the opinion if we are having only two choices, one should be 'completely patternless' or we are just trading one type of artifact for another, considering 'worm' artifacts are just a side-effect of pattern layout. Similarly, the 'completely patternless' dither should have distortion less than 'random dither' or much of the benefit goes away. |
|||
9th February 2014, 08:17 | #22827 | Link | |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
|
Quote:
|
|
9th February 2014, 08:29 | #22828 | Link | ||
Broadband Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,859
|
Quote:
No, since it seems other people want a completely non-random noiseless dither with patterns. May as well offer such an option. Quote:
ED3, since it has minimal patterns, less noise than ED7, and appears to have the smoothest result of all the randoms. While I do find it slightly worse, ED5 is similar enough to ED7 that it could be substituted in the patternless category. Beyond that, both ED9 & ED10 have around 2-3x the pattern size as ED3 which I find unacceptable. The non-random ones are obviously much worse, but as long as I have one choice I find acceptable, I could just ignore the second option. Last edited by cyberbeing; 9th February 2014 at 09:14. |
||
9th February 2014, 09:00 | #22829 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 919
|
Quote:
x1 non-random. x2 quality random. build 7 & 5 looks nice.
__________________
System: i7 3770K, GTX660, Win7 64bit, Panasonic ST60, Dell U2410. Last edited by James Freeman; 9th February 2014 at 09:09. |
|
9th February 2014, 09:06 | #22830 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 235
|
Quote:
__________________
__________________ System: Intel Core i5-6500, 16GB RAM, GTX1060, 75" Sony ZD9, Focal speakers, OS Win10 Pro, Playback: madvr/JRiver |
|
9th February 2014, 09:38 | #22831 | Link |
Broadband Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,859
|
At a certain point you go beyond preserving lost bitdepth, and begin to enter debanding territory. If you enable madVR debanding, you may achieve the result you desire, assuming madshi has it as the very last processing step before dithering down to 8bit with error diffusion.
|
9th February 2014, 09:54 | #22832 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Posts: 128
|
Madshi you said that you are using alternating direction inside every 16x16 block.
Mabe using a method like in http://www.idav.ucdavis.edu/func/return_pdf?pub_id=1049 would help to eliminate these 16x16 blocky clusters of dots. "Block interlaced pinwheel error diffusion with spiral or serpentine scan path" and "The scan path goes outward for gray blocks, and inward for white blocks. Note that during the processing of gray blocks, we diffuse errors from the gray blocks to the white blocks across block boundaries. To process each pixel, we first threshold the pixel value, then diffuse the quantizer error to its neighbors according to an error-weighting matrix..." Last edited by bacondither; 9th February 2014 at 09:57. |
9th February 2014, 12:43 | #22833 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 17
|
9 and 10:
i still prefer 4 and 2 because it is more smooth at my test-sample. @bacondither: I cant reproduce your BBB-screenshots with those strong pattern, what did you change ? When i look at Sample 6 (crf18@1080p) i cant see any pattern, and with enhanced brightness i can only see some minor pattern. (Maybe this is source-dependent/better to see on low quality videos) my untouched sample:http://s14.directupload.net/images/140209/jj8hgjtk.png your sample:http://s7.directupload.net/images/140209/tled7muo.png Maybe the tests should focus more on real world content. I cant see any pattern on my own samples without enhancing something, maybe someone can upload untouched samples where you can see pattern/worm artifacts ? |
9th February 2014, 13:08 | #22834 | Link | |
Nicolas Robidoux
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 269
|
Quote:
----- Crazy month at work with the release of the IQ250 camera http://www.phaseone.com/. Will take me a while to catch up with the questions I raised myself. But I'll get there eventually. |
|
9th February 2014, 15:47 | #22835 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 753
|
They don't seem to repeat every 16x16 block. I suspect that it is more a limitation of the random number generator, for some reason the random number generator just repeats itself. This also seems to happen on non-black colours, in my case it seems to repeat every 224 pixels. I strongly suspect that the algorithm somehow uses the position as seed for the random number generator and this seems to cause it to repeat itself when presented with identical content.
|
9th February 2014, 16:30 | #22836 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 753
|
Quote:
|
|
9th February 2014, 17:09 | #22837 | Link |
Kid for Today
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
|
So here I am after some good sleep and a full REC709 recalibration, I wanted to postpone my final answer as I wasn't sure where 5 would stand exactly...differences take a lot of concentration and are easier to spot with fresh eyes. And my previous XP calibration was a major failure on W7, I had to rework it all duh..
I understand you're willing to keep one odd and one even build, I find 2 technically impressive but too "flat looking" to my taste, on a LCD it doesn't look very natural to me...not like an "open window" as HD should. This would be great for DLP or Plasma, though. 7 is interesting but it's too fuzzy, 5 is the perfect in-between the sterile picture of 2 and the noisy 7....It looks very natural and highly enjoyable. I dearly hope that 5 will be nomitated as I really like the look PS: I did try the 10 different builds. Last edited by leeperry; 9th February 2014 at 17:14. |
9th February 2014, 17:18 | #22839 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,019
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
9th February 2014, 17:36 | #22840 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Fort Wayn,Indiana
Posts: 52
|
Build 7 is best for my projector and has plenty of pop plus a very clean picture. Don't know if I can improve on my settings but I use needi3 64
and dxva2 for the other 2. Gpu and CPU Q are 24/32 all quality settings unticked and doubling 256 for both luma and chroma on a gtx770 with nvidia 327.43. Picture is amazing with no frame drops. Might look a little over the top but that's the way I like it. Same settings on build 2 not playable. Custom fan curve gpu never gets hotter than 60 Celsius. My vote so far is for 7 and all I can say is wow!!!!!!!!!! Thanks for the awesome work 720p and 1080p movies are so real looking and no black artifacts or noise seen in the image. Using a Mitsubishi Hc7900 on a 92" screen sitting 12 ft back and gives the feeling of being inside the screen. So I would say that build 7 is my favorite so far for a movie watcher enthusiast. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
2011 VDC 9500LC ULTRA Mike Parker Modded 12-3-2015 GTX-770 and Intel Xeon V1235 Windows 10 |
Tags |
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|