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.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Hardware & Software > Software players

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 7th June 2015, 21:00   #30821  |  Link
ikarad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Freeman View Post
You are absolutely WRONG about everything.

I have a Dell U2410 which is 8bit+FRC and it can receive 10bit signal easily, in fact it is what I use now in Windows 7 by default.
I can select between 8 or 10bit in nvidia control panel, I use DisplayPort.
I can't find where selecting 8bit or 10 bit in nvidia control panel. Can you help me?
ikarad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:02   #30822  |  Link
Ver Greeneyes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 447
I don't have the option either (GeForce driver version 353.06). I think the monitor has to advertise that it supports 10-bit input, otherwise the driver just won't list 10-bit output as an option.
Ver Greeneyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:06   #30823  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikarad View Post
Thans but Do you know where this option is finding in nvidia control panel? It's for the future when I change my display
Its in Display -> Change Resolution, on the bottom of the page
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:08   #30824  |  Link
ikarad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
Its in Display -> Change Resolution, on the bottom of the page
Thanks.

I have nothing in the bottom of this page
ikarad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:09   #30825  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikarad View Post
I have nothing in the bottom of this page
You need a very recent driver, 352.86 at least, AFAIK.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:10   #30826  |  Link
ikarad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
You need a very recent driver, 352.xx at least, AFAIK.
I have the last 353.xx
ikarad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:18   #30827  |  Link
edigee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikarad View Post
Thanks.

I have nothing in the bottom of this page
That option (8bit/12bit, limited/full)only works with HDMI or Display Port connection. Not with DVI.

Last edited by edigee; 7th June 2015 at 21:22.
edigee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:22   #30828  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
not really.
looks like wrong driver to me.

http://abload.de/img/windows108rrmf.png
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:30   #30829  |  Link
ikarad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
not really.
looks like wrong driver to me.

http://abload.de/img/windows108rrmf.png
What is your driver?

I have the last driver 353.06

I have win7 64. Maybe it's only avalilable on win8.

Last edited by ikarad; 7th June 2015 at 21:33.
ikarad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:33   #30830  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
352.84
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:34   #30831  |  Link
JackCY
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6233638 View Post
Madshi's debanding seems very good at low levels,
I've toned my preset down to medium for HQ content after seeing the high removing "a lot" of detail on LQ content.

Quote:
but Shiandow's seems to look more natural at high levels of debanding - especially with the "add grain" option enabled. At higher strengths, Madshi's debanding can start to look artificial.
For me Madshi's is more selective, as in it better preserves edged detail, more accurately I should say rough detail.
Where as Shiandow's blurs out more and ignores preservation of edges/rough detail. As in it removes more more easily, which is fine for LQ content where it softens the rough detail on gradients/textures.

Quote:
Though Shiandow's debanding may lose more detail (I need to spend more time tweaking to see whether that is actually the case) it looks natural when that happens - with filmed footage at least. I haven't tested any animated content - where Madshi's deband may still fare better.
Yeah Madshi's is more selective where it gets applied where as Shiandow's seems to get applied everywhere no matter how strong effect you set.

I use Madshi High + Shiandow 1.00/0.01+grain for LQ content (SD, DVD, ...).
480p preset:
Code:
if (deintFps > 31) or (srcWidth > 2100) or (srcHeight > 1200) "2160p"
else if (srcWidth > 1400) or (srcHeight >  800) "1080p"
else if (srcWidth >  800) or (srcHeight >  600)  "720p"
else                                             "480p"
I couldn't figure out a way to make the decisions based on area due to missing arithmetic, but if someone knows how let me know.

Shiandow 1.00/1.00 removes maximum but starts to also remove useful detail with large radius like facial features, so having the margin minimum ensures the removal is done only at small radius, at least that's how I see it.




Don't know why such a useful post-processing is suddenly removed soon after it was added.
I'm keeping v0.88.10 for sure.

As you can see above, Madshi's does pretty much nothing on rough LQ content even at High, but Shiandow serves nicely to "wash" the image, which true removes a bit of contrast but the rough detail is reduced as much as you like. As long as margin is minimal it's not that crazy with altering features of faces and objects.

Last edited by JackCY; 7th June 2015 at 21:42.
JackCY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:38   #30832  |  Link
ikarad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
352.84
Maybe in 353.06 this option is not available.
ikarad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 21:51   #30833  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackCY View Post
SR is nice even though I hate sharpen and this is practically a sort of smart sharpen. There sure are crazy better SR but then those most likely wouldn't run in real time.
Totally, I hate sharpening filters but the right SR setttings allow for a pretty much perfect finetuning based on the mVR scaling algos you picked, personal taste, viewing distance etc etc.

NEDI is also nice enough to take care of chroma while it's at it so we got winning combos here IMHO. I haven't truly experimented with SR on chroma yet, though but last time I tried I didn't seem to like it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
1) In my tests medium "error upscaling quality" was quite a bit faster than high, while producing almost the same quality. Do you agree? Can I drop the "high" setting and simply always use "medium"?
I can't see any reason to justify the SR "high" settting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
3) Which combination of settings do you like most? SuperRes alone? Or in combination with FineSharp and/or LumaSharpen? Or maybe just FineSharp?
NEDI > SR > CR AR LL, it's sharper than J3AR alone and it doesn't come with the EE inherent to NNEDI3(as clearly visible in that sample I previously provided). I still use NNEDI3+SR for tiny videos.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
4) Does using the upscaling refinement options change your preferred upscaling/doubling algorithm? Which did you prefer without upscaling refinement? Which do you prefer with upscaling refinement?
Not really, J3AR is the best upscaler(GIGO principle at work) and CC AR LL the best downscaler so why worry? I guess a softer downscaler might be worth looking into later, no big hurry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
5) Which SuperRes parameters do you like?
I currently really like the "non-double defaults" with a sharpness of 28, 29 being too sharp and 27 too soft. I tried to increase the number of passes to 4 but didn't see much improvement, OTOH 2 didn't look nearly as good. I haven't run extensive tests with the other SR settings, hopefully they won't be disappearing anytime soon

Quote:
6) For experts: When upscaling with a large factor, which results in more than just one refinement pass (see debug OSD), do you prefer to refine the image after every ~2x upscaling step? Or do you prefer to refine the image only once after upscaling is complete? Of course when refining the image after every ~2x upscaling step, you should lower the values/passes to make the overall refinement strength more similar to refining only once.
Refining after every 2X step makes as much sense from a theoritical POV as it does IRL to my eyes. PQ is pretty ridiculous tbh

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
7) For experts: Considering my goal (see above) to find a setting which works for every upscaling factor to maintain the sharpness of the original goal, which exact upscaling algorithm and which upscaling refinement options do you like? I'm hoping to end up with just a low/medium/high setting, where high would maintain the exact source sharpness, and where medium and low would be toned down settings do apply less strong sharpening. Low should provide a small but noticeable sharpness boost (compared to no refinement at all). Medium should be in the middle between Low and High.
I rest my case that the SR settings will depend on a zillion factors such as the display internal processing/dithering(fighting against mVR's), anti-glare layer graininess, personal taste, viewing distance and so on.....I don't see how you could find one-size-fits-all low/med/high settings to this IMHO.

Some ppl will be using J3AR/CC AR LL coz they can, others will go cheaper and will need to increase sharpness afterwards. It makes no sense to me to be forced to enable a sharpening filter when you got the SR sharpness knob......if you somehow manage to make up your mind on presets, please also allow us to input our own settings be it via registry, a folder in mVR's folders or just a simple "expert settings" box.

I would also like to try SR on 1080p if any possible? I like how it sharpens motion blur. It would be great if it wasn't tied to upscaling IMHO as it mostly acts as a "deshaker" if I got it right?

Last edited by leeperry; 8th June 2015 at 03:21.
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 22:04   #30834  |  Link
edigee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikarad View Post
Maybe in 353.06 this option is not available.
It's available. I'm on W7 64 with 353.06. My GTX 960 is connected via HDMI with an old LG L246WH and a 40' Philips full HD HDTV. On both displays I have that option(8/12bit, full/limited RGB/YCbCr). Of course only 8 bit option available for those displays(both are not 10 bit capable).
Althouth on other set up,GT 640 connected with DVI to a Samasung 23 SyncMaster 2333T that option is not available. Same driver.

Last edited by edigee; 7th June 2015 at 22:07.
edigee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 22:16   #30835  |  Link
JarrettH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 860
Can we chill on the acronyms a bit? I get it, but it makes things stuttery to read and the search engine won't work

Last edited by JarrettH; 7th June 2015 at 22:21.
JarrettH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 22:25   #30836  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackCY View Post
I've toned my preset down to medium for HQ content after seeing the high removing "a lot" of detail on LQ content.


For me Madshi's is more selective, as in it better preserves edged detail, more accurately I should say rough detail.
Where as Shiandow's blurs out more and ignores preservation of edges/rough detail. As in it removes more more easily, which is fine for LQ content where it softens the rough detail on gradients/textures.


Yeah Madshi's is more selective where it gets applied where as Shiandow's seems to get applied everywhere no matter how strong effect you set.

I use Madshi High + Shiandow 1.00/0.01+grain for LQ content (SD, DVD, ...).
480p preset:
Code:
if (deintFps > 31) or (srcWidth > 2100) or (srcHeight > 1200) "2160p"
else if (srcWidth > 1400) or (srcHeight >  800) "1080p"
else if (srcWidth >  800) or (srcHeight >  600)  "720p"
else                                             "480p"
I couldn't figure out a way to make the decisions based on area due to missing arithmetic, but if someone knows how let me know.

Shiandow 1.00/1.00 removes maximum but starts to also remove useful detail with large radius like facial features, so having the margin minimum ensures the removal is done only at small radius, at least that's how I see it.




Don't know why such a useful post-processing is suddenly removed soon after it was added.
I'm keeping v0.88.10 for sure.

As you can see above, Madshi's does pretty much nothing on rough LQ content even at High, but Shiandow serves nicely to "wash" the image, which true removes a bit of contrast but the rough detail is reduced as much as you like. As long as margin is minimal it's not that crazy with altering features of faces and objects.
your example screen only show the negative effect of both debanding algo at the same time.

not sure what you try to achieve there to my eyes you are simply removing as much details as possible.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 22:28   #30837  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
Some ppl will be using J3AR/CC AR LL coz they can, others will go cheaper and will need to increase sharpness afterwards. It makes no sense to me to be forced to enable a sharpening filter when you got the SR sharpness knob......if you somehow manage to make up your mind on presets, please also allow us to input our own settings be it via registry, a folder in mVR's folders or just a simple "expert settings" box.
i agree. i find it hard to find a setting that works well overall.

Quote:
I would also like to try SR on 1080p if any possible? I like how it sharpens motion blur. It would be great if it weren't tied to upscaling IMHO as it mostly acts as a "deshaker" if I got it right?
as far as i know it compares different upscales and sizes so i don't see a way to use it on a not scaled images.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 23:11   #30838  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,559
I'm doing some testing with SuperRes on 288p low-quality videos.

First I wanted to see what difference the upscaling algorithm made with SuperRes. Jinc3+AR looks great. Bicubic still look good but slighly less. NEDI doubling + SuperRes, however, looks best!

Then, "High" quality makes blocking and artifacts more visible.

Interestingly enough, "NEDI defaults" at high (2 passes) looks nearly identical to "non-double defaults" at medium (3 passes)!

With NEDI, 1 pass @ "NEDI defaults" does look better than 1 pass @ "non-double defaults"

With NEDI + 1 pass @ "NEDI defaults", upscaling with Jinc3+AR gives a weird distortion... Bicubic actually does a better job here!

NEDI+Jinc looks more blurry than Jinc alone, but NEDI+Bicubic+SuperRes looks best.

With "NEDI defaults", instead of 2 passes, I can do 1 pass and increase strength from .65 to .75 and get almost the exact same result. Since SuperRes is expensive to run, you might want to do defaults for 1 passes.

Now... as to whether .65 or .75 is better is up for debate. .75 does make blocking and artifacts more visible... I'd opt for in-between, .70. I prefer this over the 2-passes default.

Activating LumaSharpen has a very subtle effect but it looks nice.

Activating FineSharp makes the artifacts stand out and makes the video look "cartoonish", I leave that off.

Overall, best setting is:
NEDI Doubling + Bicubic(75)+AR + SuperRes NEDI defaults but 1 pass strength .70 medium quality + LumaSharpen
Rendering time: 10.5ms for 288p on 768p

Second best setting is:
Jinc+AR + LumaSharpen
Rendering time: 9.7ms for 288p on 768p

Last edited by MysteryX; 24th June 2015 at 06:05.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 23:29   #30839  |  Link
MysteryX
Soul Architect
 
MysteryX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,559
Here are more tests on a 480p video on 768p display.

Here, NEDI is too expensive to run...

Option 1:
Bicubic(75)+AR + SuperRes defaults 2 passes
Rendering time: 14.4ms

Option 2:
Jinc+AR
Rendering time: 12.3ms

Results are VERY close... but Jinc+AR looks slightly more natural.

Conclusion: NEDI+Bicubic+SuperRes is a very powerful combination, but if you can't run NEDI, it's not worth trading Jinc for SuperRes.

Last edited by MysteryX; 24th June 2015 at 06:05.
MysteryX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th June 2015, 23:49   #30840  |  Link
XMonarchY
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackCY View Post
I've toned my preset down to medium for HQ content after seeing the high removing "a lot" of detail on LQ content.


For me Madshi's is more selective, as in it better preserves edged detail, more accurately I should say rough detail.
Where as Shiandow's blurs out more and ignores preservation of edges/rough detail. As in it removes more more easily, which is fine for LQ content where it softens the rough detail on gradients/textures.


Yeah Madshi's is more selective where it gets applied where as Shiandow's seems to get applied everywhere no matter how strong effect you set.

I use Madshi High + Shiandow 1.00/0.01+grain for LQ content (SD, DVD, ...).
480p preset:
Code:
if (deintFps > 31) or (srcWidth > 2100) or (srcHeight > 1200) "2160p"
else if (srcWidth > 1400) or (srcHeight >  800) "1080p"
else if (srcWidth >  800) or (srcHeight >  600)  "720p"
else                                             "480p"
I couldn't figure out a way to make the decisions based on area due to missing arithmetic, but if someone knows how let me know.

Shiandow 1.00/1.00 removes maximum but starts to also remove useful detail with large radius like facial features, so having the margin minimum ensures the removal is done only at small radius, at least that's how I see it.




Don't know why such a useful post-processing is suddenly removed soon after it was added.
I'm keeping v0.88.10 for sure.

As you can see above, Madshi's does pretty much nothing on rough LQ content even at High, but Shiandow serves nicely to "wash" the image, which true removes a bit of contrast but the rough detail is reduced as much as you like. As long as margin is minimal it's not that crazy with altering features of faces and objects.

LOL! That is exactly the same content I used to test Shiandow's debanding and all other madVR features as far as Low / Medium Quality content goes.

I disagree though. I sit about 8 feet away from my 40" 1080p HDTV and with my settings + 12bit color depth on my HDTV, the result is much better with madVR de-banding because it leaves enough detail to see the outline of black/dark parts of the image. For example, Captain/Major/Kernel Samantha Carter often wears black tops. With madVR's debanding set to Medium on top and High on bottom, I can see the outline of her boobies when she wears a black top, but with Shiandow's, her chest looks flat and un-sexish.

Sure that detail is quite LQ, but as long as you use the highest quality settings and sit reasonably far enough away, madVR's debanding does an excellent job.


Regarding new features. SuperRes is definitely here to stay! I figured that LumaSharpen for Upscaling does very little, but for Image Enhancement it does quite a lot at its default setting. The same exact content I talked about above (SMPTE 170M) looks a bit too sharp with default Image Enhancement LumaSharpen values. I decrease strength to 0.50 and clam to 0.30 and its much better!


You know, sometimes I wonder if madVR does too much when it tries to improve image quality. The original film image, when played with WMP without madVR rendering, using only LAV decoders looks sharper than madVR's image without LumaSharpen. However, vanilla image also has banding, artifacts, pixelation, etc. madVR HQ rendering settings fix all those vanilla issues and leave the image soft. Then LumaSharpen offsets the softness, but the end image looks both - 1. better IMO and 2. different from the original. The original/vanilla image sharpness looks more natural than madVR + LumaSharpen. I have not been able to restore that vanilla sharpness with any madVR settings.

I need to figure out how to create side by side comparisons shots using different madVR settings. Otherwise its hard to backup what I am saying...
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 17:47.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.