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 > Capturing and Editing Video > Avisynth Usage

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 17th December 2008, 09:19   #41  |  Link
Floatingshed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 311
Well, I had a good play around with this last night and I'm very impressed, the script worked very well on a section of telerecording from 1963.
The main problem now is the inherant film faults, which are suddenly much more noticeable.
Does anyone know what to use to remove film dirt & spots? I've tried the various filters but the results were not great. Software that allows manual "cloning" of a small area of picture from one frame to another would be ideal as most problems are on one frame but not the next.
Thanks, Andy.

Last edited by Floatingshed; 17th December 2008 at 09:52.
Floatingshed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2008, 09:55   #42  |  Link
steptoe
Registered User
 
steptoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 360
You could have a look at MCTemporalDenoise or MCSpuds

Both use motion compensation to try and remove just noise or grain but are incredibly slow as they use a lot of external filters and functions to achieve the results but if quality is what you want give them a try

They also both use Removegrain and FFT3DFilter which a lot of people recognise as being pretty good at what they achieve along with various despot and other noise/grain filters

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=139766
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=131279
steptoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2008, 11:09   #43  |  Link
2Bdecided
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 1,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floatingshed View Post
Software that allows manual "cloning" of a small area of picture from one frame to another would be ideal as most problems are on one frame but not the next.
I asked about that before. It didn't seem to exist. The BBC have something called scratch box that does exactly what you say - you draw over the bad areas and it copies them from the previous/next frame. You'd think it would be trivial on a PC (compared to the kind of processing AVIsynth does), but I haven't found the software yet!

Cheers,
David.
2Bdecided is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2008, 12:38   #44  |  Link
Floatingshed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Bdecided View Post
You'd think it would be trivial on a PC.
Precisely. Hopefully some clever chap will come up with something. I'd much rather manually clean things up than leave a filter doing it automatically for a week or two!
Floatingshed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2008, 13:28   #45  |  Link
Floatingshed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 311
JohnMeyer said: Restore the sound. I do this for a living and there are lots of tricks to add "life" to muddy sound.

I could do with some pointers here too! Sorry!
I use cooleditpro for most audio operations and I know my way around it very well (a career in radio helped with that!) but production not restoration is my forte.
These kinescopes/telerecordings have very poor optical (mostly 16mm) sound which has a very harsh middley sound with excessive muddy bass and loads of distortion. Lovely.
What do you do with the sound?
Floatingshed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2008, 18:15   #46  |  Link
johnmeyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: California
Posts: 2,343
Look for my username and "despot." I think I posted my script before. It will give you some good starting points. Here's a "before" clip:

Before Dust Removal

and after:

After Dust Removal

Ignore the dust on the first two seconds of the "after" clip (long story). As you'll see, this technique gets rid of about 80% of the dust (and without removing the tennis ball!).

As for sound, if you have Nero, you probably have the wave editor. The key tool to try is "Band Extrapolation."

Last edited by johnmeyer; 17th December 2008 at 18:46.
johnmeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2008, 16:44   #47  |  Link
Floatingshed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 311
Hello again,

i'm still trying to understand this script...
What is going on here:

#use undegrained clip for final output
last.MVFlowFps(backward_vec, forward_vec, num=50, den=1)



Is the comment correct and if so why wouldn't you use the degrained clip?
Sorry to sound stupid but its all very new.
Thanks,
Andy.

Last edited by Floatingshed; 20th December 2008 at 18:13.
Floatingshed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2008, 20:05   #48  |  Link
AnnaFan777
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 51
I wonder how could you video geeks still use 60i instead of 30i ?

24p = 24 progressive frames per sec. (film)
30i = 30 interlaced frames per sec = 60 fields interlaced (ntsc)
60p = 30i Bobbed (mostly likely)

where did the 60i come from?

60i = 120 field interlaced.

I'm sure you don't mean that.

Last edited by AnnaFan777; 20th December 2008 at 20:23.
AnnaFan777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2008, 20:30   #49  |  Link
Wilbert
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6,337
Quote:
I wonder how could you video geeks still use 60i instead of 30i ?

24p = 24 progressive frames per sec. (film)
30i = 30 interlaced frames per sec = 60 fields interlaced (ntsc)
60p = 30i Bobbed (mostly likely)

where did the 60i come from?
Some people use 60i to denote 60 fields a second (like the original poster), while others use 30i for that.
Wilbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2008, 04:59   #50  |  Link
AnnaFan777
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilbert View Post
Some people use 60i to denote 60 fields a second (like the original poster), while others use 30i for that.
60fd might be better.

Doesn't "i" indicate "interlaced"?

I remember a few years back, people still used "30i/29.976i" (from the textbook)

I think "60i" starts from those Sony/JVC specs
They think 60i is sexier, more impressive than 30i for end users.

now this is confusing, sony's 60i means interlaced ntsc video,
but 60i here apparently refers to progressive materials.

and both are wrong

Last edited by AnnaFan777; 21st December 2008 at 05:06.
AnnaFan777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2008, 13:15   #51  |  Link
Wilbert
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6,337
Quote:
Doesn't "i" indicate "interlaced"?
Yes, indeed.

Quote:
now this is confusing, sony's 60i means interlaced ntsc video,
but 60i here apparently refers to progressive materials.
No, it means interlaced.
Wilbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd December 2008, 01:09   #52  |  Link
Mug Funky
interlace this!
 
Mug Funky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: i'm in ur transfers, addin noise
Posts: 4,555
you could say "60" refers to the timebase in Hz rather than the framerate.

then the p or i denotes whether this timebase is expressed in fields per second or progressive frames per second.

60i is the standard way of saying 30fps, interlaced. it's not just marketing bunk either, as the EBU and SMPTE standards also use this terminology.

@ johnmeyer: the last bit of kine i transferred must have been done on a newer machine. fields were visible when i zoomed in my TK, but i didn't have enough time alone with the film to try to line it up perfectly. also, there was natural blurring, probably in the lens used (it was gaussian-ish). weave isn't too bad on modern cameras, and not a problem at all with pin-registered scanners (unless the film is still soft from cleaning). but of course not much kine has been done with modern cameras the most recent bit of kine i can think of is the TV series "Frontline", where the documentary-style bulk of the program was shot on hi8 and kine'd to 16mm, then TK'd back to beta SP... sort of like a very expensive deinterlace.
__________________
sucking the life out of your videos since 2004
Mug Funky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd December 2008, 02:26   #53  |  Link
NerdWithNoLife
Registered User
 
NerdWithNoLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mug Funky View Post
you could say "60" refers to the timebase in Hz rather than the framerate.

then the p or i denotes whether this timebase is expressed in fields per second or progressive frames per second.
Instinctively, I want to disagree (I was trained to think that 30i is 30 interlaced frames per second), but I can see how after using double weave for example, it's kinda sorta 60i, though it should effectively be the same as 30i. But if you were to separate the fields of double weaved "60i" it would be 120 fields per second, with every 4 being identical. And fields aren't interlaced, right? So calling it 60i while referring to fields is a bit odd to me. You've destroyed my education - I don't know what to think anymore!
__________________
f=33
NerdWithNoLife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd December 2008, 03:01   #54  |  Link
johnmeyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: California
Posts: 2,343
Quote:
the last bit of kine i transferred must have been done on a newer machine. fields were visible when i zoomed in my TK
I'm not sure whether anything has been transferred via the Kinescope process since the early 1970s. There are definitely a LOT of movies being shot on video and then transferred to film, but those video to film transfers (including those done from earlier formats like Hi8) are NOT done using a Kinescope. Instead, they are transferred using a film recorder. This device is similar to those used years ago to make 35mm slides for presentations. The usual method is to first resample (from 29.97 to 24) and then deinterlace the video (if you didn't shoot 24p or 25p). Then, each frame is displayed on the film recorder screen, and a photograph is made onto 16mm or 35mm film. Thus, the deinterlacing and frame decimation are done in software. The film recorder display is not a raster display, so there will be no raster lines.

As for the gate weave, it is still pretty obvious even in modern Hollywood movies. If you look at a static title, you'll see it bounce around. If you ever watch the old movies on the TCM channel, they all exhibit gate weave, even though they have been transferred to video from film using a Rank scanner, which provides near-perfect registration. The problem is that the cameras don't have the luxury of advancing the film slowly, but instead have to run at 24 fps. There is just too much stretch, pull, wobble, bounce, etc. in that process, and it only takes a fraction of a millimeter to result in fairly significan movement up there on the big screen.

Raster lines should not be evident in kinescopes because back when this technology was used, a "wobble" was added to each scan line to make it vary up and down slightly. This had the effect of erasing the lines between fields. There were other techniques used, but this is the one most commonly mentioned.
johnmeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2008, 09:58   #55  |  Link
mikeytown2
Resize Abuser
 
mikeytown2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnnaFan777 View Post
I wonder how could you video geeks still use 60i instead of 30i ?

24p = 24 progressive frames per sec. (film)
30i = 30 interlaced frames per sec = 60 fields interlaced (ntsc)
60p = 30i Bobbed (mostly likely)

where did the 60i come from?

60i = 120 field interlaced.

I'm sure you don't mean that.
Here's a post I made on this subject
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.ph...19#post1213819
mikeytown2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
24p, 60i, ivtc, kinescope, mvtools

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 21:24.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.