Avisynth Filter order?
 

I'm updating my humble 'noise reducing script' and want to include fluxsmooth and blockbuster. I currently use convolution3d and have been impressed with the results. However there is a certain 'restlessness' or 'swimminess' on certain static surfaces (mostly walls and floors). The addition of Blockbuster would ameliorate this, I think. My question is this. Should I run all three filters? And if so, in what order?

And BTW, my Avisynth version is 2.07. Will your filters marked 2-5 work with this, Sansgrip? Or should I go with the originals?

Re: Filter order??
 

Try FaeryDust. In my short tests it totally elimated moving blocks in static areas.

No. Those are versions for Avisynth 2.5, which is still in alpha phase. They won't work with 2.0x.

Re: Filter order??
 

There's no doubt about that :mrgreen:

-kwag

Excellent! Should I worry about that 'blockiness in high action' problem Steady wrote about? Have either of you guys seen a problem with it yet?

Sansgrip, I see you recommend Faerydust over Pixiedust. Is the light noise setting best? Remember I'm working with mostly Divx sources (more noise)...

P.S. I'm plugging in Convolution after Pixiedust right now. I'll post my results.

"Pixiedust" is that a new filter 8O 8)

-kwag

Negative. Their are two settings for the Dust filter. Faerydust is for light noise. Pixiedust is for medium noise. I'm looking at the encode now, and it looks frikkin gorgeous!!

Ah!, ok, then I guess we could try pixiedust on captures. But not on DVD sources :wink:

-kwag

It's not too bad. It is noticible if you pause during high action, but since that's when MPEG tends to get blocky anyway, I figure it's not too much of a problem. It will be nice when he fixes it though ;).

In my tests the high-motion blockiness was noticibly worse with PixieDust, and for anything other than analog captures I think FaeryDust should work perfectly well enough. For very noisy sources like captures you might want to try PixieDust though.

Jeez, you guys are 'on the spot!!' with your responses!!

I'm considering using Fluxsmooth as a complement to Pixiedust. Since Fluxsmooth is motion sensitive, it should work nicely, shouldn't it? Or would it oversoften the movie??

They're both denoisers, so you only need one. And since FaeryDust is (much) better, I'd go with that if you can afford the significantly extended encode times :).

Flux uses motion adaption, while FaeryDust and PixieDust use motion estimation. It's a whole different, much more accurate, ball of wax ;).

It shouldn't. Personally, though, I'd use FaeryDust or Flux for denoising (depending on how patient you are). If you're having trouble getting the CQ up enough then combine that with Convolution3D(preset="movieHQ") for increased compression.

Wax ON, Wax OFF. :mrgreen: