Yep, and it should be remembered that LimitedSharpen needs a good quality source. If your source has artifacts, LS will enhance them as well because it cannot determine between for example MPEG2 macroblocks and detail.
It's also a good idea to use it as a resizer. |
Quote:
What do you mean about "using it as a resizer" ? The function use lanczosresize (in a complex way ;)), is the result better than simply using LanczosResize as I do ? |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
This is all just speculation, I have no facts to prove it :? |
Okay, guys. I thought I was gonna try out this LimitedSharpen stuff. But do you recommend I use LimitedSharpenFast instead?
And, once again, what filters do I need? I downloaded the LimitedSharpen.avsi and the RemoveGrain 0.9 package. Do I need anything else? Please, provide links. ;) |
See my answer there :
http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic....654&highlight= |
Hello, just want to point out that there is a fairly new update to a mod of LimitedSharpenFaster thats working very good. Its called LSFMod. The speed of LSFMod is little bit slower but the compression results are significant.
LSFmod [v1.9 - Update 2009/10/05] Comparisons: Source [583kb] LimitedSharpenFaster(strength=200) [713kb] LSFmod(defaults="fast",strength=200) [616kb] More comparisons in #131 of the thread Saluts |
Thank you. Sounds good, weird as better compression means lesser sharpness.
You followed the thread ? What diff between slow and fast, beside for speed ? Edit: I love the "show" mode :) |
Core differences seem to be higher ss, different sharp mode, more exaustive edgemask and different ways of how to limit overshoot+undershoot (edges, nonedges, etc)
Fast is really good and is all I need for most settings, I love "show" mode too 8) |
I saw that slow mode uses a "non linear" sharpening. At the moment I don't see real benefit to use it rather than fast.
I'll compare LSF en LSFmod and report my compression gain. |
Looking forward to your real encode comparisons 8)
|
I was preparing myself to do some encode comparison, and actually I won't.
LSFMod is far less sharpen than original. That explains the size diff. I did not look at the example on my desktop monitor till now (I was on my laptop the other day). Look at the windwheel on the left: the aisles are less defined with LSFMod. The same way the sky just behind the wheel is more fuzzy (that is a good thing actually as LSF is too sharp in these gradient area). So, there is no magic :). This is still a good sharpener. (note: I looked at the example with "slow" too, and that's the same). |
Yes i noticed this but for me seems that the limitedsharpen added a little more sharp but also enhaced the noise a lot, maybe thats the reason why size is so different. For me is a trade im willing to spend.
Anyway you can emulate the same lsf result in lsfmod with defaults="old" for still being able to use "show" mode, the size ends up almost equal in both when doing this for what ive tested. So maybe if you want a little more sharp you can tweak lsfmod for something in between and get still nice size reduction. Saluts EDIT: Only by rising the strength seem to get better sharp result than a limitedsharpen and the size is a lot smaller, same source. Source [583kb] limitedsharpenfaster(strength=200) [756 kb] lsfmod(strength=300) [681 kb] |
Be carefull. On a live video (= avisynth applied on the fly while Im watching the video), whatever the sharpener (LSFMod or LSF), the strength above 150 leads to awfull result on a 50" screen. Flicking edges and other artefacts that I reduced... lowering the sharpeness of the screen ! This is a nonsense :wink:
|
Wierd thing is that with same source i got different results than the original examples with limitedsharpen(), maybe he cleaned the source a little before sharpening with both cause also get this artefacts with lsfmod (on the sky).
But is safe goin over 150 when encoding right? |
Quote:
It is NOT safe... |
Yes i forgot to add something like "...for all sources?".
So isnt this source dependent? But the comparisons i gave also goes in for example that a safe strength=135 (or even less) in lsfmod with "fast" settings should leave better or equal results in sharpening and a lot better results in compression than a limitedsharpen default strength=100. |
Yes, it's source dependant in the way the smaller the resolution is, the bigger the impact of the sharpness.
|
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.