Quantcast Avisynth: Smootherhiq vs. Convolution3D - Page 2 - digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]
  #21  
03-30-2003, 12:07 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by muaddib
Try breaking those images and examining them in PicSwith...
You will see a huge difference.
You're right muaddib , even the colors are messed up (washed out) by SHQ

-kwag
Reply With Quote
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Site Staff / Ad Manager
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #22  
03-30-2003, 12:08 PM
jorel jorel is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brasil - MG - third stone from the sun
Posts: 5,570
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by muaddib
Try breaking those images and examining them in PicSwith...
You will see a huge difference.
hi muaddib

PicSwith...????
where i get it?

thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #23  
03-30-2003, 12:43 PM
PyRoMaNiA PyRoMaNiA is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: a PAL land (UK)
Posts: 408
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
So SmoothHiQ wasn't so HiQ...back to Dust+Convolution I go!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
03-30-2003, 01:38 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by PyRoMaNiA
So SmoothHiQ wasn't so HiQ...back to Dust+Convolution I go!
I guess it is HiQ, because the Hi(Q)uality details dissapear

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #25  
03-30-2003, 01:41 PM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
hey, I'm not the guy who created this filter
however I guess this thread has led to something :

Code:
LegalClip() 
mergechroma(blur(1.58)) 
mergeluma(blur(0.05)) 
GripCrop(528, 480, overscan=2, source_anamorphic=false) 
GripSize(resizer="BicubicResize") 
SpaceDust() 
TemporalSmoother(radius=2, strength=3) 
TemporalCleaner(ythresh=5, cthresh=10) 
Convolution3D(preset="movieHQ") 
GripBorders() 
LegalClip()
if this is what you guys go for right now, i'll test it! wait right here! don't move!
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #26  
03-30-2003, 01:49 PM
KingTuk KingTuk is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 107
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
test this too...

Use instead of C3D

http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3366&start=45
Reply With Quote
  #27  
03-30-2003, 01:52 PM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I will!
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #28  
03-30-2003, 02:24 PM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Heavy Testing Here! prepare for very interesting results!!
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #29  
03-30-2003, 02:34 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jellygoose
hey, I'm not the guy who created this filter
however I guess this thread has led to something :

Code:
LegalClip() 
mergechroma(blur(1.58)) 
mergeluma(blur(0.05)) 
GripCrop(528, 480, overscan=2, source_anamorphic=false) 
GripSize(resizer="BicubicResize") 
SpaceDust() 
TemporalSmoother(radius=2, strength=3) 
TemporalCleaner(ythresh=5, cthresh=10) 
Convolution3D(preset="movieHQ") 
GripBorders() 
LegalClip()
if this is what you guys go for right now, i'll test it! wait right here! don't move!
Change Convolution3D(preset="movieHQ") for Convolution3D(preset="movieLQ") . Details are also well preserved in HQ parameters, but file size is smaller

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #30  
03-30-2003, 03:03 PM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
ok, here are my first results.
First of all : Forget SmoothHiQ

Kwag, you're script really did beat the SmoothHiQ one by far! In my tests: filesize was smaller, Q-Level was smaller and I did see less artifacts. however I still think that C3d blurrs the picture too much. I'm not talking about details like the grill or something ( ) I just think that the overall sharpness is gone whenever I use C3d. It's all a matter of taste I guess.

Then I tried STMedianFilter for C3d and in my eyes the results are AWESOME!

Filesize dropped by about 2.5% compared to C3d.
Q-Level dropped by 0.2 points compared to C3d.
Speed increased a little.
And as far as I see it the picture looks simply sharper and less artifacts are seen when motion appears.

this is the script I used. Please try this out and compare it to the script that you think is best.

Code:
Mpeg2Source("F:\Genug\genug.d2v")

LegalClip()

GripCrop (544, 576, Overscan=0)

Gripsize()

TemporalSmoother(radius=2, strength=2)
TemporalCleaner(ythresh=5, cthresh=10)
SpaceDust() 
STMedianFilter(8,15,4,7,8,15)
#Convolution3D(preset="movieHQ")
#smoothHIQ(3,15,25,192,10)

mergechroma(blur(1.58))
mergeluma(blur(0.05))

GripBorders()
Letterbox(0,0,20,20)

DctFilter(1,1,1,1,1,.5,.5,0) 

LegalClip()
Notice that mergechroma and mergeluma are used after the smoothing, since this gives me a lower Q-Level in Bitrate Viewer.
Happy Testing!
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #31  
03-30-2003, 03:22 PM
PyRoMaNiA PyRoMaNiA is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: a PAL land (UK)
Posts: 408
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
In my (very limited ) tests in avscompare, this newest script definitely looks cleaner than the Convolution3D one. Haven't compared file size or anything yet as I'm only viewing these scripts in AVScompare, but so far, looks good.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
03-30-2003, 03:43 PM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
what did you compare that script to?
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #33  
03-30-2003, 04:20 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jellygoose
Please try this out and compare it to the script that you think is best.
I'm trying your script right now, one encode with STMedianFilter(8,15,4,7,8,15), and another one with Convolution3D(preset="movieLQ").
I'll post results here.

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #34  
03-30-2003, 04:57 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Here it is:



The difference is almost indistiguisheable, but still, I see a little detail lost. Zoom in so you can see what I mean after you save the picture.

The script used was this:

Code:
GripCrop(528, 480, overscan=2,  source_anamorphic=false )

Gripsize() 

TemporalSmoother(radius=2, strength=2) 
TemporalCleaner(ythresh=5, cthresh=10) 
SpaceDust() 
#STMedianFilter(8,15,4,7,8,15) 
#Convolution3D(preset="movieLQ") 


mergechroma(blur(1.58)) 
mergeluma(blur(0.05)) 

GripBorders() 
Letterbox(0,0,20,20) 

DctFilter(1,1,1,1,1,.5,.5,0) 

LegalClip()
Of course one with STMedianFilter(8,15,4,7,8,15) and the other with Convolution3D(preset="movieLQ")
File size diff was 100KB ( lower with STM ). But I do see a little more artifacts on movement with the STM, but maybe it's my eyes

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #35  
03-30-2003, 05:15 PM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I see what you mean. It's barely visible, but it's there. what about the overall sharpness? do you see a difference there?
what does bitrate viewer say? same Q-Level?
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #36  
03-30-2003, 05:30 PM
kwag kwag is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Puerto Rico, USA
Posts: 13,537
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jellygoose
I see what you mean. It's barely visible, but it's there. what about the overall sharpness? do you see a difference there?
what does bitrate viewer say? same Q-Level?
Everything else is basically identical , however that little fault I circled has me wondering what side effects could cause on overall picture quality . Maybe it can't be seen, but maybe it can be "feeled" in overall perception
The Q is about .02 lower (better) with STM, but that's not visually noticeable. I do see a file size difference by changing the order of filters , so probably more tests should be conducted to find out the optimal position

-kwag
Reply With Quote
  #37  
03-30-2003, 05:57 PM
jorel jorel is offline
Invalid Email / Banned / Spammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brasil - MG - third stone from the sun
Posts: 5,570
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
"I do see a file size difference by changing the order of filters."

yes Kwag,
i post (don't remember where..) a few months:

resize first, filters in the end of the script:
less time to encode,more size.

filters first ,resize in the end of the script:
more time to encode,less size.

changing the order of the filters:
everything changes too... is a big confusion,
depending of the filter and the order!!
Reply With Quote
  #38  
03-30-2003, 08:29 PM
dazedconfused dazedconfused is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 316
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
I do see a file size difference by changing the order of filters , so probably more tests should be conducted to find out the optimal position
-kwag
Eagerly awaiting the outcome on this one! Gotta love these kinds of threads.

And since everyone seems to be in the "testing mood" , I thought I'd bring up a couple things mentioned by Sansgrip and GFR awhile back in JellyGoose's "Mergechroma to gain Compression?" thread that seem to have gone rather unnoticed:

Quote:
Originally Posted by sansgrip
As someone pointed out earlier, MergeChroma and MergeLuma can be used in combination with any other filters. It's often possible to apply extremely heavy filtering to the chroma components without losing noticible detail, because the eyes are much less sensitive to detail in the chroma components.

For example, while kwag finds PixieDust too strong for DVD sources, it probably isn't if it's only applied to chroma:

Code:
Mpeg2Source("blah.d2v")
...

# Do over-the-top chroma smoothing

chroma = PixieDust()
chroma = chroma.TemporalSoften(...)
chroma = chroma.Blur(...)
chroma = chroma.DctFilter(...)

# Do luma smoothing

FaeryDust()
...

# Now merge the two together

MergeChroma(chroma)
...

Obviously I'm exaggerating somewhat, but you get the idea.
Sansgrip wasn't aware at that time that we're limited to only 1 instance of Dust per script, but still, this could prove useful with other filters to gain a bit of compression, no? Anyone tried it?


also in that thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFR
BTW you can use more complicated things with the Merge filters like:

MergeLuma(Convolution3D(preset="movieHQ"))
MergeChroma(FaeryDust())
I just thought a few compression-hungry testers might want to revisit that thread and try out these suggestions to see what they bring.

-d&c
Reply With Quote
  #39  
03-31-2003, 01:05 PM
Jellygoose Jellygoose is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
@dazed and confused: I already tried stuff out. Last week I made a couple of tests using heavy filtering on chroma and only light filtering on luma. The result was ok. It was actually the same as it would have been using moderate smoothing on both, and the time to merge the chroma and luma takes VERY long. however i'll start experimenting again later tonight!

Does anyone else find these values used in kwags latest script blur the picture too much? I'll try some more stuff, hang on!
__________________
j3llyG0053
Reply With Quote
  #40  
03-31-2003, 01:49 PM
KingTuk KingTuk is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 107
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
This filter order got me the smallest filesize...
LegalClip()
BilinearResize(528, 478, 7, 0, 626, 480)
mergechroma(blur(1.58 ))
mergeluma(blur(0.05 ))
TemporalSmoother(radius=2, strength=2)
SpaceDust()
TemporalCleaner(ythresh=5, cthresh=10)
STMedianFilter(8,15,4,7,8,15)
AddBorders(0, 1, 0, 1)
DctFilter(1,1,1,1,1,.5,.5,0)
LegalClip()

you can also move...
mergechroma(blur(1.58 ))
mergeluma(blur(0.05 ))
to the end before you addborders, but the filesize increases a bit...

so keep these together in this order... at least for me...

TemporalSmoother(radius=2, strength=2)
SpaceDust()
TemporalCleaner(ythresh=5, cthresh=10)
STMedianFilter(8,15,4,7,8,15)
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Avisynth: Convolution3d on optimal script? dredj Avisynth Scripting 21 07-10-2003 03:13 AM
Avisynth: XP crashes on FaeryDust and Convolution3D? hachemoncourt Avisynth Scripting 8 01-30-2003 06:03 PM
Avisynth: Where to download vobsub.dll, convolution3d.dll, dustv4.dll nicksteel Avisynth Scripting 3 01-21-2003 01:52 PM
Avisynth: Check out the new Convolution3d LadyMiles Avisynth Scripting 8 11-03-2002 01:35 AM
Avisynth: BEST FILTER - temporal smoother or convolution3D? ? ARAGORN Avisynth Scripting 2 10-10-2002 04:38 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:22 AM  —  vBulletin © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd