05-04-2003, 09:49 AM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 108
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
@bman: I did some tests of resize-before-filter vs. filter-before-resize, encoding an xvid source to 480x480 resolution MPEG1 300-2500kbps CQ ~80.
Peering very closely at the TV I noticed the filter-before-resize video was slightly sharper. A marginal difference but it was there. As a bonus the filesize was slightly smaller for filter-before-resize, about 100Kb over 5 minutes. Again a marginal difference and very possibly dependent on the source material, but there :)
Good suggestion bman, a better picture with more compression!
For reference here are the scripts I was using:
resize-filter (normal):
Code:
LegalClip()
LanczosResize(432,416)
AddBorders(0,32,0,32)
Blockbuster(method="dither",detail_min=1,detail_max=10,variance=0.3,seed=0,cache=4096)
MSoften(3,3,4,3,pre=1,post=1,speed=4,showmask=false)
Crop(0,32,Width(),Height()-64)
FluxSmooth(MergeLuma(last,1))
LegalClip()
filter-resize (bman):
Code:
LegalClip()
AddBorders(0,32,0,32)
Blockbuster(method="dither",detail_min=1,detail_max=10,variance=0.3,seed=0,cache=4096)
MSoften(3,3,4,3,pre=1,post=1,speed=4,showmask=false)
Crop(0,32,Width(),Height()-64)
FluxSmooth(MergeLuma(last,1))
LanczosResize(432,416)
LegalClip()
|
Someday, 12:01 PM
|
|
Site Staff / Ad Manager
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
|
|
|
05-04-2003, 10:55 AM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 107
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
girv,
What decoder are you using to decode the DivX/XviD files?
If you use FFDshow latest alpha http://sourceforge.net/projects/ffdshow/
with all the postprocessing settings ( I use custom and check all the blocks and also Nic's processing)
Then in your script use this for your source...
DirectShowSource("C:\movie.avi", fps=25)
of course change the fps to whatever the movie really is like 23.976, 25 etc...
You should be able to get rid of more blocks and flickering this way...
|
05-04-2003, 12:40 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 356
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
There was no blockiness or flickering there , just Gibbs !
@ girv
I'm glad u find my observations to be correct .
Effect is very noticable when source is LQ DivX or Captured material .
bman
|
05-04-2003, 12:56 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 108
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
@KingTuk:
I tried using ffdshow and DirectShowSource when I started all this but all it did for me was to make the picture a bit softer. I'll look at it again though now that I've got a decent post-post-processing script to see if I can improve the picture further. Thanks for reminding me about it :)
[/b]
|
05-04-2003, 12:58 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 108
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bman
There was no blockiness or flickering there , just Gibbs !
|
FWIW, I found FluxSmooth was good at removing a lot of Gibbs. How about you? What do you use?
|
05-04-2003, 02:21 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
If you think that FluxSmooth is good at removing Gibbs, give FaeryDust a try
You'll see a big difference. However since FaeryDust is so slow, I usually use Flux too to remove Gibbs!
__________________
j3llyG0053
|
05-04-2003, 03:49 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Sweden
Posts: 489
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jellygoose
If you think that FluxSmooth is good at removing Gibbs, give FaeryDust a try
You'll see a big difference. However since FaeryDust is so slow, I usually use Flux too to remove Gibbs!
|
ehum..ehum... gibbs is a new word for me, what is it
//Wolfi
|
05-04-2003, 04:03 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Tejas
Posts: 86
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
@Wolfi
Me too. What is a gibb?
Back on pages 13-14 on this thread, there was a lot of discussion about DivX/XviD encoding scripts. Is there any way that these scripts can be tested and than an optimal script placed in Kwag's optimal script thread?
|
05-04-2003, 04:08 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 398
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigswaffo
@Wolfi
Me too. What is a gibb?
Back on pages 13-14 on this thread, there was a lot of discussion about DivX/XviD encoding scripts. Is there any way that these scripts can be tested and than an optimal script placed in Kwag's optimal script thread?
|
if the divx/xvid is clean, i treat it like a clean dvd, if it´s worse, i use the vhs script, works great
__________________
greetz Kane
|
05-04-2003, 04:16 PM
|
Free Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Tejas
Posts: 86
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Thanks.
|
05-04-2003, 06:46 PM
|
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 girv
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwag
STMedianFilter(10, 30, 0, 0, 10, 30), I can't see any visual difference with or without the filter
|
To me the output does look slightly softer with the above filter in effect, but you might not notice the effect on a TV. And interestingly I think it made the output look better but that might just be my noisy source material.
I think this one needs more investigation  [/b]
|
hey friends,
i am trying to find the best for us.
after hard tests my conclusion comparing samples
with and without STM filer.
with the filter the size is really short and look slighty softer.
without the filter is sharpen,faster to encode and with little more final size.
i see the images only in pc and have little differences.
really different is the size and velocity to encode.
someone make tests too?
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:46 AM — vBulletin © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd
|