digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives]

digitalFAQ.com Forums [Archives] (http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/)
-   Avisynth Scripting (http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/avisynth/)
-   -   Avisynth: Bilinear Resize or Bicubic? (http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/avisynth/3722-avisynth-bilinear-resize.html)

Jellygoose 05-22-2003 09:27 AM

Avisynth: Bilinear Resize or Bicubic?
 
Hi all...

I know many people use Bicubic Resize due to sharpening the image. However in my eyes it creates pretty ugly artifacts sometimes, and also increases filesize. Is there another reason to use Bicubic that I don't know about? I like to lower the MergeLuma in the current script to a value between 2 and 2.5, and use Bilinear Resize instead. It's softer, but you gain the sharpness by lowering the MergeLuma again. any opinions on that?

Boulder 05-22-2003 09:39 AM

I use Bilinear nearly every time. It's faster and recommended when downsizing. When upsizing, a soft Bicubic (=no b and c parameters entered) is a good choice if you don't want that extra sharpness.

Dialhot 05-22-2003 09:45 AM

Re: Bilinear Resize or Bicubic...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jellygoose
I like to lower the MergeLuma in the current script to a value between 2 and 2.5

Ugh?? You might say "0.2" ? Don't you ?

Quote:

and use Bilinear Resize instead. It's softer, but you gain the sharpness by lowering the MergeLuma again. any opinions on that?
I really find that bilinear lose too much details. I remind a sample with a man not well shaved. After a "biliearresize" you can't see the beard anymore. "Lanczos" or "Bicubic" didn't have the same problem.

I also tried Bicublin resize but the results were worst than with Lanczos (to much artifacts).

Jellygoose 05-22-2003 11:01 AM

Re: Bilinear Resize or Bicubic...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dialhot
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jellygoose
I like to lower the MergeLuma in the current script to a value between 2 and 2.5

Ugh?? You might say "0.2" ? Don't you ?

sure I mean between 0.2 and 0.25... :oops:

jorel 05-22-2003 05:56 PM

hi friends.
:)
i try to use bilinear and don't remember the reason
that i change to bicubic. maybe i saw some wrong...

i remember that when i was encoding "monsters sa" i change it.
lanczos is really sharpen and i see without doubts great and
stranges artefacts in the images, then i change to bilcubic.

just like Boulder wrote, bicubic goes to 0.6 max.

lanzos to goes 0.7 max, it give a big sharpness,
but gives simbilances in moviments around the picture.
you will see little waves round the objects or moviments.

:wink:

telemike 05-28-2003 12:46 PM

I've been using Bilinear and things are soft but not blocky and jaggy which is good.

heller 05-29-2003 10:56 AM

What is the best for upsizing for retaining sharpness and picture quality?

Thanks! :)

kwag 05-29-2003 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heller
What is the best for upsizing for retaining sharpness and picture quality?

Thanks! :)

Bicubic ;)

-kwag

heller 05-29-2003 03:49 PM

Thanks as always Kwag. :D

Bigswaffo 05-30-2003 08:36 AM

@kwag
Why was GripCrop removed from the optimal script?

break 05-30-2003 05:52 PM

GripCrop works only with "AviSynth 2.0x". It has been removed from new "latest script" to use with "AviSynth 2.5x" :wink: .

Jellygoose 06-06-2003 03:25 AM

I'm still thining about this...
There seem to be some encodes, where Bicubic looks brilliant, but on some sources there seem to be problems with it. I get ugly artifacts around objects, and I don't see a way to get rid of them...

I'd like to know some more about Bicublin Resize... experiences?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:03 AM  —  vBulletin © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd

Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.