But I encoded a movie with this script who had the res. of 544x480 and Letterbox(0,0,32,32) and that worked fine :? What actually means with "soft" :?: Thank you for helping me :)

//Wolfi

Blurred, foggy, unsharpened.

-kwag

OH that's bad. But shouldnt I stick to these values:

temporalsmoother(1,2)
mergechroma(blur(1.50))
mergeluma(blur(0.2))

As in the newest script :)

//Wolfi

Well, that's what I use, but it's all a matter of taste :wink:
Lower luma value = more sharpness + larger file size :!:

-kwag

this is the copy of what i posted here:

http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic....98e4d7a664ea24

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
girv wrote:
kwag wrote:
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]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

my post:...
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?

end.
------------------------------------------------------

edited...
details:
i forgot some observations.
was used in my tests the last Kwag's scripts
with and without STf filter only.
the other filters remains with the same adjusts.

:wink: