It took some time to install 64-bit Avisynth+ and change all of the filters, but now everything is working, so thank you for the help!

I am trying to archive a version of the restored video but FFV1 takes up too much space. I have read that mpeg2 is a good codec for analog from experts like Lordsmurf, so I exported clips at 10, 20, and 30 MBs. It is hard to tell when the video is playing but when paused the effect is noticeable, mainly in how the grain is preserved, which I want.

FFV1 Lossless
Attachment 16356

mpeg2 20 Mbps
Attachment 16357

mpeg2 30 Mbps
Attachment 16358

To me, there is a significant improvement in the grain preserved between the 20mbps and 30mbps mpeg2 video, but it still doesn't match the FFV1. Do you think going to 40Mbps is extreme or is there a better codec that can preserve this grain while not exploding the file size? I have no problem taking time in the encoding stage, since this is for archiving (I will still keep the original .avi).

I should note that, while the grain is artificial, it helps to give the psychological effect of more detail, which is why I add luma noise at the end.

P.S. For some reason the FFV1 lossless inline attachment is not coming out right, so I have attached it as well. I uploaded a .png but for some reason it is being automatically converted to .jpg, so the grain is blurred. The easiest place to see a difference (at least on my PC) is on his left cheek.

P.S. P.S. Imgur was able to preserve the grain detail:
https://i.imgur.com/fa2oS4r.png

There is not a single reason today to archive in obsolete MPEG2 format. Nowdays is only used for DVD. Broadcasted TV switched to AVC codec since longtime for good reasons, even for SD interlaced material. Same for Blue Ray.

The preferred choice for archival is the original capture, large HD drives are not expensive today.

If you really want to compress your captures use h264 at low crf, slow preset, YUV 4:2:2 and interlaced options if required. Someting like:

Thank you. From what I have read on this site, H.264 does not handle interlaced well, so MPEG2 should be used instead because it was designed with analog formats in mind. Is this your view?

For progressive formats, what bitrate would you suggest is archival quality for a typical deinterlaced 1080p video? 15mbps? I know there are calculators out there, but I care more about the quality than determining file size.

What you read is false; there were some (useless) GUIs like Handbrake or similar having problems 10 years ago, but not the codec. And no, it is not my view.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/...H-264-encoding

Use crf, a parameter for determining quality rather than calculate bitrate and then final size. :wink2:

If you search the forum there should be a comparison I made between a huffyuv capture and its h264 encoding at low crf. Not really distinguishable at normal view, need a 4x magnification to find artifacts. And you can repeat the experiment by yourself on your own material.

Thanks--it turns out that FFMPEG has an option with libx264 called -tune grain, which can preserve the grain in video. At crf 17, the file size is about 30% that of FFV1.

I don't know much about MPEG-2 vs h.264 debate for analog, but why do you think LordSmurf recommended the former is this post, if you say MPEG-2 is obsolete: https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vid...html#post38025

No idea. Better ask him directly.

I disagree with him more than I agree on many points, but he's a resource for the community, that's for sure.

I would never capture to MPEG2, even if no restoration is needed.

But all this is not really important, what is important is that you found your way of capturing and restoring your video with good quality, and did significant progress since you started.

Good luck with your captures/restoration!

Yes, in part due to your help. Thank you for all of the tips along the way!

Hi again,

Happy holidays, if you celebrate. I have a clip where the color seems to spill over in some areas, like in this frame off the top of the woman's right arm. (ChromaShiftSP was applied to the extent possible without affecting other parts of the video).

Attachment 16409

Chroma was fixed through
If I apply the same function but replace MergeChroma with MergeLuma, the problem is fixed but of course the rest of the clip is smoothed. In another NLE I would apply an edge mask so that aWarpSharp2 and MergeLuma only work on the edges, but I am not too familiar with how to do this in Avisynth with its syntax. Do you have any suggestions?

This didn't work:

Well, that's a disturbing image. :sick:

It's a woman lying down during an interpretative dance sequence. She's very much alive and well (except for her shoulder shadow)...Tape is over 40 years old.....

I would work differently on Y and UV planes, but is difficult to asses with an image.

Have a look here https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/...on#post2640813, and ask there; poisondeathray and jagabo are the masters of masking ;)

Thanks again--I'll keep everyone posted on what I find out!

I uploaded a video segment this time. Is this ghosting? It turns out that MergeLuma with aWarpSharp2 only took part of the effect away, so the masking wasn't necessary and something else might be needed. (This was after MergeChroma/aWarpSharp2 was used, plus ChromaShiftSP). Thanks for any suggestions.

Attachment 16415