VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3
FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 61 to 77 of 77
Thread
  1. @jagabo, I think post#30 was mflowfps, not interframe. He's claiming "no glitches at all" with interframe, but I'm seeing almost as many. Or maybe he's defining "glitches" differently than I am. Or maybe my interframe is producing worse results for some reason. The logo/overlays are definitely cleaner IMO than the other motion interpolation method, at the expense of strobing/ blurring

    I tried swapping different svpflow .dll's on 2 different computers (albeit Nvidia, maybe ATI doesn't have this issue but I doubt it), and GPU=true is definitely worse, definitely frame edge artifacts compared to GPU=false . I also tried the v4 dll's instead of the v2 dll's. All have the same issues

    I encoded single threaded, cores=1 to be sure . I found you need to go back a few frames, maybe 20 or so and advance frame by frame or you'd get slighly different results, even in single threaded mode. So either that or physical linear encoding. These screenshots are from linear encodes, not previews. GPU=true has more "blobby" prototypical edge morphing artifacts at the frame borders, the lower frame border in this case. The edge artifacts disappear with GPU=false, but the other artifacts such as overlay artifacts are still there

    These types of frame border artifacts are distracting in motion, just like the overlay/logo artifacts are "flickery" and distracting. My personal opinion - I wouldn't use interframe or any motion interpolation on these types of sports/action videos

    GPU=true
    Click image for larger version

Name:	interframetest003385,gpu=true.png
Views:	63
Size:	538.6 KB
ID:	38309


    GPU=false
    Click image for larger version

Name:	interframetest003385,gpu=false.png
Views:	63
Size:	582.5 KB
ID:	38310
    Quote Quote  
  2. I posted this before the post above - On my interframe script, there's a glitch on the bottom of the picture when the guy gets the clothesline. Apart from that I don't see any glitches on the borders. I've now seen some glitches in the static logos but there's hardly any of them.

    Apart from those glitches does the smoothness of the framerate look better to you in Interframe or ConvertFPS? I'm looking at it on my TV at 720 59.94fps.
    Last edited by VideoFanatic; 26th Aug 2016 at 19:50.
    Quote Quote  
  3. poisondeathray - what graphics card do you have? I don't know why the GPU option exists if it makes the picture worse!?

    Jagabo - I was talking about the interframe script.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Originally Posted by VideoFanatic View Post
    On my interframe script, there's a glitch on the bottom of the picture when the guy gets the clothesline. Apart from that I don't see any glitches on the borders. I've now seen some glitches in the static logos but there's hardly any of them.
    With GPU=true, it's frequently around on the frame borders such as in the screenshot above. It's NOT just that 1 section; that was just a representative example of GPU=true vs false. They are everywhere. If you can't see them, maybe you're lucky...or maybe something is setup differently on your system. Maybe it's something with my GPU or drivers. Maybe you have a magical computer. They are annoying in my opinion

    Apart from those glitches does the smoothness of the framerate look better to you in Interframe or ConvertFPS? I'm looking at it on my TV at 720 59.94fps.
    I'd give interframe the edge in smoothness over convertfps, but note Interframe isn't as "smooth" as it's supposed to be - because there is a strobing blur when you use the "smooth" preset. It goes in/out of focus or sharpness, much like convertfps, so there is sort of a fluttering. Some people might not be that sensitive to it, others find it distracting. If you don't use "smooth" preset , you will see the actual motion is smoother/clearer, but at the expense of more artifacts
    Quote Quote  
  5. Originally Posted by VideoFanatic View Post
    Jagabo - I was talking about the interframe script.
    Where's your video sample?
    Quote Quote  
  6. Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    My personal opinion - I wouldn't use interframe or any motion interpolation on these types of sports/action videos
    I have to agree. I find the technology interesting and play around with it but have never actually brought myself to use it because there are too many artifacts. I'd rather see slightly jerky video.
    Quote Quote  
  7. I've just now added samples to my 1st post. One for Interframe and one for ConvertFPS.

    Poisondeathray - regarding Interframe, what setting should I use for Tuning instead of Smooth?
    Quote Quote  
  8. You're getting the same sorts of GPU artifacts, look around frame 1057, 1099,1100 at the bottom around that section. They occur in other sections as well

    Like jagabo says, there are artifacts everywhere, it just depends on your tolerance for them. In motion, many of the small ones are not that noticable

    If you like "smooth", then use "smooth". Just use whatever you think looks good to your eyes. But you should be aware it has artifacts - interframe always does (same with mflowfps, mvtools2, twixtor, commercial methods etc..), and that GPU=true is definitely worse on this source than GPU=false . Maybe some people can live with those artifacts for the small speed boost. Pros/cons. You decide. I already told you what I would do personally
    Quote Quote  
  9. OK thanks. But I was wondering what looks best for you instead of Tuning Smooth?
    Quote Quote  
  10. Originally Posted by VideoFanatic View Post
    OK thanks. But I was wondering what looks best for you instead of Tuning Smooth?
    I dislike the blur /loss of detail/strobing with "smooth". But on the otherhand, I dislike the flickering logo distortions more. The "smooth" setting handles the logo/overlays better. So if I had to use interframe I would probably would use "smooth" too.
    Quote Quote  
  11. The video you posted in #30 is really, really bad. There are huge artifacts in all vertical lines, as I already mentioned. By contrast, while you are correct that the logos do break up a bit, the rest of the video that I provided in my earlier post beats your Interframe example in almost every case. I just lined up the original, your Interframe, and my MFlowFPS result, and there really isn't any place where your Interframe script produces a better result. For instance:

    Your InterFrame



    My MFLowFPS



    As already mentioned in almost every post, motion estimation technology is going to fail at times, and if you don't like that, then use ConvertFPS, as has already been suggested. Alternatively, if this project is really important, you can use a combination of motion estimation and either ConvertFPS or a field blending technology, switching to the field blending or field duplicating version via a mask, when needed.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Does anyone have an ATI card to test ? Maybe the GPU frame border issues affect the green team only ?
    Quote Quote  
  13. Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Does anyone have an ATI card to test ? Maybe the GPU frame border issues affect the green team only ?
    What graphics card do you have. I only have a crappy £30 card. Just wondering if that's the issue for me.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Originally Posted by VideoFanatic View Post
    Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Does anyone have an ATI card to test ? Maybe the GPU frame border issues affect the green team only ?
    What graphics card do you have. I only have a crappy £30 card. Just wondering if that's the issue for me.


    It's not just you, I tested with a desktop gtx 780, and a laptop gtx 960m with different svpflow dll versions, different gpu drivers. It definitely affects Nvidia. I also tried with Intel GPU, similar artifacts. I'm guessing likely ATI has the same problems, it's very likely a svpflow GPU issue. I mentioned it earlier, but I have to reiterate - svpflow is overrated (on almost every source), and at least on this source, the GPU processing is worse than CPU
    Quote Quote  
  15. I forgot that Interframe can use GPU via SVP. I use Sony Vegas for my NLE, and even after four iterations, spanning six years, they still haven't figured out how to get the GPU acceleration to provide the same video as that produced when using only the CPU. I don't know if this is a common problem, but if that is what is going on here, it would certainly explain a lot. The obvious thing to do is to render this test clip twice: once with CPU-only, and once with GPU.

    I only have an nVidia card (a 5-year-old 9800GT), and would be happy to create a test clip, using the GPU, and compare it to what others can create.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Never mind thanks. I'm just going to use ConvertFPS as it seems to give the same smoothness as Interframe and has hardly any glitches in the picture. Thanks everyone for your help. Sometimes it's good to learn what NOT to use!
    Quote Quote  
  17. Or even ChangeFPS(). ConvertFPS() will give you blended frames. ChangeFPS() simply duplicates frames. But one duplicate every 1/10 second isn't very visible.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!