VideoHelp Forum




+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. Member Soopafresh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Thanks to Didee over at doom9. It doesn't remove the grain or smooth out the image. It "calms" the fast flickery grain often seen with HD movies or films from the 60s and 70s. It's subtle, but quite noticeable, especially on HD.



    The image on top is the source, the one below is calmed:

    xvidbw.avi


    Read the top of the script for the required plugins. It runs very fast


    http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1073349#post1073349
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member vhelp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    New York
    Search Comp PM
    Thanks Soopafresh, for the interesting article read.

    I mostly like to see how far we are going in the things of noise removal and compression
    methods. And, in a few of my programming image projects, (working with various types of
    Spacial and Temporal NR algorithms) I have found that the two work differently though
    depending on the source video's noise content and level.. ie, if the video is from an Analog
    source (ie, cable/antenna) there is lots of salt n pepper, while in mpeg (ie, digital/satelite)
    there is no noise but lots of pixelation/DCT/dancing blocks. And, in the First, you have
    Spac/Temp algos that do mostly good results, while in the Second, (mpeg) you have to use
    a completely differernt apprach completely, because there is no noise, but various kinds of
    blocks -- as seen as noise.. of a different kind or nature. Anyway.

    I tried to D/L that sample clip that the user claimed was unprocessed, but I couldn't get it
    over my dial up because it kept breaking the connection after aprox 600kb of data. That
    only gave me about 5 frames to work with. However, either the person re-encoded it to
    XviD and used that as the unprocessed source vs. the (his) processed source, or his
    source was from a video downlaod site that he got it from. Either way, (and unfortuantely)
    the help he was trying to get was partly in vain because the source he posted was not HD
    (or blue-ray) but re-processed to another as codec, XviD -- per the partially D/L clip I did
    manage to get. I was really looking forward to this yet another method. Its always nice
    to try other methods when looking for lowering mileage in a source video file.

    But, in looking at the part. clip in had, it was def plauged by grain noise, but also DCT or
    dancing blocks, too. There was also noticable pixelation in the midst of it all, which gave
    even more weight to the confusion of the perceived floating/dancing pixels blocks in that
    scene. Another reason I hate the sort of vain'ness in this so called Higher quality HD/BlueRay
    source medium. Such a pitty.

    Soopafresh, have you tried testing script in any of your source trials ??

    -vhelp 4467

    :P *~*!*~*!~* HaPpY HoLiDaYs *~*!*~*!~*
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member Soopafresh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Soopafresh, have you tried testing script in any of your source trials ??


    Yes, the example clip I posted shows the results of the filtering. It only affects the lower frequencies, so the resulting image barely looks different, except that the flickering that is so common with this type of older film is greatly reduced. The reduction is most noticeable on large flat areas, such as sky and walls.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

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