A Superior Upsizing Filter/App

[Soopafresh]

Check out the pic - the one on the right is after. Nice how it gets rid of the aliasing jaggies. Also supports VirtualDub filters. You still might need to dehalo/dering, although the source I used was a low bitrate Xvid file. The developer has a 30 day full eval on his site. And no, I'm not affiliated with the product it any way.

http://www.thedeemon.com/VideoEnhancer/

[lordsmurf]

Thanks.

[SatStorm]

Veeeeeeerrrrryyyyyyyy slow on my Athlon XP2600+!
It takes 1 Hour and 25 min for a 4.14 minute 352 x 240 video clip compressed with mjpeg pic video 3 to make it 704 x 480!
Maybe I'm doing something wrong?

[Soopafresh]

No, nothing wrong. It does motion compensated resizing, which requires a ton of processing power.

[jagabo]

Bicubic Resize followed by a Sharpen or two in VirtaulDub or AVISynth does just about as well and is much faster.

[Soopafresh]

You can try eedi2 from Tritical in AviSynth, but the end result doesn't look great (still, it's fantastic for deinterlacing - the intended use for the plugin)

eedi2().turnright().eedi2().turnleft()


Another option might be to resize larger than desired, antialias, sharpen, then downsample to the desired dimension. Problem is, the luma gets trashed when you do it.

Also, there is Stair/Stairstep Interpolation, where you upsize in small increments until you reach your desired size. Not great, however.

[vhelp]

When you first posted this topic, I read it and thought about it some, but
put the idea away. Anyway.

Soopafresh, if you know of any.. can you please give us some sample AVI's
in HD format, to play with. I'm with jagabo. You can do all this in vdub
and AVIsynth filtering -- but you know this, and I'm not trying to tell
or teach you anything you don't already know

The idea is that we should embark on a trail toward the most *effecient* method
of producing HD 'like (upscaling) quality, topic.

The reason for the thoughts are simple. Because many members here and every-
where else, are slowly moving towards HD, that the sources we still have on
hand, in SD (or, standard quality) will need to be upscaled to HD specs, in
order to play in these higher capacity devices. I realize that many of these
devices will have built-in "upscaling" capabilities, but it wouldn't hurt to
explore "software" solutions. And, in fact, in a recent reading (elsewhere)
an actaul expereince has taken place, where a certain unit is not performing
as well in the things of upscaling and producing quality results. So, "software"
solutions is (or can be) a posible alternative.

Software Upscaling Methods..
So, in everyone's best interest, it would be a wise move to explore this area
further

-vhelp 4086

[Soopafresh]

Agreed ! Yeah, it's a tough issue and it would benefit us all to see if we can tackle upscaling. Let me see if I can find a couple of clips that we can all experiment with. Vhelp - why do you suggest HD clips for example files ?

[vhelp]

Soopafresh,

Sorry for the confusion. I think that after reading one too many posts and
articles on similar HD resources, that my thoughts must have crossed over
into something else I was thinking. Again, sorry.

.
.

I think that what I was actaully trying ty say was, that if we had a few
basic (clean) sources to practice on, we might all help each other find a
practicle method with good results, that all of us could use.

.
.

Also, to note regarding HD spec sources, last time I did some reading up on
it, HD requires 4:2:2 sampling in order to be HD spec. If I'm wrong, please
correct me But, I don't think I am wrong on this. And in this case, we
need to note this, when we are aiming for HD format, to not encode our MPEG's
using the tipicle 4:2:0 sampling and 720 x 480 resolution.

Profile & Level setting..
As I was noting above, when working towards HD spec, in order for this to work
and produce a HD mpeg source, the setup has to be changed to either of the
following to be at least, successful:

TMPGEnc setup, under video tab

** [High Profile & High-1440 Level ] and [4:2:2 ]
** [High Profile & High Level (HP@HL)] and [4:2:2 ]
** [4:2:2 Profile & Main Level (422P@ML)] and [4:2:2 ][/b]

And of course, the resolution has to be changed as well. I'm too lazy to look up
the resolution options, but last I worked on an HD source, I had the resoution at
1280 x 720 dimensions.

If you noticed, I BOLDed the 3rd item, because I think that this is the one we
are suppose to setup with, but the others provide 4:2:2 sampling, so I included
them as well in this list. I'm not sure what the *exact* calling on this is,
but they all work for the time being. I would prefer to call the excact specs,
if possible.

Also, to point out here, that when working with aiming towards HD spec, there are
several key points to keep in mind, to help minimize quality disturbances. And
these key points are:

** Aspect Ratio; Resizing; and sub-sampling upwards;

As I have seen on various occasions, that there are many units that do not do
as good a job at bringing an SD type source upwards (upscaled) to HD specs. I see
this a lot, and where the results *are* poor. But to note, one excuse for the
poor results could be blamed on the TV sets being watched on. So that needs to
be considered as well.

And, when we attempt at upscaling to HD spec, the Aspect Ratio + Resolution
need to be properly balanced for minimal artifacts.

Bitrate.. also needs to be looked at in a new light. The old days of trying to
fit so much on one small media is not as forgiving in this new format. So, high
bitrate methods should be considered.
And, to get more done, in terms of testing, etc. it would probably be a wise
move to utilize 1-pass CBR method in this regimum, for now.

.
.

Now, as far as providing test samples for everyone to practice on, we could have
the most common ones posted: VHS; Laserdisc; DVD; are some examples. Though,
I would prefer *clean* sources. Nothing with blemishes, if at all possible.

VHS would be the exception to this, because it is the most noisiest of all.
But, these are the THREE most used sources, and you can't discount them, because
everyone *does* use at least one of them. And, you know how people are with
transfering/encoding the worst of sources. So, you can't say, no, to that
kind of source -- cause you know, sooner or later, you'll be reading, where
someone wants to transfer such sources to HD spec. (And you know its gonna
be VHS or something worse)

.
.

Well, these are things to look at and consider. I hope I got most, if not all,
correct. And try to understand, that this driving-hobby of mine is to blame
here, for all this babbling about, above

-vhelp 4089

[Soopafresh]

Just a few notes, Vhelp. There's so much technical information out there regarding image resizing that my head is spinning. Here's a good starter from Mr VirtualDub himself:

http://www.virtualdub.org/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=86


I stumbled upon a pretty decent resizing algo in Mpeg StreamClip v1.01 for PC - it uses a technique called 2D-FIR scaling. I have no idea what that means at the moment. Time to hit the Google search pages. Still, pretty good results, except for the usual Aliasing that needs to be addressed. Fast, though.


Encoding to 720p or higher - there are several issues to address in that area - 1) Encoding is slowwwwwwwww - .5 fps on a 3Ghz PC 2) Encoding should be set to fixed bitrate, single pass (obviously), and ultimately muxed into MPEG2 Transport Stream format, depending on playback device. 3) a Two Hour movie is not going to fit on a 4.xGB DVD . In the last regard, you can see why h264 has captivated the video enthusiast world, but encoding to h264 is even slower than Mpeg2. I really question if a home PC is going to cut it.

[vhelp]

Soopafresh,

(most info/facts here, are based on my own current experiences with HD)

One thing that I have noticed (on some pics) image sources that I've seen
show no "granularity" or gradients throughout the image. That displeases
me. In normal Commercial produced DVD sources (including Digital Satellite)
you have gradients in the image. Its hard for me to explain. But this
gradient is what is giving the image its overall quality appeal.

When you starting futzing around with an image that has not been prepped,
(aka, gradient) as an example, resizing/upscaling, you are just doing so
with "individually" (non-gradient) (NG) colored dots. And, beause these NG
images, when resizing, they don't have that even flow of grandularity of
pixels. Instead, you have (similarily speaking) two harizontal lines not
evenly spaced (for upscaling) who's end result is poor, due to the equations
used to "filter" during the resizing or upscaling. Like I said, its hard
for me to explain.

Therefore, it would seem to be that HD source do not go through a prep stage
(pre-filtering) much like the Commercial DVD's do. Because of their size,
they are just taken as-is and thrown at us, as HD.. wahoo!

Now, taking a source who *has* gone through the prep stage, and is a good
size -- 720 x 480 for instance. You can probably do better at upscaling it
to HD size with the right combination of filter and upscaling technique.

There is an example (experiment) that I would like to partake in with regards
to one of my laserdisc's and use it as part of my upscaling to HD tests.

Because the star wars is comming out in HD soon, (exact date unknown) I
though it would be a good test example to compare results from. I realize
that it probably won't be as good as the pros, when complete, but there
would be some things learnt from it, at the very least.

Well, that's all I have for now.

-vhelp 4100

[Soopafresh]

vhelp - Both the 1080i and 720p sources recorded OTA are 4:2:0

Also, found an upscaling app that's supposed to work in AfterEffects and Premiere (of which I have neither, so I can't test it). Price is right -$100. Once again, supposed to be slow. The guy who wrote the first app in this thread has re-released his upsizer that is Dual Core optimized.

http://www.redgiantsoftware.com/instanthd.html

Also, here's some HDV clips - http://www.vasst.com/HDV/FX-1_images.htm

Finally, FFMPEG can encode to MPEG2 at 29,000kbs and 1280x720 (it might encode at even higher resolution, haven't tried it). Lemme know if you'd like the syntax.

[vhelp]

Morning Soopafresh,

Great to hear from ya. I have soo much on my place, in terms of just
video app tools to code -- the ideas keep comming in. And, I'm working
on multiple programming projects as we speak. So anything is possible
out of all this an example..

Lemme know if you'd like the syntax.

Yeah, (I mean, yes) if you don't mind.. I'll take a crack at it. I have
a tiny tool -- gui-like that accepts dragged in files to process in ffmpeg,
though its not complete, but working. It might prove useful, with user
ideas, etc., moving forward.

Cheers,
-vhelp 4115

[VegasBud]

In case anyone is interested, there is another path to video upsampling that I've seen, but haven't personally used. It's called Topaz Enhance, and is a set of plugins for After Effects, Premiere Pro and Digital Fusion. At $349 it's more expensive than what you're discussing, but it includes other tools also. There is a 30 day free trial, so anyone who's experimenting with upsampling could give it a try.

While I haven't tried Enhance, I regularly use another of their products, Topaz Moment, which does upsampled video capture (output is one frame only). The captures using Moment are the best I've seen produced by any software, or technique(s) (which is why I use it regularly). It is certainly better than the best technique I had previously worked out, which was overlaying several frames in photoshop, reduce noise with Neat Image, adjust levels and color, upsample using the Hybrid SE algorithm in QImage, and finally deblurring with Focus Magic.

You've got to figure they would use the same upsampling module in both the products, in which case the Enhance upsampled video might well give the highest quality possible. Or maybe it won't. The only way to tell for sure is if someone is willing to play around with it.

[Soopafresh]

To do HD encodes with FFmpeg, grab the latest version from http://ffdshow.faireal.net/mirror/ffmpeg/

The newest versions allow direct Avisynth input and multiple threads (if you have enough procs in your PC)


ffmpeg.exe -i x.avs -threads 2 -vcodec mpeg2video -r 23.976 -dc 10 -g 15 -bufsize 786 -minrate 8000 -b 12000 -maxrate 18000 -aspect 16:9 -s 1280x720 -an -mbd 2 -qmin 2 -async 1 -y "x.m2v"


All of the above settings are suggested, but work fine for me. I've gone as high as 29000 for the bitrate.

[SingSing]

I stumbled upon a pretty decent resizing algo in Mpeg StreamClip v1.01 for PC - it uses a technique called 2D-FIR scaling. I have no idea what that means at the moment.

It means two dimensional Finite Impulse Response. It implies all frame is treated as a two dimensional picture, and low pass filters are used to removed the sudden signal change. The outcome should be softer. For true pcitures, FIR are able to remove dot and dash of dirt spot, I assume this is also true in this application.

[Soopafresh]

Thanks, SingSing. I did not know that (said in my best Johnny Carson voice).

[SingSing]

The video enhancer application does not have mpeg-2 output. Which is best video format for its output, before feeding it thru a mpeg encoder like TMPGenc ?

[Soopafresh]

Lagarith v1.39 gives lossless compression and is fairly fast. Compresses a bit better than Huffyuv. Cineform HD codecs ($100.00) can do an almost 2:1 compression depending on the amount of motion on the source file, that is - a 1GB Mpeg file is 2GB in Cineform.

I guess Lagarith is the way to go.

[vhelp]

BUMP ..

hay Soopafresh I was reading around and even posted my throughts in another
thread over here, (below) and it got me to thinking (for fooling around some) work in
h264 (x264) vfw encoder. I thought I would play around with the command-line aspects
of it and 1280 x 720p dimensions, and see how far I might get with it.

Since you mentioned h264 (via ffmpeg ?? ) ..

If I'm not mistaken, the prefered route is through cmd-line, (rather than the gui) so I
was wondering (since you've worked with this x264-cli encoder) if you know of a few
good .BAT scrip (cmd-line) strings to throw at it. I've since upgraded my computer and
windows os, so I should see better performance from my prev setup. I would be greatful

Thanks.

F: https://forum.videohelp.com/topic333556.html -- Digital TV / DVB / HDTV
S: what is upconversion real mean? -- by Xnici;(5 ), July 19, 2007

-vhelp 4358

[Soopafresh]

Sure, but the easiest way is to copy the processing logs of AutoMKV (specifically the X264 lines) to a .BAT file. AutoMKV is a pretty good app as it is.



Here's a 2 pass example snagged from the log:

x264_encode.cmd

[buzzqw]

Hi All!

about AutoMKV a quick view of command line can be obtained in Advanced Profiles Editing, at botton is show the command line

changing the profile, or editing the xml and ckecking "Use this profile" will update the command line at bottom

and about upconversione.. i suggest to try with automkv the LanczosmtPlus , only for upconversion (just write a bigger value than actual width in Width or in Manual Cropping), otherwise automkv will switch to lanczos

BHH

[vhelp]

Morning guys.

@ Soopafresh or anybody..

Keeping in mind that I am (still) on dial-up, and this files are 8 MB or greater..
I noticed in the link from the tools page of this windows application, that
there are many versions (and noted alternates) to choose from. I'm not sure
which one I should choose for the occasion. w/ dial-up, I can't afford to just
D/L them all (quickly) and see for myself. You understand.

I have high hopes to write yet another tool/front-end to these cmd-line
specialties -- for home personal use, of course. I like mine because I always
design them with drag n drop lugzury. Anyways.

As always, Thanks guys.

--> http://mirror.hostbrigade.com/automkv/

Parent Directory
AutoMKV076.rar
AutoMKV076_NODECRYPTER.rar
AutoMKV078.rar
AutoMKV078_NORIP.rar
AutoMKV078a.rar
AutoMKV078c.exe
AutoMKV079a.rar
AutoMKV079a_NORIP.rar
AutoMKV080.rar <--- 12 MB, 50 min.., downloading now..
AutoMKV080_NORIP.rar
AutoMKV080b.exe

-vhelp 4359

[Soopafresh]

http://www.64k.it/andres/data/a/AutoMKV087_NORIP.rar 12MB

[SatStorm]

Just to add, that you can use the vfm version of x264 with virtualdub and the Super encoder.

Super has that "batch encoding" feature and you can also force the aspect ratio. The problem is that the encoding results are somehow inferior the other methods, but you sure speed up things.

[Soopafresh]

True, but the problem with Super is that you have to install it. AutoMkv is a matter of unzipping. No registry changes, etc.

[vhelp]

@ SatStorm I've been using x264 via VirtualDub for some time now. No,
not every day, but on occasions, its been my regular method of encoding the
videos this way. But, I was on the assumption that you can gain more control
(and possibly, quality) by going directly to source, via cmd-line from a dos
console window. Course, I'll leave that up to a front-end that I will devise.

Peronally, I think I'm gonna go with the x264 via cmd-line. I want to be able
to write quick cmd-line scripts to throw at it, and being able to create front-end
tools (GUI's) for personal use is a plus since I can make any changes or add-on's
(feature'wise) as I see fit -- all this will help me in that path.

I think that Soopafresh idea with AutoMkV is prob a good idea, after all..
for the cmd-line scripts (params) to syphen from and into my gui. I'm sure there
are other front-end tools already made for x264, but I want to write one for my
specific needs.

-- Soopafresh, if you get any good x264 cmd-line script tips (param setup)
please don't hesitate to post them. Thanks, everyone.

-vhelp 4362

[Undead Sega]

i am suprised that InstantHD isnt mentioned that much (or at all).

i have InstantHD and it did give me results that i find very good, but i am not exactly the HD experts to your eyes, and as i did beofre in another forum, i made an Upscale of a sequence from the film Final Fantasy VII Advent Children, and it was in a compressed divx.

i think i might want to do that again.

[Undead Sega]

okay, i know my reply might have silenced this thread here, i do apologize, but i have gone through the effort on Upscaling the scene from the film using InstantHD, and hoping to see if anyone can give me their opinion on what they think. True HD experts

the scene by the way is around 2mins 30secs, and at the moment, the oringal SD and direct rip to Lagarith is over 800MB while the upscaled version goes around over 4GB on the Lagarith codec aswell, and i know it would be waaaay too big for u lot to download, so i was wondering if anyoen can give me a codec that cn retain the quality (since it is a CGI movie) and to a smaller file size, so i can upload it for those who can watch and handle HD vidoes on their PCs.

thanks. i am really excited to know wat u lot think.

Cheers.

[guns1inger]

H.264 would be the best option. Ditch the audio as it doesn't matter in this instance.