Hi!
I know some people from VideoHelp used only prehistoric 5 or even 7 years old free Neat video softwares.
Neat video beats all competitors by a long shot.
Whatch this short comparison video , where every detail will beexamined and enlarged:
https://youtu.be/Y-Oeo2oFZ5g
Closed Thread
Results 1 to 30 of 359
-
Okay,..
- Can't verify.
a. no available download of before and after
b. no detailed settings (assuming there are settings) - No clue, how competent the one who made the comarision is when it comes to denoising.
- No clue, why he didn't try denoising using Avisynth/Vapoursynth. (or whether he even is aware of their existence and the filters that exist for them)
- No clue, what made:
- Denoiser III
- Topaz Video Enhance AI
- Pixop AI noise reduction
- Neat video - Remove noise
- Davinci Resolve - Noise reduction
=> At least I'm by no means qualified to judge this, but my trained sceptisism let's me doubt that 'Near Video' is the best video denoiser for any kind of noise video.
Cu Selurusers currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555, marcorocchini
- Can't verify.
-
There is nothing that Neat Video or Topaz Video Enhance AI can do that couldn't be achieved or beaten with Vapoursynth or Avisynth. (quote Selur)
-
https://youtu.be/4llwOYg4eiM?t=209
Watch this short video from that time-point.
Neat video has the most complex options and settings, it is supported by the HW acceleration of Nvidia cards.
Avysynth and Vapoursynth denoisers had no HW acceleration, all goes trough CPU, so they are slow.
Maybe I can ask Rigaya to make an Nvidia accelerated Avisynth for his NVENC project.Last edited by Truthler; 11th Sep 2021 at 14:03.
-
Avisynth denoiser is even worse than TOPAZ denoiser , which was the worse denoiser in the comparison in the first video. Proof: https://youtu.be/vmHJyF_XxT0
-
So I can record videos with even max iso settings, and nothing ZERO noise is visible in post production due to Neat Video!!!! It is hyper clear detailed and and sharp. :PPPPPP
-
I regret having answered to a troll. That’s my video for a doom9 topic where everybody agreed AviSynth is superior.
It will never happen again!
-
I will shot a short lossless night scene about the traffic of a 8 lane way with fast shutter speed and very high iso. So it will be noisy. I upload the lossless file, and we will see your result. I know that the fast tensor cores of the NVIDIA card with Neat video will do a fascinating result.
-
Pros and cons to each of them - each can have good or poor results in specific situations
Neat v5 is good for general use, nice GUI interface, and fast with a good GPU ... It's a nice tool to add to the toolset.
But Neat Video is not the best for certain types of noise
It does well on low light, high iso camera sensor noise. But be aware there are dozens of different categories of "noise" (!!) - It does not do well on all of them
-
NeatVideo analyses an area defined by user (simple gradient with a noise, uniform area for a color) and basically getting a noise sample out of it for what to remove. Then to oversimplify it, using a slider to define how much to remove. Is it still like that or did they change it?
That's a light year advantage. Was always thinking why avs/vs filters are not using something like that. Instead it is a user decision what type of filter to select. Or what filters to chain. It needs some knowledge to just not be an average guy and removing just something or ruining it. Neat video uses engine defining that noise and searching for those patterns in video. Is that why it is so successful? And also why others cannot copy that approach?Last edited by _Al_; 11th Sep 2021 at 18:36.
-
Basically yes... that part is retained from old - but it has improved over those earlier versions, both in terms of speed (largely because GPUs are getting much faster) and quality.
There are more advanced settings in current version compared older ones - Frequency separation, Y,CbCr denoising (even though it works in RGB); also there are options for flicker reduction, dust/scratches, dot/lines - so yes more buttons and sliders. The biggest issue with older versions was oversmoothing/overdenoising - that has improved current versions, but you can still overdo it
Another benefit for camera users using Neat Video - is calibrated camera profiles. So if you have camera model "XYZ" and shot 800 ISO - there is likely a profile for that already since the user community shares profiles. It's a better starting point, specific for that camera/sensor/setting
That's a light year advantage. Was always thinking why avs/vs filters are not using something like that. Instead it is a user decision what type of filter to select. Or what filters to chain. It needs some knowledge to just not be an average guy and removing just something or ruining it. Neat video uses engine defining that noise and searching for those patterns in video.
Is that why it is so successful?
And also why others cannot copy that approach?
-
Best for what?
For VHS source footage? Almost never..
For HD camera work? Maybe. Don't know, don't shoot HD right now. But I'd assume probably.
For forensic work? Laughably not.
Why is it successful? Several possible reason, aside from thinking "sales = best ever!"
- users that don't know what they don't know (aka, unaware of Avisynth)
- users that think freeware = poopy (false), while payware = it must be great to cost money (false)
- users that think script = hard (wah!), while slider and buttons = best
Neat Video has advanced in recent years, but it's still often like using a meat cleaver for video NR, rather than the scalpel that is Avisynth.
The preview box was often hard to work with. I imagine the larger resolution of HD videos made it easier, as it was with Neat Image and SLR photos. I used to use Neat Image often in the 90s/2000s but Photoshop advanced enough to not need it during the latter CS# era.Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
FAQs: Best Blank Discs • Best TBCs • Best VCRs for capture • Restore VHS
-
I will shot a short lossless night scene about the traffic of a 8 lane way with fast shutter speed and very high iso. So it will be noisy. I upload the lossless file, and we will see your result. I know that the fast tensor cores of the NVIDIA card with Neat video will do a fascinating result.
Looking forward to being able to see a before and after.
I don't doubt that Neat Video might be faster and easier to use, but atm. I doubt that it's better than a custom written Avisynth script.
Cu Selurusers currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555, marcorocchini
-
I think some people have lost sight of the fact that Avisynth is very hard to set up and even then, knowing how to denoise a video requires a huge amount of learning as well. I can well understand that many of us just do not have the time (or brain-power) to get Avisynth singing like some of you. I've said it before: I am in awe of the experts here; the stuff you guys do is absolutely amazing. I also know that I will never be able to do the same. So when something like Neat Video comes along, sure, it might not be the be-all-and-end-all for all scenarios, but it's good.
With a few clicks I can clean up most film dirt, virtually eliminate cine flickering and get rid of most of the noise. I just want "good" video, and it gives me that.
And it works directly in my NLE, which won't accept frameserved AVSs. I can apply different Neat video settings to any number of cuts on my timeline almost instantly.
It has a lot going for it IMO.
-
It has a lot going for it IMO.
I agree Avisynth/Vapoursynth are not easy to handle and definitly not something that requires understanding and time.
So saying that NeatVideo&Co beat Avisynth&Co in terms of usability&co is a given.
The only thing I personally question is:
a. a comparision that offers no way for reproduction/validation
b. some broad claims that say tool xy is the best seemingly base on such comparisions
Cu Selurusers currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555, marcorocchini
-
Alwyn, it is time to try out modern Neat video too. Your experiences came from an old version maybe... 4-5 years old.
It is not possible to do such videos with Avisynth. It is similar when you try to build a primitive car at the garage, and you wanto to race with a Rimac Concept 2 super car. IT has simply no chance at all.Last edited by Truthler; 12th Sep 2021 at 13:16.
-
The power of avisynth/vapoursynth for the most part does not result from 1 filter - It results from the usage of a combination of filters and techniques to get the end result.
But the same thing can be said about Neat Video. The majority of Neat Video users limit themselves to the simple GUI - hit a few buttons, drag a few sliders - yet ignore the power of the host application. But if you are familiar with advanced denoising techniques - luminance masks, frequency masks, line masks, channel ops, compositing principles - you can apply those same techniques to Neat Video. eg. Lets say some anime DVD or BD - neat video will soften and degrade the entire picture if you don't use line masks (but the same can be said with avs or vpy denoisers that don't have built in line protection)
So really it's a faulty comparison , apples and oranges. Neat Video is 1 filter (with many settings) . AVS/VPY are frameworks with hundreds if not thousands of filters with with very flexible processing . If you use a single SomeDenoiser(some settings) call in avisynth or vapoursynth , is analogous in NV to hitting random sample and profile without leveraging any other techniques - you're not going to get ideal results either. A more valid comparison would be Neat Video vs. a specific denoiser like MCTD, or SMDegrain etc...
But it's going to be much easier for the general user to get good results fast in a general denoising scenario using Neat Video, than putting together some specific filter chain or script in avisynth or vapoursynth. Because of Neat Video's host integration convenience - you don't need to frameserve, or use lossless intermediates or all that jumping through hoops.
The problem is there are many types of noise and scenarios that Neat Video (alone) does not handle as well as other programs. But for general use , it generally works great. Use what works best - each tool has pros/cons
-
http://macilatthefront.blogspot.com/2020/01/two-different-solutions-for-denoising.html
SMDegrain is worse, they guy had only a Neat video 5 trial version, but even the Trial proved to be better than the above mentioned free solutions...
Similar Threads
-
Restoring a whole Anime movie using Neat Video
By xonathan in forum RestorationReplies: 4Last Post: 26th Apr 2021, 08:55 -
Neat video "colorizes" wrong color hands and face
By mammo1789 in forum RestorationReplies: 4Last Post: 25th Aug 2020, 15:21 -
Any Experiences with "NEAT VIDEO"?
By Avagadro1 in forum RestorationReplies: 3Last Post: 12th Aug 2020, 00:22 -
Create a function in Avisynth to apply this denoiser
By zerowalk in forum EditingReplies: 3Last Post: 19th Aug 2019, 07:45 -
is neat video my best option
By hdfills in forum RestorationReplies: 9Last Post: 25th Aug 2017, 12:57