View Profile
View Forum Posts
I did it!Originally Posted by DMS
Download it!
https://sendgb.com/KqBf0uDX6d4
Closed Thread
Results 121 to 150 of 359
-
-
1. what the frick did you do with the audio?!Originally Posted by Truthler
2. it looks so fake and processed. it has that plastic feeling to itLast edited by rrats; 21st Sep 2021 at 17:43.
-
You call it fake, simply because it was so good in the reality.Originally Posted by s-mp
1. what the frick did you do with audio?!Originally Posted by Truthler
2. it looks so fake and processed. it has that plastic feeling to it
Where is your version?
HEre is my other version.....
https://sendgb.com/vrgNV6SqU7p
Just try to make better. :P
You can not!
It has more real detail (not noise or fake detail) than the original video!
Neat video even could give back the invisible, unreadable text of the noisy calendar video. Incredible, but the text of the calendar literally resurrected...
There is no other denoiser on the market which can do that!Last edited by Truthler; 21st Sep 2021 at 14:24.
-
The video in better color range, because previous was not good, it was washed out.
https://sendgb.com/lmZ8pv3M19e
-
I got that stupid Covid, but When I will recover, I willl make the SCENE 3 parliament video for Herr/Gebieter Selur.
Last edited by Truthler; 21st Sep 2021 at 14:56.
-
Is the the result? Where's the corresponding original source?Originally Posted by Truthler
-
Read #121Originally Posted by davexnet
Is the the result? Where's the corresponding original source?Originally Posted by Truthler
-
Capturing Memories
- Jan 2016
- Member Since 2005, Re-joined in 2016
One of the signs of trolls is they quote the entire post including pictures, I've seen it before with baydav, Probably the same guy re-registerd as Truthler.
-
Baseless accusation is not a nice thing, neither the personal attacks (which is fallacy).Originally Posted by dellsam34
Have a nice day!
-
Of course this 'wonderful' version does not match the clip the poster wanted to see.
But the 'wonderful' version is rubbish. I only have one 'good' eye but Will Hay never appeared in cartoons.
As for the clip the poster wants to improve that may not be possible since it is already compromised and any 'improvement' will just make it worse.
No need for name calling. I do not think that the OP is Babygav. But the whole topic is an exercise in trolling and I had hoped that the OP would just go away and actually learn how to use the program and not, as it appears, to claim that sharpening is noise removal.
But I am equally sorry to read that the OP has a 'dose'. Just use your isolation time valuably. But, equally, do us all a favour and forget about any more samples. No one will waste their time in downloading and assess them.
-
Originally Posted by Truthler
No. It's overdenoised and oversharpened. s-mp calls it "fake" because it looks unnatural . "fake" might be a slightly confusing term in this context
Amount of denoising is "subjective" and people prefer varying degrees - but it's indisputable that there is texture and detail loss, oversharpening with halos in that Neat Video version.
Here are some apng's . They should animate in most browsers (if they don't click on them and open in new window). I'll also include them in a zip. The "original" levels have been adjusted similar to Truthler's version, so it's easier to compare
Look at the stone textures in the background. There is a patch of smoothness blurred away above guy's head. Stones have details and textures around that patch and in different frames, but there is an area of ''blur" It looks very unnatural.
[Attachment 60858 - Click to enlarge]
Look at the loss of detail on the jacket - whereas before you can make out fabric textures, they are blurred and smeared away by those Neat Video settings. Even if you look at the Neat version alone, parts of the jacket have fabric textures, parts are blurred away - again it looks unnatural
[Attachment 60859 - Click to enlarge]
This happens when the temporal settings are too high. It happens with other denoisers with too strong settings as well, not just Neat Video
This is classic "overdoing" it - this is the type of thing that gives Neat Video a bad reputation. Many people think Neat Video "sucks" because of stuff posted like this - they think neat video can only degrade the video like this. But it's adjustable
The goal is to reduce noise, but keep details, NOT destroy and oversmooth details.
Neat Video is very good for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but it's very easy to overdo it.
Neat video even could give back the invisible, unreadable text of the noisy calendar video. Incredible, but the text of the calendar literally resurrected...
There is no other denoiser on the market which can do that!
Yes, it does a good job in terms of text/writing clarity - but free open source workflow with denoisers can get similar results on the calendar.
I demonstrated a starting point with smdegrain in the earlier post. If you sharpen that, you get similar results to the Neat Video results posted. (e.g. add nonlinusm(str=0.6, rad=5) ) .
Sharpening is not really the same thing "denoising" . But you can include other filters too with open source workflow too - in fact I suggested it earlier.
The problem is the Neat Video settings you used, sharpens/enhances the noise too much and that obscures some of the typed text - so the results are not as clear
Here are some cropped apngs. Same deal with animating, try clicking or open in new window if they don't animate, or check the zip below. The text is less clear Neat Video version. There are blurred artifacts over some, oversharpened noise artifacts around others that obscures the legibility. The handwriting is less clear too for the Neat Video version. e.g. 31 is "Farkas" on the 1st one . Or 23 "Brigitta" in the 2nd one . Check the full frame versions in the zip. This is the same 466 frame from before. Truthler's is ~453, because of his framedrops. The sharpened errors and noise around text in Neat Video reduce the text legibility
[Attachment 60860 - Click to enlarge]
[Attachment 60861 - Click to enlarge]
As mentioned earlier, if you pre stabilized, apply smdegrain, sharpen, the end result in terms of typed and written text legibility is BETTER than what you used in Neat Video.
But now we're talking about other steps, part of a full workflow, not just "denoising". Apples and oranges.
You could improve Neat Video results too... by using it with other filters and programs.
And you can improve all of them farther by adjusting contrast using curves in a limited range to enhance text / handwriting (you could do that for neat video too)
Neat video is a very good denoiser and useful tool, but you can often get similar results with other free tools (albeit slower, and more difficult to use). And there are many scenarios and noise types where Neat Video just cannot compete as a denoiser, or you need or use other tools and techniques to make it more useful . I can post some examples if you want, I already mentioned a few
-
[Attachment 60871 - Click to enlarge]
[Attachment 60870 - Click to enlarge]Originally Posted by poisondeathray
Originally Posted by Truthler
No. It's overdenoised and oversharpened. s-mp calls it "fake" because it looks unnatural . "fake" might be a slightly confusing term in this context
Amount of denoising is "subjective" and people prefer varying degrees - but it's indisputable that there is texture and detail loss, oversharpening with halos in that Neat Video version.
Here are some apng's . They should animate in most browsers (if they don't click on them and open in new window). I'll also include them in a zip. The "original" levels have been adjusted similar to Truthler's version, so it's easier to compare
Look at the stone textures in the background. There is a patch of smoothness blurred away above guy's head. Stones have details and textures around that patch and in different frames, but there is an area of ''blur" It looks very unnatural.
[Attachment 60858 - Click to enlarge]
Look at the loss of detail on the jacket - whereas before you can make out fabric textures, they are blurred and smeared away by those Neat Video settings. Even if you look at the Neat version alone, parts of the jacket have fabric textures, parts are blurred away - again it looks unnatural
[Attachment 60859 - Click to enlarge]
This happens when the temporal settings are too high. It happens with other denoisers with too strong settings as well, not just Neat Video
This is classic "overdoing" it - this is the type of thing that gives Neat Video a bad reputation. Many people think Neat Video "sucks" because of stuff posted like this - they think neat video can only degrade the video like this. But it's adjustable
The goal is to reduce noise, but keep details, NOT destroy and oversmooth details.
Neat Video is very good for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but it's very easy to overdo it.
Neat video even could give back the invisible, unreadable text of the noisy calendar video. Incredible, but the text of the calendar literally resurrected...
There is no other denoiser on the market which can do that!
Yes, it does a good job in terms of text/writing clarity - but free open source workflow with denoisers can get similar results on the calendar.
I demonstrated a starting point with smdegrain in the earlier post. If you sharpen that, you get similar results to the Neat Video results posted. (e.g. add nonlinusm(str=0.6, rad=5) ) .
Sharpening is not really the same thing "denoising" . But you can include other filters too with open source workflow too - in fact I suggested it earlier.
The problem is the Neat Video settings you used, sharpens/enhances the noise too much and that obscures some of the typed text - so the results are not as clear
Here are some cropped apngs. Same deal with animating, try clicking or open in new window if they don't animate, or check the zip below. The text is less clear Neat Video version. There are blurred artifacts over some, oversharpened noise artifacts around others that obscures the legibility. The handwriting is less clear too for the Neat Video version. e.g. 31 is "Farkas" on the 1st one . Or 23 "Brigitta" in the 2nd one . Check the full frame versions in the zip. This is the same 466 frame from before. Truthler's is ~453, because of his framedrops. The sharpened errors and noise around text in Neat Video reduce the text legibility
[Attachment 60860 - Click to enlarge]
[Attachment 60861 - Click to enlarge]
As mentioned earlier, if you pre stabilized, apply smdegrain, sharpen, the end result in terms of typed and written text legibility is BETTER than what you used in Neat Video.
But now we're talking about other steps, part of a full workflow, not just "denoising". Apples and oranges.
You could improve Neat Video results too... by using it with other filters and programs.
And you can improve all of them farther by adjusting contrast using curves in a limited range to enhance text / handwriting (you could do that for neat video too)
Neat video is a very good denoiser and useful tool, but you can often get similar results with other free tools (albeit slower, and more difficult to use). And there are many scenarios and noise types where Neat Video just cannot compete as a denoiser, or you need or use other tools and techniques to make it more useful . I can post some examples if you want, I already mentioned a few
Why didn't you used the latest version?
Why do you call rapidly changing paterns on the wall as "deatail"? Real detail don1t change rapidly. So it is not detail but noise. Neat video restored the original look of the stone coverage of the wall precisely, the original video you can not see that clearly.
It also restored the real faces and skins. Vibrating rapidly chaning noise pattern is not real detail of the skin, but noise!
__
No wonder that you did not post your version of denoised video on sendGB, because you can not make good quality denoise with free tools.
The text in your example of calendar video is less clear, and a noise level is higher around it... So just you proved that you werre unable to reproduce the quality of my denoise. Why can't you admit, that free tools can not do good job?Last edited by Truthler; 22nd Sep 2021 at 01:40.
-
Video Restorer
- Jun 2003
- dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
-
He used your samples. So tell me, why aren't you using the latest version?Originally Posted by Truthler
It's a brick. If you have a brick that rapidly changes pattern, then please contact a ufologist. That Roswell debris has been missing for decades.Why do you call rapidly changing paterns on the wall as "deatail"? Real detail don1t change rapidly. So it is not detail but noise.
No. Your sample required squinting and guessing at what many of the letters might be. The smdegrain had almost none of that. I could actually read it.The text in your example of calendar video is less clear,
Why are you worshipping software? It's just a tool for a task, and not one of the better ones. I do not understand this mentality. Neat Video (like Topaz) mostly has a dummy-friendly GUI (for better or worse). That's really the main benefit. Not the power or quality of the actual functions of the software. Yes, I wish Avisynth had better GUI and documentation (my gripe for 20 years now), but I'm not going to sacrifice quality for a GUI. Some folks are willing to sacrifice quality, but it's generally due to laziness ("Avisynth is hard, wah!") or lack of knowledge of video restoration. I'm sure as hell not going to pretend that a mere GUI magically makes software better at the core function (ie, restoring video). As pointed out, with tweaking (NOT the default values!), Neat Video has some uses. Not better than Avisynth, but it can function decently in some situations. That's always been the case. But I'm not paying for something inferior.Why can't you admit, that free tools can not do good job?
Probably.Originally Posted by dellsam34
Lots of links is another, and very often the linked content has nothing to do with the conversation.
VH has had trolls since the days of Gina, and arguably even kwag.Last edited by lordsmurf; 22nd Sep 2021 at 02:09.
Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
FAQs: Best Blank Discs • Best TBCs • Best VCRs for capture • Restore VHS
-
Capturing Memories
- Jan 2016
- Member Since 2005, Re-joined in 2016
-
Wow, that Gina thing is interesting, That was 2 years before I was an active member here so I must have missed it, When you see those signs in the members posts it is a good time to report to the suicide hotline.
-
Originally Posted by lordsmurf
He used your samples. So tell me, why aren't you using the latest version?Originally Posted by Truthler
It's a brick. If you have a brick that rapidly changes pattern, then please contact a ufologist. That Roswell debris has been missing for decades.Why do you call rapidly changing paterns on the wall as "deatail"? Real detail don1t change rapidly. So it is not detail but noise.
No. Your sample required squinting and guessing at what many of the letters might be. The smdegrain had almost none of that. I could actually read it.The text in your example of calendar video is less clear,
Why are you worshipping software? It's just a tool for a task, and not one of the better ones. I do not understand this mentality. Neat Video (like Topaz) mostly has a dummy-friendly GUI (for better or worse). That's really the main benefit. Not the power or quality of the actual functions of the software. Yes, I wish Avisynth had better GUI and documentation (my gripe for 20 years now), but I'm not going to sacrifice quality for a GUI. Some folks are willing to sacrifice quality, but it's generally due to laziness ("Avisynth is hard, wah!") or lack of knowledge of video restoration. I'm sure as hell not going to pretend that a mere GUI magically makes software better at the core function (ie, restoring video). As pointed out, with tweaking (NOT the default values!), Neat Video has some uses. Not better than Avisynth, but it can function decently in some situations. That's always been the case. But I'm not paying for something inferior.Why can't you admit, that free tools can not do good job?
Probably.Originally Posted by dellsam34
Lots of links is another, and very often the linked content has nothing to do with the conversation.
VH has had trolls since the days of Gina, and arguably even kwag.
Again, why didn't he used the latest version of my denoised video , and making comparison with that? Because he knows, it is much better than what he can produce with free tools.
Yes, the original video was so bad quality that brick changed their places like in tetris, vibrated etc.
About the calendar video. I really suggest to go to eye doctor, and change diopter in your glasses. Or even worse: Cataract? or glaucoma ? Who knows what's your problem... Skillful surgeries and other treatments are now available. Don't worry my Covid infection is more dangerous than your eye problems.Last edited by Truthler; 22nd Sep 2021 at 04:47.
-
Isn't that Gina your wife? Just because you have so similar mentality and "polite behavior" . She is exactly the female version of you.Originally Posted by dellsam34
Last edited by Truthler; 22nd Sep 2021 at 04:41.
-
It's more likely yoursIsn't that Gina your wife?
-
First, the word is "detail". I know English may not be your native language but if you intend to act like you are quoting something when you aren't, you should at least run it past Google translate or other net tools first. Takes 5 seconds.Why do you call rapidly changing paterns on the wall as "deatail"? Real detail don1t change rapidly. So it is not detail but noise.
Second, have you not heard of DITHER? Dither is a type of noise that is not only not that objectionable, but has the added benefit of revealing detail that is otherwise hidden. It is used extensively to give audio & video material more clarity than would be expected by looking at the quantizing numbers alone. Another good example is in capturing of analog material (which has a form of self-dither). Your clip is just such a source.
But neat video removes the dither and in doing so, it is also removing the clarity.
Look up "picket fence" phenomenon.
Scott
-
Video Restorer
- Jun 2003
- dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
-
Do you remember Naked Geek? He was a mouthy SOB, and got bent out of shape when his "magic media" was shown to be inferior junk. He was using AN32 coded discs, essentially bottom-feeder crap that was so bottom feeding that it used the default Anwell codes. After one of his earliest (and dubious slef-promoting) posts, I offered to run a spindle through the same testing I did for other manufacturers. He flipped out.Originally Posted by dellsam34
He also ran a torrent (warez) site.
Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
FAQs: Best Blank Discs • Best TBCs • Best VCRs for capture • Restore VHS
-
Sample_3.avi is still overdenoised. It's basically the same, but the levels are more like original than Sample_2 but details are still blurred away - fabric, wall etc..Originally Posted by Truthler
Not all wall textures are not rapidly changing like "noise". For example, the outline edge of the brick to the man's right is blurred away - that's a real detail that has been destroyed. That brick edge is present and visible in multiple contiguous frames - it's a real detail. Also why is there some detail to the left and right of the blurry patch , even in the Neat Video version ? If that was "noise" should that not all be blurred away too ? The uneven quality of the denoising is unnerving and unnatural. There is a halo of bluriness surrounding the man's head as the head moves. This is because inaccurate and too strong temporal settings. Neat Video confuses the motion of the man's head , so there is a patch of blurriness above the head. It does not segment areas accurately enough (BTW - this is one of the tasks "AI" can be trained for - object segmentation)
The jacket textures are still blurred away. These are real details that are present across several contiguous frames. Not all of it is "noise". It's the same phenomenon - the details around motion areas (arm moving, head moving in the other shot) are blurred away too excessively, because too strong temporal denosing settings.
[Attachment 60873 - Click to enlarge]
[Attachment 60874 - Click to enlarge]
[Attachment 60875 - Click to enlarge]
[Attachment 60876 - Click to enlarge]
When you combine overdenoisng with oversharpening, you get that "water painting" look. Lines are thicker and coarser. BTW - QTGMC has that look too, because it denoises and oversharpens too much by default too. It's not a good look
I'll give you another hint as to how to improve all denoising, not just Neat Video - decimate the duplicates before denoising (this is 25p content with duplicates to make up 50p) . Duplicates interfere with motion compensation and denosing quality. Also denosing 2x the number of frames will be slower. It's a win-win
It's obvious that free tools did a better job in this case (more difficult to use, slower, multiple steps, but still better). The proof is posted above.The text in your example of calendar video is less clear, and a noise level is higher around it... So just you proved that you werre unable to reproduce the quality of my denoise. Why can't you admit, that free tools can not do good job?
You said the goal was text and handwriting clarity. The open source version is more clear and legible in this case for both. You can't even read some text in the Neat Video version which is legible in the free tools version - there are many noise and sharpening artifacts obscuring the text for the Neat Video version. The Neat Video handwriting is more faint, less clear as well.
If you said the primary goal was denoising, not text/handwriting clarity, the settings and filters could be adjusted to reach that goal too
You could improve the neat video version by using those other techniques and filters too - stabilizing too, increasing local contrast selectively, and not sharpening as much using that algorithm (the sharpening artifacts obscure parts of the text, it's counterproductive for "legibility") .
-
Truthlers results look like some of these remasters youtube has been pulling out on some music videos
-
Capturing Memories
- Jan 2016
- Member Since 2005, Re-joined in 2016
-
If I can't tolerate her posts there is no way in hell I can live with her, So that can't be true. That's something suitable for your mentality.Originally Posted by Truthler
-
She wrote here, because you did not deal with her problems.Originally Posted by dellsam34
If I can't tolerate her posts there is no way in hell I can live with her, So that can't be true. That's something suitable for your mentality.Originally Posted by Truthler
-
I think in most time the faces and texture of the clothes were more accurate than in the original version. The denoised video hold the necessary dithering, but what was removed is not real detail in most case, but old film noise from the film grain. It did not contain real visual information.
If we would record the same film with modern 8K cameras in Black and White, and after we downsamled it to 720*576 resulotion, I'm sure that my version would be closer to the reality.
What you see dithering is not dithering in the reality, but agening and primitive film grain.Last edited by Truthler; 22nd Sep 2021 at 11:08.
-
No, too much detail lossOriginally Posted by Truthler
Lots of noise is removed, but also real details.The denoised video hold the necessary dithering, but what was removed is not real detail in most case, but old film noise.
No, too much detail loss.If we would record the same film with modern 8K cameras in Black and White, and after we downsamled it to 720*576 resulotion, I'm sure that my version would be closer to the reality.
A big difference is in the fine high frequency details. When you overdenoise and oversharpen, the line edges are thicker and coarser with edge ringing - it's that water painting look
A real (decent quality HD is all you need) downscale would demonstrate higher frequency details, thinner lines. It's a night and day difference
It's difficult to distinuguish high frequency detail, from high frequency noise . This is not just a unique problem to Neat Video, this is in general with any denoising. So "conservative" denoising is usually better approach, because you don't destroy as many details
-
I think it is mostly film grain which was lost.
Nobody posted his own denoised version. I can guess why.... It can have only one reason.....
-
Sure, lots of film grain is lost, but so are detailsOriginally Posted by Truthler
Neat Video is a very good denoiser, but not when you use it like that.
You've demonstrated how not to use it. The developers should offer you a refund and take their license back
because you're making them look bad
It's very easy to "overdo" it in Neat Video.
It's easy to denoise and blur (with any denoiser) - but difficult to denoise and yet keep details. That's what separates good vs. bad denoiser
Do you remember the comparision video you linked to in the 1st post? The reviewer was singing the praises of Neat Video because of the texture details ("individual loops of fabric", the "fine knitting", etc... ) retained by Neat Video, underneath the noise, in the sweater compared to the other denoisers such as Resolve, Red Giant etc...Well the situation is similar here - you've overdenoised it and the fabric details are gone. Your results look like the oversmoothed results of the "other" denoisers
-
Here's some mild filtered versiond of the Sample.avi:
Cu SelurCode:# Imports import os import sys import vapoursynth as vs # getting Vapoursynth core core = vs.core # Import scripts folder scriptPath = 'I:/Hybrid/64bit/vsscripts' sys.path.insert(0, os.path.abspath(scriptPath)) # Loading Plugins core.std.LoadPlugin(path="I:/Hybrid/64bit/vsfilters/DenoiseFilter/CTMF/CTMF.dll") core.std.LoadPlugin(path="I:/Hybrid/64bit/vsfilters/Support/libtemporalmedian.dll") core.std.LoadPlugin(path="I:/Hybrid/64bit/vsfilters/Support/libmvtools.dll") core.std.LoadPlugin(path="I:/Hybrid/64bit/vsfilters/SharpenFilter/CAS/CAS.dll") core.std.LoadPlugin(path="I:/Hybrid/64bit/vsfilters/SourceFilter/LSmashSource/vslsmashsource.dll") # Import scripts import nnedi3_resample import mvsfunc import havsfunc import SpotLess import lostfunc import adjust # source: 'C:\Users\Selur\Desktop\Sample.avi' # current color space: YUV420P8, bit depth: 8, resolution: 720x576, fps: 50, color matrix: 470bg, yuv luminance scale: limited, scanorder: progressive # Loading C:\Users\Selur\Desktop\Sample.avi using LWLibavSource clip = core.lsmas.LWLibavSource(source="C:/Users/Selur/Desktop/Sample.avi", format="YUV420P8", cache=0, fpsnum=50, prefer_hw=0) # making sure input color matrix is set as 470bg clip = core.resize.Bicubic(clip, matrix_in_s="470bg",range_s="limited") # making sure frame rate is set to 50 clip = core.std.AssumeFPS(clip=clip, fpsnum=50, fpsden=1) # Setting color range to TV (limited) range. clip = core.std.SetFrameProp(clip=clip, prop="_ColorRange", intval=1) # cropping the video to 678x568 clip = core.std.CropRel(clip=clip, left=22, right=20, top=0, bottom=8) # Color Adjustment clip = adjust.Tweak(clip=clip, hue=0.00, sat=0.00, cont=1.00, coring=True) # contrast sharpening using CAS clip = core.cas.CAS(clip=clip, sharpness=0.870) clip = lostfunc.DeSpot(o=clip) clip = lostfunc.DeSpot(o=clip) clip = lostfunc.DeSpot(o=clip) clip = lostfunc.DeSpot(o=clip) clip = SpotLess.SpotLess(clip=clip, chroma=False, radT=3) # adjusting frame count and rate with sRestore clip = havsfunc.srestore(source=clip, frate=25.000, omode=6, speed=9, thresh=16, mode=2) # removing grain using SMDegrain clip = havsfunc.SMDegrain(input=clip, tr=6, interlaced=False) # adjusting output color from: YUV420P8 to YUV420P10 for x265Model clip = core.resize.Bicubic(clip=clip, format=vs.YUV420P10, range_s="limited") # set output frame rate to 25.000fps clip = core.std.AssumeFPS(clip=clip, fpsnum=25, fpsden=1) # Output clip.set_output()
users currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555, marcorocchini
-
@"Truthler", If you think that film grain doesn't retain detail (and that losing the grain doesn't lose detail as well), you need to get your eyes checked.
Scott
Visit Homepage
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