VCR vs VCR

[Sharc]

Some comparison screenshots from JVC, LG and SONY.

As I always say, it's better to compare what's underneath the noise than the noise itself -- screenshots after (almost) identical processing

For me these are all too smoothed.

Totally agree. All details smoothed away/killed. Are these recorded in extra long play (EP) or does NeatVideo do such a distructive denoising job?

[The 14th Doctor]

If they are EP (or LP) mode that doesn't surprise me, in terms of high end units the Panasonic 1980 is the best at LP/EP mode tapes in terms of quality, at least from what I've tested and in comparison to my prosumer JVC S-VHS VCRs.

I've said this before but for my equipment, the differences between the 1980 and my JVC VS30U/MV45U when it comes to SP Mode (and HiFi audio) boil down to slight hue differences, quality is pretty much the same.

[rgr]

Some comparison screenshots from JVC, LG and SONY.

As I always say, it's better to compare what's underneath the noise than the noise itself -- screenshots after (almost) identical processing

For me these are all too smoothed.

Totally agree. All details smoothed away/killed. Are these recorded in extra long play (EP) or does NeatVideo do such a distructive denoising job?

The tape was poor quality, looking like a copy of a copy, but also heavily noisy -- perfect for testing.
This isn't a beauty contest, it's just meant to show the differences between VCRs.
The original is also there: https://forum.videohelp.com/attachments/91543-1773686968/test2-NOISE-SONY.png

[Alwyn]

does NeatVideo do such a distructive denoising job?

Just to put you at ease, the "destructive" nature of NeatVideo is totally customisable and, in the hands of an expert such as rgr, would not be responsible for any ugly denoising.

[Sharc]

does NeatVideo do such a distructive denoising job?

Just to put you at ease, the "destructive" nature of NeatVideo is totally customisable and, in the hands of an expert such as rgr, would not be responsible for any ugly denoising.

Well, look for example at the guy's hair of the unprocessed noisy SONY picture (link in post#33), and see what the denoising (NeatVideo or whatever) did with it. Noise and details equally killed. Plastic Bertrand?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8soQkubMk1g

I don't question NeatVideo (it was used as far as I undestood though). My comment referred to the strength of the denoising. Well, to each his own .....

[Alwyn]

My comment referred to the strength of the denoising. Well, to each his own .....

Precisely my point. If a tool is used wrongly, it's the user's fault, not the tool. NV has infinitely variable settings, from zero denoising to full-on smoothing, just like many AVISynth denoisers are able to. If a video gets mushed it's because the operator messed it up. If the same result occurred after the use of TemporalDegrain2 (for example), I assume you'd be as critical.

[timtape]

My comment referred to the strength of the denoising. Well, to each his own .....

Precisely my point. If a tool is used wrongly, it's the user's fault, not the tool. NV has infinitely variable settings, from zero denoising to full-on smoothing, just like many AVISynth denoisers are able to. If a video gets mushed it's because the operator messed it up. If the same result occurred after the use of TemporalDegrain2 (for example), I assume you'd be as critical.

It's the same with audio denoising. Yes the tools have definite limitations so it's up to the operator to learn those limitations and not push the tool too hard. Dont just look at the noise you've reduced. Look at what damage the "restoration" might have done to the picture or sound.

Some people want a 100% noise free picture. You can have it but often at the price of softer picture or sound.

[rgr]

My comment referred to the strength of the denoising. Well, to each his own .....

Precisely my point. If a tool is used wrongly, it's the user's fault, not the tool. NV has infinitely variable settings, from zero denoising to full-on smoothing, just like many AVISynth denoisers are able to. If a video gets mushed it's because the operator messed it up. If the same result occurred after the use of TemporalDegrain2 (for example), I assume you'd be as critical.

How could such an expert not even notice that it's a different frame

Before denosing:

[Attachment 91557 - Click to enlarge]

The second thing you missed, and the most important one -- even with stronger denoising, the SONY generated the most details (even with the same denoising, by the way, I also recommend taking a closer look).

[Sharc]

How could such an expert not even notice that it's a different frame

Not being an expert I noticed the different frame, but I could only make comments based on the screenshot(s) which you linked to. Also, some of the 'before denoising' screenshots look like deinterlaced and so does the noise look like 'deinterlaced noise' (?).

The second thing you missed, and the most important one -- even with stronger denoising, the SONY generated the most details (even with the same denoising, by the way, I also recommend taking a closer look).

No, I didn't miss. If you take a certain tape and play it on several players you can always identify one which you think delivers the best result - depending on some specific criteria (how about rainbows, dotcrawl, halos? *)). The "best" for this tape and test case can be a basic VCR in good condition - even with composite video - why not. It may be valid for your tested case and current setup. If you decide for the SONY just use it (I have a SONY as well btw. *)). Nothing wrong with this.

*) my experience with my SONY composite: Pretty good in capturing details + noise. Its wide bandwidth has the drawback of producing rainbows and heavy dotcrawl though. Pretty much annoying unless one uses a recommenden DVD recorder like ES-10, ES-15 with a strong Y/C separating filter in passthrough, or a capture card with a similar strong Y/C separation (the USB capture dongles are all poor in this respect it seems). Then the results are quite acceptable after applying a balanced denoising in post.

[rgr]

Also, some of the 'before denoising' screenshots look like deinterlaced and so does the noise look like 'deinterlaced noise' (?).

They were after the usual simple deinterlace.

If you decide for the SONY just use it (I have a SONY as well btw. *)). Nothing wrong with this.

So you can present your experiences as well.

*) my experience with my SONY composite: Pretty good in capturing details + noise. Its wide bandwidth has the drawback of producing rainbows and heavy dotcrawl though. Pretty much annoying unless one uses a recommenden DVD recorder like ES-10, ES-15 with a strong Y/C separating filter in passthrough

Yes, the DMR-EH585 was used as a filter here.