The only noise reduction plugins for VirtualDub that even come close to Avisynth's can be found here:
http://acobw.narod.ru/
+ Reply to Thread
Results 31 to 45 of 45
-
"Quality is cool, but don't forget... Content is King!"
-
NeatVideo acts as a VirtualDub filter. Hard to beat that one, although even on my quad core it runs at only 3fps (with a bunch of other filters also in the chain).
Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
FAQs: Best Blank Discs • Best TBCs • Best VCRs for capture • Restore VHS -
Originally Posted by poisondeathray
-
Originally Posted by deadrats
-
With a lot of noise filters in VirtualDub you can get acceptable results simply by separating the fields:
Deinterlace -> unfold fields side by side
filter
Deinterlace -> fold side-by-side fields together
Be aware that VirtualDub does not handle interlaced YV12 sources correctly. You should use AviSynth to ConvertToRGB(interlaced=true) first.
VirtualDubMod handles interlaced YV12 properly. -
Originally Posted by poisondeathray
-
Originally Posted by poisondeathray
But yes, if you want to do all your filtering in VirtualDub, and you have superblacks and superwhites in the source, you should use ConvertToRGB(matrix="PC.601", interlaced=true|false). Then in VirtualDub either make sure your output codec understands that you are giving it PC.601 levels (for example, frame serving to TMPGEnc Plus allows this), or adjust the levels to rec.601 in VirtualDub before output.
This thread has some discussion of video and RGB levels:
https://forum.videohelp.com/topic359049.html -
just 2 more potentially silly question: many encoders, tmpg express, main concept, procoder, pretty much anyone i have ever seen, allow you to choose whether you want interlaced or progressive encoding, what happens if your source is interlaced, you don't de-interlace (either with a built in filter or via avisynth) and you set the encoding parameters to encode progressive output? does the encoder automatically de-interlace? does it ignore the "progressive" option and encode as interlaced?
the second question deals with frame rate: recently i have run across a couple of dvd rips where the guy that ripped them had created a 60fps h264 640x480 video and the results were incredible (unfortunately due to the nature of the content i can't provide a short clip). many have tried to ask him how exactly he does it but he has been kind of coy, giving only round about answers, he did say that not all dvd's were ideal candidates for frame rate doubling and he also indicated that the dvd's had to be interlaced. i'm assuming that what he did was some sort of "bob" de-interlacing and then set the output frame rate at 60fps. in addition i assume if you are "unfolding" each interlaced frame and building a true frame you are effectively doubling the number of frames which means you also need to double the bit rate. what this guy does is use 4mb/s h264, presumably because 4mb/s is kind of high for h264 at 640x480 and thus there's enough bit rate to be go around for all the added frames. if anyone has any idea what the proper procedure is for frame rate doubling please let me know, i would love to try it out on some of my dvd's (though i believe we already covered that h264 720x480 progressive at 60fps is not blu-ray complaint).
thanks. -
Originally Posted by deadrats
the second question deals with frame rate: recently i have run across a couple of dvd rips where the guy that ripped them had created a 60fps h264 640x480 video and the results were incredible (unfortunately due to the nature of the content i can't provide a short clip). many have tried to ask him how exactly he does it but he has been kind of coy, giving only round about answers, he did say that not all dvd's were ideal candidates for frame rate doubling and he also indicated that the dvd's had to be interlaced. i'm assuming that what he did was some sort of "bob" de-interlacing and then set the output frame rate at 60fps. in addition i assume if you are "unfolding" each interlaced frame and building a true frame you are effectively doubling the number of frames which means you also need to double the bit rate. what this guy does is use 4mb/s h264, presumably because 4mb/s is kind of high for h264 at 640x480 and thus there's enough bit rate to be go around for all the added frames. if anyone has any idea what the proper procedure is for frame rate doubling please let me know, i would love to try it out on some of my dvd's (though i believe we already covered that h264 720x480 progressive at 60fps is not blu-ray complaint).
720x480/60p is not complaint with blu -ray. When you leave it interlaced, the blu-ray or dvd player will deinterlace it anyway, and you should still get the full 60 fields/second temporal resolution. (i.e it would make no difference for the smoothness). It's only when you deinterlace it single rate to 30p, that it becomes relatively choppy
x264 (with proper settings) is very efficient at encoding similar progressive frames, so doubling the number of frames, might only need 1.3-1.5x more bitrate for a certain "quality level" (like psnr or ssim) instead of 2x (but it will still vary by content complexity). But it's interlaced encoding efficiency is poor currently. -
If you encode an interlaced video as if it is progressive (and assuming the editor doesn't deinterlace it for you) you will end up blurring the two chroma channels together. You will also have playback problems. Over interlaced analog cables you may get fast-jerky playback as the player doesn't know which field to send first. Or you will see comb artifacts whenever there is motion (the player and the TV don't know the video is interlaced and display the frames as if they are progressive).
I agree that a well bob'd video usually doesn't need twice the bitrate as the changes between frames are smaller. But a poorly bob'd video may require more than double the birate:
xvid at 30i (target quantizer = 3) 60 KB:
fps30i.avi
poorly bob'd to 60p (target quantizer = 3) 1.36 MB:
bob60.avi -
Originally Posted by jagabo
-
The only "good" candidates are interlaced ones. These have a temporal resolution of 60 fields per second. If you have a progressive film source, it will be 24p.
Noise & non predictive motion (like camera shake) require much more bitrate for equivalent "quality". Hence the use of denoising and stabilizing filters
Poorly bobbed (or poorly deinterlaced) footage - like if you use TMPGEnc - leaves jaggies which , to the encoder, acts as "noise" and requires more bitrate to encode. If you use a high quality deinterlacer, not only will it look better, you will require less bitrate for a similar level of "quality"
Similar Threads
-
something doesn't make sense (aspect ratio question)
By njitgrad in forum Newbie / General discussionsReplies: 6Last Post: 21st Nov 2010, 17:29 -
Does this convert formular make sense?
By helenw in forum Video ConversionReplies: 0Last Post: 26th Oct 2009, 17:04 -
From Letterbox to Anamorphic. Does it make any sense?
By Instant Martian in forum DVD RippingReplies: 4Last Post: 9th Aug 2009, 12:40 -
aspect ratio question/does this make sense?
By deadrats in forum Video ConversionReplies: 5Last Post: 24th Dec 2008, 17:22 -
Does it make sense to use Iphone without AT&T service ?
By SingSing in forum Newbie / General discussionsReplies: 10Last Post: 21st Sep 2007, 02:32