Filters sharpeners and antialiasing

[jagabo]

Jagabo, analyzing the original video you got a solution for that problem I told you about?

Skip the resizing. Your video is then sharper than "encode other". Oh, I also commented out "antialiasing()" since I don't have that filter. Maybe that helped too.

[charlesn73z]

I don't see the point in resizing. How many 4:3 videos have you seen on your 16x9 computer or TV that don't have side borders when they display? If you want to crop the borders, leave the basic image unchanged at 704X480; that frame size is valid for DVD/AVCHD, and the unchanged image will display properly at 4:3 without resizing. The source video already has what appears to be edge noise due to playback or other problems; resizing makes those problems look worse.

If I do not crop and resizing because the original image gets stretched vertically in relation to the encode, they are not the same size, when I compare the screens?

[sanlyn]

It's not possible to spend the next few weeks discussing pixel aspect ratios in this thread. All that can be said at this point is: resizing low-resolution video such as VHS source is a bad bad bad bad idea. The VHS source has already been resized a few times on its way from tape to MPEG and then to your computer. When the original 4:3 image was encoded to MPEG it was placed into a 720x480 frame in such a way that it would display as 4:3 when played on TV or played in a PC media player that correctly resizes the video's encoded rectangular pixels into square pixels for 4:3 display on a computer monitor. The original image in the encoded 720x480 MPEG frame occupies 704x480 pixels inside that frame. As it happens, this a normal storage area for 4:3 source video. Many commercial DVD's are already formatted at 704x480 for 4:3 content. There have been DVD recorders that can record to that frame size. 704x480 is valid for standard definition digital video.

You can encode the 704X480 AVI images at 704X480 with an MPEG encoder and flag it for 4:3 display. It will display properly on a TV or in a media player at 4:3, with no distortion of the original image. However, if you crop off the side borders and leave the 704x480 image as-is and then encode it into a 720x480 frame, or if you stretch that image so that it is 720x480, you would alter the physical aspect ratio of the original image and aspect ratio within the encoded frame. A display device would play a 4:3 image that would be "thinner" than the original by several pixels on each side -- and on a 16x9 display, you would still see black borders on each side of the image, whether you crop the image or not.

If you want VirtualDub to display your video frames at 4:3 aspect ratio, right-click on the image in VirtualDub. From the popup menu that results, click "4:3" image display ratio from the right-hand side of the menu.

[sanlyn]

Two mkv's attached:
A = 704x480 4:3 DAR video at 23.972
B= same 704x480 video with pulldown flags added for smoother motion and 29.972FPS playback

I used QTGMC in progressive mode with higher repair settings and nnedi3 to clean up some motion and edge artifacts due to (apparently) poor tape playback. Not 100% perfect. Stab() used to stablize frame hopping. Also arbitrarilly corrected some color. The 16-bit version of Dfftest was used for more denoising and flicker reduction. The original image was cropped but not resized.

I ran my scripts in 2 steps because (a) QTGMC at high power runs slow in my system, (b) separate step for the versions of masktools and mvtools used by dither plugins. Suggestions, corrections and tweaks welcome.

# ---------------------------
#          STEP 1
# ---------------------------
# Plugins used:
#- TIVTC.dll
#- Stab.avs
#- ReplaceFramesMC2.avs
#- QTGMC-3.32.avsi
#- santiag.avsi
#- HQdering.avs
#
MPEG2Source("path\to\d2v Project file\dbz1v2.d2v")
TFM(order=1).TDecimate()
Stab()
# ---- correction for borders changed by Stab() ---------
Crop(12,2,-8,0).AddBorders(2,2,2,0) # <- frame = 704x480
ReplaceFramesMC2(851,3)
Santiag(1,2)
HQDering()
QTGMC(InputType=1,TR1=2,TR2=3)
# --- Save output with Lagarith as YV12 ----

# ---------------------------
#          STEP 2
# ---------------------------
# Plugins used:
#- Dither.avs
#- mt_xxpand_multi.avs
#- avstp.dll
#- dither.dll
#- dfttest.dll (dither package 16-bit version)
#- mt_masktools-26.dll
#- masktools.dll (v1.5.8 for FastLineDarken)
#- FastLineDarken 1.3.avs
#- TTempTempSmooth.dll
#- RemoveGrainSSE2.dll
#- LSFMod.avsi
#- GradFun3 (from the dither package)
#- AddGrainC.dll
#
AVISource("path\to\STEP1 AVI\dbz1v2_01.avi")

dfttest (lsb=true)
f = DitherPost (mode=-1)
s = f.TTempSMooth().RemoveGrain()
d = mt_makediff (s, f)
DitherPost ()
mt_adddiff (last, d, u=2, v=2)

## ----- partial repair of some broken lines + edges ----
w = width
h = height
nnedi3_rpow2(opt=2,rfactor=2,cshift="spline64resize").TurnLeft().\
  RemoveGrain().NNEDI3().TurnRight().NNEDI3().spline64resize(w,h) FastLineDarken(thinning=48)

MergeChroma(aWarpSharp2(depth=30))
LSFMod(strength=75)
GradFun3(thr=1.8,mask=0)
AddGrainC(2.0, 2.0)

# ------ to RGB32 for RGB color work ------
Dither_convert_yuv_to_rgb(matrix="601",interlaced=false,tv_range=true,\
 cplace="MPEG2",lsb_in=false,output="rgb32")
return last

[sanlyn]

If I do not crop and resizing because the original image gets stretched vertically in relation to the encode, they are not the same size, when I compare the screens?

I'm not quite certain what you mean. If you crop the image to 704x480, and then resize it to 720x480,you have added width that was not in the original image. The same thing would happen if you crop to 704x480 and then resize to a full 4:3 image size (720x536, which is not quite 4:3). When either of those resized videos is encoded to 720x480, the displayed image will be a 4:3 picture but it will be wider than the original. The difference in width might not always be apparent, but people will be slightly fatter and circles will no longer be perfect circles.

Both images below are displayed in a 16x9 panel. The top image has been cropped to 704x480 but not resized.It has been encoded at 704x480 with a flag for 4: display.
The bottom image was cropped to 704x480, resized to 720x480, and encoded at 720x480 with a flag for 4:3 display. You can see that the bottom image is wider in the bottom panel. The same thing would happen if the 704x480 image had been resized to 720x536 and resized again by the encoder at 720x480.
If you click either image to enlarge, you can switch your view back and forth in the forum viewer by clicking "Previous" and "Next" in the viewer. The change in size will be even more apparent.



Besides that, all the resizing will introduce artifacts to some degree into the bottom image.

[charlesn73z]

I think there is only one way to solve the problem of edges, is upscaling to 960x720, someone suggest me some script? But it's something that does not change the colors.

[sanlyn]

That won't solve the problem. I don't know what you expect from the "edges", but if you think you can make a VHS source look like HD, it won't happen. The best one can do with such a source is clean it up and make some improvements, but noisy analog source won't look like a well-produced digital original. Poor playback in the original doesn't help matters.

[charlesn73z]

The point is not to see in HD, because it never will be, just upped the resolution to solve that problem of ill-defined borders that is bothering me, and actually decided. Pretty soon post the video and screens to prove it.

Encode:
http://uploaded.net/file/pyorrgh6
password:dfg


Original:


The colors were changed, that filter should I use to fix this?

[jagabo]

Why don't you increase the strength of unsharpenmask() in your script?

[charlesn73z]

Why don't you increase the strength of unsharpenmask() in your script?

I did not think it was necessary, but after I test.

See the videos I posted, I managed to solve that problem at the edges.

[sanlyn]

The point is not to see in HD, because it never will be, just upped the resolution to solve that problem of ill-defined borders that is bothering me, and actually decided. Pretty soon post the video and screens to prove it.

Encode:
http://uploaded.net/file/pyorrgh6
password:dfg

You proved nothing. That's a different video.

[charlesn73z]

The point is not to see in HD, because it never will be, just upped the resolution to solve that problem of ill-defined borders that is bothering me, and actually decided. Pretty soon post the video and screens to prove it.

Encode:
http://uploaded.net/file/pyorrgh6
password:dfg

You proved nothing. That's a different video.

See my previous post, I put two versions, the first is to show the issue of the colors that were changed, and the other to prove that the edges have been improved.



Increased the resolution to see if I get rid of a problem, but another appeared.

[sanlyn]

Wait a moment. You introduce a different video than the one we've been discussing, The later sample doesn't have the problem you were complaining about concerning Raditz. You also claimed that resizing the Raditz clip would solve the problem you complained about. If you already have the solution, why didn't you use it yourself? On top of that, the lines in your "improved" sample are no "sharper" than the Raditz mkv posted above, and in some frames they look rather soft. So if you want sharper lines, use more sharpeners. In short, if you already know how to solve the problem, just do it.

[charlesn73z]

I managed to solve the problem, thanks to jagabo and sanlyn and everyone who helped me, thanks guys!

[jagabo]

Why don't you state exactly what you did so the next person can benefit?

[charlesn73z]

Why don't you state exactly what you did so the next person can benefit?

I left the video in perfect 4:3 equal to the input video and used supaa ().

[charlesn73z]

Someone show me how to use the function of MVAnalyse LSharpAAF?