VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Consider supporting us by disable your adblocker or try DVDFab and copy, convert or make Blu-rays and DVDs! :)
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 8
1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 224
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Switzerland
    Search PM
    NOW NEW VERSION 2 !!

    We would like to show you a software for restoring old cine films.

    Gilles and I are passionate about old movies and digitization of these films.
    Using Avisynth is difficult if you do not know what computer language.
    With Film9, the user changes the settings directly on the interface by manipulating knobs and never write or modify scripts.
    The software allows the Deshaking, Sharpening, Colour corrections, Cleaning and more.
    The video clips are created automatically.
    This software enables the processing of old movies (8mm, Super8, etc. ..) or video cassettes
    and Film9 completely free and translated into English.







    Here is the link to download Film9 V2 (english)


    In all modesty, we hope that this program will appeal to those of us who are passionate by old images.
    Feel free to send us your comments.
    And sorry for my English.

    Gilles et Roland
    Last edited by Gelinox; 10th May 2016 at 08:07.
    Quote Quote  
  2. I tried it good idea but it seems more complicated than using avysinth alone. It seems that it accepts only progressive because my lagartih file (interlaced) camera point method was interpreted as progressive.I came to point to save the file ( final stage) don't know what compliant files means ( here) and it is empty.
    Thanks for your effort Gelinox I will try to play with it and post some results
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Switzerland
    Search PM
    Here is a short demonstration Film9 that will help understand its operation:

    https://vimeo.com/115483154

    mammo1789:
    Film9 accept not only progressive file. If you have problem with file format, you can send us a sample of your video so that we can test it.
    Last edited by Gelinox; 27th Dec 2014 at 15:03.
    Quote Quote  
  4. The first part of the demonstration looks like you are removing the duplicates that happen when capturing from a projector with the shutter removed. That is not easy to do, and congratulations on figuring it out. I did this over ten years ago and was going to apply for a patent, but it was too expensive to do that. I know the issues involved.

    You then do several additional steps, but I am not sure why more than one step is required. It looks like you are applying some color correction, and perhaps dirt removal. Hard to tell. Not much seems to be happening after the initial removal of the blurred pulldown frames.

    The transfer has all the highlights "blown out" (over-exposed). I do not know if this is the result of your transfer system, the film itself, or your post-processing. I don't want to be offensive, but it really is not a very professional-looking transfer, and is certainly not something I would use to show the quality of your software. If you are going to sell this, or get people interested in using your services, you most definitely should use a better-looking film transfer.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    France
    Search PM
    Hello John ,

    Thank you for your comments about FILM9 .

    The film captures 16.6 fps without shutter is fairly easy to implement for a beginner.
    Easier than installing an electronic synchronization between the projector and the sensor.
    And so, to delete the blurred pulldown images introduced by this type of capture, it must pass through a space scripting (GetDups) that does not accept cohabitation with temporal filters.
    This is the reason for this initial treatment. And, we added at this first step color corrections for a better consideration of future temporal filters in the second process.

    After, the second treatment takes much of your own learning and that of FRED on the restoration of old films.
    We have appreciated, among others, your study on RemoveDirt and RemoveGrain .

    FILM9 default settings can indeed not appeal to those who prefer a little more grain. It is a matter of judgment or taste.
    But, it is quite possible to disable certain options or return the settings to reduce the effects.

    Finally, Roland and I would like to emphasize that this software will never be for sale .
    It is a contribution from us to help those who have totality of difficulties with AviSynth scripts.

    Just as you have done, John, we try to help all lovers of film restoration.
    And thank you for continuing to give advice.....

    Gilles
    Quote Quote  
  6. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by GillesH View Post
    Finally, Roland and I would like to emphasize that this software will never be for sale .
    It is a contribution from us to help those who have totality of difficulties with AviSynth scripts.


    Quote Quote  
  7. Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Search Comp PM
    Is it possible to also integrate qtgmc into this?
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    France
    Search PM
    QTGMC is an excellent filter with many features.
    But, imposing to other filters that can be associated with it.
    Which could penalize them in their respective fields.
    For now , we therefore can not use it in FILM9 .
    But thinking remains open !
    Quote Quote  
  9. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by GillesH View Post
    But, imposing to other filters that can be associated with it.
    Which could penalize them in their respective fields.
    Could you translate that for me?
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    France
    Search PM
    Sorry for my Google translation ....
    I hope that it will be more clear.
    I wanted to say :
    QTGMC is a powerful filter, but that looks like a "big factory".
    It requires a lot of resources. Its association with other temporal filters may pose some problems.
    As CPU resources, and this may penalize the other filters.

    Thanks, Newpball, for your applause. I dream to have the same thing for my English ... but it's only a dream !!!!
    Gilles
    Quote Quote  
  11. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by GillesH View Post
    Sorry for my Google translation ....
    I hope that it will be more clear.
    I wanted to say :
    QTGMC is a powerful filter, but that looks like a "big factory".
    It requires a lot of resources.
    And the problem with that is?
    Are you perhaps targeting this program for people running a Pentium 4 with XP and 1GB of memory?

    Anyone who wants to restore a film should not be particularly in a hurry right?
    So what if you start the program in the evening and it is ready in the morning?

    Seriously I do not get it, QTGMC is a great filter, to refuse it because it uses a lot of computer resources is a very strange argument for me. Of course it uses a lot of resources, that's why it is such a good filter.

    If you want to restore a painting would you say: well I got this old painting and the best guy to restore it is Jimmy across the street but Jimmy takes a long time so he is out, but I know this other guy who hacks it together in 20 minutes so I am heading for this other guy.

    Originally Posted by GillesH View Post
    As CPU resources, and this may penalize the other filters.
    How?
    The other filters do not run in parallel.

    So also here I do not understand the argument.

    It's not the English I do not understand but the argumentation.

    Quote Quote  
  12. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    France
    Search PM
    Do not forget that the main purpose of QTGMC is deinterlacing. Which is not the purpose of FILM9.
    But, QTGMC has also other possibilities.
    During the study FILM9, QTGMC has been tested to explore all other options (deinterlace is not priority), such as Sharpen or Degrain, etc ...
    Compared with other filters, such as LSF, RemoveGrain, RemoveDirt, Dither, etc , we found that the performance was worse to reach the goal of FILM9 which is the restoration of the old movie.
    However, QTGMC could have been kept for some minor functions. But its weight hanging over the other filters (speed slowdown, decreased performance).
    Of course, the time is not a priority and that it is the quality that counts.
    FILM9 uses a lot of different and important filters, each with its specificity to treat our old movies.
    But, the "big factory" of QTGMC mixture with all other filters did not allow optimum operation.
    And only use a small function QTGMC was unreasonable.
    Certainly, QTGMC has its uses in other areas. And when used with little related filters.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Search Comp PM
    QTGMC does wonders when you apply to analog video sources that are interlaced.

    having used QTGMC on old family videos i can say that it improves the picture by a large magnitute.

    If you allowe QTGMC with a click and a warning window about huge CPU use and possible side effects, i think noone would argue about it with you.

    Please integrate QTGMC
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member 2Bdecided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Search Comp PM
    If the input is a video shot from a frameless film projector, QTGMC is a very bad choice. You do not need to deinterlace in the conventional sense. You need to find the clean frames. It sounds like they are already doing this. QTGMC would make things worse, not better.

    This is similar to removing 3-2 pulldown, at least in that QTGMC is a poor choice for that task as well.

    QTGMC is most useful on genuinely interlaced content (potential movement in every field), and quite useful on content with interlace-related problems (e.g. progressive content that has been badly processed as interlaced content). If the latter applies to your film captures for some reason, you can run QTGMC as a pre-process - but it shouldn't be used for everything by default.

    Cheers,
    David.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Search Comp PM
    just make it optional via a checkbox that says Source Interlaced.
    Quote Quote  
  16. QTGMC is totally the wrong tool for this workflow and should not be used, for the reasons already given by 2Bdecided and others. You most definitely do NOT want to deinterlace, because that operation makes no sense for progressive content. If the content is telecined in some way, as with film transfers done on non-frame-accurate systems, then QTGMC will make a total mess of things.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Search Comp PM
    not for progressive videos but for vhs imports!
    Quote Quote  
  18. Originally Posted by Opticum View Post
    not for progressive videos but for vhs imports!
    I agree. However, this thread is about restoring film transfers, not VHS imports.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Search Comp PM
    no its not, title says "video" also and the software can process interlaced video too.

    or video cassettes
    Quote Quote  
  20. Originally Posted by Opticum View Post
    no its not, title says "video" also and the software can process interlaced video too.
    Yes, the word "video" does appear in the title, but that means absolutely nothing. The first two lines of the OP are:
    We would like to show you a software for restoring old cine films.

    Gilles and I are passionate about old movies and digitization of these films.
    Gee, do you think maybe this thread is about restoring old films? Yes, it is, and QTGMC has no place in this work flow.

    I'm not bashing QTGMC: it is a wonderful script. It just is the wrong tool for this job.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Switzerland
    Search PM
    The video word is mentioned twice. Once in the title and once in the first text.

    This software enables the processing of old movies (8mm, Super8, etc. ..) or video cassettes
    Except this detail, the problem is not there.
    On this forum, very few users tell us using this software ...
    Use problem? ...
    No interest to automate using AviSynth? ...
    Quality of the images do not match the expectations?
    or everything works fine and nothing to say ?
    Quote Quote  
  22. Hi everyone

    New user here (long time lurker)

    I have been using Film9 and trying it out on progressive material from a 16mm digi-beta source i`m restoring,
    I primarily use a pro type restoration software ( not sure if i can mention the name?) to repair dirt,scratches and damaged frames etc but wanted to give Film9 a try as i am interested in its simplicity and automation as i haven`t got to grips with AVI synth scripts yet.

    I like Film9s stablisation and deshaker feature and the despot and dirt funtions are quite useable (depending on material),The only thing i would like to see changed would be the sharpness controls,The sharpness is much too high for my taste and over the top, Even with the sharpness sliders at zero the sharpness is still activated and i prefer to do my own subtle sharpning and have more control over this. Can you add a check box to disable sharpning?

    I think Film9 has real potential .
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Switzerland
    Search PM
    Thank you for answer !!!

    I'll watch this with Gilles, it's true that the settings can be too strong.
    We will consider your remark in a future release to reduce even more the effect of "sharpness".

    Quote Quote  
  24. Thank you Gelinox

    The inabilty to turn off the sharpness control is actually stopping me from using Film9, Sometimes i might only want to use Film9 for lets say removing frame jitter or removing a little grain and the allways- on- built in sharpner is obtrusive for my projects and taste.

    I think if your tutorial videos could be remade in English then that would help your cause as the translated english Gui of film9 is a bit ambiguous, i eventually got it working and sussed out how to import clips for the tape section but a lot is lost in translation i feel.

    Keep up the great work
    Quote Quote  
  25. The software is only for film transfer not VHS transfer. I must agree with johnmeyer and 2Bdecided on their points concerning 8mm film transfer ( and this "software" is all about that) and qtgmc. I did a lot of 8mm and super8mm transfers ( mostly homemade films not professional ones) in couple of methods "real time, scanning type, DYi and such and using QTGMC on those makes very annoying artifacts. In my experience for real transfer 8mm (using camera on a projection ) best script is alternated Videofred script by fpp ( he is also french like the authors of FILM9 maybe the same person? ) he uses bob ( with different field orders in different way not just deinterlacing). I also tried FILM9 and it seems gets very similar results (maybe they are used) to those 2 scripts that i mentioned but for me the software (and french explanation) is much harder and confusing than using those scripts alone in vdub.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Switzerland
    Search PM
    Thank you for the advice.

    To be the co-author of Film9 some details:

    Film9 is for movies AND cassettes !!!!!! there is a different treatment of the two.

    The scripts are not identical to those of Fred, even if it is inspired.

    Gilles and I have no contact (unfortunately?) with VideoFred, if that does not prevent us to appreciate hes work.

    Personally four or five mouse click should not be more complicated than running a script with Avisynth.
    Move a trackbar should be easier than changing a value in a script. no?
    Quote Quote  
  27. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    France
    Search PM
    Small complementary precisions :

    Our great inspirers are VideoFred and John Meyer and we take advantage of this message to thank them infinitely.
    And also, many other developers of Doom9 which also brought numerous ideas.
    Then, and thanks to all these studies, Roland and me, we realized the development of our own scripts.
    It is true that they are very similar, but with some differences which we hope to answer the objective of FILM9.
    We know the works of FPP, but no link with this developer.

    From there, the objective was to make accessible, to the largest number of people, the great possibilities of Avisynth.
    Even if Avisynth is wonderful, its learning asks for an important learning.
    And thus, it would be it's a pity that many people wishing to restore old movies cannot take advantage of it.

    We tried to return the FILM9 interface of the most intuitive possible (with a translation in English).
    Sorry for tutoriels in French. But if FILM9 interests a large number of people, an evolution is always possible.

    On the technical plan:
    A small debate appeared about QTGMC. Here are some complementary explanations:
    QTGMC bears the generic name of "deinterlacer", but it is a multi-filters. In fact, QTGMC uses basic deinterlacer as Bob, Yadif, TDeint.
    Then, to improve the image, QTGMC proposes in its file AVSI of the other complementary filters which are added to these deinterlacer.
    As RemoveGrain, VerticalCleaner, AddGrainC, etc....
    Thus, let us not forget that QTGMC is a sum of filters added to the basic deinterlacer. It is one Multi-filters.
    Like that was said, it can help for certain applications, but is not adapted to FILM9.

    In FILM9, when a movie is captured in Interlaced mode (Movie Film or Cassette), we also use a basic deinterlacer which is called SBDeint.
    This deinterlacer is the "brother" of Yadif (used in QTGMC).
    Then, we add other filters to improve the image (as QTGMC).
    The principle is thus completely identical to QTGMC, except that we chose other filters and another method.

    As indicated by Roland, we wait for the reactions of the users to try to improve FILM9.
    Thanks
    I am CHARLIE
    Quote Quote  
  28. Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Search Comp PM
    so it is for interlaced too like i said.

    thank you.
    Quote Quote  
  29. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Switzerland
    Search PM
    A new version of Film9 is available here:

    FILM9

    The changes are:

    - Each filter can be set ON or OFF
    - Optimization of FullHD based on recent updates to some filters
    - Improved Responsiveness
    Quote Quote  
  30. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    I'll have to give this a spin.
    Some of these tasks are not easy, and the simple check button and sliders give me doubts.
    It's a lot like vReveal.
    Last edited by lordsmurf; 25th Feb 2015 at 14:41.
    Quote Quote