VideoHelp Forum

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 14
FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 417
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Location
    Australia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by davexnet View Post
    Originally Posted by b3nd0vah View Post
    Okay, after following the documentation, this thread, and some help from Troc (above); I've managed to get avisynth, nnedi3, the sharpening syntax, and vdub cooperating. However, I don't actually know how to proceed from here and output a video that I can open with something like MPV (if that's even an option, I don't know).

    Also, despite the hate all of Topaz's products seem to get here, for whatever reason, VEAI has given me good results when deblocking, denoising, and upscaling videos, not that I'd ever pay for the product. How would I go about replicating this function with AVISynth and what sort of quality comparison should I expect to see?
    Create your script, open in vdub2, set video/compression, file/save video
    Thanks, I'll run this through tonight with some different values and see what outcome I get. Am I able to parse this through to ffmpeg (since I run ffmpegsource) and have it encode the output directly?
    Quote Quote  
  2. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by b3nd0vah View Post
    or method to produce a better result
    Again, you don't know what you don't know.

    Video restoration -- which is what the non-upscale aspects of this are (deblock, sharpen, etc) -- is very content based. So you cannot simply say "I want to upscale a video". You must understand the each video is different, each restoration must be approached differently. Without samples, this is an academic discussion. For me, such a discussion is a waste of time. No samples, nothing to discuss.

    The basic scripting for Avisynth is already shown here, using rpow2.
    Usage info here: http://avisynth.nl/index.php/Nnedi3/nnedi3_rpow2

    Beyond that, whatever filtering is used is content based. And it takes trial, clip testing.
    Many here: http://www.avisynth.nl/index.php/External_filters
    Many also attached elsewhere (here at VH, at the digitalFAQ.com forums, Github, various Doom9 user 3rd-party accounts, etc). Avisynth is a bit spread at times, but all the core stuff is at the official wiki.

    Using Avisynth is easy.
    - Install. I consider x86 official and x64+ best, and realize that 86 and 64 act different. Some filters only work in one, some in both.
    - AvsPmod, again both x86 and x64, help with preview script actions.
    - Then save scripting .avs file, open in VirtualDub or Hybrid to encode. Hybrid also has filters included, for the newbies, or just for convenience (as I use it more and more for ease).

    To return to my earlier analogy, this is not going to work on me: "I don't believe you that Alpo is bad because you won't cook me a steak". No, that's not how this works. You've been given lots of info here already. Use it. When you start your own project, or A/B comparison project, and have questions (and samples!), then come back and post those. Nobody here is going to do A/B testing to "prove" anything to you. You can choose to learn better method, or you can continue to live in a Topaz bubble.
    Last edited by lordsmurf; 14th Nov 2020 at 08:01. Reason: typo
    Quote Quote  
  3. OP should provide samples.

    Topaz might be easier to use than avisynth (or at least have less of a learning curve) and fit the OP needs better, even if it is inferior in quality.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member Troc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Finland
    Search Comp PM
    When all you've ever eaten is dog food, you are unaware of what a steak or hamburger tastes like. Can you imagine somebody claiming that Alpo tastes great, and he/she doesn't understand why you hate it so much?

    You don't know what you don't know.

    We're trying to show you. Avisynth is steak. Topaz software is Alpo.
    You're exaggerating. The quality of Video Enhance AI is not something you can just brush aside like that. It sounds like you don't want to consider a different way to approach problems, even when it's been demonstrated that people have used VEAI for great effect. Have you tried the latest versions?

    You say that people want you to cook them a steak, when they haven't cooked before and are now genuinely asking "can a steak be cooked using that method?" I personally have now learned to use Avisynth and it has a lot of good uses. Many rare video artifacts can be solved pretty nicely with Avisynth. It's fast when you get it going and very customizable. However, the way it's used is archaic and the community hasn't been very welcoming. Picture the situation:

    "Hey, I have noticed that people don't like X. Why?"
    "Hmph, X is like dog food. Total trash for simple-minded people. I use Y."
    "W-what? It's bad? I like it..."
    "You only like it because you don't know any better."
    "Could you show me how to get better, then?"
    "You expect me to do everything for you? Educate yourself."

    I do get that communities need to gatekeep somewhat in order to keep away those who only want to leech. However, being so closed off means that new people will have hard time learning and fitting in.
    I myself have now taught some people how to use Avisynth. They said they couldn't figure out the manuals and people on forums told them to read the manuals. The issue comes when the manuals are unclear to newcomers. At least I learn very well with trial and error and even that requires that I get some process running. If someone actually just cannot figure out Avisynth and fires up Topaz VEAI, is that a bad thing?

    I guess the main question is, do you want people to use Avisynth, or do you just enjoy having superior skills?
    I would not use VEAI if I got concrete proof that I can get at least the same quality with more efficiency using Avisynth. However, despite my ongoing tests, I haven't been able to replicate it. At the moment, I'm testing on 1080p to 4K and as asked for by some in the thread, I'll provide picture proof of output differences. After I post the comparisons, I'm fully ready to try different scripts in order to get better and better results.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    You say that people want you to cook them a steak, when they haven't cooked before
    Follow a recipe.

    Total trash for simple-minded people.
    Nobody here stated that.

    "W-what? It's bad? I like it..."
    "You only like it because you don't know any better."
    "Could you show me how to get better, then?"
    That's why samples were requested.

    They said they couldn't figure out the manuals and people on forums told them to read the manuals. The issue comes when the manuals are unclear to newcomers.
    I agree. I've had gripes about Avisynth documentation for years.

    But again, the main aspect is starting with samples. This is a task-based exercise, and generic "teach me how to use Avisynth to make videos better" is a non-starter. Again, you don't know what you don't know, and don't realize the overly generic nature of that question. Instead, "here's a sample clip, and here's what I want to do", hopefully along with "I looked at the Avisynth wiki, and some forum posts, and I think using XYZ filter is a good place to start?". (Demonstrate some non-lazy factor to requests.)

    If someone actually just cannot figure out Avisynth and fires up Topaz VEAI, is that a bad thing?
    Depends.
    - Professional use = yes, bad, and the "pro" user is likely either lazy or limited in knowledge (or both)
    - Work to distribute to others, like fan endeavors = yes, bad, don't subject others to lower quality
    - Hobby just for yourself, nobody else will see these videos = knock yourself out, but realize that it's not best

    do you want people to use Avisynth
    That's why I suggested it for better results.

    I'll provide picture proof of output differences
    Nope. Cherry picking not allowed, not taken seriously. Pictures are fine, pointing out whatever, but post long clips, various content types. This is video, not still photography.

    The quality of Video Enhance AI is not something you can just brush aside
    As it exists now, 2020, it most certainly can. Perhaps later? Maybe. There are some commercial software like Mercalli that can edge out current Avisynth on some tasks. If you're part of a beta group, then learn Avisynth, and make Topaz function better. Not just "as good as", but better. That's not something that will happen fast, but it can surely happen later on. However, equally, a new Avisynth filter could debut. But I'm not as interested in "what if" as much as the video problems that I currently face today, projects for now. And for now = Avisynth, not Topaz.
    Last edited by lordsmurf; 14th Nov 2020 at 08:38. Reason: better explain
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member Troc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Finland
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    You say that people want you to cook them a steak, when they haven't cooked before
    Follow a recipe.

    Total trash for simple-minded people.
    Nobody here stated that.
    Oh?
    It's overpriced garbage. The "AI" marketing suckers newbies. You've been had.
    All of the "AI" from Topaz is marketing for gullible newbies.
    Hmm...

    "W-what? It's bad? I like it..."
    "You only like it because you don't know any better."
    "Could you show me how to get better, then?"
    That's why samples were requested.
    If someone cannot even get started, should they quit or ask for advice? There are definitely many cases where you end up banging your head into a wall instead of getting anywhere productive.

    They said they couldn't figure out the manuals and people on forums told them to read the manuals. The issue comes when the manuals are unclear to newcomers.
    I agree. I've had gripes about Avisynth documentation for years. But again, the main aspect is starting with samples. This is a task-based exercise, and generic "teach me how to use Avisynth to upscale/restore" is one of those questions that shouldn't even be asked. Again, you don't know what you don't know, and don't realize the stupidity of that question.
    Do you realize how that response sounds like?
    "How do I restore video with Avisynth?"
    "That's stupid question, you shouldn't even ask it."
    The person will now think that Avisynth cannot be used for restoring video. They will never consider approaching it again. Besides, when someone is asking, they are freely admitting that they have a lack of knowlege. It's not some novel reveal that they don't know, they themselves don't know and just managed to put together some guts to ask a question. That should be rewarded instead of punished. As in, "It's nice you're interested. Avisynth might indeed help you, depending on what you're looking for. Do you have any particular examples?"
    Obviously it's better if OP does that part themselves and Doom9's rules explicitly state that OP needs to be very specific and say how they attempted to solve the problem before asking for help. However I feel like VideoHelp is a more laidback place. Again, obviously, if OP barges in with "lol xd what can this trash do evenn?" it's reasonable to answer very firmly and cut the nonsense. Polite, honest questions should be treated as such.

    I'll provide picture proof of output differences
    Nope. Cherry picking not allowed, not taken seriously. Pictures are fine, pointing out whatever, but post long clips, various content types. This is video, not still photography.
    Oh? I'm getting quite confused here. First, Avisynth is not a general purpose tool and you have to treat each video differently to get good results. Then, when I get into treating a singular video, you ask me not to cherrypick. Are there official video enhancing test videos out there, perhaps?
    Here's my comparison pictures, if someone else reading the thread is interested in seeing the difference.
    https://gofile.io/d/ifGrT2

    I'm testing on a Vocaloid video "Night Fever", which I downloaded from Youtube.

    I then ran "GAIA CG" on VEAI and this script on Avisynth:
    PHP Code:
    LoadPlugin("C:\Program Files (x86)\AviSynth+\plugins\ffms2.dll")
    LoadPlugin("C:\Program Files (x86)\AviSynth+\plugins\nnedi3.dll")
    LoadPlugin("C:\Users\Troc\Documents\Avisynth Scripts\NNEDI3_v0_9_4_57\x64\Release_clang_W7\nnedi3.dll")
    LoadPlugin("C:\Users\Troc\Downloads\aWarpSharpMT_v2_1_3(1)\x64\Release_clang_W7\aWarpsharpMT.dll")
    FFmpegSource2("C:\Users\Troc\Music\VOCALOID\Megurine Luka - Night Fever 1080p.mp4")
    nnedi3_rpow2(4cshift="Spline36Resize"fwidth=3840fheight=2160)
    sharpen(0.5)
    AWarpSharp2(depth=10
    Since you wanted video, I posted both videos into my MEGA:
    VEAI
    https://mega.nz/file/HTY3iQyL#BMGelDPZfDpIG2Cocj-I9jml-b-723GT_Gn3wjJb_wQ
    Avisynth
    https://mega.nz/file/aT4BWIIR#cWrGsDijUVt2wcnXzMDBBcfcARm9hrIjqdYqlFoE54w

    If you have time, go ahead and see how much better VEAI performs in this task.

    The quality of Video Enhance AI is not something you can just brush aside
    As it exists now, 2020, it most certainly can. Perhaps later?
    For the vast majority of people, VEAI is unconditionally the superior program, because a normal person can use it. You need so much expertise to get use out of Avisynth that it might as well be in the same category of prohibitively expensive.

    do you want people to use Avisynth
    That's why I suggested it for better results.
    Please demonstrate the better results. I have not seen Avisynth provide better results than VEAI.
    It's very good in solving video issues like banding and is faster way to do some basic video editor stuff, but if I only had it to use in video work, I would quit. Here's a good place to shine. You said earlier that VEAI is a series of filters. Can you replicate the video enhancement that VEAI does using Avisynth or do even better than it? Let's only stay focused on Night Fever.

    If you can make a script in ASvisynth with results superior to VEAI, I'll concede that Avisynth can be superior.
    Note, not is superior, can be superior. Even if you managed to do what I ask, the user experience is still so bad. I'll keep using it for special video errors in pre-cleaning but never as the final upscaler.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    Oh?
    gullible != simple-minded
    - gullible = you were had, because you didn't know any better (shame on them)
    - simple-minded = moron (shame on you)

    If someone cannot even get started, should they quit or ask for advice?
    Uh ... no.
    Read. Try. If fail, ask for help. Don't quit, pout, tantrum.

    Do you realize how that response sounds like?
    Interesting how you've quoted something that I edited minutes after posting, hours before your quoting. Why was that done? Are you trying to be a troll?

    Obviously it's better if OP does that part themselves and Doom9's rules explicitly state that
    Obviously.

    which I downloaded from Youtube.
    I'm not wasting my time on a Youtube source video.

    For the vast majority of people
    No.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    The person will now think that Avisynth cannot be used for restoring video.
    Nonsense. It's about all I use in my video restorations and you already know many many people use it for their own restoration projects. lordsmurf is perfectly capable of rebutting you on his own but maybe you'll think he's the only one that finds your arguments lazy and worthless.
    They will never consider approaching it again.
    Maybe if they had approached it properly in the first place... How do you do that? By reading and studying and trying/experimenting. You come for help when stuck on something specific. You provide scripts and untouched video samples. And not YouTube garbage. Unless and until one can show having really tried, that person will just not be taken seriously. And you don't begin by asking how to restore videos. Walk before you run. Begin with the basics and work from there.
    Besides, when someone is asking, they are freely admitting that they have a lack of knowlege.
    There's nothing wrong with being ignorant. We all began with zero knowledge. But we didn't go on Doom9 or videohelp.com asking to be taught everything from scratch.
    It's not some novel reveal that they don't know, they themselves don't know and just managed to put together some guts to ask a question. That should be rewarded instead of punished.
    For asking a question? No, the ones that get rewarded and admired are the ones that show they've tried to solve whatever specific problem they're having before coming here with a specific question. The problem could be something really basic, such as how to open a specific video in Virtual Dub. or something more complex, such as suggestions for what denoiser to use and at what settings to remove heavy grain from a source.
    However I feel like VideoHelp is a more laidback place.
    It is, yes, and I, for one, sometimes think Doom9-like rules should be in effect here as well. I have no interest at all in this Topaz software and don't do much upscaling myself (some, just not much), so I prefer to not get involved in that can of worms.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member Troc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Finland
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by manono View Post
    Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    The person will now think that Avisynth cannot be used for restoring video.
    Nonsense. It's about all I use in my video restorations and you already know many many people use it for their own restoration projects. lordsmurf is perfectly capable of rebutting you on his own but maybe you'll think he's the only one that finds your arguments lazy and worthless.
    I know perfectly well that Avisynth can be used to restore video. However, a person who is interested and receives an aggressive answer with nothing concrete for them to work on, they will be turned away, possibly forever. It's a matter of opinion if that's a good thing. I would prefer a bit of leniency.
    Also, how is my argumentation lazy and worthless? I think I've thought pretty deeply about these matters and made points that could be root for discussion at least.

    They will never consider approaching it again.
    Maybe if they had approached it properly in the first place... How do you do that? By reading and studying and trying/experimenting.
    I think discussion is a perfectly acceptable form of study. Should everyone be forced to learn everything from the scratch, instead of being guided by those with pre-existing knowledge? If so, why? Is the skill more "pure" that way? I thought the entire point of a civilization was that not everyone needs to invent the wheel.

    And you don't begin by asking how to restore videos. Walk before you run. Begin with the basics and work from there.
    While that is the textbook way to learn things and the way we train robots, people tend to enter training or work based on high aspirations. Some join NASA to find out the secrets fo the Universe. When the actual job description is looking at numbers on a screen and writing them on an endless number forms, that aspiration can be the thing which keeps you going. In the case of Avisynth and video restoration, Avisynth is not the goal. Restoration is. Avisynth is a hurdle to get over in the way to the goal.

    Besides, when someone is asking, they are freely admitting that they have a lack of knowlege.
    There's nothing wrong with being ignorant. We all began with zero knowledge. But we didn't go on Doom9 or videohelp.com asking to be taught everything from scratch.
    "There's nothing wrong with being ignorant but don't ask people to help!" Perhaps if you did go and ask, you would've learned faster and therefore been ignorant for a lesser length of time. Would that not be good?

    It's not some novel reveal that they don't know, they themselves don't know and just managed to put together some guts to ask a question. That should be rewarded instead of punished.
    For asking a question? No, the ones that get rewarded and admired are the ones that show they've tried to solve whatever specific problem they're having before coming here with a specific question.
    What if they get "syntax error" and don't know where to even begin, even after following a guide? What if the guides found online are outdated and you'd have better time asking someone in the community for up to date advice? That happens constantly in the DAIN Discord, where an earlier build was used for a guide and now several elements are vastly different. Being uninformed is actually often better than being misinformed, and who would know better information than the people who actively participate in the subject matter?

    However I feel like VideoHelp is a more laidback place.
    It is, yes, and I, for one, sometimes think Doom9-like rules should be in effect here as well. I have no interest at all in this Topaz software and don't do much upscaling myself (some, just not much), so I prefer to not get involved in that can of worms.
    I disagree. I think the current rules for both forums are good as they are.

    On a lighter note, good. I wish I didn't care about upscaling, it is indeed a whole can of worms and has resulted in multiple sleepless nights solving issues with dependencies, drivers, all that good stuff. Blessed are the simple, I guess.
    Last edited by Troc; 14th Nov 2020 at 16:16.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    Originally Posted by isapc View Post
    The Topaz app uses A.I it isn't just another upsizer.
    All of the "AI" from Topaz is marketing for gullible newbies. Most of their stuff is now "AI".
    Can you give me evidence that it ISN'T AI?
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member Troc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Finland
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    gullible != simple-minded
    - gullible = you were had, because you didn't know any better (shame on them)
    - simple-minded = moron (shame on you)
    Alright, this was a misunderstanding on my part. English is not my first language and these two terms are the same in my native language. I apologize for the misunderstanding, no ill will was meant.
    If someone cannot even get started, should they quit or ask for advice?
    Uh ... no.
    Read. Try. If fail, ask for help. Don't quit, pout, tantrum.
    Alright, so asking for help is a valid option. It's good that we agree on this. Asking questions from people who have knowledge on a field can be a good way to cut through the waffle of official texts and getting some real knowledge. At least it has been in my experience. Talking with an actual indie filmmaker was more informative to me than reading a 500-page book called "Learn filmmaking".
    After being somewhat shut down on here and Doom9, talking with someone helpful in the AV1 Discord was helpful in firstly avoiding being demoralised and secondly to get some tips on it relevant to my interests.

    Do you realize how that response sounds like?
    Interesting how you've quoted something that I edited minutes after posting, hours before your quoting. Why was that done? Are you trying to be a troll?
    That's purely coincidental. I happened to see a forum notification arrive on my email that I had left open, read your comment and started answering it immediately. In the middle of answering, I had to take care of housework and I assume between then you had edited the message, which I didn't see. I then simply kept editing and rewriting my message to make it as concise and to the point as I could. It took a lot of time.
    Looking at your edited comment, it is better this way. I wonder if I should edit that part of my last post as well since it is a rather unflattering quote.

    I'm not wasting my time on a Youtube source video.
    I'm assuming you mean by that statement that Youtube has poor quality. Yes. That's why I wanted to restore it.

    If the quality was already high enough that the effects I observed by running my script would've made it perfect, it would've already been so good I might not have bothered restoring it. I often deal with very low quality video precisely because it has issues that annoy me when I watch them back.
    Second reason could be that you are not going to write a script only to prove a stranger wrong on the internet. Fair enough. I do stuff like that all the time, maybe it speaks to my lower self-esteem.
    Third option is that getting high quality out the source would actually be tricky and your refusal is a way to flip the chess board. Who knows? Maybe this file could've been made to look much better in Avisynth than in VEAI, no-one will ever know now.

    Guess I'll educate myself on the best method of fix Youtube compression. Looks to me like it needs deblocking, mix of sharpening and smoothing and something that can recognize and bring out the letter shapes better. I feel like this will take a long time of trial and error to get working and it's disappointing having to do it at least mostly alone. This also gives a nice defense to people who hate VEAI. They can simply say that I cannot code well and THAT's the reason why I can't get better results than VEAI from Avisynth.

    For the vast majority of people
    No.
    I've worked IRL tech support. You overestimate the PC using skills of normal people. I really wish everyone could use high quality video tools, but it seems thus far to be a pipedream. I feel like if people were smart enough to do that, things like global warming wouldn't be as pressing of an issue either.
    This might be the result of everything in PC design nowadays being about ease of use and user comfort. Years back it required relative expertise to even go into the internet and now everyone does it every waking hour on their phones and websites have introduced mobile versions to further increase comfort levels. Maybe ten years ago relatively larger portion of people using PCs could've also used Avisynth, but things have definitely changed - some for the better and some for the worse.

    I'm sorry you feel like I'm trolling you. I'm taking this discussion very seriously, as I absolutely want to know the reasons for your choice of tools. Understanding them could benefit me in reaching my goals.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Tika View Post
    Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    All of the "AI" from Topaz is marketing for gullible newbies. Most of their stuff is now "AI".
    Can you give me evidence that it ISN'T AI?
    I truly dislike willful ignorance. Predictive algorithms are nothing new, and certainly not artificial intelligence. In the case of Topaz, the predictions are often pretty bad, leading to artifacts.

    Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    I'm assuming you mean by that statement that Youtube has poor quality. Yes. That's why I wanted to restore it.
    That's not restoring video. You need actual sources, not the butchered results of a Youtube encode. Details are largely lost, and gives neither Topaz nor Avisynth much to work with. That video you linked was some anime video game, really crappy source. It will be a slightly-less-crappy, and pointlessly upsized, new encode. So again, not wasting time on that.

    You overestimate the PC using skills
    You also overestimate the desire of
    (1) wanting to upscale, seeing as how many people enjoy watching video on their phone, and
    (2) willing to pay $200 for software.

    Again, no.

    I think this conversation is going nowhere. Thanks for the banter. Please do learn Avisynth.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member Troc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Finland
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    Originally Posted by Tika View Post
    Can you give me evidence that it ISN'T AI?
    I truly dislike willful ignorance. Predictive algorithms are nothing new, and certainly not artificial intelligence. In the case of Topaz, the predictions are often pretty bad, leading to artifacts.
    How do you define Artificial Intelligence? Predictive Algorithms include machine learning, which falls under AI. The AI being faulty doesn't mean it isn't AI, similarly to how a leaking boot is still a boot.
    What kind of AI video software would you accept as being AI?

    Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    I'm assuming you mean by that statement that Youtube has poor quality. Yes. That's why I wanted to restore it.
    That's not restoring video. You need actual sources, not the butchered results of a Youtube encode. Details are largely lost, and gives neither Topaz nor Avisynth much to work with. That video you linked was some anime video game, really crappy source.
    I count restoring to mean making video look less garbage and closer to how it's supposed to.
    Yes, this is butchered. There are moments where the best source you have is low quality. In this case, would you quit and deem the video a lost cause? Are you saying that you won't or that you can't deal with that?
    Either way, VEAI could deal with it. Obviously there comes a point where even AI cannot fix the highest quality source I can find for a thing and at that point I'll just have to cope.

    By the way, interesting fact: This is Vocaloid Project Diva. Running the game and recording my screen with OBS gives me a native 4K version. I upscaled the 1080p Youtube version to compare it and native 4K to find out both what VEAI does to a video and how close I could get to native.

    It will be a slightly-less-crappy, and pointlessly upsized, new encode. So again, not wasting time on that.
    Not pointlessly upsized, upsized to look better. Generally, 720p looks better than 480p. 1080p looks better than 720p. 4K looks better than 1080p. 8K looks better than 4K. The software doesn't just save as higher resolution with bicubic or spline, it enlarges the video and fits the material to look good in that resolution.
    Check out this Youtube channel:
    https://www.youtube.com/c/ChaseSalasMMD/videos
    Most of the sources are 720p or 1080p and his videos look really good on my 4K monitor. I'm somewhat of a quality freak so that's not an insignificant viewpoint. Since Youtube is not optimal as a delivery method, I could arrange for you to have download links for videos before put into Youtube.

    Besides, fully crappy is worse than slightly-less-crappy. This post was pretty clear about that:
    https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/189452-Garbage-In-Garbage-Out-An-intro-to-restoring
    The only goal: Video and audio restoration has ONE GOAL: To make it better than the source. The goal is NOT to make it perfect quality. Just fix as much as you can and be happy with the results.
    Improvement is improvement. In the case of this video, VEAI was improvement. It seems to me that you are entirely dismissing VEAI as a method of restoration because it's not perfect. No method is perfect. There are moments where VEAI is the most fit for purpose. In my testing earlier, I wanted

    You overestimate the PC using skills
    You also overestimate the desire of
    (1) wanting to upscale, seeing as how many people enjoy watching video on their phone, and
    (2) willing to pay $200 for software.
    Phone resolutions are often over full hd, meaning that people are being exposed to higher and higher resolutions in their everyday lives. Topaz advertises and SEOs heavily, meaning that when a person is frustrated with low res video and googles "how to boost video resolution", they will find TopazLabs.
    Topaz also offers a free month with no limit on video specs and also no watermark, meaning that many people can get their fill in one month and if they feel like they want to purchase, they are informed of the program's abilities. There's also a lot of material out these, such as what Chase there has made to base an informed purchase decision on.

    If they decide not to purchase, they will not have wasted a lot of time learning For most people, they'd rather pay money than spend time and be uncomfortable. I have certainly been very uncomfortable during my process of learning Avisynth, from the clunky user experience to the chilly, suspicious climate towards newcomers. For a normal person, paying 200 dollars instead of spending 200 hours learning without even assuredly getting the same quality of output is not worth it. To put this into a perspective, new games cost around 60$ and many people buy those.For the price of two AAA games, a controller and a nice pizza, you could instead have VEAI.
    Many people also buy a 1000$ new phone yearly or biyearly. That's five VEAIs.

    Again, no.

    I think this conversation is going nowhere. Thanks for the banter. Please do learn Avisynth.
    This discussion doesn't move forward since you refuse to demonstrate the superiority of Avisynth. You also dodge some of my meaningful points. Please link a source, an Avisynth-improved version of the source and the script you used. I will not ask you to dirty your hands with VEAI, I'll do that part of the comparison myself. That way, I could have better knowledge. I will freely admit if your version is better than what I can create. It doesn't have to be long, even less than a minute is acceptable. You can choose the material you use and use any scripts you want to.

    It's really weird to me how reluctant you are to concretely demonstrate the superiority of your method. Saying that I should "learn and see for myself" feels like you just want me to shut up and go away. If I know a good thing and someone says it's bad, I feel the need to argue, since the facts need to be out there for people looking for good methods. If someone saw your comments in isolation and based on your other expertise and reputation were to think that VEAI is actual garbage that has no merits or usecases ever for anything that isn't a personal project you should still feel shame for, they'd be misinformed.
    Quote Quote  
  14. As a side note: when doing super resolution with Avisynth on natural content (no Cartoon/Anime( you might want to do some Contrast Adaptive Sharpening (CAS https://github.com/Asd-g/AviSynth-CAS)
    users currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member Troc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Finland
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by langeloso View Post
    i have topaz program, i used it cracked, for me was free doesn't have to pay nothing
    just replace the crack
    I do not condone piracy.

    windws Xp is a mess, only stupid people still used windows XP, try run games in directx 12 if you can in windows xp
    I do agree that it is unwise to use Windows XP as a daily driver in 2020. I use it for playing older games on a machine that's separate from my own. It works fine for that purpose. None of them use DirectX 12 and they do just fine without.
    Quote Quote  
  16. b3nd0vah & troc,

    I feel badly for both of you. This used to be a friendly forum, and the people here used to deride all the nasty people over at doom9.org.

    They all need to look in a mirror. This has become the old doom9.org, except the people there did (and still do) have real programming capability. That place, after all, is where much of the AVISynth development takes place.

    So, you may indeed "not know what you don't know," but a lot of people creating these haughty posts clearly think they know a lot more than they really do.

    As for the topic at hand, predicting detail by looking at past patterns in similar videos (or other scenes in the same video) is an intriguing idea, and is the subject of papers and sessions at the Siggraph trade show and conference that has been held for the past fifty years. To date there are lots of tantalizing evidence that this eventually will be something available to all of us, but in the meantime the best most of us can do is create the perception of more detail with very careful sharpening.

    Upscaling doesn't do much more than smooth out some of the jaggies.
    Last edited by johnmeyer; 15th Nov 2020 at 20:17. Reason: added last sentence.
    Quote Quote  
  17. aBigMeanie aedipuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    666th portal
    Search Comp PM
    is this post just an ad for topaz? i think i tried their star effects p.s. plugin long ago with dismal results. looking at their promo for the a.i. video just made me ill. taking old 480i video and claiming to be able to make stellar 4k out of it is just nuts. any detail that wasn't in the 480i original isn't going to magically appear no matter what, it just wasn't recorded. but if it's in demand i might release an app myself
    --
    "a lot of people are better dead" - prisoner KSC2-303
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    I didn't see any examples so I did one myself. To me it looks as if the Super Resolution process maintained
    slightly more detail. Whether the NNED sample could have been improved with a little post-sharpening,
    I didn't try that.
    Used the plugin from here:
    http://www.infognition.com/super_resolution_avisynth/

    Not a great source, but still a valid comparison

    Code:
    vid=lwlibavvideosource("C:\Users\davex\Desktop\clip2-source.mkv").trim(500,1000)
    
    vid=vid.ColorMatrix(mode="Rec.601->Rec.709")
    
    #vid=vid.sr(1280)
    vid=vid.NNEDI3_rpow2(rfactor=2,cshift="spline36resize",fwidth=1280,fheight=688)
    
    return vid
    Quote Quote  
  19. I'm a Super Moderator johns0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    Originally Posted by langeloso View Post
    i have topaz program, i used it cracked, for me was free doesn't have to pay nothing
    just replace the crack
    I do not condone piracy.

    windws Xp is a mess, only stupid people still used windows XP, try run games in directx 12 if you can in windows xp
    I do agree that it is unwise to use Windows XP as a daily driver in 2020. I use it for playing older games on a machine that's separate from my own. It works fine for that purpose. None of them use DirectX 12 and they do just fine without.
    I deleted his post cause it was warez and not needed and his first post.
    I think,therefore i am a hamster.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by aedipuss View Post
    is this post just an ad for topaz?
    Originally Posted by johns0 View Post
    I deleted his post cause it was warez
    I'm fairly certain that most (almost all?) Topaz posts will be from warez/review/beta users, not paid users. We've seen that many times over the years at VH. Stuff like this comes and goes, very cyclical. Topaz is the buzz of the moment. The moment will pass.
    Last edited by lordsmurf; 16th Nov 2020 at 01:39. Reason: punctuation
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member Troc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Finland
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by aedipuss View Post
    is this post just an ad for topaz? i think i tried their star effects p.s. plugin long ago with dismal results.
    They have become better. Also, I've heard that their plugins are worse than their plugin anyway.
    Also, I'm not advertising Topaz. I saw their stuff being called garbage and since they are not garbage, I engaged in conversation to state as much. I have my own issues with their stuff which I did go into earlier.
    Originally Posted by aedipuss View Post
    any detail that wasn't in the 480i original isn't going to magically appear no matter what, it just wasn't recorded.
    Unfortunately true. However, it does make vides look noticably better. Here's a couple test pictures:
    https://gofile.io/d/vJbEVJ
    Here's a zoomed shot:

    To zoom in even further:

    I think my point is made. Which picture looks the best?

    Even if you don't take into account my attempth at Avisynth, which you are very justified in doing, you will see an improvement from the original source into VEAI.
    Originally Posted by johnmeyer View Post
    Upscaling doesn't do much more than smooth out some of the jaggies.
    If that's what it can do, I will use it. Smoothing out jaggies is better than keeping them in. I think you can see some significant jaggie-smoothing in these examples.

    Originally Posted by aedipuss View Post
    but if it's in demand i might release an app myself
    Please do! I'll try it. I try all upscalers to find the best ones. I then share the knowledge in my communities so that most people can benefit.
    Do I have some way to follow up on this? Do you have a website, for example?

    Originally Posted by davexnet View Post
    Used the plugin from here:
    http://www.infognition.com/super_resolution_avisynth/

    Not a great source, but still a valid comparison

    Code:
    vid=lwlibavvideosource("C:\Users\davex\Desktop\clip2-source.mkv").trim(500,1000)
    
    vid=vid.ColorMatrix(mode="Rec.601->Rec.709")
    
    #vid=vid.sr(1280)
    vid=vid.NNEDI3_rpow2(rfactor=2,cshift="spline36resize",fwidth=1280,fheight=688)
    
    return vid
    I'll have to try that. The example in the website looks good but it's marketing, I'll have to see the true result for myself.
    Thank you for providing a link and code.


    Originally Posted by johnmeyer View Post
    b3nd0vah & troc,

    I feel badly for both of you. This used to be a friendly forum, and the people here used to deride all the nasty people over at doom9.org.

    They all need to look in a mirror. This has become the old doom9.org, except the people there did (and still do) have real programming capability. That place, after all, is where much of the AVISynth development takes place.
    Do you feel like I've been treated unfairly in this conversation? I'm asking since I'm not sure myself. Maybe I am wrong and there's something that I'm just not seeing. Maybe the other parties are unwelcoming to new ideas even to a fault. I do feel like I've learned some things in this conversation, thought probably not the intended messages.
    I'll take a look at Siggraph stuff. I'm fairly new to extensive video work so it might take a while to take it all in. In regards to your last point there, yes. Perception of higher quality is what I'm after, since in consumed media, perception is the way 99% of all people approach media. If you've ever shown RAW/Ungraded pictures or video to a customer, you know that they don't really like it most of the time. I have sort of learned to like the look since I know what kind of possibilities it represents but it still isn't visually pleasing in isolation.

    Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    I'm fairly certain that most (almost all?) Topaz posts will be from warez/review/beta users, not paid users. We've seen that many times over the years at VH.
    Unfortunate but true. Then again, I wonder how many legitimate VS pirate users there are for Sony Vegas, DaVinci Resolve, WinRAR, newest Office suite, Windows itself and many others. People will pirate whenever there's cool stuff they want but cannot afford. It really sucks.
    I myself did what I said earlier, set priorities and acted accordingly. VEAI was more important than pizza dinners.
    Quote Quote  
  22. There seems to be a lot of talk in this topic, maybe it would be better to focus on substance ?

    Troc claims to be getting better results with Topaz than Avisynth:
    https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/399360-so-where-s-all-the-Topaz-Video-Enhance-AI-d...e2#post2601098

    Comparison pictures: https://gofile.io/d/ifGrT2
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Search Comp PM
    There's more than just Topaz that use this technology.There are cloud based solutions there is DVDFAB https://www.dvdfab.cn/enlarger-ai.htm.
    The DVDFAB site does a better job at explaining this Tech than Topaz.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    this script on Avisynth:
    Code:
    nnedi3_rpow2(4, cshift="Spline36Resize", fwidth=3840, fheight=2160)
    sharpen(0.5)
    AWarpSharp2(depth=10)
    As you've seen, if you have crappy video before upscaling you'll get crappy upscaled results. You need to clean the video before upscaling. Apparently VEAI does that automatically, nnedi3 doesn't.

    Also, you usually want to aWarpSharp2() before Sharpen(). aWarpSharp2() smooths out jaggy edges as well as sharpening.
    Quote Quote  
  25. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    I think my point is made.
    Not really.

    Which picture looks the best?
    Alright, samples, I asked for samples, so I'll play along...

    Each is crappy in its own way. The main problem is that the source was overcompressed Youtube dreck.

    Topaz mostly smoothed out both noise and details, added aliasing. It has nicer gradients, but I can do that in Avisynth or even VirtualDub.

    In the anime-girl-hand picture, she no longer has a neck, Topaz obliterated it.

    Avisynth must have been very minimalist upsize, just the rpow2, as it essentially still looks like the source. If you used sharpen(), that was a mistake, as it's a dumb/not-smart sharpener, and is the wrong choice for something like this. Topaz did better on deboogering the straight lines, but I don't really see that you addressed it in any way in Avisynth. I'd bet even QTGMC would tackle some of that, but there are more targeted methods here.

    On the girl-with-no-hands image, Topaz sample, her mouth is smeared and weird, like she ate the lipstick instead of applying it. On the same image, in the hair ribbon, it added aliasing. Really ugly DV-like aliasing.

    On the dress sample, Topaz altered colors, added aliasing. It has lots more sharpening going on.

    There's really nothing "better" here, just different, sometimes in a bad way. Because the source is just Youtube junk, the compression forces some pretty random corrections, various artifacts even on stills.

    Attached are the samples from that other site.

    In these exact pictures, Topaz does look best, sure. But Avisynth can look better. I don't see where it was used to its full potential.

    But these are all still images, which really say next to nothing about a video. The real challenge is the motion.

    Also realize that cartoons/anime is simple to work with, you can take cheat shortcuts not allowed on live-action footage.

    ...

    YOUR SOURCES, ATTACHED FOR POSTERITY:
    Image Attached Files
    Last edited by lordsmurf; 16th Nov 2020 at 08:49.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    There are going to be instances where the source is not pristine; that's just reality.
    In this example, I didn't think the pre-upscale awarpsharp was necessary but it did help,
    the results look quite close now
    Code:
    vid=lwlibavvideosource("C:\Users\davex\Desktop\desktop\clip2-source.mkv").trim(500,1000)
    vid=vid.ColorMatrix(mode="Rec.601->Rec.709")
    vid=vid.sr(1280)      # infognition super resolution
    #vid=vid.awarpsharp2(depth=2).sharpen(0.1).NNEDI3_rpow2(rfactor=2,cshift="spline36resize",fwidth=1280,fheight=688)
    return vid
    Image Attached Files
    Quote Quote  
  27. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by davexnet View Post
    There are going to be instances where the source is not pristine; that's just reality.
    In this example, I didn't think the pre-upscale awarpsharp was necessary but it did help,
    the results look quite close now
    Code:
    vid=lwlibavvideosource("C:\Users\davex\Desktop\desktop\clip2-source.mkv").trim(500,1000)
    vid=vid.ColorMatrix(mode="Rec.601->Rec.709")
    vid=vid.sr(1280)      # infognition super resolution
    #vid=vid.awarpsharp2(depth=2).sharpen(0.1).NNEDI3_rpow2(rfactor=2,cshift="spline36resize",fwidth=1280,fheight=688)
    return vid
    That's a decent sample to show upscale detail. I just wish it had more motion, especially panning. There are more tweaks that can be done against some of the noise, but overall not a bad upscale. You resisted the urge to crank the sharpen dial to 11, which was good.

    I hate that "=" style of Avisynth coding. It's backwards to how I learned it. Takes my brain longer to process the script. Too many variables for me.

    Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    Phone resolutions are often over full hd, meaning that people are being exposed to higher and higher resolutions
    I wanted to revisit this. That claim is ridiculous because at 5 inches SD and HD look virtually the same. Something I remembered just now, looking at davexnet's samples.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    Originally Posted by davexnet View Post
    There are going to be instances where the source is not pristine; that's just reality.
    In this example, I didn't think the pre-upscale awarpsharp was necessary but it did help,
    the results look quite close now
    Code:
    vid=lwlibavvideosource("C:\Users\davex\Desktop\desktop\clip2-source.mkv").trim(500,1000)
    vid=vid.ColorMatrix(mode="Rec.601->Rec.709")
    vid=vid.sr(1280)      # infognition super resolution
    #vid=vid.awarpsharp2(depth=2).sharpen(0.1).NNEDI3_rpow2(rfactor=2,cshift="spline36resize",fwidth=1280,fheight=688)
    return vid
    That's a decent sample to show upscale detail. I just wish it had more motion, especially panning. There are more tweaks that can be done against some of the noise, but overall not a bad upscale. You resisted the urge to crank the sharpen dial to 11, which was good.

    I hate that "=" style of Avisynth coding. It's backwards to how I learned it. Takes my brain longer to process the script. Too many variables for me.

    Originally Posted by Troc View Post
    Phone resolutions are often over full hd, meaning that people are being exposed to higher and higher resolutions
    I wanted to revisit this. That claim is ridiculous because at 5 inches SD and HD look virtually the same. Something I remembered just now, looking at davexnet's samples.
    Thanks for looking at it. There is more video in the clip; just delete the .trim(500,1000) on the first line
    Quote Quote  
  29. I hate that "=" style of Avisynth coding. It's backwards to how I learned it. Takes my brain longer to process the script. Too many variables for me.
    I have the exact same feeling when folks just tend to build long filter chains in one line. Doesn't look clean and understandable and adjustable.

    my impression of VEI:
    1. I like their 'Area smoothing' it works fine on large same colored areas, which is nice for old cartoons, but has it's draw backs when dealing with real world content.
    2. I don't like their deblocking (it's often too destructive)
    3. I see nothing amazing about the upscaling capabilities
    so atm. I would say: I see it's usefulness for fast results, but I would still prefer manually adjusted filtering using Vapoursynth or Avisynth.
    I personally wouldn't use it on restoration projects I wanted to keep for archiving.

    Cu Selur
    users currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555
    Quote Quote  
  30. Some grade A gate keeping happening here, but then OP did poke the old guard and ask their opinion on this new fangled AI gubbins.

    The videohelp mullahs have decide AI is not welcome here, so why bother?

    I've been using it to enhance 540p to 4K for months and the results are truly spectacular. It gets better with every update. Their GigapixelAI and DenoiseAI programs are effortless to use and create wonderful results.

    Leave the command line dinosaurs where they are, they have no desire to evolve, so why force them?
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads