Conversion 4:3 to 16:9

[jagabo]

The think the border artifacts are a result of oversharpening, not mpeg compression. Try something like this:

Mpeg2Source("HORSE(01).d2v", CPU2="ooooxx", Info=3) 

# IVTC first
TFM(d2v="C:\Users\John\Desktop\HORSE(01).d2v") 
TDecimate() 

# restore black borders that were remove before, so dehaloing will work at the edges of the frame
AddBorders(8,8,8,8)

# overlay a dehaloed video only at sharpest edges
emask = mt_edge(mode="prewitt", thy1=150, thy2=150).mt_expand().Blur(1.5).Blur(1.5)
dh = dehalo_alpha(rx=2.0, ry=2.0, DarkStr=1.5, BrightStr=1.5)
Overlay(last, dh, mask=emask)

# sharpen a little, skip this if you don't like it
Sharpen(0.3, 0.2)

#remove the borders we added and the letterboxing
Crop(10,52,-10,-56)

# increase contrast and saturaton a little, convert to rec.709, temporal denoise and sharpen/shift chroma
ColorYUV(gain_y=30, off_y=-10, cont_u=30, cont_v=30)
ColorMatrix(mode="rec.601->rec.709") 
SMDegrain(tr=1, thsad=100, prefilter=4)
MergeChroma(last, aWarpSharp2(depth=10).ChromaShiftSP(x=-0.5, y=-0.5))

# upscale
nnedi3_rpow2(4, cshift="Spline36Resize", fwidth=1920, fheight=1164).aWarpSharp(depth=3).Sharpen(0.2)

# just the same portion that Sharc uploaded
Trim(0, 1396)

[Sharc]

The think the border artifacts are a result of oversharpening, not mpeg compression. Try something like this:

Mpeg2Source("HORSE(01).d2v", CPU2="ooooxx", Info=3) 

# IVTC first
TFM(d2v="C:\Users\John\Desktop\HORSE(01).d2v") 
TDecimate() 

# restore black borders that were remove before, so dehaloing will work at the edges of the frame
AddBorders(8,8,8,8)

# overlay a dehaloed video only at sharpest edges
emask = mt_edge(mode="prewitt", thy1=150, thy2=150).mt_expand().Blur(1.5).Blur(1.5)
dh = dehalo_alpha(rx=2.0, ry=2.0, DarkStr=1.5, BrightStr=1.5)
Overlay(last, dh, mask=emask)

# sharpen a little, skip this if you don't like it
Sharpen(0.3, 0.2)

#remove the borders we added and the letterboxing
Crop(10,52,-10,-56)

# increase contrast and saturaton a little, convert to rec.709, temporal denoise and sharpen/shift chroma
ColorYUV(gain_y=30, off_y=-10, cont_u=30, cont_v=30)
ColorMatrix(mode="rec.601->rec.709") 
SMDegrain(tr=1, thsad=100, prefilter=4)
MergeChroma(last, aWarpSharp2(depth=10).ChromaShiftSP(x=-0.5, y=-0.5))

# upscale
nnedi3_rpow2(4, cshift="Spline36Resize", fwidth=1920, fheight=1164).aWarpSharp(depth=3).Sharpen(0.2)

# just the same portion that Sharc uploaded
Trim(0, 1396)

The dehaloing is effective, but I think you attached my file of post#89 instead of yours, right?

[jagabo]

I think you attached my file of post#89 instead of yours, right?

You're right. I'll fix it now.

[cholla]

First jagabo I want to thank you for all the work.
What you did is above my knowledge level to do.
I have never used dehalo or overlay.
I would sure need to use your sharp edge settings.
I would have to Google to try to understand them.

My BD player would not play the resolution height.
My TV could play it direct.I could see the vertical line but it was only about 1/16th" wide.

Sharcs video you made it from has the line about 1/8th wide.
For some reason in Sharc's video the line is more translucent.

I will explain this again.The line is translucent on all the videos posted here.
I have to be very close to the TV to see it.
From normal watching distance I do not see it
The test pattern Sharc posted does not have the line.
I have tested other videos I have & a few DVDs .
On some the line is there & some it is not.
So I believe it is the TV.


Instead of restoring the black borders;why not start with the original rip from the DVD?
Then use the other procedures you recommend.

[jagabo]

Instead of restoring the black borders;why not start with the original rip from the DVD?

Because the dehalo filter needs the black border to recognize the halo at the edge of the frame. Without it the halo isn't detected correctly.

[Sharc]

My BD player would not play the resolution height.

Many/most BD players won't play >1080 height and/or level L5.
You can try to crop jagabo's file vertically by 84 pixels to make it 1920x1080 (16:9), and you may have to change the Level to 4.1 to make your BD player happy. The PAR (pixel aspect ratio) will be ok, means the objects in the picture are not stretched by the cropping.

[jagabo]

My BD player would not play the resolution height.

Many/most BD players won't play >1080 height and/or level L5.
You can try to crop jagabo's file vertically by 84 pixels to make it 1920x1080 (16:9)

Or upscale to 1782x1080 instead of 1920x1164.

[cholla]

@jagabo,
I meant using the DVD rip strait from the DVD.
I uploaded a clip like this in post#35.
It is a pillared & bared 4:3 resolution.
I never was able to determine if it actually had pillars or was just a size that looks like it has them.

@ Sharc,

Many/most BD players won't play >1080 height and/or level L5.

I believe you meant 1164 height like jagabo's video.

My TV played it fine & I believe that was good enough to check the results.

[Sharc]

@ Sharc,

Many/most BD players won't play >1080 height and/or level L5.

I believe you meant 1164 height like jagabo's video.

">1080" in words means "larger than 1080". So yes, most BD-players will not play files with 1164 height, because 1164 is larger than 1080.
(Your TV is not a BD-player. Obviously it can play .mkv and .mp4 files which are not BD-compliant, and apply its own resizing rules.)

[salvo00786]

Hi... Your panoramic conversion is one of the option of Atomic Stretch a free plugin for Adobe Premiere, that can give you various stretching options.

I use another method of stretching, a mixed method. I stretch the 4:3 to 5:3 and I zoom the rest to 16:9. With this method some of the upper and lower parts of the video are cutted, but each movie I have seen does not have so many important detail in these two little parts cutted. With these method, The peoples on the video are not too much stretched.

[cholla]

Many/most BD players won't play >1080 height and/or level L5.
You can try to crop jagabo's file vertically by 84 pixels to make it 1920x1080 (16:9), and you may have to change the Level to 4.1 to make your BD player happy. The PAR (pixel aspect ratio) will be ok, means the objects in the picture are not stretched by the cropping.

I did some conversions:
The first gave an "Incorrect Resolution" Then "Cannot play this file" HORSE_jagabo_High4.mkv
Correct on this one the BD player could not play 1164 height.

The second gave "Cannot play this file" HORSE_jagabo_1080.mkv
Correct on this one the BD player could not play High 5 even if the resolution is 1080.

The third is a working video with 1080 & High 4.1.
It plays correctly.

[salvo00786]

An Example:

Original
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WzUQULXhX8RfYwrbc0PUWUbn8-G9s35r/view?usp=sharing

Stretch to 5:3 with Topaz
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1X-H7SaQD3HTvlLkPTaoPIHd4myogrR1J/view?usp=sharing

Crop to Fill to 1920x1080 with Topaz
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WzpVLq63Xh4UNDpaFHR_Mgrm8ayyW4fg/view?usp=sharing

[Sharc]

@chollo: No surprise, no miracle. It's what I said.
Some players may be even more picky with what they play. Read the specs of your BD player.

(Btw. the 3rd got horizontally stretched again by ~7% ("fat people") by your re-encoding. You should have cropped it vertically to keep the proportions intact, as discussed before.)

[lollo]

An Example:

Original
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WzUQULXhX8RfYwrbc0PUWUbn8-G9s35r/view?usp=sharing

Stretch to 5:3 with Topaz
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1X-H7SaQD3HTvlLkPTaoPIHd4myogrR1J/view?usp=sharing

Crop to Fill to 1920x1080 with Topaz
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WzpVLq63Xh4UNDpaFHR_Mgrm8ayyW4fg/view?usp=sharing

Poor Luigi Comencini must be turning in his grave

https://imgsli.com/Mjc3MzA2

and Nino Manfredi as well

[jagabo]

My BD player would not play the resolution height.
My TV could play it direct.I could see the vertical line but it was only about 1/16th" wide.

Sharcs video you made it from has the line about 1/8th wide.
For some reason in Sharc's video the line is more translucent.

Note that Sharc removed the artifacts by cropping them away. I removed them by dehaloing -- leaving more of the original picture.

I will explain this again.The line is translucent on all the videos posted here.
I have to be very close to the TV to see it.
From normal watching distance I do not see it
The test pattern Sharc posted does not have the line.
I have tested other videos I have & a few DVDs .
On some the line is there & some it is not.
So I believe it is the TV.

Make sure your TV's Sharpen filter is disabled or lowered as far as possible. All those enhancement filters do is mess up a good picture.

[cholla]

Read the specs of your BD player.

I will if i can find them.

(Btw. the 3rd got horizontally stretched again by ~7% ("fat people") by your re-encoding. You should have cropped it vertically to keep the proportions intact, as discussed before.)

I wasn't co0ncerned about the ("fat people") I was just making an example that would play on my BD player & probably other peoples.
In case someone reads this topic & needs to check out their BD player.

Make sure your TV's Sharpen filter is disabled or lowered as far as possible. All those enhancement filters do is mess up a good picture.

I will check my TV settings to see. It has a lot of settings .

This is my final video for this project.
If the people are stretched horizontally "fat" I will live with it.
I'm now converting it back to a DVD format & will burn that to a DVD disc.
To me it will still be a lot better than watching a small square or rectangle surrounded by black on all sides.
I look at it like this: even if at a movie theater the people are in the correct proportion.
They are still a lot fatter than on my TV.

[Alwyn]

All the work of the last 4 pages has been spoiled by that stretching. A pity.

[cholla]

All the work of the last 4 pages has been spoiled by that stretching. A pity.

I do appreciate the effort & I'm satisfied with my result.
So I wouldn't say spoiled.

I did a comparison & all the videos were stretched some.
I made these measurements with VLC player & a ruler on a 24" monitor set to 1920x1080.
The original DVD rip 720x480 Man in middle 1 is 3 1/4" at shoulders. Man 2 in white coat is 2 5/16" at shoulders.

jagabo's was the least stretched the resolution was 1920x1164.


HORSE(01) 880x540 6k.mp4 Man width 4"but this video is not 1920 x1080.

HORSE(01) 1280x720_.mp4 Man width 4 1/16" but this video is not 1920 x1080.

HORSE(01) 1920x1080_ffmpeg_.mp4 Man width 4 3/8"

HORSE(01) 1920x1080_ffmpeg_2.mp4 Man width 4 3/8"

HORSE(01) 1920x1080_ffmpeg_stretch.mp4 Man width 4 3/8"

HORSE(01) No Bars 884x540.avi Neither man was not in this video but this video is not 1920 x1080.

HORSE(01) VDub IVTC Crop Resize 1920x1080.mp4 Man was not in this video,Had to use different man. Shoulders 3 1/8"

horse(01).mp4 Man width 4 1/16" video is 720x480

HORSE(01).vob.avs.mkv Man width 4"

HORSE(01)_zoomed_.mp4 Man was not in this video.Had to use different man. Shoulders 2 7/8"

Jerky AVISynth.mp4 Man was not in this video.Had to use different man. Shoulders 2 7/8" .Video 720x480.

Horse(06)cut.mp4 Man width 4" 5/16" Other man 3 1/8"

The images are the location in the video I made the measurements at.

[Attachment 80510 - Click to enlarge]


[Attachment 80513 - Click to enlarge]

[Sharc]

@cholla
With the examples you have it is a good time to lean back and study and try to understand the concepts of proper resizing versus oddly stretching of sources, principles of fitting to a canvas, aspect ratios like Pixel Aspect Ratio, Display Aspect Ratio, Frame resolution (sometimes called Storage Aspect Ratio), impact of player settings etc. Then you will have the conclusive answer to all your findings, conclusions and surprises. It will also help for future cases which may be quite different from this specific case and save you a lot of tinkering.
It probably takes some time, and it is at times confusing.....

[cholla]

@Sharc,
I expected some stretching from the start.
A 720x480 can't become a 1920x1080 without stretching.
I was always OK with some stretching.
That is the reason none of the conversions were without stretching.

I know the media player as well as monitor size also makes a difference when measuring.
That is why I was specific on this. I have VLC mostly at Default & let it detect what it considers the correct video display.

When a nonstretched video is shown it should be in better proportion.
But this is still the case:
On my 32" computer room TV the images are narrower than on my 55" TV.
If I go to a movie theater especially a large screen one the images are a lot wider.
So if a video is some wider I don't have a problem with it.
It isn't like John Wayne looked like Stan Laurel Then looked like Oliver Hardy after the conversion.

I have tried to learn some & have.
My knowledge level is less than those that helped me in this thread.

[Sharc]

It's all good as you like and prefer it
I remember the old days when 16:9 TVs were introduced and friends proudly presented 4:3 content stretched to 16:9, filling the screen of their new widescreen TV
It's much less dramatic when stretching 1.65:1 to 16:9 of course.

[cholla]

@ Sharc,
Like most of us all my TVs are wide screen.
I kept my 32" CRT operating as long as it lasted but also had widescreens.
I liked to watch some movies on the CRT & it was better for older video games.

I usually just watch a 4:3 movie as it is or upscale with My BD player or TV or both.
This movie did not do that very well.
That is the reason I decided to convert it.
Just too much black around all sides for my taste.

I remember the old days before my parents even got a B&W TV set.
I believe it cost more than a smaller wide screen does now.

[cholla]

This is a clip of the .vob I will be burning to a DVD disc.
I already did a test burn to a DVD +RW & it looked like what I wanted.
Played fine on my BD player.

[Sharc]

How did you create this one? Frame repeats producing judder, .... Did you deinterlace instead of IVTC?
Most important however that you are happy with your production and it works for you.

[jagabo]

Might as well screw up the frame rate while he screws up the aspect ratio.

[cholla]

How did you create this one? Frame repeats producing judder, .... Did you deinterlace instead of IVTC?
Most important however that you are happy with your production and it works for you.

I used the full size video that is the same conversion with ffmpeg as the clip in post#106.
I used AVStoDVD to convert the full video to a DVD folder set.
I made the clip in post 113 from that.

The DVD looks good to me when played on my BD player.

[Alwyn]

Might as well screw up the frame rate

Can a 23.976 Progressive file be authored to DVD format?

[jagabo]

Might as well screw up the frame rate

Can a 23.976 Progressive file be authored to DVD format?

Yes. Any progressive frame rate from 19.98 to 29.97 with pulldown flags is legal.

[Sharc]

File in post #113 HORSE(02)cut.vob: Apparently AVStoDVD did not apply pulldown flags for telecining but just converted 23.976p to 29.97p by simply repeating every 4th frame like abcddefghh...... Not the smartest conversion method.
I haven't been using AVStoDVD since long, but doesn't AVStoDVD have a decent 2-3 pulldown option? Its HCenc encoder provides for this AFAIK....
(apart from the stretching,but @cholla prefers it this way).

Edit: I gave AVStoDVD a quick shot using the original HORSE(01).vob as input. It produced a correctly soft-telecined output here, means it preserved the pulldown flags.
Tried the file of post#106 HORSE(06)cut.mp4 as well. Output produced by AVStoDVD is correctly soft-telecined here.
So maybe it's just an issue with the file HORSE(02)cut.vob in post#113 which has lost the pulldown principle for some reason, or a wrong configuration/setting option (?) in AVStoDVD when this file was produced.

[DB83]

As someone who contributed to the initial discussion some years ago, allow me to add my two cents.

Cholla, that sample which you are 'happy' with is terrible. As others have mentioned, the aspect ratio is well off so everything is wider/fatter than it should be.


I took a slightly different approach - if I echo other contributers then I apologise. But if you start with a 4:3 720*480 and wish to avoid ANY side-bars you must crop a total of 120 pixels from top and bottom and then resize that back to 720*480 with a change in AR to 16:9. Yes. You lose a little information top and bottom but surely that is better than your own 'mess'


Result as attached.