VideoHelp Forum

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 6
1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 151
Thread
  1. Hi!


    I know some people from VideoHelp used only prehistoric 5 or even 7 years old free Neat video softwares.

    Neat video beats all competitors by a long shot.

    Whatch this short comparison video , where every detail will beexamined and enlarged:

    https://youtu.be/Y-Oeo2oFZ5g
    Quote Quote  
  2. Okay,..
    • Can't verify.
      a. no available download of before and after
      b. no detailed settings (assuming there are settings)
    • No clue, how competent the one who made the comarision is when it comes to denoising.
    • No clue, why he didn't try denoising using Avisynth/Vapoursynth. (or whether he even is aware of their existence and the filters that exist for them)
    • No clue, what made:
      • Denoiser III
      • Topaz Video Enhance AI
      • Pixop AI noise reduction
      • Neat video - Remove noise
      • Davinci Resolve - Noise reduction
      the only noteworthy options.

    => At least I'm by no means qualified to judge this, but my trained sceptisism let's me doubt that 'Near Video' is the best video denoiser for any kind of noise video.


    Cu Selur
    users currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Italy
    Search Comp PM
    There is nothing that Neat Video or Topaz Video Enhance AI can do that couldn't be achieved or beaten with Vapoursynth or Avisynth. (quote Selur)
    Quote Quote  
  4. Originally Posted by lollo View Post
    There is nothing that Neat Video or Topaz Video Enhance AI can do that couldn't be achieved or beaten with Vapoursynth or Avisynth. (quote Selur)
    Maybe it was true 4-5 years ago... But in the last 2 years these are not even play in the same league with Neat Video...
    Quote Quote  
  5. Originally Posted by Selur View Post
    Okay,..
    • Can't verify.
      a. no available download of before and after
      b. no detailed settings (assuming there are settings)
    • No clue, how competent the one who made the comarision is when it comes to denoising.
    • No clue, why he didn't try denoising using Avisynth/Vapoursynth. (or whether he even is aware of their existence and the filters that exist for them)
    • No clue, what made:
      • Denoiser III
      • Topaz Video Enhance AI
      • Pixop AI noise reduction
      • Neat video - Remove noise
      • Davinci Resolve - Noise reduction
      the only noteworthy options.

    => At least I'm by no means qualified to judge this, but my trained sceptisism let's me doubt that 'Near Video' is the best video denoiser for any kind of noise video.


    Cu Selur
    https://youtu.be/4llwOYg4eiM?t=209

    Watch this short video from that time-point.

    Neat video has the most complex options and settings, it is supported by the HW acceleration of Nvidia cards.

    Avysynth and Vapoursynth denoisers had no HW acceleration, all goes trough CPU, so they are slow.

    Maybe I can ask Rigaya to make an Nvidia accelerated Avisynth for his NVENC project.
    Last edited by Truthler; 11th Sep 2021 at 14:03.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Avisynth denoiser is even worse than TOPAZ denoiser , which was the worse denoiser in the comparison in the first video. Proof: https://youtu.be/vmHJyF_XxT0
    Quote Quote  
  7. I bought Neat video today, it was dirty cheap 145.92 EUR. with VAT.
    Quote Quote  
  8. So I can record videos with even max iso settings, and nothing ZERO noise is visible in post production due to Neat Video!!!! It is hyper clear detailed and and sharp. :PPPPPP
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Italy
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Truthler View Post
    Avisynth denoiser is even worse than TOPAZ denoiser , which was the worse denoiser in the comparison in the first video. Proof: https://youtu.be/vmHJyF_XxT0
    I regret having answered to a troll. That’s my video for a doom9 topic where everybody agreed AviSynth is superior.
    It will never happen again!
    Quote Quote  
  10. Okay lollo, let be there a video contest!

    We will denoise the same noisy video, and we will see who will have the superior image quality.

    OK?

    I'm 100% sure that you will lose the contest.
    Last edited by Truthler; 11th Sep 2021 at 14:42.
    Quote Quote  
  11. I will shot a short lossless night scene about the traffic of a 8 lane way with fast shutter speed and very high iso. So it will be noisy. I upload the lossless file, and we will see your result. I know that the fast tensor cores of the NVIDIA card with Neat video will do a fascinating result.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Pros and cons to each of them - each can have good or poor results in specific situations

    Neat v5 is good for general use, nice GUI interface, and fast with a good GPU ... It's a nice tool to add to the toolset.

    But Neat Video is not the best for certain types of noise

    It does well on low light, high iso camera sensor noise. But be aware there are dozens of different categories of "noise" (!!) - It does not do well on all of them
    Quote Quote  
  13. Maybe you have right Poisondeathray. But in most cases it is superior. I bet that user: Lollo won't dare to participate in this contest.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Neat video is a must have for video denoise , plus with every update gets better and better
    Quote Quote  
  15. Originally Posted by hdfills View Post
    Neat video is a must have for video denoise , plus with every update gets better and better
    Where can I give you an upvote? And it is a cheap software, but they did not even tried the latest full versions for 4K videos.....
    Quote Quote  
  16. i use neat video for my analogue transfers, not 4k sorry
    Quote Quote  
  17. NeatVideo analyses an area defined by user (simple gradient with a noise, uniform area for a color) and basically getting a noise sample out of it for what to remove. Then to oversimplify it, using a slider to define how much to remove. Is it still like that or did they change it?

    That's a light year advantage. Was always thinking why avs/vs filters are not using something like that. Instead it is a user decision what type of filter to select. Or what filters to chain. It needs some knowledge to just not be an average guy and removing just something or ruining it. Neat video uses engine defining that noise and searching for those patterns in video. Is that why it is so successful? And also why others cannot copy that approach?
    Last edited by _Al_; 11th Sep 2021 at 18:36.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Originally Posted by _Al_ View Post
    NeatVideo analyses an area defined by user (simple gradient with a noise, uniform area for a color) and basically getting a noise sample out of it for what to remove. Then to oversimplify it, using a slider to define how much to remove. Is it still like that or did they change it?
    Basically yes... that part is retained from old - but it has improved over those earlier versions, both in terms of speed (largely because GPUs are getting much faster) and quality.

    There are more advanced settings in current version compared older ones - Frequency separation, Y,CbCr denoising (even though it works in RGB); also there are options for flicker reduction, dust/scratches, dot/lines - so yes more buttons and sliders. The biggest issue with older versions was oversmoothing/overdenoising - that has improved current versions, but you can still overdo it

    Another benefit for camera users using Neat Video - is calibrated camera profiles. So if you have camera model "XYZ" and shot 800 ISO - there is likely a profile for that already since the user community shares profiles. It's a better starting point, specific for that camera/sensor/setting

    That's a light year advantage. Was always thinking why avs/vs filters are not using something like that. Instead it is a user decision what type of filter to select. Or what filters to chain. It needs some knowledge to just not be an average guy and removing just something or ruining it. Neat video uses engine defining that noise and searching for those patterns in video.
    It would be nice in AVS/VPY - but you need a more advanced interactive GUI, and the analysis back end needs to be coded

    Is that why it is so successful?
    It's successful because of good results, fast, and host application integration with a good GUI. User support and feedback actually exists, instead of some other commercial products where you wait 2 weeks for email reply

    And also why others cannot copy that approach?
    There are other commercial denoisers (not listed in that video) can sample user defined area too, or even take "x" random spatial samples; some of them actually predated Neat Video. That YT video was not a very good analysis as Selur pointed out, nor was it comprehensive - it was very limited testing in a very limited subset
    Quote Quote  
  19. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Best for what?
    For VHS source footage? Almost never..
    For HD camera work? Maybe. Don't know, don't shoot HD right now. But I'd assume probably.
    For forensic work? Laughably not.

    Why is it successful? Several possible reason, aside from thinking "sales = best ever!"
    - users that don't know what they don't know (aka, unaware of Avisynth)
    - users that think freeware = poopy (false), while payware = it must be great to cost money (false)
    - users that think script = hard (wah!), while slider and buttons = best

    Neat Video has advanced in recent years, but it's still often like using a meat cleaver for video NR, rather than the scalpel that is Avisynth.

    The preview box was often hard to work with. I imagine the larger resolution of HD videos made it easier, as it was with Neat Image and SLR photos. I used to use Neat Image often in the 90s/2000s but Photoshop advanced enough to not need it during the latter CS# era.
    Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
    FAQs: Best Blank DiscsBest TBCsBest VCRs for captureRestore VHS
    Quote Quote  
  20. I will shot a short lossless night scene about the traffic of a 8 lane way with fast shutter speed and very high iso. So it will be noisy. I upload the lossless file, and we will see your result. I know that the fast tensor cores of the NVIDIA card with Neat video will do a fascinating result.
    For reprouceability please not only share the lossless source, but also a lossless version of the filtered content and the settings you used.
    Looking forward to being able to see a before and after.
    I don't doubt that Neat Video might be faster and easier to use, but atm. I doubt that it's better than a custom written Avisynth script.

    Cu Selur
    users currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Search Comp PM
    I think some people have lost sight of the fact that Avisynth is very hard to set up and even then, knowing how to denoise a video requires a huge amount of learning as well. I can well understand that many of us just do not have the time (or brain-power) to get Avisynth singing like some of you. I've said it before: I am in awe of the experts here; the stuff you guys do is absolutely amazing. I also know that I will never be able to do the same. So when something like Neat Video comes along, sure, it might not be the be-all-and-end-all for all scenarios, but it's good.

    With a few clicks I can clean up most film dirt, virtually eliminate cine flickering and get rid of most of the noise. I just want "good" video, and it gives me that.

    And it works directly in my NLE, which won't accept frameserved AVSs. I can apply different Neat video settings to any number of cuts on my timeline almost instantly.

    It has a lot going for it IMO.
    Quote Quote  
  22. It has a lot going for it IMO.
    True.

    I agree Avisynth/Vapoursynth are not easy to handle and definitly not something that requires understanding and time.
    So saying that NeatVideo&Co beat Avisynth&Co in terms of usability&co is a given.

    The only thing I personally question is:
    a. a comparision that offers no way for reproduction/validation
    b. some broad claims that say tool xy is the best seemingly base on such comparisions


    Cu Selur
    users currently on my ignore list: deadrats, Stears555
    Quote Quote  
  23. Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
    Best for what?
    For VHS source footage? Almost never..
    For HD camera work? Maybe. Don't know, don't shoot HD right now. But I'd assume probably.
    For forensic work? Laughably not.

    Why is it successful? Several possible reason, aside from thinking "sales = best ever!"
    - users that don't know what they don't know (aka, unaware of Avisynth)
    - users that think freeware = poopy (false), while payware = it must be great to cost money (false)
    - users that think script = hard (wah!), while slider and buttons = best

    Neat Video has advanced in recent years, but it's still often like using a meat cleaver for video NR, rather than the scalpel that is Avisynth.

    The preview box was often hard to work with. I imagine the larger resolution of HD videos made it easier, as it was with Neat Image and SLR photos. I used to use Neat Image often in the 90s/2000s but Photoshop advanced enough to not need it during the latter CS# era.
    i use neat video mainly with video8 footage it does a nice job for me .... freeware is always a first start for me but if i feel a software will meet my needs i will always pay
    Quote Quote  
  24. Originally Posted by Truthler View Post
    So I can record videos with even max iso settings, and nothing ZERO noise is visible in post production due to Neat Video!!!! It is hyper clear detailed and and sharp. :PPPPPP
    good luck with generatin gdetails /s
    Quote Quote  
  25. Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post

    And it works directly in my NLE, which won't accept frameserved AVSs.
    Which NLE ? It probably accepts AVFS
    Quote Quote  
  26. Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    I think some people have lost sight of the fact that Avisynth is very hard to set up and even then, knowing how to denoise a video requires a huge amount of learning as well. I can well understand that many of us just do not have the time (or brain-power) to get Avisynth singing like some of you. I've said it before: I am in awe of the experts here; the stuff you guys do is absolutely amazing. I also know that I will never be able to do the same. So when something like Neat Video comes along, sure, it might not be the be-all-and-end-all for all scenarios, but it's good.

    With a few clicks I can clean up most film dirt, virtually eliminate cine flickering and get rid of most of the noise. I just want "good" video, and it gives me that.

    And it works directly in my NLE, which won't accept frameserved AVSs. I can apply different Neat video settings to any number of cuts on my timeline almost instantly.

    It has a lot going for it IMO.

    Alwyn, it is time to try out modern Neat video too. Your experiences came from an old version maybe... 4-5 years old.
    It is not possible to do such videos with Avisynth. It is similar when you try to build a primitive car at the garage, and you wanto to race with a Rimac Concept 2 super car. IT has simply no chance at all.
    Last edited by Truthler; 12th Sep 2021 at 13:16.
    Quote Quote  
  27. The power of avisynth/vapoursynth for the most part does not result from 1 filter - It results from the usage of a combination of filters and techniques to get the end result.

    But the same thing can be said about Neat Video. The majority of Neat Video users limit themselves to the simple GUI - hit a few buttons, drag a few sliders - yet ignore the power of the host application. But if you are familiar with advanced denoising techniques - luminance masks, frequency masks, line masks, channel ops, compositing principles - you can apply those same techniques to Neat Video. eg. Lets say some anime DVD or BD - neat video will soften and degrade the entire picture if you don't use line masks (but the same can be said with avs or vpy denoisers that don't have built in line protection)

    So really it's a faulty comparison , apples and oranges. Neat Video is 1 filter (with many settings) . AVS/VPY are frameworks with hundreds if not thousands of filters with with very flexible processing . If you use a single SomeDenoiser(some settings) call in avisynth or vapoursynth , is analogous in NV to hitting random sample and profile without leveraging any other techniques - you're not going to get ideal results either. A more valid comparison would be Neat Video vs. a specific denoiser like MCTD, or SMDegrain etc...

    But it's going to be much easier for the general user to get good results fast in a general denoising scenario using Neat Video, than putting together some specific filter chain or script in avisynth or vapoursynth. Because of Neat Video's host integration convenience - you don't need to frameserve, or use lossless intermediates or all that jumping through hoops.

    The problem is there are many types of noise and scenarios that Neat Video (alone) does not handle as well as other programs. But for general use , it generally works great. Use what works best - each tool has pros/cons
    Quote Quote  
  28. Originally Posted by Truthler View Post
    Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    I think some people have lost sight of the fact that Avisynth is very hard to set up and even then, knowing how to denoise a video requires a huge amount of learning as well. I can well understand that many of us just do not have the time (or brain-power) to get Avisynth singing like some of you. I've said it before: I am in awe of the experts here; the stuff you guys do is absolutely amazing. I also know that I will never be able to do the same. So when something like Neat Video comes along, sure, it might not be the be-all-and-end-all for all scenarios, but it's good.

    With a few clicks I can clean up most film dirt, virtually eliminate cine flickering and get rid of most of the noise. I just want "good" video, and it gives me that.

    And it works directly in my NLE, which won't accept frameserved AVSs. I can apply different Neat video settings to any number of cuts on my timeline almost instantly.

    It has a lot going for it IMO.

    Alwyn, it is time to try out modern Neat video too. Your experiences came from an old version maybe... 4-5 years old.
    It is not possible to do such videos with Avisynth. It is similar when you try to build a primitive car at the garage, and you wanto to race with a Rimac Concept 2 super car. IT has simply no chance at all.

    Maybe English isn't your first language...Alwyn is advocating and uses Neat Video.
    Quote Quote  
  29. Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    Originally Posted by Truthler View Post
    Originally Posted by Alwyn View Post
    I think some people have lost sight of the fact that Avisynth is very hard to set up and even then, knowing how to denoise a video requires a huge amount of learning as well. I can well understand that many of us just do not have the time (or brain-power) to get Avisynth singing like some of you. I've said it before: I am in awe of the experts here; the stuff you guys do is absolutely amazing. I also know that I will never be able to do the same. So when something like Neat Video comes along, sure, it might not be the be-all-and-end-all for all scenarios, but it's good.

    With a few clicks I can clean up most film dirt, virtually eliminate cine flickering and get rid of most of the noise. I just want "good" video, and it gives me that.

    And it works directly in my NLE, which won't accept frameserved AVSs. I can apply different Neat video settings to any number of cuts on my timeline almost instantly.

    It has a lot going for it IMO.

    Alwyn, it is time to try out modern Neat video too. Your experiences came from an old version maybe... 4-5 years old.
    It is not possible to do such videos with Avisynth. It is similar when you try to build a primitive car at the garage, and you wanto to race with a Rimac Concept 2 super car. IT has simply no chance at all.

    Maybe English isn't your first language...Alwyn is advocating and uses Neat Video.
    But maybe he uses an older version. No way that amateur Avisynth based denoiser can compete with it.... And I will prove it.
    Quote Quote  
  30. Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    The power of avisynth/vapoursynth for the most part does not result from 1 filter - It results from the usage of a combination of filters and techniques to get the end result.

    But the same thing can be said about Neat Video. The majority of Neat Video users limit themselves to the simple GUI - hit a few buttons, drag a few sliders - yet ignore the power of the host application. But if you are familiar with advanced denoising techniques - luminance masks, frequency masks, line masks, channel ops, compositing principles - you can apply those same techniques to Neat Video. eg. Lets say some anime DVD or BD - neat video will soften and degrade the entire picture if you don't use line masks (but the same can be said with avs or vpy denoisers that don't have built in line protection)

    So really it's a faulty comparison , apples and oranges. Neat Video is 1 filter (with many settings) . AVS/VPY are frameworks with hundreds if not thousands of filters with with very flexible processing . If you use a single SomeDenoiser(some settings) call in avisynth or vapoursynth , is analogous in NV to hitting random sample and profile without leveraging any other techniques - you're not going to get ideal results either. A more valid comparison would be Neat Video vs. a specific denoiser like MCTD, or SMDegrain etc...

    But it's going to be much easier for the general user to get good results fast in a general denoising scenario using Neat Video, than putting together some specific filter chain or script in avisynth or vapoursynth. Because of Neat Video's host integration convenience - you don't need to frameserve, or use lossless intermediates or all that jumping through hoops.

    The problem is there are many types of noise and scenarios that Neat Video (alone) does not handle as well as other programs. But for general use , it generally works great. Use what works best - each tool has pros/cons
    http://macilatthefront.blogspot.com/2020/01/two-different-solutions-for-denoising.html

    SMDegrain is worse, they guy had only a Neat video 5 trial version, but even the Trial proved to be better than the above mentioned free solutions...
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads