are there any tried and true methods of sharpening a blurry video?

[snafoo]

I had some video tapes converted to Mp4. They turned out better than i expected, but there is some blurriness to them. Can any editors out there sharpen them and make them less blurry? Hoping that answer is a yes!

[Bwaak]

Care to share a sample? Is it blurriness or double image? Is the resulting video in 30p by chance?

[snafoo]

yes, i will upload some of it It is blurriness from a 1980"s camcorder. Not sure of the speed, or anything. Will upload soon.

[Bwaak]

Yes, it is 30p, so you lose both spatial and temporal resolution, and the deinterlacer softens the picture. You can start with capturing as interlaced and deinterlacing into 60p, this will help a bit on high-motion scenes.

Frankly, I don't think this can be significantly improved. Even the static scenes are blurry. It is like the focus is not there - I cannot find a single object that is sharp. But let's see what the resident "cleaners" are going to say

Can you, please, re-capture as interlaced and post that one? As close to the original source as possible. Ideally 720x480, yours is 640x480, but this matters less than capturing and saving it as interlaced.

[pandy]

In theory you can try video deconvolution https://www.mathworks.com/help/images/deblurring-images-using-the-blind-deconvolution-algorithm.html
Nowadays there is lot of activities on this with machine learning... search for blind deconvolution.
But proper capture is primary step.

[Selur]

I agree, proper capturing is the main step.
' video sample 1.mp4 ' is too far gone to produce anything useful even with current machine learning stuff.

[lollo]

Once more, capture Analog SD in YUV 4:2:2, lossless, interlaced, using an Y/C signal Time Base Corrected. With the recommended workflow. Then move to restoration.

[Selur]

Side note, for clarification: lossless does not mean uncompressed. (So any video format that is lossless and supports interlacing can be used, but: 'Yes, lossless files are huge.')

[snafoo]

Yes, it is 30p, so you lose both spatial and temporal resolution, and the deinterlacer softens the picture. You can start with capturing as interlaced and deinterlacing into 60p, this will help a bit on high-motion scenes.

Frankly, I don't think this can be significantly improved. Even the static scenes are blurry. It is like the focus is not there - I cannot find a single object that is sharp. But let's see what the resident "cleaners" are going to say

Can you, please, re-capture as interlaced and post that one? As close to the original source as possible. Ideally 720x480, yours is 640x480, but this matters less than capturing and saving it as interlaced.

I had the tape digitized from a local business that does tape digitizations. i will inquire to the people there if they can re-capture as interlaced. The tape conversion cost me $30. I want a better finished product, and i will get one. I will find out in a few days what they can do.



Thanks!

[aramkolt]

Highly suspect with that resolution and file format that they just used an Elgato video capture. Way to know for sure it to see if the bitrate also matches what Elgato does. Seems like most video capturing services use those because it's easy and files don't take up much space and are therefore easy to distribute.

Theres' a YouTube channel/business called GotMemories that does that, and he states that interlaced lossless captures are possible to do, but he'd charge 10x the price for doing them and no one wants to pay that. Costs don't really go up much to capture lossless/interlaced, it's just hard to fit a bunch of tapes onto flash drives and being interlaced isn't really in a final viewing format for most modern devices. He does have pretty good google reviews, so I guess most people are satisfied with the quality of the Elgato captures anyway.

[Alwyn]

Costs don't really go up much to capture lossless/interlaced

For a business, I think they do because you either have to halve your capture rate because you're using your computer to recode the lossless capture and so can't capture the next tape or you have to buy another computer to capture. Double the hardware, not to mention the extra time it takes faffing around deinterlacing and managing files, as well as the know-how required to properly process lossless interlaced captures.

[Bwaak]

interlaced isn't really in a final viewing format for most modern devices

Most software players can deal with interlaced just fine. It is YT that is the main culprit. I don't get why YT cannot do offline what all TVs do in realtime. If YT cannot reliably detect interlacing, it could offer a checkbox when uploading. I also hate that YT does not honor 576p50 and 480p60.

I think converting to something like 720p60 is better, even if it is pillarboxed (hello, Cloner Alliance box). If Cloner guys make a box that records into, say, 960x720 @ 59.94 or 1440x1080 @ 59.94, they would steal the market from Elgato.