Lynne <d...@lynne.ee> schrieb am Di., 4. Juli 2023, 00:54: > Jul 4, 2023, 00:08 by tmund...@gmail.com: > > > Am So., 2. Juli 2023 um 20:58 Uhr schrieb Lynne <d...@lynne.ee>: > > > >> Jul 2, 2023, 20:41 by tmund...@gmail.com: > >> > >> > Am So., 2. Juli 2023 um 18:57 Uhr schrieb Lynne <d...@lynne.ee>: > >> > > >> >> Jul 2, 2023, 18:54 by d...@lynne.ee: > >> >> > >> >> > The issue is that clipping the interpolated temporal sample against > >> >> > the spatially predicted sample causes artifacts to appear. > >> >> > > >> >> > Discovered while writing the Vulkan version (where I omitted the > >> >> > same check). > >> >> > > >> >> > The clipping in the code is carried over from yadif. Removing the > >> >> > same code in yadif does not make any difference to the output. > >> >> > I think that the check was simply ill-adapted to the new prediction > >> >> > code and does more harm. > >> >> > > >> >> > I tested replacing the range clip with only an FFMAX, and only an > >> >> > FFMIN, but in both cases, artifacts still appeared. > >> >> > > >> >> > Test sample 1: > >> >> https://files.lynne.ee/testsamples/mbaff_1080i60_idx.mkvTest sample > 2: > >> >> https://files.lynne.ee/testsamples/mbaff_bdmv_1080i60_8slice.mkv > >> >> > > >> >> > Command line: > >> >> > ./ffmpeg_g -cpuflags 0 -i <INPUT> -vf bwdif=mode=send_field -c:v > >> >> rawvideo -y <OUTPUT>.nut > >> >> > Make sure to disable the assembly. > >> >> > > >> >> > Comparisons: > >> >> > https://files.lynne.ee/bwdif_01_before.png > >> >> > https://files.lynne.ee/bwdif_01_after.png > >> >> > Generated from sample 1 via: > >> >> > ffmpeg -ss 00:00:00.184 -i <INPUT>.nut -vf > >> >> crop=w=420:h=240:x=700:y=300,scale=iw*2:ih*2 -y <OUTPUT>.png > >> >> > > >> >> > https://files.lynne.ee/bwdif_02_before.png > >> >> > https://files.lynne.ee/bwdif_02_after.pngffmpeg -ss 00:00:00.417 > -i > >> >> <INPUT>.nut -vf crop=w=420:h=240:x=1100:y=200,scale=iw*2:ih*2 -y > >> >> <OUTPUT>.png > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> Corrected links for the second sample: > >> >> > >> >> https://files.lynne.ee/bwdif_02_before.png > >> >> https://files.lynne.ee/bwdif_02_after.png > >> >> ffmpeg -ss 00:00:00.417 -i <INPUT>.nut -vf > >> >> crop=w=420:h=240:x=1100:y=200,scale=iw*2:ih*2 -y <OUTPUT>.png > >> >> > >> >> I'm sure I hit a newline. The artifacts are a lot more noticeable in > the > >> >> second sample. > >> >> > >> > > >> > I developed the bwdif to achieve the best possible balance between > speed > >> > and quality of all different image contents from the broadcast point > of > >> > view. This includes moving video as well as moving and static graphic > >> > elements. Unfortunately, the improvement of one image content often > leads > >> > to the degradation of another. The code you removed fundamentally > >> > stabilizes the static graphic elements. This outweighs the slightly > more > >> > frequent artifacts in moving video considering the general purpose of > the > >> > filter. > >> > > >> > >> Could you post examples? I've been unable to find any that look worse > >> with the patch. > >> > > > > Unfortunately, I no longer have most of the test material that I used > years > > ago at the development of the bwdif. > > But on the quick I have this clip with an "Archiv" insert. With your > patch > > the letters are jumping. Without your patch they stay static. > > https://www.dropbox.com/s/jzoezjbi3ho9nja/bwdif-test.mov?dl=1 > > ffmpeg.exe -cpuflags 0 -i "bwdif-test.mov" -vf "bwdif=1:-1:1, > > scale=1920:1080" -sws_flags lanczos -aspect 16:9 -c:v libx264 -crf 21 > > "bwdif_original.mp4" > > ffmpeg_lynne_patch.exe -cpuflags 0 -i "bwdif-test.mov" -vf "bwdif=1:-1:1, > > scale=1920:1080" -sws_flags lanczos -aspect 16:9 -c:v libx264 -crf 21 > > "bwdif_lynne_patch.mp4" > > https://www.dropbox.com/s/tonsomtkhyaha91/bwdif_original.mp4?dl=1 > > https://www.dropbox.com/s/aaj8o5yzlocu55z/bwdif_lynne_patch.mp4?dl=1 > > > > Can confirm the letters are jumping with my patch. > Fair enough, consider this patch dropped. I've added the check > in Vulkan to make that version exact to C. > Thanks for testing and writing the filter! >
Thanks > _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
