On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 6:15 PM Robert Krüger <krueger@lesspain.software> wrote:
> [...] > what is the way to best contribute with test cases? I have two samples that > I use for testing, so far the results look very, very promising but there > are still a few artefact problems, so these could maybe serve as a good > test case. In some cases the artefacts almost certainly look like there is > a bug in motion vector calculation as a very large area suddenly begins to > move in which really only a small part is/should be moving. > > How do I make this available to you or other devs at this stage? Just trac > tickets or is it too early for that and you would like to work on this > differently? After all it is always a grey area, when this can be > considered solved, as it is a process of gradual improvements, so maybe > it's not well-suited for a ticket. > > Let me know. Happy to contribute samples and some testing time here and > there. > I'm currently testing support for unrestricted search area which can be used with EPZS, which has improved the quality. Once I send the patch you can test if it actually reduces the artifacts or doesn't make it worse. For smaller details newer recursive algorithms should perform better. Like this one, https://www.osapublishing.org/jdt/abstract.cfm?uri=jdt-11-7-580 which uses Modified 3D recursive search iteratively. So, at this point before any new algorithm is implemented, best way to test is to verify the experiments I do improves the quality for most of the samples or not. One would like to compare PSNR, as it's hard compare each frame visually. http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-April/193067.html (for better results, original sample should be 60fps, subsampled to 30) for visual testing, I used to transcode interpolate sample to images and compared them to original ones. Thanks for testing. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
