On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 12:58:20AM -0500, Matto Marjanovic wrote:
>
> Romildo: 544x304 is a very strange framesize. You say it should
> have roughly a 4:3 display aspect ratio? Hmm... then it seems like
> it has roughly a 3:4 pixel aspect ratio. Not a common SAR.
This movie has been ripped
Hiya,
I think you and Romildo are suffering from similar problems. (And I
just got Romildo's post, too --- the re-ordering and delays on the
Sourceforge lists are really crazy these days.)
>> >I tried to use some automatic guesses from y4mscaler, but they did not
>> >do what's IMHO righ
HI!
Matto Marjanovic wrote:
>Sorry to reply on the list, but your host ist blacklisted, so I cannot
>send email to you.
(This message is meant for *me*, right? Lots of people on this list,
and quite a few even involved in this thread.
Right. ;-)
Who/what blacklisted my host? We've been re
HI!
Matto Marjanovic wrote:
>Sorry to reply on the list, but your host ist blacklisted, so I cannot
>send email to you.
(This message is meant for *me*, right? Lots of people on this list,
and quite a few even involved in this thread.
Right. ;-)
Who/what blacklisted my host? We've been re
> (Hmm... I wonder if there is something beneficial to the cubic-esque gradual
> taper, versus blurring/"noise-reduction" via lowering the cutoff frequency
> of an ideally sharp low-pass filter Just musing to myself.)
In terms of visual appeal, that's probably an empirical question. But
>From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Thomas_B=F6rkel?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:06:59 +0100
>
>HI!
>
>Sorry to reply on the list, but your host ist blacklisted, so I cannot
>send email to you.
(This message is meant for *me*, right? Lots of people on this list,
and quite a few ev
HI!
Sorry to reply on the list, but your host ist blacklisted, so I cannot
send email to you.
I tried to use some automatic guesses from y4mscaler, but they did not
do what's IMHO right.
Example:
I have an NTSC AVI with 640x352 16:9. I want to transcode it to MPEG2
NTSC 4:3 (720x480).
According
>> > The sinc* kernels are very bad at removing noise. IMHO, the
>> > cubic* kernels are better for this job...
I'm guessing that the cause behind Nicholas' HO is that the cubic kernels
remove a lot of the *lower* frequency content --- the taper of such filters
in frequency space is very grad
...
>>y4mscaler -S option=sinc:8 ...
>>
>> will perform very high quality scaling and I think the artifacts
>> will disappear.
>
>The sinc* kernels are very bad at removing noise. IMHO, the
>cubic* kernels are better for this job...
A factor to consider (for why the sharp
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > What about yuvmedianfilter? Is it a spatial lowpass filter?
>
> It's a nonlinear spatial filter that generally gives an overall
> lowpass effect. Ideally it removes noise without attenuating high
> signal frequencies (thus preserving edges), but
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Nicolas Boos wrote:
> > That's what yuvdenoise is for :)
>
> For "big" noise only... :-)
As in "VHS" ;)
> Yes, but a _clean_ source is rare... If source is noisy (even a
DV (from miniDV or Digital8) is very clean. DVDs are clean, at least
for
> > But it would be nice to have a spatial lowpass filter in the
> > toolbox also to reduce noise that way.
>
> What about yuvmedianfilter? Is it a spatial lowpass filter?
It's a nonlinear spatial filter that generally gives an overall
lowpass effect. Ideally it removes noise without attenuati
Le Thu, 22 Jan 2004 13:06:13 -0800 (PST)
"Steven M. Schultz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> écrivait :
> > The sinc* kernels are very bad at removing noise. IMHO, the
> > cubic* kernels are better for this job...
>
> That's what yuvdenoise is for :)
For "big" noise only... :-)
> For clean sour
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 05:30:55PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> But it would be nice to have a spatial lowpass filter in the
> toolbox also to reduce noise that way.
What about yuvmedianfilter? Is it a spatial lowpass filter?
---
The
> > The sinc* kernels are very bad at removing noise. IMHO, the
> > cubic* kernels are better for this job...
>
> That's what yuvdenoise is for :)
Well, sort of. It removes noise temporally. But it would be nice to
have a spatial lowpass filter in the toolbox also to reduce noise that
wa
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Nicolas Boos wrote:
> The sinc* kernels are very bad at removing noise. IMHO, the
> cubic* kernels are better for this job...
That's what yuvdenoise is for :)
For clean sources the sinc kernels are better at preserving
detail (it's an open question h
Le Thu, 22 Jan 2004 10:21:41 -0800 (PST)
"Steven M. Schultz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> écrivait :
Hello Steven,
[...]
> "If I use -q 2 or -q 3, I get pulsating (every second or so) block
> artifacts in the background, which I get not with -q 4."
>
> I wonder if those artifacts are also due to t
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Thomas Börkel wrote:
> > "If I use -q 2 or -q 3, I get pulsating (every second or so) block
> > artifacts in the background, which I get not with -q 4."
> I tried without scaling and still have the artifacts. Maybe it's the
> source material.
That mig
HI!
Steven M. Schultz wrote:
I can see light vertical stripes in bright scenes in my encoded result.
I seem to recall transcode's -Z scaling causing problems for someone
else in the past.
A (much) better way to perform scaling is to use 'y4mscaler'. You can
find y4mscaler
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Thomas Börkel wrote:
> Bernhard Praschinger wrote:
> >
> >>I can see light vertical stripes in bright scenes in my encoded result.
> >
> > How large is the stripe ?
> > Do you scale (guessed from the -Z option) the picture ?
> > If yes does it also happen when
HI!
Bernhard Praschinger wrote:
Hallo
I can see light vertical stripes in bright scenes in my encoded result.
I can't see them in the original AVI (Xvid).
How large ist the stripe ?
Do you scale (guessed from the -Z option) the picture ?
If yest does it also happen when you don't scale it ?
That
Hallo
> I can see light vertical stripes in bright scenes in my encoded result.
> I can't see them in the original AVI (Xvid).
How large ist the stripe ?
Do you scale (guessed from the -Z option) the picture ?
If yest does it also happen when you don't scale it ?
That it would be from scaling.
22 matches
Mail list logo
