On 01/21/2021 09:04 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 2:34 PM Mark Filipak (ffmpeg) <markfili...@bog.us>
wrote:
On 01/21/2021 07:54 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 1:51 PM Mark Filipak (ffmpeg) <
markfili...@bog.us>
wrote:
On 01/21/2021 07:31 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:51 PM Mark Filipak (ffmpeg) <
markfili...@bog.us>
wrote:
On 01/20/2021 04:50 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:45 PM Mark Filipak (ffmpeg) <
markfili...@bog.us>
wrote:
On 01/20/2021 06:17 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
Motion compensation does not work that way.
Thank you, Paul. Yes, I knew that. I'm not seeking motion
compensation.
Kindly reread my filter
features and suggest what comes closest. What I seek simply works on
pixels. I'm relying on your
experience (and perhaps the experiences of others here).
Have you tried nnedi or estdif filters? Both are intra only
deinterlacers.
Thank you for the guidance. I'm trying estdif first because it seems
simpler, but it doesn't do the
good thing. It does decomb very effectively, but it does it by
aligning
(shifting) the edges in
field'2' to the edges in field'1' (which are not shifted). Aligning
with
field'1' produces judder
(or in my case, doesn't eliminate judder). What I want it to do is
align
both field'1' edges and
field'2' edges to the median (i.e. half way between the input's
edges).
I
do realize that such a
method would introduce combing along the edges of the frame, but
that's
okay.
Here's the command I used to transcode 24FPS to 60FPS:
ffmpeg -i 24[1][2].mkv -map 0 -filter_complex "telecine=pattern=5,
split[1][2],
[1]select=not(eq(mod(n\,5)\,2))[3], [2]select=eq(mod(n\,5)\,2),
estdif=mode=frame[4],
[3][4]interleave" -codec:v libx265 -x265-params "crf=16:qcomp=0.60"
-codec:a copy -codec:s copy
24[1][2]-to-60[1][1][estdif=mode=frame(1~2)][2][2].mkv
I'll try nnedi. Perhaps I can figure it out.
Do not even try.
Mentioned filters work only with interlaced frames, while your use case
is
completely invalid and frowned upon.
I deeply regret replying to this thread.
I did get nnedi to work but with similar results to estdif.
Kindly educate me: What do you mean by "interlaced frames"? Aren't all
frames that come out of the
decoder and into the filter chain interlaced?
Why do you say that my use case is invalid? telecine=pattern=5 works
very
well -- there's no judder
at all! And if, for the combed frame, I use pp=linblenddeint, it's even
better, far better than what
either the NVIDIA GPU or the TV does when fed a 24FPS source and of
course
far, far better than
telecine=pattern=23.
Please educate me. Why are my stunning results invalid?
Because you are trying to interpolate new frames using telecine filter.
I am? I apologize for not being clear...
The source is 24FPS. 'telecine=pattern=5' makes a 60FPS target with frames
0 & 1 == source frame 0,
and frames 3 & 4 == source frame 1. Target frame 2 (i.e. the target frame
in the middle) is combed
of course. What I'm trying to do is decomb it. How is that interpolating
new frames? Educate me. And
if it is interpolating new frames, what's wrong with that? -- It looks
stunning on a 60Hz TV whereas
24FPS fed to a 60Hz TV has serious judder.
You want to decomb telecined frames. But telecine already used existing
frames to create combed frames.
So you actually seek frame that is between these two fields in combed
frame, you cant create it by some nonsense tricks.
I do understand, and I do respect your opinions. May I update?
Using only minterpolate was good, and I saw what it was doing, but it was twice as fuzzy as what I
already did with the fancy split+select+modulo+interleave that you so dislike. So I tried a
combination: split before {telecine pattern 5 and minterpolate in parallel} and use the
select+modulo to pluck out only the middle minterpolate frame, to wit:
ffmpeg -i 24[1][2].mkv -map 0 -filter_complex "split[1][2], [1]telecine=pattern=5,
select=not(eq(mod(n\,5)\,2))[3], [2]minterpolate=fps=60000/1001:mi_mode=blend,
select=eq(mod(n\,5)\,0)[4], [3][4]interleave" -codec:v libx265 -x265-params "crf=16:qcomp=0.60"
-codec:a copy -codec:s copy 24[1][2]-to-60[1][1][minterpolate+select=0(1~2)][2][2].mkv
That worked for 2 or 3 sets of 5 frames, but the minterpolate-split soon fell behind. The longer the
video, the more that the minterpolate-split fell behind, further and further behind. The sample
video is only 24 seconds but by the end of it, the telecine-split and the minterpolate-split were so
out of sync that it was actually painful to watch. I have no idea why the minterpolate-split was
'running' slow. Do you?
You obviously see what I'm trying to do. Simply pp=linblenddeint'ing the combed frame works pretty
damn well -- there's only 1 combed frame in a set of 6 frames. And apparently a pp blend is the best
that can currently be done.
But how difficult would this:
BEFORE
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
AFTER
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
be? If amount of combing could be divided into (global) combing-due-to-panning and (local)
combing-due-to-object-motion, and the combing-due-to-panning was compensated first, then second, the
combing-due-to-object-motion applied, I think the result would be fantastic. It would only need to
be done between line-pairs, and only horizontally (not vertically, as in cubic). Give it a thought,
Paul. I'd write it if I knew 'C'. If you'd like a commission, I'll go for it. ...Let me know, eh?
Regards,
Mark.
Thanks again,
Mark.
Regards,
Mark.
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 2:45 AM Mark Filipak (ffmpeg) <
markfili...@bog.us>
wrote:
Hello All,
I seek a decomb filter that operates on H/2 number of line pairs:
lines
i
& i+1 (where i=0..H/2-1),
by aligning edges in the two lines at x = delta-x(edge)/2 (i.e.
the
median). The ideal filter would
differentiate overall motion due to panning versus local motion
due
to
local object motion.
Pan-combing on the left & right edges is acceptable but it would
be
a
great bonus if the filter
performed blend on those edges with the blending radius equal to
one-half
the pan-comb.
Vertical, line-pair-to-line-pair processing is not needed or
desired.
Frame-to-frame processing is not needed or desired.
I have been trying a great number of filters based on their names
and
what
is in the documentation.
The best I've found so far is pp=linblenddeint but it obviously
doesn't
align edges via the edge
median and it obviously isn't aware of pan-combing versus
object-motion-combing.
Any suggestions are very welcome. If I find this filter I will
post
a
link
to a 60FPS telecined
video that will amaze everyone -- better than anything that Cuda
can
do.
-Mark.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
