Hi!
> From: Bernhard Praschinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > yuvfps -> yuvmedian -> yuvdenoise -> yuvscaler
> > or
> > yuvmedian -> yuvdenoise -> yuvscaler -> yuvfps
>
> I would use: ... -> yuvfps -> yuvdenoise -> yuvscaler -> ...
Agreed. You (almost always) want to give 'yuvdenoise' first chance
at the raw data.
> You usually do not need yuvmedianfilter any more.
Actually I think there is use for the medianfilter - in fact I'm
looking at working on it to implement separate thresholds for luma and
chroma as well as separate radius selection for the luma and chroma.
The logic is present so I think it's just a matter of option
processing and a small amount of extra code.
I've found The medianfilter quite useful. IF I use the medianfilter
then I do *not* use the "-N" option with mpeg2enc. The resulting
video is, to me, very good looking.
Warning: yuvmedianfilter uses about the same amount of cpu as
yuvdenoise. I found myself wishing for a 3 or 4 cpu system :)
> yuvdenoise checks the differnence between the frames, so you should have
> the needed frame rate before you change the frame rate. The scaler can
> come at laste because it introduces no noise.
Actually the scaling can introduce a little high frequency noise.
y4mscaler introduces less HF noise - using y4mscaler results in a
slightly lower average bit rate than using yuvscaler.
> > 2) Should I use the "yuvycsnoise" filter?
> No, because it only help you if you have NTSC noise. If you have a PAL
> source it won't help.
Correct. And, as I recall, yuvycsnoise was primarily useful for
capture cards with poor chroma separation. The program should not
be needed if you are dealing with DV or MJPEG data.
Cheers,
Steven Schultz
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Mjpeg-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users
