Xenocyde wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:

Rife v4.20 has been released. I didn't do a large amount of testing but I did check the few remaining artefacts I know of and there doesn't seem to be a clear  difference to v4.15/v4.18 on my system.

I can see a slight improvement for some interference pattern artifacts, but 4.20 introduces other artifacts especially on the edges of the video in fast moving scenes.

Yes I saw those too after I wrote my original message and went back to 4.18 smile

Rife v4.20 has been released. I didn't do a large amount of testing but I did check the few remaining artefacts I know of and there doesn't seem to be a clear  difference to v4.15/v4.18 on my system.

Update: Apparently v4.20 is great when using 16x interpolation with Anime. I would be interested to hear if that is helpful for anyone.

Blackfyre wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:

How are you using FSRCNNX because by default because it doesn't work unless there's at least 2x scaling required. Is it listed your in your mpv page 2 stats?

1080p to 4K content, such as Arcane (Netflix) when testing RIFE versions or when watching old content. Some old favourites like Everybody Loves Raymond, Friends, etc are all not 4K content too.

Yep that makes sense. I frigged the code so that it works on everything lol. It didn't make any difference to the normal stuff I was watching and a decent high end Sony TV from the last 7 years upscales DVDs and other low rez stuff better than any PC upscaler I've tried. But recently other TV manufacturers are catching up.


Blackfyre wrote:

Otherwise at 4K, mpv will automatically use the internal scaler, for example I have mine set to ewa_lanczos in the config, which btw:

I just use the High Quality profile default which is lanczossharp.

Blackfyre wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:

As I said before, machine generated scores doesn't guarantee the best looking picture because human perception and preference isn't objective. The other thing I said is that much of this is designed specifically for Anime and that definitely applies to ArtCNN. So hopefully you are an Anime watcher smile

Also don't forget there are different levels to it, for example I would never use strongest FSRCNNX because it would introduce too much sharpness for non-Anime. However, the one I do use, is always very helpful in improving the sharpness just a little a bit because I have the TV sharpness set to 0 on the LG C2.

TV sharpness is much worse than these AI shaders btw, so actually using the shaders as an alternative and toning down the TV ones definitely helps.

In most cases though, I imagine people here use monitors, which automatically have sharpness set to 0.

It also wouldn't make sense to use these upscalers on a 27" or 32" 4K monitor, as again like @dawkinscm says, it would look too sharp.

However, watching on a 42" screen, and I have been using 42" and 43" screens for almost a decade now, I started using FSRCNNX in its very early days and have not looked back, it is great.

So, a lot of factors play a role, no harm in testing and seeing what you prefer.

For reference, I use FSRCNNX_x2_8-0-4-1.glsl, which is the 8- and it's very low sharpness compared to the 16- and 32-.

How are you using FSRCNNX because by default because it doesn't work unless there's at least 2x scaling required. Is it listed your in your mpv page 2 stats?

flowreen91 wrote:
Blackfyre wrote:

You can read more about them on their pages. But also, if you want an article explaining them, as well as better shaders that are more demanding which I cannot run with an RTX 3090 while using RIFE, have a read through this: https://artoriuz.github.io/blog/mpv_upscaling.html

I tried to download ArtCNN since it says here that it beats FSRCNNX:
https://www.svp-team.com/forum/viewtopi … 264#p84264

As I said before, machine generated scores doesn't guarantee the best looking picture because human perception and preference isn't objective. The other thing I said is that much of this is designed specifically for Anime and that definitely applies to ArtCNN. So hopefully you are an Anime watcher smile

Xenocyde wrote:

I just had SVP trigger in "ignore HFR sources," but I'm not really sure why this happened. I'm watching S10 of the new Doctor Who series and all episodes appear to be encoded at 25 fps according to MPV. However, starting with Episode 6, SVP is triggering the ignore HFR sources profile after saying it is playing at 50 fps. How does SVP identify some videos as HFR and some as non-HFR if all are 25 fps? Also, if I raise the video frame rate threshold from 47 to 60 on the ignore HFR sources profile, the RIFE profile gets triggered with fixed 60 fps, but some videos exhibit strange microstuttering as if they are not truly running at 60 fps, probably because of the threshold conversion. Any way to fix this?

I've seen it do that a few times, but I usually ignore it because it only triggers on stuff I normally wouldn't watch with SVP. But if you regularly watch 4K with SVP then I see how it could be a problem.

donnieyeen wrote:

Did anybody try to manually update the TRT libraries to v15.1: latest TensorRT library? Any benefits over the standard TRT install from SVP?

Don't upgrade. Both myself (twice) and @Chainik have already explained why. The next version will hopefully be fixed.

flowreen91 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:

Nowadays I mostly use in-built scalers.

I found this link with upscaler examples really useful:
https://github.com/LitCastVlog/Plex-GLSL-Shaders

the ultimate goal is to improve visual quality, so we will always try to pick the combination that makes it look better overall
can u please explain which in-built scalers combination u use so we can try that too?
i preffer to set max visual quality + resize down until GPU stops dieing, than watch pure image native 24 fps. xD

I've found that the key to the best picture quality is basic picture calibration. Get the brightness, contrast, saturation and gamma right and 90% of the work is done. You need a calibration disc like Spears & Munsil for this. Like @Blackfyre, my MPV config has evolved over time and is now much simpler. MPV has been around for years and its defaults are set after dev testing, discussion and years of user feedback, some of which I have read.

I set SVP downscale to Bilinear to remove any obvious sharpening done by SVP. Lanczos is a great default but even with the mildest MPV scaling algorithm I sometimes see bad effects like ringing when used with SVP sharpening. This is NOT a problem with SVP, just a consequence of double sharpening so I want full control over sharpening post downscale.

I use Lanczossharp which is the default scaler. For movies on a large screen it's not actually that sharp, but it might be the most natural of the sharp scalers. For additional sharpening I use Contrast Adaptive Sharpening because it gives more fine tune control. But you can get a similar affect with a lot less hassle using the Adaptive Sharpening shader and others. Maybe also SSIMDownscaler.

oriento wrote:

New version
4.19 (Add SportsSlomo) - 2024.07.12

Thanks. Not sure how to actually use SportsSlomo. But it is clearly worse than v4.15/4.18 and maybe even worse than v4.9.

Blackfyre wrote:
Xenocyde wrote:

What are these for exactly?

Scaling methodology.

Dithering methodology.

The shaders at the bottom (which have to be downloaded and added into a shaders folder separately) improve quality. FSRCNNX is an upscaler, while KrigBilateral is a chroma upscaler, SSimDownscaler is for downsampling.

You can read more about them on their pages. But also, if you want an article explaining them, as well as better shaders that are more demanding which I cannot run with an RTX 3090 while using RIFE, have a read through this: https://artoriuz.github.io/blog/mpv_upscaling.html

First here's the appology I owe you. I must have been reading with old, assuming eyes smile

As for the shaders, just like Rife, a lot of this applies to Anime and results are based on machine generated scores. I've had almost every shader in my config at one point or another including the 3 above. Krig is technically it is better than default but visually speaking the difference myself and others have found is negligible. Since I read that it can generate also errors I stopped using it.  SSSimDownscaler might be great for Anime but when used with video content it's too sharp even for me, but especially when tested with calibration tools. FSRCNNX is a GPU killer for anything above 1080p. I've been using it to upscale low res poor quality content but i recently removed it because like the other AI based upscalers it made little visual difference. That's why I initially said that it's personal taste and machine generated scores.

Nowadays I mostly use in-built scalers.

Blackfyre wrote:

[
I'll post the latest config here as a quote:

ontop
fullscreen=yes
d3d11-exclusive-fs=yes

volume=100
volume-max=100

vo=gpu-next
gpu-api=d3d11
hwdec=auto-copy
hwdec-codecs=all
gpu-context=d3d11

hdr-compute-peak=yes
tone-mapping=bt.2446a
target-colorspace-hint=yes

scale=ewa_lanczos
cscale=ewa_lanczos
dscale=ewa_lanczos
tscale=ewa_lanczos

dither-depth=10
dither=error-diffusion
error-diffusion=burkes

glsl-shader="C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\Roaming\mpv\Shaders\FSRCNNX_x2_8-0-4-1.glsl"
glsl-shader="C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\Roaming\mpv\Shaders\KrigBilateral.glsl"
glsl-shader="C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\Roaming\mpv\Shaders\SSimDownscaler.glsl"

To be fair this is a very much cleaned up version. I'm curious if this different to the one I commented on because if it isn't then I owe you an apology smile

On this cleaned up version, you don't need  hwdecs-copy=all and you are not using tscale. On my setup, Error-diffussion in general isn't required for gpu-next coz Ordered works as well or better and costs almost zero resources. Again on my system, if error-diffusion is used then Burkes is worse than Floyd. After that the shaders are personal preference.

Good job big_smile

Blackfyre wrote:

For anyone interested, this is my mpv config now - you can scroll up and down in the code below to see the full config:

ontop 

dither=error-diffusion 
error-diffusion=burkes 

Thanks for this. There's nothing in your config that makes a difference for SVP and we've already had the discussion about config lines that essentially do nothing or are even contradictory. But if you are happy with the picture then I suppose it doesn't matter big_smile However I am interested in the error-diffusion you chose so I will try that out. Thanks smile

Xenocyde wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:
Chainik wrote:

dawkinscm
> One minute you are saying that I'm seeing garbage frames with IC.

you said you have "very sharp cut" with MVs, while it's not that sharp with IC
meaning you saw frame repeating with MVs and some kind of "soft" mixing with IC
dunno how I supposed to understand this in opposite way

I was going to say that this was probably a language misunderstanding but I felt you might be insulted by me saying that. But you still don't understand so that's clearly the issue. The key words "sharp" and  "jarring" used together like this is always bad. SVP and NVOF have "jarring" cuts means they have bad scene cuts.

I think what Chainik is trying to say is it seems counterintuitive to have sharp and jarring cuts with "garbage" AI blended scenes on SPV and NVOF, while IC has no sharp and jarring cuts with no "garbage" blending.

Except he regularly made jokes about me "preferring" garbage AI frames while I was using IC. But ironically, it was SVP and NVOF that had the garbage frames, not IC. Anyway that's in the past, let's move forward.

Chainik wrote:

dawkinscm
> One minute you are saying that I'm seeing garbage frames with IC.

you said you have "very sharp cut" with MVs, while it's not that sharp with IC
meaning you saw frame repeating with MVs and some kind of "soft" mixing with IC
dunno how I supposed to understand this in opposite way

I was going to say that this was probably a language misunderstanding but I felt you might be insulted by me saying that. But you still don't understand so that's clearly the issue. The key words "sharp" and  "jarring" used together like this is always bad. SVP and NVOF have "jarring" cuts means they have bad scene cuts.

Chainik wrote:

> Is there anything we can do to increase NVOF and SVP algorithms strength

yep
smooth.scene.limits.scene
smooth.scene.limits.blocks

the bad thing is that values that work good with resizing to 720p doesn't seems to work with 1080p and 4K

What are the values that work well with 1080p and 4K? That could be of use to many of us on here.

Chainik wrote:

> IC is properly processing that scene.

with a threshold value <=15
making a lot of false SC detections in other scenes

dawkinscm
> The only "garbage" Rife frames are with SVOP and NVOF which explains why I didn't like what I saw.

but you said the opposite thing - "With both NVOF and SVP this is a very sharp and jarring cut" big_smile

When something is "jarring" it is bad which is why "I didn't like what i saw". I can't even begin to understand where you are coming from when what you are saying is contrary to what I have said, but more importantly it is also contrary to what we are seeing. One minute you are saying that I'm seeing garbage frames with IC. Then when it's clear that myself and others are not seeing the same thing, now you are saying something else.

So let's just get back to the point I have been making since the start. There is an issue with SVP and NVOF and @flowreen91 has kindly demonstrated it. We all want SVP to be better so if it can be fixed then great. If not then we will continue to use IC.

flowreen91 wrote:
Chainik wrote:

flowreen91
> When trying to transcode ... to see the difference between scene changes

Hint: press '.' key in mpv to step frame by frame. Or "Ctrl+right" in MPC-HC.

By spamming '.' in following example we can see that the cape scene frames are correctly repeated only for the Image comparison algorithm:

SVP motion vectors:
https://gyazo.com/e72e6ff3a090edd396057d0b26eee3f7
NVOF motion vectors:
https://gyazo.com/1b5a7afb1ceabf2ecd0f4a9c6b250de8
Image comparison:
https://gyazo.com/050c30df626410bde53291b9d8c47f76

Is there anything we can do to increase NVOF and SVP algorithms strength in order for them to correctly detect it and not interpolate that cape scene change?

Thank you! Watching on a large screen I could see the difference but I didn't know why until @Chainik suggested frame-step and this is exactly what I saw so I'm glad you were able to reproduce it here. IC is properly processing that scene. The only "garbage" Rife frames are with SVOP and NVOF which explains why I didn't like what I saw.

To summarise my previous comments: I did not see the Rife "garbage" frame shown in Rife.jpg for IC but I am seeing it for SVP and NVOF.

Chainik wrote:

dawkinscm
> He says he sees Rife.jpg with IC

This isn't what I'm saying.
I'm saying you'll see either
1. repeated frame 1 - when SC detected + "Repeat frame", regardless of the method used (IC or MVs)
2. blended frame 1 and frame 2 - when SC detected + "Blend adjacent frames",  regardless of the method used (IC or MVs)
3. some garbage mixed by RIFE - when SC missed, regardless of the method used (IC or MVs)

Thanks. This makes things clearer so here is what I am seeing:

For Image Comparison I see point 1 and point 2 for "repeated frames" and "blend adjacent frame" respectively.
For SVP and NVOF and disabled I see point 3.

Drakko01 wrote:
dawkinscm wrote:
Chainik wrote:

it's clearly a scene change and SVP do everything right - see f1.jpg before SC and f2.jpg after SC

> what you call "garbage" might simply the AI doing it's job1

see attached rife.jpg
for the 3rd time - if you OK with this - then OK, "SC = disabled" is right for you
and I'll continue thinking that proper SC detection is a must for every frame interpolation algorithm

So I just checked I do get the same before and after frames as shown in f1.jpg and f2.jpg, but for IC.  When I use either SVP or NVOF SC, I get the same issue as shown in Rife.JPG. It would be interesting to see what others are seeing here because I checked and rechecked using SVP SC to be sure,  so something strange is happening here. This might explain why I didn't like the look of what I see when using SVP SC.

For me the frame between F1 and F2 are much better that the rife.jpg and all methods look almost the same.

They do all look almost identical. But the issue is that I am seeing the opposite to @Chainik. I see f1 and f2 with IC and Rife.jpg with SVP and NFOF. He says he sees Rife.jpg with IC.

Chainik wrote:

it's clearly a scene change and SVP do everything right - see f1.jpg before SC and f2.jpg after SC

> what you call "garbage" might simply the AI doing it's job1

see attached rife.jpg
for the 3rd time - if you OK with this - then OK, "SC = disabled" is right for you
and I'll continue thinking that proper SC detection is a must for every frame interpolation algorithm

So I just checked I do get the same before and after frames as shown in f1.jpg and f2.jpg, but for IC.  When I use either SVP or NVOF SC, I get the same issue as shown in Rife.JPG. It would be interesting to see what others are seeing here because I checked and rechecked using SVP SC to be sure,  so something strange is happening here. This might explain why I didn't like the look of what I see when using SVP SC.

Chainik wrote:

> But an example of why IC is slightly better is in Dr Strange 2 where he throws his cloak to catch the girl. At the point she is caught the scene changes to show her being carried back.

what is the timecode?

He throws the cloak at 9:32 which catches her at 9:33 then the scene change happens. It's a sharp cut but I never noticed it before until I used SVP and NVOF.

Chainik wrote:

there's no way to "over-react"
if it see the SC it repeats the frame before SC or blends two frames
if it miss the SC then you'll see something mixed by RIFE -> which is your case with IC
that's it

But it's not missing it is it?. Wouldn't there be a clear difference between IC and disabled if it was?. But there is a difference between all 3 SC algorithms and disabled. It's just that whatever IC is doing while still there, is less jarring.  But even if you are correct then all that means is that what you call "garbage" might simply the AI doing it's job. Isn't that a good thing too?

Chainik wrote:

> At the point she is caught the scene changes to show her being carried back. With both NVOF and SVP this is a very sharp and jarring cut. With IC there's still an issue but it's less jarring and looks more natural.

So MVs see the scene change while IC doesn't, and still it's "better". OK then big_smile

All 3 "see the scene change" but two of them makes the scene change look like a jump cut. There's a difference between reacting to the scene change and over-reacting to it. We are grateful for SVP and so we are only trying to help you make SVP even better. But in this particular instance you seem determined to not even try to understand what we are saying.

Chainik wrote:
Drakko01 wrote:
Blackfyre wrote:

Can you provide the timestamp? I have that in high quality and I can test tomorrow.

3.06 and 3.16 the ribbons of the creature , maybe I misinterpreted and its something else.Thanks for taking the time.

---

smooth.scene.limits.scene = 8000;

will do the trick for those scenes
---
updated defaults in svpflow libs, ver. 273-1

With this latest update, all 3 SC algorithms are produce very similar results. But an example of why IC is slightly better is in Dr Strange 2 where he throws his cloak to catch the girl. At the point she is caught the scene changes to show her being carried back. With both NVOF and SVP this is a very sharp and jarring cut. With IC there's still an issue but it's less jarring and looks more natural.