You are not logged in. Please login or register.
SmoothVideo Project → Using SVP → About Artifact Removal
The setting in SVP to remove artifacts seems to decrease fluidity to prevent artifacts.
Would it be effective to instead process the output to remove or process artifacts? Kind of like an "anti-ringing" filter after upscaling.
... and the most efficient way to "process artifacts" is to mask them with the source frame
and that's what it's currently doing?
guess why it decreases fluidity 
Yeah. Thing is, that method removes fluidity in places where it shouldn't, to the point where I keep that option disabled.
Perhaps there would be another method that at least improves the result without sacrificing fluidity?
Or perhaps it's an issue with the current method that it removes fluidity in places that have very little visible artifacts.
"Atrifact masking" is a very straightforward method - that area is "bad" - lets mask it!
21th and 23th shaders use more intelligent ("cover / uncover") masking.
21th and 23th shaders?
Mystery
THe "Complicated" shader does make artifacts more bearable, and the overall video considerably sharper.
However, with "Complicated", I'm also getting lags when CPU usage is only ~70%. Why is that? That's the reason why I had been holding off from using it.
I always found that Complicated introduced more and worse artifacts than standard...
Or are you saying that Complicated + Artifacts masking is less artifact-ridden than Standard + Artifact masking?
or u can use lumasharpen 1.5.0 (madvr isnt updated it yet)
http://pastebin.com/rxDjqmGg
I always found that Complicated introduced more and worse artifacts than standard...
After watching it for a while, there are places where I'm seeing more artifacts, yet in the places with the worst artifacts, it's better.
So, it seems artifacts are simply being generated differently. Maybe "more" of "lesser" artifacts.
LumaSharpen, is that the same thing that was introduced into madVR recently?
After trying it for a while, Complicated "might" add a few subtle artifacts, BUT
1. the worst artifacts are better
2. the overall image is sharper and better looking
For these 2 reasons, it's worth using Complicated even though it might add a few subtle artifacts.
Try it yourself, comparing Standard and Complicated, on these 2 videos that have serious artifacts. With standard, I preferred to disable SVP altogether, but with Complicated, I can stand it and keep SVP running.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyS9HeCgJL8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xF3MC8PWgJE
I'm actually getting pretty good results even in these worst cases with Complicated and noise reduction at Weak. I might try that out for a while.
Well one thing I find complicated worse for is for thin line-like objects. With complicated, it tried to interpolate them with more detail but pretty much always failed, while standard interpolated them much-less so; cross-hairs in first-person games like Minecraft are a great example of this.
In general, I also find that the artifacting seems worse at lower resolutions - perhaps this is because objects that are thinner in terms of pixel resolution are more common?
THe "Complicated" shader does make artifacts more bearable, and the overall video considerably sharper.
However, with "Complicated", I'm also getting lags when CPU usage is only ~70%. Why is that? That's the reason why I had been holding off from using it.
I had a same problem too, and I resolved it.
The method of resolving is modify threads of CPU.
Right click SVP's windows bar, and give more threads to SVP.
Even I have a 4790K, SVP use only 70%, so when I change the value, CPU usage is up to 100% and remove lags.
It is 19 threads are adapt to me, Giving 30 threads sometime occur error.
So, choose appropriate value for your CPU. Thank you~
and sorry for lack of English
I had a same problem too, and I resolved it.
The method of resolving is modify threads of CPU.
Right click SVP's windows bar, and give more threads to SVP.
Oh, that issue. Another trick to solve it is to just disable GPU acceleration in SVP, but this will obviously give worse performance unless you have quite the fast CPU.
Oh, that issue. Another trick to solve it is to just disable GPU acceleration in SVP, but this will obviously give worse performance unless you have quite the fast CPU.
I have a fast CPU. It may be 2-year-old but this quad-core i7 is twice faster than brand new laptops. But even then, disabling GPU acceleration will DRASTICALLY decrease performance. SVP needs to lower all its settings to run on CPU-only, because the CPU just doesn't compare to a GPU when it comes to computing millions of pixels at once.
I had the same concerns about CPU load when disabling GPU assistance. I was like 'why would anyone do that?' Well, I wanted to test the pixel scale options (as I recall) and for whatever reason I had to disable GPU to do so (see attached AviSynth script excerpt I use for clarity). And guess what..CPU utilization went from 49% in a taxing scene to 55% in the same scene. I liked the results so I left it set to "0". If I really need CPU I can reset it. I recall noting in a discussion regarding GPU assistance that it didn't really off-load the CPU all that much. YMMV 
global super_params="{pel:2,scale:{up:2,down:4},gpu:0,full:true,rc:true"
Edit: I am apprehensive about posting this (I like to keep a low profile and only post when I'm 'pretty sure' of the facts) but after retesting it 3 times w/wo GPU assistance I note that GPU utilization drops from 33% to ~31/32% when disabling GPU (HD-7850) and the actual peak CPU (i7-3770 @3.40GHz) utilization throughout the 60 second video was ~66% with GPU enabled and ~60% without GPU enabled. It appears that the load pattern shifts shape a fair bit and the peak moved 5 seconds or so in the video stream when changing to/from GPU enabled. I don't think absolute numbers are that important here - it's the relative values that tell the story with all else being equal (such as it was). I'm going back to lurking now.
Numbers don't lie. Here are CPU utilization screenshots with with GPU enabled and disabled.
Intel quad-core i7 with Radeon HD 7670M
CPU.jpg 19.73 kb, 663 downloads since 2015-06-11
GPU.jpg 20.49 kb, 671 downloads since 2015-06-11
I've definitely noticed that in some videos, some small noise gets amplified with Complicated. Setting Artifacts Masking anything above Weak, however, considerably decreases smoothness. I've seen some terrible unsmooth effect when combining Complicated with Average artifact removal, whereas it plays fine Weak.
Overall, Complicated + Weak artifact removal is still what works best.
Here are CPU utilization screenshots with with GPU enabled and disabled.
Protip: for images like this, PNG is both smaller and higher quality.
Obviously the images are small enough that this isn't an issue, but for future reference this would be something to keep in mind, especially for larger things.
IOverall, Complicated + Weak artifact removal is still what works best.
Ok, this is what I was trying to establish earlier when I was asking about complicated + artifact masking.
When using InterFrame, I can set the Complicated algorithm, but how can I tweak it to use Weak noise reduction?
Is it using the right "high" settings for all other options?
SmoothVideo Project → Using SVP → About Artifact Removal
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.