logo Sign In

Star Wars GOUT in HD using super resolution algorithm (* unfinished project *) — Page 48

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Anyone interested in getting the color correction GUI can send me a PM. I will then send you a link to the necessary files.

When you've downloaded the file named ColorCorrect_pkg.exe, execute the file. You will be asked to install the MATLAB runtime environment. After you have finished installing, a new executable named ColorCorrect.exe will be available. Open this file as administrator, else it will not work. 

A few words of advice on using the GUI. The GUI itself is pretty self explanatory.

The process is as follows:

1) Select a test image. A figure will open, showing the image. You will be able to crop the frame, with your cursor.

2) Select a reference image. A figure will open, showing the image. You will be able to crop the frame, with your cursor.

3) Build a color correction model. Depending on the resolution/size of the images after cropping and your hardware, this may take 0-15 minutes (15 min for a 4K image) on an Intel Core i5. A figure will open showing you the test frame as it is being matched. With each iteration it should be closer to the reference.

4) Save the color correction model for later (optional).

5) Import a color correction model (optional).

6) Import any number of images, and color correct them with a color correction model you just built or imported. The images will be saved in a newly created directory named "Corrected" with the same name as the original images. Color correcting a frame may take anywhere between 5 and 20 seconds, depending on the resolution/size of the frame, and of course your hardware.

When building a color correction model you should consider the following:

1) The model assumes the test and reference images (frames) are identical, aside from the color. In other words it's important the images are cropped in the same way (to a reasonable degree). Incorrect cropping may lead to artifacts.

2) When using a print or a low quality source as a reference, there may be color variations within the frame. For example some parts may be darker or brighter than others. If you use the full frame for building a color correction model, it will try and fail to reconcile these differences, resulting in artifacts. The best way to go, is to select a consistent part of the frame, select the same part for the reference, and then build the color correction model. 

3) Although it is in theory you could regrade an entire film, based on a single reference frame, this will probably not work in practice, because one reel may have degraded in a different way than another or one scene may have been color graded differently from another. In principle it is possible that each frame will have to be matched individually, but usually a film is graded on a scene by scene basis, so a single reference will suffice for a particular scene. 

Hope you enjoy the tool. Of course if you use the tool for your projects, any acknowledgements will be appreciated. The same is true for any comments, critisism or suggestions you may have. In that case send me a PM. 

Author
Time

Has anyone tried to upscale the Blu Ray to 4k using this technique? I'm curious how well it would work with a higher quality source. That is assuming that SRV11 isn't written specifically for the GOUT.

Author
Time

Wazzles said:

Has anyone tried to upscale the Blu Ray to 4k using this technique? I'm curious how well it would work with a higher quality source. That is assuming that SRV11 isn't written specifically for the GOUT.

 

This technique works well on the GOUT because of the extreme aliasing the transfer has. The Blu-ray has none.

There would be insignificant gain only, if any, but I didn't actually try it. Noone did yet.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Thanks for the scripts, DrDre. First off, wow, those rendering times can be really frustrating when you have to wait a few minutes for one frame!

I have played around quite some time with the v12 script. Replaced NNEDI2 with NNEDI3 at some points (not all, as some delivered worse results) and tried different QTGMC settings.

More or less subtle difference depending on the frame, but it is there:

(note that I only have the trial of Video Enhancer and for a good comparison I used it in the frames for the "untouched" script too)

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/143105

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/143111

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/143113

What do you all think?

I think I will soon look into how much the script can be sped up because I guess that the changes have increased rendering times.

Darth Id on ‘Why “Ben”?’:

And while we’re at it, we need to figure out why they kept calling Mark Hamill’s character “Luke Skywalker,” since it’s my subjective opinion that his name is actually Schnarzle Shnuzzle.  It just doesn’t make sense!

Damn you George Lucas for never explaining why they all keep calling Schnarzle “Luke”!

Damn You!!!

Author
Time

@Intruder

Looks pretty good! I can definitely see a bit of additional sharpening in the detail. Its awesome to see what others can do with the same script!

Although I think we can all agree that we have pretty much hit a wall with the GOUT here, I cant imagine more can be squeezed out of it without the use of high end professional grade equipment.

Author
Time

Intruder said:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/143105

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/143111

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/143113

What do you all think?

It is the same thing as the original, tuned slightly differently. It's a bit sharper, but artifacts are also sharper and detail-wise it's the same.

At this point, the only thing GOUT could really benefit from, is eliminating the halos without losing detail. Of course, it's next to impossible to achieve, but an interesting topic nonetheless.

Author
Time

Zyrother said:

@Intruder

Looks pretty good! I can definitely see a bit of additional sharpening in the detail. Its awesome to see what others can do with the same script!

Although I think we can all agree that we have pretty much hit a wall with the GOUT here, I cant imagine more can be squeezed out of it without the use of high end professional grade equipment.

Don't forget it was pro equipment that got us into this mess to begin with! :)

About what else can be done, there exists a transfer function (and a bunch of other non-linear shit) that turned the 35mm frames into the GOUT we all know and hate. Take a raw frame, downsample it, throw away lines to get the same aliasing as the GOUT, FFT both, get the transfer function, iFFT the transfer function, convolve with the GOUT, and you should end up getting rid of the ringing/haloing.

-G

Author
Time
 (Edited)

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Color-matching-between-two-sources/topic/18128/

JEDIT: Too slow I am. Now we did spam, great...

Darth Id on ‘Why “Ben”?’:

And while we’re at it, we need to figure out why they kept calling Mark Hamill’s character “Luke Skywalker,” since it’s my subjective opinion that his name is actually Schnarzle Shnuzzle.  It just doesn’t make sense!

Damn you George Lucas for never explaining why they all keep calling Schnarzle “Luke”!

Damn You!!!

Author
Time

g-force said:

Zyrother said:

@Intruder

Looks pretty good! I can definitely see a bit of additional sharpening in the detail. Its awesome to see what others can do with the same script!

Although I think we can all agree that we have pretty much hit a wall with the GOUT here, I cant imagine more can be squeezed out of it without the use of high end professional grade equipment.

Don't forget it was pro equipment that got us into this mess to begin with! :)

About what else can be done, there exists a transfer function (and a bunch of other non-linear shit) that turned the 35mm frames into the GOUT we all know and hate. Take a raw frame, downsample it, throw away lines to get the same aliasing as the GOUT, FFT both, get the transfer function, iFFT the transfer function, convolve with the GOUT, and you should end up getting rid of the ringing/haloing.

-G

 I think at that point it wouldn't even be remotely worth it.

Author
Time

In the end here, the original goal of determining whether Super Resolution was a viable option in up scaling the GOUT was a tremendous success. Comparing the original screenshots to the chosen V11 script is startling. 

It was a community effort and everyone did excellent work! :)

Author
Time

Zyrother said:

In the end here, the original goal of determining whether Super Resolution was a viable option in up scaling the GOUT was a tremendous success. Comparing the original screenshots to the chosen V11 script is startling. 

It was a community effort and everyone did excellent work! :)

 Amen! :-)

Author
Time

Oh I'm not arguing that it wasn't worth it, I'm just saying using a 35mm source to remove halos just kind of defeats the purpose of this project.

Author
Time

Wazzles said:

Oh I'm not arguing that it wasn't worth it, I'm just saying using a 35mm source to remove halos just kind of defeats the purpose of this project.

 I disagree potentially.  I think it is a brilliant concept if it actually works.  From my understanding it would only take one frame to figure out the math formula that could be then applied to all of the other frames that would remove the halos.

Author
Time

Yeah, DeHalo_alpha is not very effective, and kinda harmful from what I remember. I have little ambition these days to try fixing the GOUT any more.

-G

Author
Time

DeHalo_alpha, while very effective in eliminating halos, makes everything waxy. It is impressive for animation, but for live footage? I always had to pass on it eventually.

Author
Time

You guys are amazing, some of what has been done I would not have thought possible. Unfortunately though it looks like this case of GOUT is incurable, the patient is terminal.

Author
Time

Hi DrDre, just wondering if your computer is working on SRV11 currently.  Thanks!

Author
Time

I've been working on some other stuff, but SRV11 will be processing in a day or two.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

A while a ago I posted a color correction to the GOUT, based on an Technicolor IB print, that was criticized by some, who didn't believe Star Wars used to look this way, with greater contrast and blown out whites:

GOUT:

GOUT color matched to Tech IB:

I argued then that it was the poor quality of the GOUT that caused the lack of detail, but that the colors are accurate. 

Well, turns out there is a video where David Prowse original voice heard during the filming of Star Wars is ridiculed. In this video there is a clip, which shows the Tantive IV scene in it's original color pallette. Here you can see for yourself that the color correction is accurate:

The clip can be seen here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjMDavV_2Wo

Author
Time

DrDre said:

A while a ago I posted a color correction to the GOUT, based on an Technicolor IB print, that was criticized by some, who didn't believe Star Wars used to look this way, with greater contrast and blown out whites:

 

I assume it's pure irony, but one can't be sure about it these days. :)

Author
Time

There is no way that latest clip is accurate.  The storm troopers and lights are pinkish purple and the guy on the left's skin tones look like he is sun burned or something.

I think your version looks good but the blacks are just slightly too crushed.