Sign In

Star Wars GOUT in HD using super resolution algorithm — Page 25

Author
Time
 (Edited)

In my opinion, the softness will help alleviate the aliasing, and reduce some of the noise.

But the question is how soft is acceptable without compromising quality.

*Edit* Never mind, those comparisons were from the Spline64 images. Still, it is important to balance sharpness and softness.

Have you been, or will you ever be?

Author
Time

I think an "harsh" version could used better to refine somehow the image with further filters, than a softer one... again, IMHO!

The ResolveR ultimate restoration workstation | [Fundamental Collection] thread | blog.spoRv.com | fan preservation forum: fanres.com |

Author
Time

I think both look good and if I had to pick one, it would be tough but would go with Laserdisc Master's based on those screenshots.  It seems like there is a bit more clarity/vibrance to the image despite the additional noise.  However, if one was better at hiding the aliasing than the other, I would easily pick that one.  DrDre, can you dial back the denoising a bit?  It might give yours the edge in that case (no pun intended).

Looking at R2 in the first screenshot, it looks like there is more detail in the rectangular lights section of his chrome head for example.

Author
Time

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:


and I miss your old avatar...

 It will come back, one year!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Andrea, I can't thank you enough. There actually was a bug in the SRV8 script, causing some of the detail reconstruction to be undone. So, the full potential of SRV8 has not yet been seen. It sadly also means I have to process the movie again... :-( 

Here are new comparisons to MagicSR for the previous frames:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127050

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127051

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127052

There are actually tiny new details to be found here and there...

Update: 

Removed another bug, so there's a little more detail.

Author
Time

Now I think I like DrDre's better ever so slightly at least in the first shot and probably in the others too.  R2's red light is more clear in the SR V8 shot and his blue stripes in the front are better defined. 

I am not sure because it is hard to compare but I think I like the grainier ones better.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

It's debatable, but especially the Tantive IV scenes, and the very grainy scenes on Tatooine benefit from slightly less grain, especially in motion, as could be seen in the last video sample. Also, the colors are brought out more.

Author
Time

The video is being processed, and I will put up video samples as soon as possible. 

Author
Time

Great! And glad you found those bugs (the worst kind are those that don't break the program, just contaminate it).

I jury-rigged a Screenshot Comparison (locally) of your two versions (SRv8 and SRv8-lessGrain) and the difference was subtle on those shots. As you concluded, that makes the less-Grain-put-back approach more generally suitable (keeping in mind those odd, noisier scenes). I hope that is the sample you're processing.  :)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Yep, that's the one. Here is a long list of screenshot comparisons for the debugged SRV8:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127093

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127094

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127095

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127096

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127097

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127098

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127100

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127102

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127103

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127105

Update:

Here are the comparisons to the simple upscales for the frames used in the MagicSR comparisons:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127115

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127116

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127118

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The differences are not as big as in the first renders (SRv4 and below I think), but there are also fewer artifacts while you can clearly see that detail is recovered (for example Vader's arm in frame 8228).

Jagged lines are also reduced in comparison to earlier attempts.

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
 (Edited)

I'm posting a single comparison with Team Blu, to highlight the differences between the two approaches. The methods chosen to enhance the film leads to a very different end result. In my humble opinion there are positives and negatives to be found in both methods, which is why they can co-exist as two different visions on what the GOUT can be.

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127122

Anyone interested in other comparisons, please send me a PM or post on this thread, 

Author
Time

Yes I agree that both can co-exist. I've tried the super resolution plugin for avisynth now just to compare, and unfortunately while it digs out detail it also makes the aliasing more visible and even the antialiasing used in our own script can't handle that. I think the super resolution plugin will work better on material without aliasing. The GOUT is really a nightmare when it comes to that.

Author
Time

Yes, unfortunatelly antialiasing and super resolution are not best friends. I did make some alterations in the SR script I use, which seems to reduce the aliasing to a certain degree. Maybe your antialiasing will work better on the sample I put up. I would be happy to share my SR script if that helps. 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Looking excellent as always! Color, contrast, and the AR seem great!

With the increase in detail, the poor quality grain field is very apparent now. The noise reduction wiped away the thick, front layer noise/grain, but it revealed the frozen and ugly grain layer underneath. Its a common thing because DVDs simply cant handle the grain field. The grain should dance and swirl around. It does slightly, but no where near it should.

Again, I feel that some of the aliasing is not as apparent as in earlier version of SR.  Progress is definitely being made!

Any progress on implementing those AA scripts others have been posting? Their enthusiasm for those techniques/scripts seem very promising.

Have you been, or will you ever be?

Author
Time

Would it be beneficial to recapture the video from a laserdisc?  In other words, would that eliminate the aliasing?  I would think so unless the laserdiscs themselves are poorly authored.  Theoretically in a perfect world, the interlacing could be removed using 3:2 pulldown if it was authored and captured properly.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The AA filters I've tested do better, but the loss in terms of detail is still apparent, so some progress, but not so much that I would use any of them at this point. I think I will now first focus on releasing a version of this that goes for maximum detail recovery, with a mild grain reduction, and leave the antialiasing for the next iteration. I never considered doing multiple iterations, but I've discovered that once you're down this path, forever will it dominate your destiny... ;-)

The laserdisc captures I've seen so far have a significantly lower resolution than the GOUT. However, I've seen some pretty promising developments on this forum with respect to laserdisc captures, so if one approaches the GOUT in terms of detail, it is certainly worth a try.

Author
Time

@DrDre

That makes sense. Its better to have more detail, and just try to ignore the aliasing as opposed to losing detail, and having less aliasing.

@thorr

LaserDisc capture is a very delicate, and tedious process to get the most quality. But the amount of time and work to get the perfect capture would not be ideal in this situation. But, it would have much less aliasing, and noise too.

I think LaserDisc Master is the guy to ask on this. I have a strange feeling that he is knowledgeable in this area :D

Have you been, or will you ever be?

Author
Time

Yes, see his thread about it.

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

I thought I remember hearing the laserdiscs for SW and ESB still have aliasing due to noise reduction pass used at the time of authoring?  And that the Japanese discs didn't have this?  I forget.  Anyways, yeah, ask "Laserdisc Master".  [job title of the year]

Author
Time
 (Edited)

jrmilt said:

I thought I remember hearing the laserdiscs for SW and ESB still have aliasing due to noise reduction pass used at the time of authoring?  And that the Japanese discs didn't have this?  I forget.  Anyways, yeah, ask "Laserdisc Master".  [job title of the year]

Aliasing is so bad with scope films on LD because said films were usually scanned flat with the same (e.g., flying spot) scanners used for other non-scope films. The choice was made to drop half the scanlines rather than do the 2:1 anamorphic stretch (like with an anamorphic lens) since doing the latter would require LD companies to use a whole different machine specifically for scope films.

Dropping half of the scanlines allowed them to use one machine for all transfers, so it was the cheap and easy route.

The vertical blur on consumer CRTs made this a non-issue for the time.

But still... Yuck!

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time

Thanks to everyone! Maybe it's time to remove that presumptuous title, chosen few years ago...

Even if GOUT used the same master of DC (and Faces) laserdisc, it has a better resolution; but ***maybe***, using different editions (read: NOT DC nor Faces), good player, and happycube software/hardware capture solution, right software techniques and filters, it is ***possible*** to get a better result than GOUT - just because the latter is not anamorphic, and its quality is quite poor in comparison to the DVD quality standards... if you have time, read this thread to know more about other laserdisc versions of Star Wars that could be interested to restore.

It could be possible to reach amazing results (thinking about original source) with good quality laserdiscs, multiple captures, PaNup and SuperResolution techniques, coupled with some cleaning filters - take a look at the comparisons in this post.

The ResolveR ultimate restoration workstation | [Fundamental Collection] thread | blog.spoRv.com | fan preservation forum: fanres.com |