Here's a comparison with a frame from Team Blu's upscale found on this forum.
Avisynth Spline64Resize vs Team Blu
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/125656
Team Blu vs super resolution v8
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/125657
Avisynth Spline64Resize vs super resolution v8
@ Zyrother
And it has been and will be thanks to constructive critisism from forum members like yourself.
@ Laserdisc Master
Wise words my friend...
@ zee944
It's becoming tedious, but again only opinion, and nothing to back it up. You're 80% claim would mean something if you could provide some evidence. There is plenty of evidence to the contrary, and it's neither theoretical or inaccessible. I've got more faith in years of scientific research than your baseless claims. But like Laserdisc Master suggested, if you think you can do better, start a thread and prove your point, but until that time: "bachelor's wifes and maiden's children are well trained".
In any case, you're happy with your method, I'm happy with mine. Let's leave it at that. This discussion is pretty pointless anyway, since we're obviously never going to agree.
Edit:
To answer your question: sharpening refers to the process of increasing contrast in edges of objects; deblurring refers to the process of deconvolution, which corrects a defect. To say it bluntly, sharpening treats the symptoms, deblurring treats the cause. It comes as no surprise the latter is generally preferred.
Here's an interesting link from last year:
If only they would have known about sharpening and denoising. That would have saved them millions of dollars developing some inferior super resolution camera system.
O, I'm being sarcastic... :-P
@ Zyrother
Thank you! I could not agree more.
@ zee944
No it does not mean I say sharpening and denoising can achieve the same results. For your information, the super resolution algorithm uses deblurring, not sharpening. There is a difference. You could have known this if you would have taken the time to read some of the scientific literature you dismiss. Again you offer nothing more than unsubstantiated opinions, and misrepresent what I have stated. If you would have taken the time to follow the link Laserdisc Master posted, you would have seen that there is nothing magical about super resolution, and that it's performance has been validated on a large number of real video samples. However, you seem to be interested only in throwing around baseless accusations. As I said put your money where your mouth is, and offer some real evidence, rather than hearsay.
Edit:
As far as your Twin Dragons example is concerned, some details are enhanced, others are removed. Is it improved? Definitely. How does it compare to super resolution? No idea, since you're comparing apples and oranges. You can't possibly expect anyone to form an opinion based on two samples from a totally different source.
@ zee944
It's a bit ironic that it was Team Blu member You_Too who first suggested using the Spline64Resize as a benchmark for the super resolution upscale in this thread. Not that it is anywhere near the quality of their upscale, but apparently it's a reasonable enough choice for a comparison.
@ Laserdisc Master
I certainly agree combining different methods has the best chance to achieve superior results. In fact my current version of "super resolution" now uses multiple other filters to enhance the results further. One of the great things about your algorithm is that it is able to greatly enhance SD material by using custom build methodologies. I think this is very important, because I believe there's a limit to what sharpening and denoising alone can achieve. Your upscales of the LD are a good example. The enhancement is astonishing, and I'm very sure you could not have gotten that far with sharpening and denoising alone.
@ zee944
The problem is that for this methodology no sharpening has been applied. In fact in the first iterations no denoising was applied. So, yes the detail enhancement is due to super resolution. You don't need to compare a Tesla to a Ferrari to know you have a supercar. Your argument is like arguing the Tesla's performance is most likely due to the number of cylinders (update for those that don't know this: Tesla produces electric supercars). If course it is interesting to compare them, but it is in no way misleading to show a method is able to retrieve details that are not visible in the original or a simple upscale. The fact that another method may be able to also retrieve these details doesn't take away from this fact.
Now if you want to argue that super resolution has very little to offer, and that it is mostly due to sharpening and denoising, I suggest you write a scientific paper that proofs the last 20 years of scientific research is wrong. It's been scientifically proven time and time again that super resolution can retrieve details better than most other methods.
As I've stated I'm very interested in comparing super resolution to Team Blu's upscale. Maybe their upscale is better, maybe not. However, if you argue you can reproduce my results with sharpening and denoising, you should be able to back that up with a direct comparison. Otherwise your words simply ring hollow.
Edit:
You argue my comparison in my last post to the Avisynth Spline64Resize is unfair, but you forgot to mention that I also compared it to the true HD frame. This to me seems like the fairest comparison of all.
Very nice result, Laserdisc Master! It's hard to believe these come from an analogue source. No analogue noise, and a sharp frame at the same time :-).
@ zee944
Deblurring can indeed restore details that are normally not visible. In many cases however when the source is not blurry retrieving details can be difficult. Have you tried your method on the GOUT?
However the best test is to downscale a real 1080p sample to 540p, and then upscale back to 1080p.
Here's a screenshot comparison for the Star Wars blu ray. In this case the raw super resolution upscale is shown. For a true upscale some denoising and regraining would be performed, but as an example for detail reconstruction it is good enough.
Original 1080p vs super resolution v8:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/125526
Avisynth Spline64Resize vs super resolution v8:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/125527
Here's the 540p video sample:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8_LYKyZDiajV0pRbUFYeW1NM28/view?usp=sharing
I used frame 600. Why don't you try your method for a fair comparison?
@ zee944
They look much improved. There seems to have been some deblurring done among other things, but I may be mistaken. Some detail has been lost on the walls, but very impressive nonetheless. Did you develop this methodology yourself?
@ pittrek
If you can get me one of the scenes, I'll certainly give it a try :-).
@ NeverarGreat
Thanks, I'm hoping I can stop myself from more tweaking, so I can finally complete Star Wars ;-).
@ zee944
Although I certainly would like to compare super resolution to Team Blu's method or another, I simply don't have Team Blu's or another video available. So that complicates matters. Also Team Bu did a lot more to enhance the GOUT, like enhancing the colors for example. To make a fair comparison you would have to compare the results to Team Blu's upscale before the color corrections, which complicates matters further. As towne32 stated, he did provide a few screenshots for some comparisons (for which I'm very grateful). However, it's difficult to draw conclusions from those, considering the above.
We did however post examples of frames where details are recovered by super resolutions that could never have been recovered with sharpening or (temporal) denoising. Take this screenshot for example that was created with an older super resolution script:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/122740
You can clearly see details reconstructed in Tarkin's face and Vader's chest plate. This cannot be done with sharpening and denoising. The same is true for a more recent example:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124983
Again details are reconstructed in Vader's chest plate that simply are not visible in the GOUT. As a rule of thumb sharpening and denoising can only enhance details that are already visible. Details that are not visible are beyond retrieval with such methods. Super resolution uses information from multiple frames to reconstruct these details, increasing the true resolution of the frame. With sharpening and denoising details may be enhanced, but the resolution stays the same. That's not to say super resolution doesn't have it's drawbacks, but as far as detail reconstruction there is no comparison.
In any case, this thread was not started to compete with any of the other methods seen on this forum. In a sense it was inspired by them. I was just interested to see what super resolution could do with the GOUT. So far I'm pleased with the results, and if Team Blu is interested in a comparison or cooperation I'm certainly in for it. I'm hoping to get Star Wars finished soon (although the constant tweaking has delayed the release unfortunately). Then TESB is next in line. As Team Blu is also gearing up for TESB, we may see some interesting comparisons in the near future.
@ pittrek
We did use it on one of the AOTC deleted scenes. It worked really well. Here's the screemshot comparison I posted before:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124536
and the upscaled video sample:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8_LYKyZDiajUWFhcEt6aGpVSjA/view?usp=sharing
It took a little time, but here is super resolution v8. The ringing is reduced to the level of the original GOUT. The grain is also reduced, while avoiding a painted look. Here are 7 screenshot comparisons:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/125446
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/125447
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/125448
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/125449
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/125450
Colors look amazing. So much better than the washed out GOUT.
Thanks for the info. It's great to see some work has been done, and it's a nice teaser for what's to come. As much as I love Harmy's work on reconstructing the originals, nothing beats the real thing. The bluray looks digitally enhanced, even with all the color corrections. Yours just have that authentic look that no smart algorithm can reproduce. It's simply a wonder to behold...
Looking incredible! Do you plan to release the trilogy all at once, since you're making so much progress with all three?
Looking good! What source are you using for the upscale? Laserdisc? It looks much cleaner than the GOUT.
Glad to hear that! I was about to call my psychiatrist. :-P
Is it just my screen or is there a slightly pinkish tint to the stormtroopers and lights in the last screenshots? Maybe it's supposed to be this way, but I just thought I would mention it.
Thanks for the update. It's great to hear you guys are being funded. A project like this deserves to be. Since I will probably have little to contribute, I will just keep expressing my admiration, and wait in line for the eventual release... :-)
@ thorr
I tested the plugin. Sadly it gives the same result as the deinterlacing method I use. Although it is true that poor deinterlacing can result in aliasing, I don't think deinterlacing will improve material with aliasing in the source, before it was interlaced.