@ thorr
The problem is that the aliasing is in the source (watch the dvd and see for yourself). I'm afraid decombing is not going to help, as the video has been properly decombed. The only solution is a some super antialiasing script, but the ones I tested, destroyed to much detail (according to my tastes).
It would be interesting to compare both methods to Team Blu's Star Wars upscale. Since I don't have that one, I wonder if someone could provide some screenshots for comparison?
These screenshots show super resolution v7's strengths and weaknesses. A lot of detail is recovered (see Vader's chestplate in the last comparison for example), but the ringing around objects is enhanced also, and the aliasing is more apparent, due to the sharper edges.
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124980
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124981
It's looking really good! Are you still accepting donations?
@ Laserdisc Master
Thanks for posting the screenshot comparison. Very good cleanup! Just watched your clip on HD-TV. It looks really good. It certainly is the most photorealistic upscale you have done so far. Very good job on removing the jaggies!
@ Laserdisc Master
I'm kind of curious how MagicUp/Clean would handle frame 6167. I tried to clean it in the past, but didn't get very positive feedback. It's a really difficult frame, because of the amount of grain. Here's how it's going to look in my upscale:
Although at first I was enthousiastic about a deringing filter I implemented, it turns out it removes many details in the process, so I decided to stick to super resolution v7.
@ Laserdisc Master
Thanks a lot! I cut a few bars, because CatBus explained to me that the first 8 and last 8 pixels are not supposed to be in the frame. This leads to a 704x480 frame, displayed at 640x480, with an aspect ratio of 4:3. When upscaling 3x you get 1920x1080. So the only way to get the correct aspect ratio is to scale the 704x274 frame to 720p or 1080p. The reason I use 1920x816 is because it corresponds to an aspect ratio of 2.35:1.
For more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_analogue_blanking
Wow, just wow! I just watched the Grindhouse. I'm sorry I even mentioned I could add anything in terms of resolution. You're 35 mm preservations are now definitely at the top of my wish list. This effort is monumental.
Thanks to all your team members for making this possible!
@ Laserdisc Master
720p:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124690
1080p:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124691
Could you post frame 12342?:
@ Laserdisc Master
While I would agree an upscaled "stair effect" is undesirable, I do not agree the lines should be smooth at the near pixel level. At this level, much of the details and structure are created by subtle differences in individual pixels creating the perception of detail from a distance. The eyebrows for example are supposed to be pixelated, because the actual hairs themselves are at a subpixel level. By forcing them to be smooth at the super pixel level, they now seem unrealistically thick. The same is actually also true for the soldiers hair.
It's actually interesting to compare both methods to the simple upscale.
Avisynth Spline64Resize vs MagicUpSR5 + MagiClean2:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124619
Avisynth Spline64Resize vs super resolution v7:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/123815
While super resolution v7 simply adds detail, MagicUpSR5 & MagiClean2 alterations are less subtle, enhancing details more strongly at the super pixel level, but reducing detail at the pixel level.
The problem with removing the GOUT "grain" is that the detail at this level is also removed, and obviously not restored by adding a realistic grain plate. So I would agree it's better to have a good replacement than a bad reinterpretation, but not at the cost of what to me is more important, namely what is behind the grain.
Although I was tempted to do a cleanup (including reducing aliasing), I came to the conclusion that it was not possible for me to reduce one artifact without introducing others. I think Laserdisc Man's method is probably the best I've seen so far, so I'm not going to attempt to compete with him.
My upscale is trying to squeeze as much detail out of the GOUT as possible, while maintaining the original viewing experience. This is why for the last version of my script I put much effort in keeping the GOUT's original grain intact, while undoing any unwanted noise enhancement.
Here's the super resolution sample for the prequel deleted scene:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8_LYKyZDiajUWFhcEt6aGpVSjA/view?usp=sharing
Some of the shots in the source seem very out of focus, so there's not much that can be done about those.
@ Laserdisc Master
Although it is an amazing cleanup script, and it certainly adresses many of the issues with the GOUT in the best way I've seen so far, it does introduce a slightly cartoony look to 3PO and R2 in the video sample, and in the face of the soldier from frame 5121:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124557
Take the eye brows for example. Some of the details in the hairs are enhanced, while others are removed, making them look a bit artificial somehow. But aside from that minor critisism, great work Laserdisc Man! I think we should release a cleaned up and raw version, as you proposed :-D.
Here's a screenshot for the super resolution upscale of one of the prequel deleted scenes:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124536
The video will take a couple of hours to process, and will be available tomorrow to anyone who sends me a PM.
Hahaha, I'm using the NTSC versions for all three films.
@ Catbus
Great, thanks! I think AC3 should be fine. As you say they are universally supported.
I have a question. Do you think it might be useful to apply super resolution to the cleaned 35 mm preservation? It might be able to undo some of the degradation of the 35 mm film, once digitized and cleaned. The super resolution script I wrote is able to recover a good amount of detail from the GOUT, which has a lot of problems. From what I've seen so far, your preservation is going to be so much better.
Since it is going to be a mkv anyway, I can put in as many audio mixes as you want. So if you can get them to me, I will gladly put them in.
@ Laserdisc Master
Very impressive cleanup! In the end (after some discussion about a cleanup I did) I decided to go for a faithful representation of the GOUT, without any cleanup. However, your cleanup version certainly looks pretty good :-).
@ CatBus
Thanks for the info! I would like to get the most accurate representation of the aspect ratio. We wouldn't want any long faces... I assume this is true for the ESB and ROTJ as well?
Edit: just read the wiki, so there's my answer.
Here is the sample for the first 10 min of Star Wars, which includes the intro, title track, Tantive IV scenes, and the arrival on Tatooine. Hope you like it ;-):
Sample removed to make place for new samples.
I was planning on leaving the audio as it is. So, it will be an exact dublicate of the audio on the DVD. I think it sounds fine as well. :-)
At first I did leave the over scan, only the Infognition super resolution plugin doesn't like black borders (which the over scan is for most of the film), leading to edge artifacts. So I decided to cut it. However, even with the over scan the aspect ratio of the NTSC DVD seems wrong. The planets have an oval shape, and people have slightly elongated faces. The display aspect ratio of the DVD is 2.316:1 with the over scan. So in that case I would say the true aspect ratio should be 2.35:1 without the overscan, which would mean 1280x544 is the better choice.
I actually have a question. In preparing the GOUT Star Wars for processing I cropped the black bars, which resulted in a video with 714x274 resolution. I then cropped the left of the frame with two more pixels, because of the weird black bar in the film. So my final video is 712x274. At this point I'm using 1280x544 as the resolution for the upscale (2.35:1). However, 1280x554 is closer to the actual aspect ratio of the GOUT DVD. Then again the AR for the NTSC GOUT DVD seems a bit off (2.31/2.33:1), and definitely different from the PAL DVD. I'm now wondering what the most accurate representation is for the true aspect ratio of the film? Any thoughts?