[FFmpeg-devel] [GSoC] Motion Interpolation

Robert Kr├╝ger krueger at lesspain.software
Fri Aug 19 17:28:55 EEST 2016


On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 8/19/16, Davinder Singh <ds.mudhar at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 3:27 AM Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 8/18/16, Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On 8/18/16, Davinder Singh <ds.mudhar at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:52 PM Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> [...]
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> i tried to modify EPZS. i removed the early termination threshold
> which
> >> >> skip some predictors :-/
> >> >> new score:
> >> >> $ tiny_psnr 60_source_2.yuv 60_bbb.yuv
> >> >> stddev: 1.02 PSNR: 47.94 MAXDIFF: 186 bytes:476928000/474163200
> >> >>
> >> >> original epzs:
> >> >> $ tiny_psnr 60_source_2.yuv 60_bbb.yuv
> >> >> stddev: 1.07 PSNR: 47.51 MAXDIFF: 186 bytes:476928000/474163200
> >> >>
> >> >> epzs uses small diamond pattern. a new pattern could also help.
> >> >>
> >> >> Please post patch like last time.
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> latest patch attached.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > UMH ME is still somehow buggy.
> >> >
> >> > EPZS seems good, great work!
> >>
> >
> > what epzs did that i couldn't be able to do with umh is, it fixed lot of
> > artifacts that require bigger search window. if i increase search param
> > with umh it increase the artifacts. same happen with esa.
> > i guess umh uses less predictors but a better search pattern. if we
> combine
> > both epzs and uhm, it should increase the quality further.
> >
> >
> >> Actually after second look EPZS is not much better than UMH here.
> >>
>
> 720p parkjoy sample looks fine with EPZS it seems.
>
> >
> > please give me link to the video that you tested.
>
> http://samples.ffmpeg.org/benchmark/testsuite1/matrixbench_mpeg2.mpg
>
> Too much dark scenes.
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>

Impressive results, great job!

I just tried  minterpolate=fps=250:mc_mode=aobmc:me=epzs and did have some
artefacts in one of my slowmo samples but overall the quality is very, very
nice! If you're interested in more samples or in more testing, let me know.

Is the command line I used the one best for reducing artefacts or are there
options known to be better in terms of artefact reduction?


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list