Removal of NOISE and MACRO BLOCKS from HVX and DVX footage solved!!!!!!!

More HD samples and then a Person Adobe Premiere review soon...

This thing against 12db Gain is incredibly impressive. I'm puttin' the Pro plug-in through the EXTREME paces and just now checkin' out the regular footage, but it's pretty friggin' nice.
 
Can you tell us what the render time is like? What CPU speed and number of Processors does your PC have?

I guess if you can tell us how long 24 frames takes we can figure the rest out from there.


Thanks
Ben
 
bena said:
Can you tell us what the render time is like? What CPU speed and number of Processors does your PC have?

I guess if you can tell us how long 24 frames takes we can figure the rest out from there.


Thanks
Ben
Click to expand...


It's more like rendering it on the timeline. I suspect exporting should take as much time as it does to normally export.

However --

I have a Quad Core Running @ 3.4Ghz and on average clip there's about 300 frames. That takes me 2 - 3 minutes to render on the timeline.
 
I dunno, in the HD clip there was still quite a bit of blocky junk in the blacks over his shoulder. Could be a compression issue, looks decent, but far from flawless.
 
Uploading a clip now. 480(P) H.264 File using the Gamma Curve we all wish we could use on the HVX200: Cine D

Gonna take a second cause it's a 44mb file, but it's a good example of using the pre-set and the outcome.

Still have yet to form a thought on the practicality of using it for an entire project. It may depend on the severity?
 
Two Clips here. The first one is a really random clip that came from messin' around with scene file settings a month ago. First clip is the noise clip, second one is exact same clip with my newb settings applied.

+2, +2, +2, 0 -- Master Pedestal -2 -- Cine V -- www.kholi.net/noiseremoval.mov

Second one is three short clips of Cine D done naked HVX tonight just to see how this thing works. There's no before and after, it's also 853 x 480 not 1080p. File's named that way because I exported a few different things.

+2, +2, +2, 0 -- Master Pedestal -2 -- Cine D -- www.kholi.net/1080iNR.mov

RIGHT CLICK AND DOWNLOAD. DON'T DRINK MY BANDWIDTH!

There's an obvious oil paint effect going on. I'm sure there's a way to reduce it, but this is what I see first off. For starters, though, it could be promising.
 
You can do this with regular old AE 7.0 using a luma mask and the remove grain effect.... if you don't want to spend money on a plug in. I've been doing that for quite some time actually, though not much anymore.
 
The remove grain feature is amazing in AE. The advantage to AE is its customizability. It's not really a set-and-forget type of NR but I bet I can outperform any simple denoiser hands down, one shot at a time.
 
ProfessorU said:
The remove grain feature is amazing in AE. The advantage to AE is its customizability. It's not really a set-and-forget type of NR but I bet I can outperform any simple denoiser hands down, one shot at a time.
Click to expand...

If you have a look at the website there's an advanced mode where you can switch color space (RGB, etc), decide how much noise for each color, decide how much the filter does, decide highs, mids, lows and also how much sharpness for each color.

I'd say it's a lot more than simple. Again, just take alook at the site. The AE's decent, it adds a lot of motion blur when it gets too heavy.
 
Freudenberg, can you test it against Raylight MXFX for noise reduction speed and quality?
Click to expand...

Hi Barry,

I'm using RAYLIGHT to export the MXF clips into after effects. the tests where done using that program.

I'm a PC guy, like MAC but LOVE PC so everything I have is geared to the PC.

My computer is running 2.8 P4 cpu, 2 gigs of memory and a 512 GB graphics card.

All up it does slow the rendering process but thats only because of the job its doing. I bought the Neat Video plugin for After effects so I'm not sure if it will slow down the NLE for premiere pro.

As you can see with the green screen test. It does a great job of making a messy key very clean, the shadow on the right side of the footage does show a little noise but I really made sure I shot a bad piece of footage.

What I will do is try and get some time this weekend to shoot so well lit screen tests.

I will be shooting my first ever live short film on Sunday so this may slow the test down. Worse case I'll use some footage from that days shoot.

OR!!!!!!

If anyone has some noisy footage ( 4 seconds of it ) and want me to test it on that please set up a link here and ill use that in my test. Likewise Barry, if you have something you would like tested please link me to it and ill show you what can be done with just some basic modifications.

I'll keep you all posted.

Michael
 
Last edited:
Removing grain in video is certainly getting better, but I'd be careful with it. These grabs look great when they are down resed to internet size, but when you look at them full res.... it can get a bit ugly.
 
That's definitely a good point. I noticed at larger size (1080) it'll get bad but then again, you shouldn't be de-noising to the extreme either. Using it sparingly will give the best results. You OBVIOUSLY lose detail when messin' with these things.

Again, here's some footage posted: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1175220&postcount=27

HVX stuff from me. Just quick diddling tonight, will have more time tomorrow to actually go through it some more.

I was gonna try out MXFX but Neat got posted and someone actually had more footage from it. Maybe I'll try that plug-in and see what it does?
 
An interesting observation I made over this past year is that some noise reducers work better with film / RAW digital images then they do compressed images. The AE plug in is a great example of this. I get much better results when using it on Andromeda footage (if I even need to) than I do when using it on HVX footage. It is after all called "Remove Grain". The Neat image one seems like its designed more for compressed images.

There is a big difference between trying to target and eliminate big hunks of color VS single pixels, at least thats how I've observed it.

Just for the record, I do realize more "beefy" images will reduce better by default because of their data, but noise is also different looking in RAW images.
 
But have you tried MXFX? It's a new raylight product which is designed to cut image noise.
http://dvfilm.com/MXFX/index.htm

It'd be interesting to see how it compares to what you've been doing with neat, from a time and performance perspective.
Click to expand...

Haven't. So it removes up to 50% of the footage in a MXF file? nice!



Might have to buy that and check it out .........


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Removing grain in video is certainly getting better, but I'd be careful with it. These grabs look great when they are down sized to internet size, but when you look at them full res.... it can get a bit ugly.
Click to expand...

I really haven't had this problem but I have only made the tests I have shown so far. I find there is no drop in image quality from the size of the footage. It just takes a lot longer to render out.

Michael
 
Last edited:
They have a free demo, I'm just curious as to how it performs vs. Neat and seeing as you've been running tests, I figure you'd be one of the best to ask to give it a shot.
 
They have a free demo, I'm just curious as to how it performs vs. Neat and seeing as you've been running tests, I figure you'd be one of the best to ask to give it a shot.
Click to expand...

Sounds good. Ill do a side by side comparison for you Barry and see which one has the best noise reduction. and then use them both together.

Cheers

Michael Freudenberg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top