Which HD **** would be sufficient for MadVR - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 207 Old 10-02-2013, 08:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_Slayer View Post

Didn't bump it myself

Yes, I see that now.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

assassin is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 207 Old 10-04-2013, 03:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
StinDaWg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,610
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

Why was this bumped? Do we really need to repeat this argument every month?

Apparently we do.
Seriously, give it a rest people.

I see no difference between Lanczos/Spline and Jinc at a normal viewing distance (or even closer) with moving video content.

MadVR is terribly unoptimized, my silent and passive graphics card (5450) can't run anything but bilinear smoothly. No problems under EVR or XBMC with Lanczos/Spline though. I don't want to buy a noisy gaming graphics card if I don't game.

MadVR can't be used natively in XBMC or WMC, it's pretty much MPC/BE for most people. Not everyone wants to launch an external player and lose FF/RW support among many other things.

Respect our opinions and move on.
StinDaWg is offline  
post #183 of 207 Old 10-04-2013, 04:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
madshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,465
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 128
It would be easier to move on if you guys didn't say things like "madVR is terribly unoptimized", which is an insult to my development skills, and besides isn't true. madVR performs slower because it does things differently. EVR (and probably XBMC, but I don't know that for sure) are making use of GPU hardware circuits where they can, e.g. color conversion etc. And they often default to low bitdepth buffers. On the other hand, madVR does everything itself, in high bitdepth, with dithering as the last step, in order to be able to guarantee that quality is impeccable. GPU circuits might also be able to produce good quality, but that depends on the GPU manufacturer, model, OS, driver version, driver settings and the constellation of the planets. Try switching MPC-HC's EVR renderer to "Full floating point processing" and you'll see that EVR suddenly isn't so fast, anymore. By default many EVR implementations work in 8bit, dropping BTB/WTW, introducing banding etc etc. But it's fast that way, of course. I could program madVR that way, too. But we don't need another low quality renderer alternative. I've always said that madVR's primary focus is quality and that I'm not taking shortcuts on the way. But that doesn't mean that madVR would be "terribly unoptimized". It isn't. Just my priority is different. Quality over speed. Still at the same time my algorithms are reasonably well optimized. For example, I've even written separate shader routines for upscaling with an exact scaling factor of 2x or 3x to improve performance on slower GPUs. I don't think any other renderer has invested that much optimization work.

If you decide that you don't want to use madVR, if you prefer EVR for the lower power consumption (or for other reasons), that is your choice and I respect that. But don't insult madVR or my development skills. There's really no need for that...
madshi is online now  
post #184 of 207 Old 10-04-2013, 05:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,835
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 189
^^ EXACTLY ^^

I on the other hand prefer your renderer. I was not aware that >> and << worked for mkv's in other renderer's/players. Last time I used WMC's player or MX player on my android stick they behaved the same. This is an issue with mkv as far as I know. Am I wrong?
Mfusick and ricemanva like this.

Sammy2 is offline  
post #185 of 207 Old 10-04-2013, 10:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,769
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)
Liked: 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by StinDaWg View Post

Seriously, give it a rest people.

I see no difference between Lanczos/Spline and Jinc at a normal viewing distance (or even closer) with moving video content.

MadVR is terribly unoptimized, my silent and passive graphics card (5450) can't run anything but bilinear smoothly. No problems under EVR or XBMC with Lanczos/Spline though. I don't want to buy a noisy gaming graphics card if I don't game.

MadVR can't be used natively in XBMC or WMC, it's pretty much MPC/BE for most people. Not everyone wants to launch an external player and lose FF/RW support among many other things.

Respect our opinions and move on.

I think you have things reversed.

First, it's unreasonable to say some of the things you have and not expect madshi to be offended. If you worked as hard as he has on a project and he made claims against your work and achievements that were not just derogatory but factually untrue I am sure you would be offended too. Screen shots have been posted many times in many threads in this forum showing specific differences between MadVR settings, and rendering methods and the differences are pretty clear to many. I am not saying you can't have your own opinion otherwise, but you need to at least respect other peoples opinions too.

Second, it's the guys coming into a Madvr thread saying "there is no difference" that are picking the fight. If you think there is no difference then run with your simple XBMC player and be gone, nothing to see here for you. There is a difference between a madvr user (or developer!) defending their opinion on it's benefits versus someone coming into a thread attacking it. It's again unreasonable to think a madvr fan is going to just lay down his sword and walk away conceding "there is no difference" so coming into any madvr thread and expressing such an opinion is asking for a debate. Personally I see no reason with a little debate- as it usually brings information to the surface and helps people make decisions and gain insight. There is nothing wrong with debating the benefits of madvr. But if you don't want to debate them just don't enter the thread. You can't stop others from doing it, and it is perfectly in line with the intention of this forum. Saying "why is this bumped" or negatives about madvr like "it's terribly unoptimized" then quickly saying "respect our opinions and move on" is just insane. Only an insane person would think that actually would, could, or should happen. It's obviously not going to happen; rather further debate will be fueled.

Third, It's not madshi's or anyone else that happens to appreciate Madvr's fault if you do not want to invest in the proper hardware to maximize your experience. There is nothing wrong with doing such. Your suggestion "I don't want buy a noisy gaming graphics card" just shows your personal bias, and also that you likely have not actually tested something like Jinc3/AR with madvr as compared to your beloved XBMC player. If you don't want to invest in a GPU card, or have not done so- nothing at all wrong with that. But just assuming that everyone else is going to share you opinion is silly to do. If the multitude of screen shots are not enough to show you- or you personally do not care for the differences that's ok too. Just don't insist "there is no difference" or try to pretend the XBMC player is just as good simply because it's easier and that's what you do. Madshi listed some quick technical reasons why the XBMC player might not be preferential in terms of picture quality (I share his opinion from my own non technical observations) but if you can't or don't appreciate them that's ok. Very different if you can not appreciate the differences (like your system is not capable without a proper GPU card) or that you simply do not appreciate them (like you just don't care that much) than if you claim or promote "there is no difference" or "it's terribly optimized" How could you know the real difference without a GPU card installed and proper testing ?

Fourth, it's almost universal that the people that attack madvr or claim it's not worth it are the ones on simple integrated graphics and low power systems- and they prefer the simplicity of an older lower quality player or rendering option like XBMC. I attribute this to several factors. (1) it's natural for people to defend their own personal decisions so if they are only using XBMC player it's likely they would insist it's the best method or other methods are not superior even if they have not actually tested that reality in detail, or tested other options like madvr in detail. (2) Many people don't want to extra hassle of configuring an external player and madvr properly so they don't bother but saying "there is no difference" is wrong because in reality they have not fully tested it because they simply avoid the extra hassle or do not care enough to do so. Very different - They should really be saying "I never bothered trying it because I don't care that much to put in the extra work" (3) They actually only have integrated graphics or a lower power system that can't actually run madvr at optimum settings so they can't even test it to know if there is any difference. But since they are reluctant to install or purchase a GPU card they defend that decision which gets twisted into "there is no difference". I wonder how many people that actually have robust fully optimized HTPC's capable of running Madvr at optimal settings and actually go through the proper set up of an external player like the MPC-HC sticky at the top of this forum and use it for a while actually think there is "no difference" and stop using it ??? My guess is ZERO PEOPLE do that.

Why not use it if you can ? Quite simply there is no reason. The reason why people don't use it are: (1) Don't care (2) Can't (3) too lazy to try it or never have. IMO people that have not tried it properly, don't care about quality much, or can't use it because of hardware limitations should just stay out of madvr threads and avoid giving off too much opinion about how it sucks- or it's not worth it, terrible unoptimized, or that it provides no difference in PQ. It's not helpful and it's absolutely going to fuel further debate. The effect of that debate (posting of screen shots, discussion of technical differences etc.. ) actually is helpful but often that is done by others defending madvr.

I remember when renethx posted some screen shots showing clear differences in your thread (your own thread complaining about how XBMC sucks, DXVA in XBMC is broken and bad, and you complain about PQ) and you took offense and made him delete / remove the screen shots and posts. It seemed like you did not want to see the benefits or differences because you already had your mind made up with what you wanted, and what you were chasing.


Renethx basically told you:
AMD is the worst, NVIDIA is not so good (ES = Edge sharpening), Intel is the best among the three. Unfortunately, with Intel, DXVA2 decode is sometimes broken and "DXVA Best" deinterlacing never works in XBMC.

I remember clearly before he deleted the post your objection or failure to understand what he was telling you about how XBMC works, and how what scaling or rendering methods do what with what settings are optimal. This nonsense that the XBMC player is good need to stop. There is pretty clear areas where it lacks compared to other players, and rendering methods and there is lots not to like about the XBMC player if you wanted to take a deep look at it.

All that said, I hope you don't think I am attacking you because that is not my intention. I just want to make you (and others) aware it's ok to prefer XBMC player for simplicity, or prefer not installing a GPU card into your HTPC but IT IS NOT OK to falsely claim negative things about madvr or other player options you don't choose to use personally and things that are factually incorrect and offensive to others. There are many more people out there that don't care about the differences, don't understand them, and do not care to ever understand them, than the few people that do. It's asking for a debate if you enter a thread or express personal opinion and comments that attack people that care about quality and how they do things if those comments you make stem from a total lack of care about quality yourself. It's oil and water. It shall never end well.
ricemanva likes this.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #186 of 207 Old 10-04-2013, 11:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 227
That chart is wrong for Nvidia - they're using bilinear scaling and edge sharpening, not lanczos.

But you're right, the people that claim madvr makes no difference are typically the people with hardware incapable of running it properly.
And I suspect the next version of madvr is going to silence a lot of critics.

For people that think it's too difficult to configure madvr, you can always use JRiver which requires no configuration to get madvr working, but you have to purchase that, which a lot of the HTPC users seem opposed to.
Mfusick likes this.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #187 of 207 Old 10-04-2013, 02:41 PM
Advanced Member
 
MlNDBOMB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 847
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 48
i pretty much always recommend that mpc hc users use madvr. The modern low end gpu is the intel hd4600, and since madvr supports dxva scaling, even those users get high quality scaling with great performance. Plus smooth motion, xy subfilter support, and ivtc in madvr is neat too. And all that display calibration stuff too.

Plus, some perks of using a directshow player is that you get lav filters, with it's various hardware acceleration options for video decoding and great quality audio decoder that supports dts-hd decoding with an external file, and reclock for perfectly smooth video.

I do understand, however, that if you are using a linux operating system, or attached to a player that doesn't support madvr, that it might not be worth changing everything just to get madvr.
Mfusick likes this.
MlNDBOMB is offline  
post #188 of 207 Old 10-04-2013, 02:54 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,769
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)
Liked: 820
I am surprised re-clock is so under appreciated. It's really pretty awesome in that it completely gets rid of any jerky playback that can be common with HTPC's. Re-clock is loaded in place of the default directsound audio renderer and it provides a new reference clock that is locked to the video card hardware clock so it ensures the frames at the exact speed of what is expected by the video card vertical sync. It just blows me away that more people don't use it, talk about it- or appreciate it. Having audio sync issues is so common with HTPC and video file playback. These problems are often made worse with crappy players or crappy video files. I have had issues with XBMC, WMC, MPC-HC and VLC. VLC is actually one of the worse offenders in that if you fast foward past something ( like the into in a series you don't need to watch over and over for every episode) you can get all messed up. The solution was often to switch from bitstreaming back to analog then back to bitstreaming to correct this.

Out of sync audio or jerky playback just totally crushes the "cinema" or "theater" experience IMO. It reminds you it's playing from a PC, and these things are what many non HTPC-ers call "PC BS". It's the reason why the people who don't favor HTPC don't favor HTPC. (is that a double negative ?)

Yet no one seems to complain or care much. Makes me wonder do they just not understand or are aware of re-clock ? Just don't care? Or do they simply just accept what they have without it as normal and acceptable ? I can't possibly fathom that a serious HT enthusiast or HTPC enthusiast never experienced the things re-clock improves.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #189 of 207 Old 10-04-2013, 03:37 PM
Advanced Member
 
MlNDBOMB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 847
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 48
well, the one legitimate problem people can have with reclock is that they might need to bitstream dts-hd ma in order to get lossless audio.
with reclock, you can't bitstream, meaning you have to decode dts-hd ma on the pc. but there are no completely free dts-hd ma decoders atm, so this can be difficult (though lav audio can with an external file).

Another problem is that a lot of people watch stuff on computer displays, which typically are 60hz, and reclock works best if you are using a refresh rate near 24hz (or a multiple).
MlNDBOMB is offline  
post #190 of 207 Old 10-04-2013, 03:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,769
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)
Liked: 820
Some really good points you make. I use re-clock on my desktop- but I don't bitstream on this machine. I have 5.1 Logitech THX set that I hooked up with the analog wires. On the HTPC though, I go the other route.

Is the open sharing of the file dtsdecoderdll.dll allowed or legal on AVS or in general ?

In other words,

Any reason why we can't share dtsdecoderdll.dll – from arcsoft TMT software with each other ? Or point to where it can be obtained easily ?

You don't need to buy TMT software to get "dtsdecoderdll.dll" to bitstream DTS-HD with re-clock. Just not sure how legal sharing the file is ???

I imagine sharing the entire software is illegal, but extracting the file from a free trial obtained directly from the MFG webpage ??? No clue on that.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #191 of 207 Old 10-04-2013, 05:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

I am surprised re-clock is so under appreciated. It's really pretty awesome in that it completely gets rid of any jerky playback that can be common with HTPC's. Re-clock is loaded in place of the default directsound audio renderer and it provides a new reference clock that is locked to the video card hardware clock so it ensures the frames at the exact speed of what is expected by the video card vertical sync. It just blows me away that more people don't use it, talk about it- or appreciate it. Having audio sync issues is so common with HTPC and video file playback. These problems are often made worse with crappy players or crappy video files. I have had issues with XBMC, WMC, MPC-HC and VLC. VLC is actually one of the worse offenders in that if you fast foward past something ( like the into in a series you don't need to watch over and over for every episode) you can get all messed up. The solution was often to switch from bitstreaming back to analog then back to bitstreaming to correct this.

Out of sync audio or jerky playback just totally crushes the "cinema" or "theater" experience IMO. It reminds you it's playing from a PC, and these things are what many non HTPC-ers call "PC BS". It's the reason why the people who don't favor HTPC don't favor HTPC. (is that a double negative ?)

Yet no one seems to complain or care much. Makes me wonder do they just not understand or are aware of re-clock ? Just don't care? Or do they simply just accept what they have without it as normal and acceptable ? I can't possibly fathom that a serious HT enthusiast or HTPC enthusiast never experienced the things re-clock improves.
Reclock has the same problem as madvr - it requires you to configure something the first time you use it, for it to work properly. There's also a lot of bad or misinformed information about it out there too.

JRiver has tight integration with madvr and uses its refresh rate timings in their "video clock" feature, which does not require any of the configuration of Reclock, and that's why I recommend it for a lot of new HTPC users these days, but that has the other problem of costing money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MlNDBOMB View Post

well, the one legitimate problem people can have with reclock is that they might need to bitstream dts-hd ma in order to get lossless audio.
with reclock, you can't bitstream, meaning you have to decode dts-hd ma on the pc. but there are no completely free dts-hd ma decoders atm, so this can be difficult (though lav audio can with an external file).
Well you can get it working with a trial of Arcsoft which does not cost any money, but you have a point. I wish I could just pay $25 for a licensed decoder that would work anywhere. You can buy a copy of Arcsoft TMT, but I don't think they intended for its decoder to be used externally. So that's probably still questionable from a legal standpoint, but I feel a lot better about it.

Then again, we have to run software like AnyDVD to get Blu-ray working on a HTPC at all, so depending on where you live, that's of questionable legal status too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MlNDBOMB View Post

Another problem is that a lot of people watch stuff on computer displays, which typically are 60hz, and reclock works best if you are using a refresh rate near 24hz (or a multiple).
Reclock combined with madvr's smooth motion is perfect for this.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #192 of 207 Old 10-04-2013, 08:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
StinDaWg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,610
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

I remember when renethx posted some screen shots showing clear differences in your thread (your own thread complaining about how XBMC sucks, DXVA in XBMC is broken and bad, and you complain about PQ) and you took offense and made him delete / remove the screen shots and posts. It seemed like you did not want to see the benefits or differences because you already had your mind made up with what you wanted, and what you were chasing.


Renethx basically told you:
AMD is the worst, NVIDIA is not so good (ES = Edge sharpening), Intel is the best among the three. Unfortunately, with Intel, DXVA2 decode is sometimes broken and "DXVA Best" deinterlacing never works in XBMC.

I remember clearly before he deleted the post your objection or failure to understand what he was telling you about how XBMC works, and how what scaling or rendering methods do what with what settings are optimal. This nonsense that the XBMC player is good need to stop. There is pretty clear areas where it lacks compared to other players, and rendering methods and there is lots not to like about the XBMC player if you wanted to take a deep look at it.

I'm not going to respond to your whole post as I generally agree with what you have to say, but I've already stated that I don't see any noticeable benefit going past Lanczos/Spline in real world content, if anything Jinc is softer which is something I don't like. I prefer using XBMC internal player over launching MPC-HC and losing FF/RW support, easy downloading of subtitles, info screen with estimated time ending and episode information ect. Others may not care, that's fine.

To specifically respond and correct your point about XBMC scaling, when I wrote that first post XBMC only offered DXVA scaling with GPU acceleration. This only gives bilinear for 720p->1080p scaling on AMD cards, and it looks bad. Since then in XBMC 13 (Gotham) they included a patch and you can now choose the type of scaling you want and it will be hardware accelerated. It was not possible to do GPU accelerated Lanczos/Spline in XBMC, now it is, and I'm completely satisfied. That was the part I was correcting Renethx on, his statement about having to choose either DXVA deinterlacing but losing Lanczos scaling wasn't correct anymore for the newest version of XBMC.

I do use MPC-HC/MadVR film mode for 1080i files that need IVTC, because it is the only renderer I've found that does this properly. It works well. smile.gif
StinDaWg is offline  
post #193 of 207 Old 10-05-2013, 09:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by StinDaWg View Post

I'm not going to respond to your whole post as I generally agree with what you have to say, but I've already stated that I don't see any noticeable benefit going past Lanczos/Spline in real world content, if anything Jinc is softer which is something I don't like. I prefer using XBMC internal player over launching MPC-HC and losing FF/RW support, easy downloading of subtitles, info screen with estimated time ending and episode information ect. Others may not care, that's fine.
The benefit of Jinc scaling is that you get most of the sharpness of Lanczos with less ringing, and very low levels of aliasing. Lanczos is sharp, but has a lot of ringing and aliasing.
I'm not sure what you mean about losing FF/RW when using MPC-HC. I have seek mapped to my mousewheel so I can seek through a video with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StinDaWg View Post

I do use MPC-HC/MadVR film mode for 1080i files that need IVTC, because it is the only renderer I've found that does this properly. It works well. smile.gif
One of its many benefits.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #194 of 207 Old 10-05-2013, 12:33 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

.... Lanczos is sharp, but has a lot of ringing and aliasing....

This is just wrong, dude!cool.gif
PetitDragon is offline  
post #195 of 207 Old 10-05-2013, 01:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by PetitDragon View Post

This is just wrong, dude!cool.gif
Compare Lanczos 3 in any other renderer, to Jinc 3+AR in madvr. There is a lot more aliasing.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #196 of 207 Old 10-07-2013, 12:32 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,769
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)
Liked: 820
As far as Jin3+AR there has been a multitude of screen shots showing how it's better. To me it's much more natural and almost more film like.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #197 of 207 Old 10-07-2013, 04:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
StinDaWg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,610
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

The benefit of Jinc scaling is that you get most of the sharpness of Lanczos with less ringing, and very low levels of aliasing. Lanczos is sharp, but has a lot of ringing and aliasing.
I'm not sure what you mean about losing FF/RW when using MPC-HC. I have seek mapped to my mousewheel so I can seek through a video with that.
One of its many benefits.

This may be true for some SD content but it's not for 720p->1080p scaling, certainly nothing that can be seen during normal viewing without blowing up/zooming an image to proportions that you would not normally see.

As far as the FF/RW stuff, XBMC has true FF/RW like a Blu-ray player or WMC playing back locally recorded files. You can go from 2x all the way to 32x. You can't do this in MPC-HC, you can only use the skip/seek function which isn't the same thing. If you use a remote control rather than a mouse it wouldn't even be possible to map that function.
StinDaWg is offline  
post #198 of 207 Old 10-08-2013, 05:44 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,769
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)
Liked: 820
Sounds like you might be a mb3 theater candidate ... I'm hoping the HD overlay and player retain functionality with MADVR

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #199 of 207 Old 10-08-2013, 08:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark_Slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,551
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

I was not aware that >> and << worked for mkv's in other renderer's/players. Last time I used WMC's player or MX player on my android stick they behaved the same. This is an issue with mkv as far as I know. Am I wrong?

Works in XBMC, as mentioned above by StinDaWg. I thought it worked in WMC with LAV as well, but haven't been setup like that in a long time
Dark_Slayer is offline  
post #200 of 207 Old 10-08-2013, 09:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by StinDaWg View Post

This may be true for some SD content but it's not for 720p->1080p scaling, certainly nothing that can be seen during normal viewing without blowing up/zooming an image to proportions that you would not normally see.
Well that depends on your display type and size. There are clear improvements using Jinc+AR rather than Lanczos in my setup. Many people are using projectors rather than televisions.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #201 of 207 Old 10-08-2013, 10:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,835
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_Slayer View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

I was not aware that >> and << worked for mkv's in other renderer's/players. Last time I used WMC's player or MX player on my android stick they behaved the same. This is an issue with mkv as far as I know. Am I wrong?

Works in XBMC, as mentioned above by StinDaWg. I thought it worked in WMC with LAV as well, but haven't been setup like that in a long time

Please define "works". It is functional in MPC-HC but it is a user set skp for as many seconds the user sets it up to do. The last time I checked WMC it did not have true >> or << either. So you are saying that in XBMC you press >> or << and it scrolls ahead on the time bar until you release it?

Sammy2 is offline  
post #202 of 207 Old 10-08-2013, 01:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark_Slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,551
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

Please define "works". It is functional in MPC-HC but it is a user set skp for as many seconds the user sets it up to do. The last time I checked WMC it did not have true >> or << either. So you are saying that in XBMC you press >> or << and it scrolls ahead on the time bar until you release it?
Remotes haven't worked that way since VCR days. All "digital playback device" remotes (as I've been aware) begin 2x (or faster) playback when >> is pressed (not held). I'm referring to DVD/Blu-Ray players when I say digital playback device, and they also have the "faster" fast forward options as well. Sometimes 2x, 4x, etc is displayed and sometimes not, but I've never come across a single one that requires you to hold the button down to ff/rw and release to resume 1x playback.

However, if you "press and release" the >> button in XBMC while playing back an MKV, you will begin 2x playback of video w/o audio. Pressing play will resume playback at 1x, or repeating a press/release of >> will take you through 4x, 8x, 16x, 32x, and then cycle back around to 1x.

One strange caveat that I've never figured out is that 2x (>>) is slower than 2x (<<) for some reason
Dark_Slayer is offline  
post #203 of 207 Old 10-08-2013, 02:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,835
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_Slayer View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

Please define "works". It is functional in MPC-HC but it is a user set skp for as many seconds the user sets it up to do. The last time I checked WMC it did not have true >> or << either. So you are saying that in XBMC you press >> or << and it scrolls ahead on the time bar until you release it?
Remotes haven't worked that way since VCR days. All "digital playback device" remotes (as I've been aware) begin 2x (or faster) playback when >> is pressed (not held). I'm referring to DVD/Blu-Ray players when I say digital playback device, and they also have the "faster" fast forward options as well. Sometimes 2x, 4x, etc is displayed and sometimes not, but I've never come across a single one that requires you to hold the button down to ff/rw and release to resume 1x playback.

However, if you "press and release" the >> button in XBMC while playing back an MKV, you will begin 2x playback of video w/o audio. Pressing play will resume playback at 1x, or repeating a press/release of >> will take you through 4x, 8x, 16x, 32x, and then cycle back around to 1x.

One strange caveat that I've never figured out is that 2x (>>) is slower than 2x (<<) for some reason

For any source material?

As far as the way I stated it before, I was not explaining what I meant well but in your answer that I put in bold, it is clear that you understood what I meant.

Sammy2 is offline  
post #204 of 207 Old 10-09-2013, 04:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
StinDaWg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,610
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy2 View Post

For any source material?

As far as the way I stated it before, I was not explaining what I meant well but in your answer that I put in bold, it is clear that you understood what I meant.
Yes, it works for any source material.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Sounds like you might be a mb3 theater candidate ... I'm hoping the HD overlay and player retain functionality with MADVR
I'm going to give MBT a try, but I doubt it will be able to replace XBMC for me. There are so many addons I use on XBMC like ESPN, Youtube, NFL Game Pass, The Verge, MLB-MC, SportsDevil, Revision3, TWIT and dozens others that I don't think MBT will be able to replicate that. I have everything customized on XBMC down to a T through advancedsettings I don't think any software could replace it at this point. When I used MB in the past the scraper never picked up everything like XBMC does, everything had to be named in a very specific format or it would just ignore the file. XBMC seems a lot smarter in this regard.
StinDaWg is offline  
post #205 of 207 Old 10-09-2013, 05:02 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,769
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)
Liked: 820
I always use MCM for metadata and renaming.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #206 of 207 Old 12-29-2013, 03:23 PM
Member
 
noiselisten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi.
MadVR seems like a great choice for many computer users, and those interested in the highest quality.

This post concerns configuring MadVR for the highest quality scaling algorithm settings with the given setup (hardware and software listed below).

Software: MPC-HC, MadVR, lav filters, reclock, xy-subtitles
Hardware: 64 plasma TV Samsung pl64f8500, Rx-v773WA yamaha AVR, radeon AMD RADEON 7970 3GB DDR5 PCI-E 3.0 GPU, powerful HTPC Intel(R) Core™ i5-3570 3.40 GHz

Is there a guide that lists the highest quality configurations for the MadVR scaling algorithm tab?

Thanks.
noiselisten is offline  
post #207 of 207 Old 12-29-2013, 06:36 PM
Member
 
Bizzy G.L.X.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wash DC
Posts: 173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by noiselisten View Post

Hi.
MadVR seems like a great choice for many computer users, and those interested in the highest quality.

This post concerns configuring MadVR for the highest quality scaling algorithm settings with the given setup (hardware and software listed below).

Software: MPC-HC, MadVR, lav filters, reclock, xy-subtitles
Hardware: big plasma TV, new yamaha AVR, radeon AMD RADEON 7970 3GB DDR5 PCI-E 3.0 GPU, powerful HTPC

Is there a guide that lists the highest quality configurations for the MadVR scaling algorithm tab?

Thanks.

 

Checkout this thread, specifically posts #76 and #82.

 

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1477339/so-youve-built-your-htpc-now-what-is-next-how-to-get-the-ultimate-picture-and-sound-quality-from-your-htpc-madvr-svp-xbmc-mediabrowser-jriver/60

 

Mfusick started the thread, and ReneTHX posted his test results.

 

I think with the 7970, you should be able to do 'Level 5' for both Film and Video material with no issues.

 

 

 

noiselisten likes this.

Case:Fractal Design Node 605
APU:AMD Richland A10-6700
RAM:8GB AMD 1866
Board:ASUS A88XM Plus
Storage:OCZ 256 GB Vector
Optical:Panasonic Slim BDR
PS:Silverstone Strider 550 Gold SFF
Software:WMC8+LAV+madVR+MPC-HC
Input:Logitech K400 mini KB/trackpad+Harmony 720
Output:Sammy 55" S6 LED LCD+Yamaha soundbar
Bizzy G.L.X. is offline  
Reply Home Theater Computers

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off