Messages

yes, I already did a try, blowup3 with film grain is perfect! you cannot tell it was shoot in 960x544, looks like fullhd for sure. I think it will be even better if using the defringe in acr before upscaling. I used sharpening 30 / 1 / 10 in acr and worked fine, no need sharpening in blowup3.

sizefixer is a little bit better than instanthd, but just a little bit...

but instanthd works in after, so it is faster and easier to do.

maybe we could do a petition for Alien Skin to develop a version for after...

and here is the instanthd vs default 200%

a comparison between sizefixer and blowup3. blowup3 is more plastic look, but sizefixer does not remove aliasing completely. add a small amount of film grain simulation can be a good solution for both, to hide the imperfections and bring a more analog film look. both are 960x544 upscaled to 1920x1088.

wow, excelente results with defringe!

a review comparing blowup3 and sizefixer, maybe the new version of sizefixer is faster, the article is old...

http://photo.it-enquirer.com/2011/11/review-alien-skin-blow-up-3-vs-sizefixer-xl/

more options:

http://www.benvista.com/photozoompro

http://www.fixerlabs.com/EN/upsize/sizefixer/sizefixerxl.htm

(the last one is supposed to be better than blowup3, but slower)

Alien Skin BlowUp3 turns T3i 600D into a Pocket Cinema Camera!

No aliasing, just NOTHING, NADA!

Upscales PERFECTLY, much better than InstantHD.

Only wires against sky shows a small amount of aliasing (much less than InstantHD), but this is expected.

Worth every penny!

(Just some advices: it is slower than InstantHD, rendering upscaling frames takes long time... and batch processing just works in LightRoom using still images, batch processing does not work in Photoshop, it does not work in video files also. My tests was done in jpg files exported from the dng, I do not know if it can be applied to dng files in LightRoom, needs tests)

others:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/RP/

http://after-effects.softalizer.com/

Interesting! Deserves a try!

I found this page also, lots of comparisons in there (it seems these people did a try in almost everything):

http://www.infognition.com/articles/video_upsize_methods_comparison.html

http://www.infognition.com/articles/video_resize_shootout.html

The optical filter have some advices to use in specific lenses and distances, needs tests... Maybe VAF-Txi will be better option, but I do not have it and do not know if it will be useful for 960x544 cropped sensor, needs tests...

I agree when the image starts to go out of focus the aliasing decrease and disappears. In low resolutions raw shooting a very small amount of "out of focus" can help.

I saw the algorithm test. I believe the Instant HD is different... I think it has some proprietary algorithm which corrects the aliasing in the edges and keep the rest of image untouched. In the same way the Power Retouche plugin does. I tested the power retouche, but the render time is infinitely slow and results are not better than Instant HD, (at this moment it is just 32bits, a 64bits version is on it's way), see:

http://powerretouche.com/Antialias_plugin_tutorial.htm

Here it is a 600D dng file, just some wires against the sky for aliasing tests, do your own settings in ACR:

http://www.apefos.com/upload/000240.dng

I already uploaded an image in the post number 7 showing the difference between "Instant HD upscaling" and "default upscaling"

Both images was identically sharpened in ACR before the upscaling. The settings for tweaking these images are described in my posts here in this topic, read them all.

It is so simple:

If you do not do sharpening in the image, it will be too much soft, no good to look at.

But there is a problem: every sharpening filter, effect or plugin from any software will increase aliasing. So this is the challenge: to do some amount of sharpening without hurt the image with aliasing.

Upscaling will magnify the image, so imperfections will be more easy to see. So to do sharpening and upscaling at the same time is something very difficult to do considering we want good results.

In my tests I found the Instant HD upscaling is the best because it corrects the aliasing found in low resolution video.

In my tests I found ACR sharpening is the best results to my eye, maybe because it is applied in the raw file using all the bits before converting.

So, I did tests in three way of doing the sharpening:
1- in ACR before Instant HD upscaling
2- inside Instant HD at the moment it does the upscaling (it has a sharpen slider)
3- using sharpen effect after Instant HD upscaling

The best results was from option 1: apply sharpening in ACR before upscaling and do upscaling in timeline using Instant HD.
Maybe this was the best result because sharpening in ACR uses all the power from raw file and doing upscaling with Instant HD uses the power of it's anti-aliasing which is very good.

As you can see I did try all the options and this was the best results. Using sharpening slider  inside Instant HD is optional, it is a matter of taste because sharpening was already done in ACR, so the different settings in Instant HD in my previous post is for you to choose the best for your eyes.

Improving results for 960x544@24p...

All the settings in Instant HD in my previous posts was found for ACR sharpening in AMOUNT=25, RADIUS=1, DETAIL=25

I realized if all sharpening in ACR is set to 0 (zero), Instant HD makes no difference because there is no significant aliasing in the image to correct, but this way, the overall looking is too much soft...

So I started to find the best balance between ACR sharpening and Instant HD correction...

Best results for 960x544 upscaling to 1920x1088 I found was:
setting ACR sharpening AMOUNT=30, RADIUS=1, DETAIL=10
setting Instant HD to sharpening 13, quality 08, anti-aliasing=10, mode=better
more or less the same thing as before, no other sharpen was used
if ACR is the same, this also works in Instant HD: sharpening=00, quality=08, anti-aliasing=06, mode=better

There is another plug-in called ReSizer which comes togheter in the Instant HD package. It works great also, and delivers slightly different results, and it needs a small amount off sharpen filter also. you can compare both and decide what you prefer... for my taste the instanthd is better than resizer for anti-aliasing results.

here is a crop from a small part of the image for comparison, (240x150 pixels section from the 1920x1080 image). it is not perfect, but it is much better:

I did some more tests comparing apply the instant hd once or twice and I realized that twice adds some artifacts to the image, so apply once will be better. apply it once there is no artifacts.

I found a good solution, please take a look, try it and post your feedbacks:

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6248.0

I did another test and realized that apply two instances of the filter makes things even better:

first instant hd filter settings:
custom
1280x720
better
00
00
10

second instant hd settings
custom
1920x**** (height depends on what resolution you are shooting, for 960x544 = 1920 x 1088, for 768x432 = 1920x1080)
better
08
08
10

about upscaling and aliasing, I found a solution to make it look better, from unacceptable to reasonable good.

please, see this topic, try it and let us know if it satisfies your needs.

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6248

@1%, @a1ex,

Hi guys, did you try it? the results are amazing, it deserves a try...

I did a look at the theorem, but my maths is not enough to understand... maybe the Red Giant did a break on it?

Please, can you share how to make the upscaling in ACR to get good results? It will be useful for lots of people...

thanks!

In my tests with T3i 600D shooting 768 x 423 @37,7fps and 960 x 544 @ 24fps and upscaling to 1920 x 1080 I found the best solution for removing aliasing:

Red Giant Magic Bullet Instant HD 1.2 (99 usd plug-in)

Best settings for 768x432 and 960x544 resolutions:

output size: custom
1920 x **** (do your aspect ratio calculations) for 960x544 it is 1920x1088, for 768x432 it is 1920x1080
lock aspect ratio: off
filter type: better (important, "better" is even better than "best")
sharpness: 13 (more than this hurts the image)
quality: 8 (more than this hurts the image)
antialiasing: 10 (the maximum possible)

these settings I found after try everything with careful comparisons

you will not believe your eyes.

best and simple solution would be to put the top overlay in one line and a little more up.
and the bottom overlay a little more down.

if cannot put top overlay in one line, keep it two lines and put it more up and it will be fine.

the red skip frame information can be inside the frame, in another line, because it is a warning, not a constant information, and I believe people will try to avoid skip frames using correct resolution/fps combos.

I also have a suggestion for you to enable 9:16 aspect ratio, and 544 width because it will be great for 3D stereoscopic work using two 600D fixed bottom to bottom together.

ok, so next build it will go back to 16:9

you did well in making one line at bottom with three information, file name, file size and datarate, you used ":" and "," to separate.

maybe you can try to make top information in just one line also, this way it will be ok for 1344x768 at 12fps

mov ind build feedback:

first a question: why changing the default aspect ratio to 2:1? it was great with 16:9 being the default.
globaw draw on / off was a good add
removing the black side bars from the lv in 640x480 mode was great

overlay indicators position improved, but needs a little tweaking to be better: move them more to top and more to bottom a little bit, see the photos showing 1344x768 and 1664x944. Move more to top will solve perfectly for 1344x768 and move more to bottom will solve bottom part for 1664x944. Maybe it will be impossible to solve the top part for 1664x944, but no problem at all.

1344x768 is the maximum resolution for 12fps and 1664x944 is the maximum resolution for 8fps, due to this I chose them.

ok, maybe these ntsc fps are not so useful considering we can shoot 24p and do interpret footage in post to set the 23,976p frame rate... the same for the other values...

so keep going on improving the overlays and solving the spanning problem fot fat32 cards... (fat32 cards are very useful to use in different cameras, like GH2 and 600D, so a good spanning in raw recording is welcome)

thanks