My latest hyperfixation
-
noob here
is DAV1D a thing as well ?
That's a decoder for AV1. That allows you to play AV1 files, but it can't create new AV1 files.
-
That's a decoder for AV1. That allows you to play AV1 files, but it can't create new AV1 files.
thanks !
-
That's more or less what I'm saying yes, I do like the original film grain look of movies, and often attempts to remove it removed detail, making things look smudgy.
As for if no codec is designed for this, Blu-Rays preserve film grain, often very well, and they use x265. Granted they do this partially by brute force by having a bit rate of 30mbps+, but I've found that you can quite easily reduce that but rate to 12mbps and still preserve most film grain reasonably well. Especially if you use h265, the CPU version (NVENC is nowhere near as good with grain).
By comparison, with my brief stint with AV1 I found even maxing out the settings did not seem to preserve film grain. I guess the codec is inherently heavy handed, which is fine for what it's intended for.
On film grain movies x264 can work, but then you typically need 20-50% more space for the same quality.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Yeah, it does feel like AV1 is tuned for higher compression. Hence its explicitly designed to try and denoise the grain away then replicate it.
To be clear, I'm with Pyro here (I just denoise grain away with a BM3D-V prefilter), but TBH I'd rather keep the raw rips at such high bitrates anyway.
-
Ah, but are you using aomenc, SVT-AV1 or rav1e? Or one of the forks maybe?
wrote last edited by [email protected]av1an with its dark scene boost/per scene tuning is the best.
It works with x265 (or hardware encoders) too.
-
I could be wrong, but isn't the idea that it removes the film grain to aid compressing the ""actual"" image behind the grain, and then the player adds the grain back in during playback?
The way you say it makes it sound like you want to compress the grain itself, and that sounds to me like a "I like the vinyl crackle in my digital media" take. Not that that's a bad thing, everyone has preferences, but it's also unlikely that AV1 (or any codec for that matter) was designed with the preservation of accurate film grain in mind.
Yeah, it does feel like AV1 is tuned for higher compression. Hence its explicitly designed to try and denoise the grain away then replicate it.
To be clear, I'm with Armand1 here (I just denoise grain away with a BM3D-V prefilter), but TBH I'd rather keep the raw rips at such high bitrates anyway.
-
Somebody save my CPU.
made with Krita
wrote last edited by [email protected]Just wait until you discover vapoursynth.
-
Somebody save my CPU.
made with Kritawrote last edited by [email protected]Clicked the link and was instantly blocked. WTF
-
Clicked the link and was instantly blocked. WTF
-
Clicked the link and was instantly blocked. WTF
What?...
My power just went out, are you talking about the cloudflare 404? lol -
Are you using a VPN or something maybe? Just spitting ideas out my ass but maybe there's lots of people accessing it using the same IP?
-
Are you using a VPN or something maybe? Just spitting ideas out my ass but maybe there's lots of people accessing it using the same IP?
No VPN, direct connection to carrier. I'm in Brazil, maybe there's a block.
-
Somebody save my CPU.
made with KritaAll VP9 and Opus here, but I have a similar fixation. Wouldn't find this lady odd at all.
-
I tried AV1, but it seems to work really poorly for compressing film grain which is my main usecase (movies).
I realise you can add fake film grain, but that's not really my thing.
I'm sure it's great for video game footage or low grain modern video, but that's not what I need it for.
For now, I'll likely stick with x265.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I'm no expert on the grain side, but Netflix had a nice writeup about its power.
https://netflixtechblog.com/av1-scale-film-grain-synthesis-the-awakening-ee09cfdff40b
I also heard that when you use film grain, you should disable the denoising done on the output to properly preserve detail in the encoding. Which depends on the encoder, but should generally be possible on the ones that do film grain.
But it might not be as good for artistic film grain that doesn't fit normal "grain" in videos.
-
Somebody save my CPU.
made with KritaThis is what I subscribe to lemmy for.
-
I'll take any excuse I can get to dump my perspective here. I love AV1 for video and I hate AVIF with a passion. Every video that I create is delivered in AV1, because it is incredibly useful, versatile and extremely powerful. Right tool for the right job.
Not that there's anything inherently wrong with AVIF other than it tries to force a video codec into something that is that it is not meant for, namely a still image codec. I hate the drama around it that Google has created. Because the stupid cunt that created AVIF is an emotional slime, he tried to block JPGXL, a competitor for AVIF, from having official support in the Google Chrome browser. And because Google Chrome is a monopoly in the browser market, CDNs and other people who'd like to use JPGXL, since it has significantly better all around features for still images, cannot use it now.
Features of JPEG-XL:
- better still image compression than AVIF
- lossless JPEG transcoding
- progressive image loading
- universally usable from capture to delivery
- layer support with 4,099 channels
- CMYK Compatible
- 32 bits per channel
- no limitations on image size or colour precision
And all of that is thrown away because one bastard has his feelings hurt by user choice.
Thank you for listening to my useless TED Talk.
Edit: While I sound extremely black-pilled about this, because monopolies are bad, the positive thing is that it's gaining traction, finally. Apple has fully embraced it some time ago. Now Microsoft Windows supports it natively as well. Literally the only missing piece is the browser. While Safari, thanks to Apple, - never thought I'd say that - now supports JPEG XL natively, Firefox and Google Chrome do not as of right now. So the browser is literally the last missing link for full native support. Also, I'd wish for the people at Mozilla to stop letting themselves be cucked by Google. But JPEG XL is around the corner, luckily, because sooner or later they will be forced to use the modern format to stay competitive, like Samsung already does for their phone cameras. Still salty about the attempt, though.
ldk, avif looks really good at the really high compression ratios. My problem with it is that usually it includes lots of details, except those details weren't the actual details of the original image. It just kinda hallucinates them
Also ofc the unlimited layers, great lossless mode, and high color depth etc would still make jxl a better universal choice, but avif just looks better at the ultra low end
-
No VPN, direct connection to carrier. I'm in Brazil, maybe there's a block.
It's also possible your ISP is using CGNAT and someone else got flagged by Cloudflare on the same IP...
-
Somebody save my CPU.
made with KritaLet’s Jellyfin and chill
