Video Enhancement

AAProds Posté à 28/12/2020 14:23

Don't be conned by the "AI" term. That said, the examples they give are pretty darn good (I suppose they would be, wouldn't they?). I might have a look at it myself! I already use NeatVideo for noise reduction (I latched onto it because it was mentioned on this forum), but it doesn't have any sharpening function as far as I can tell, unlike that Topaz software.

It'll probably end up being one of those lawn-mowers or Bamix mixers; yeh, it works OK but maybe I should have bought something else...

Depending on how serious you want to get or as it's called in the business, how far down the rabbit hole you want to go, "Film9" could be worth looking at:

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/369010-FILM9-Restoration-software-for-old-films-%288mm-Super8-16mm%29-and-video?highlight=Film9

Good luck!

CubeAce Posté à 28/12/2020 14:43

@AAProds

Hi Alwyn.

Did you mean to link to here?

Ray.

AAProds Posté à 28/12/2020 15:00

@CubeAce @Xenofex2

No Ray, the link to the Film9 website is in the first post, and I think it's always good to consider the views of others before deciding. I wasn't implying that George had to read the 15 pages! 😀 The last couple of pages though are always helpful.

Check out the shenanigans on the Topaz VE AI thread here:

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/399360-so-where-s-all-the-Topaz-Video-Enhance-AI-discussion

CubeAce Posté à 28/12/2020 15:25

@AAProds

Hi Alwyn.

Sorry, I misunderstood the point you were making.

Ray.

Xenofex2 Posté à 28/12/2020 15:42

Thanks Guys. Some interesting comments, thankyou. I must add that until retirement I had no involvement in video editing so am basically an amateur. The trouble is that as a result, whilst I have learnt loads, a lot of the terminology tends to go over my head.

Interestingly, trying to checkout other views on the Topaz program wondering whether to purchase, I did happen to come across that videohelpforum topic on the Topaz program, but again, some of those comments there, seemed to use jargon that I did not understand and thought there was quite a bit of negativity of the program.

Hence my confusion.

George

CubeAce Posté à 28/12/2020 17:14

@Xenofex2 @AAProds

Hi George.

It is my experience that no matter which forum you visit you will have negativity from those who either have unrealistic expectations of what is possible at current technology levels or don't understand the procedures necessary to get the best result within a given scope of complexity.

There is at present no ideal way to tackle any problem in any camera or with any post production method. There is never a 'one setting that covers all ills' from any piece of equipment or program. People on average expect too much and understand too little. They compare their results with what is achieved with professional equipment and knowledge but expect close to the same results.

However things progress. My photo editing packages of ten years ago could not do what is possible today and new plug-ins and programs come out all of the time. All with claims from the various advertising teams whose job it is to sell the product and hope the person seeing the information does not have the ability to know what the actual specifications of the program mean in the reality of its use or expected outcome.

That to my mind is the difficult part. Some software does things that to my mind are truly mind blowing and capable in the right and experienced hands while others are modern 'snake oil'. Trying to separate the two from each other often then comes down to relying on reviews, understanding the technical requirements, not just for getting the program to run at all due to processing needs but how to handle the controls to best effect for a given problem. Then there is having to sort out those who are fan boys that will see no evil within a given product to those frustrated at not being to get the results they expect.

Last but not least is how much work has to be done? Can you expect the same results across the board given the variation in the quality of what you have to work with in the first instance?

So my conclusion is normally one of initial scepticism that may change with enough evidence to the contrary and no illusion I will get even close to the same results without a lot of practice and understanding.

All I know for sure is that some people, at home, possibly working alone, can produce some mind boggling footage. What I don't know is their experience levels or how much effort and cost it took to produce it.

Ray.

Xenofex2 Posté à 28/12/2020 20:27

Ray,

Thanks for those comments. Certainly some ‘food for thought’.

Also I must agree with you about negative reviews and have found the same over the years with whatever I have been thinking of buying. It was just on this particular topic though, on that forum, there seemed to me to be quite a bit of more ‘hard core negativity’ than I have usually seen.

On reflection, I probably have the answer right in front of me. I have only been testing on relatively small movie clips of around 60 – 90 seconds. Even here and without any upscaling the program is taking over 2 hours. Longer clips thus affecting other use of the computer even longer. Worth it? And then would the family notice any improvement? The 1,000 dollar question.

Thankyou everyone for your thoughts.

George

CubeAce Posté à 28/12/2020 20:58

@Xenofex2

Hi George.

I think your last point is the most pertinent.

In my experience over the years it is the person putting the project together that is most concerned about the quality of what they put together. Most people can't tell the difference between the original material and enhanced material.

By that I mean if you present them with just the one choice, they never question it, not the 'Can you see a difference?' type of choice.

They only seem disappointed when quality gets to the point that it is hard to make out details or hear the sound recorded clearly.

However, there may be the secondary concern of preservation. If it is doubtful that the original material will stay at it's current quality if it was recorded in an analogue fashion such as flaking of the substrate or degeneration of magnetic field strength or even the ability to transfer the images due to lack of relevant hardware then perhaps it is better to do the best you can at that point. If you feel anyone may appreciate the effort at some future time and want to continue, and perhaps add to the work at a later date.

It was probably only when my last parent died that I really had an interest in preserving my family history for my son and grandson. No-one else in my immediate family wanted the photo albums and were more interested in items of monetary value. It was also some years after my parents departure I have had requests for odd bits of information and images from more distant relatives with memories of various events but no physical record of them.

Either way, it's a tough call as to what to do, especially when trying to decide which format to use for longer term storage. Not just the physical storage medium but the chosen encoding format.

Ray.