Forum Archive Home -> Camcorders (DV/HDV/AVCHD) -> Taking forever to use virtualdub denoiser filter.
Taking forever to use virtualdub denoiser filter. | ||
| capman21 posted 2007 Aug 13 21:08 | ||
| I am using MSU Denoiser for virtualdub and it takes me forever to use it even on a small dv file like 50mb. Until I can figure out Avisynth someone recommended I use Fast Recompress rather than full processing mode. Whats the difference? Is there a difference in quality, file size, etc? BTW, I always use the filers Smart Deinterlace, resize, and MSU Denoiser if that helps any. | ||
| guns1inger posted 2007 Aug 13 21:22 | ||
| Fast Recompress still re-encodes, but avoids the colourspace changed forced by Full Processing Mode. The catch : you must use Full Processing Mode if you use filters. Something else to consider - most good noise reduction filters are slow, even in avisynth. It it not unusual for me to have jobs run 8 - 12 hours to process 2 hours of video. | ||
| capman21 posted 2007 Aug 13 21:30 | ||
| Its taking me about a hour and 15 mins to process a 125mb file. What happens if you use the fast recompress with the filters loaded? Does it just avoid the filters? | ||
| guns1inger posted 2007 Aug 14 01:55 | ||
| Yep. Skips them. That combination of filters will be slow. You also haven't filled in your computer details, so I have no idea what sort of system you are working on. There are many denoisers, some of them much faster than the MSU Denoiser. Perhaps you should look into them. I am also curious as to just how much noise you really have from a DV source. DV is usually pretty good unless used in low light. | ||
| capman21 posted 2007 Aug 14 17:28 | ||
| I am using it on a old 533mhz pc, and yeah I am using the minidv indoors at low light. | ||
| guns1inger posted 2007 Aug 14 17:56 | ||
It would almost be quicker to hand clean every frame in photoshop :) Unfortunately these are very processor intensive filters, and you are working your CPU as hard as it can go. The only way to speed this up is to buy a new PC. | ||
| SatStorm posted 2007 Aug 14 20:58 | ||
| Forget the MSU filters with your PC.
The only filter close alternative you have is the following (use the filters in this specific order): deinterlace: unfold Static Noise reduction ( leave defaul value, that is "6" ) Video DeNoise (leave the default settings) Dynamic Noise reduction ( set the value to 3 - 6, but not more) deinterlace: fold Smart Deintarlace Resize If your source are PAL VHS tapes, on the top of the filter chain, add "rmPAL" That way, you have the fastest possible way, decent picture filtering. Good luck and inform us about the results and the needed time | ||
| Simster posted 2007 Aug 16 08:01 | ||
| i think your processor is too slow to make it go fast, i have never tried it, but i know computers and that processors can't really do much image and video editing. | ||
| guns1inger posted 2007 Aug 16 09:17 | ||
| I can remember when that was state of the art, and I used to do video work on something similar. It can do it, but it will only do it as fast as it can - which by todays standards isn't very. | ||
| SatStorm posted 2007 Aug 16 18:28 | ||
| I can remember the days that 486 was a "state of art" PC. So ZX Spectrum 128K or Amiga 500....
His CPU needs about 9 hours to convert 90 min to half D1 using the filters I suggest to him. Using CCE that is... | ||
| Simster posted 2007 Aug 17 01:19 | ||
| it can do it, but it sure works slow, if i went over to that computer i would go nuts | ||
| redwudz posted 2007 Aug 17 02:00 | ||
| I remember many times in the past with a 400 Celeron encoding SVCDs overnight for 11 - 15 hours. :) But it's really not that bad. The results should still be the same as the faster computers around these days. It just takes more time. :) |
Login/Register to our forum to be able to post here.