On 4/24/19, Michael Koch <astroelectro...@t-online.de> wrote: > Am 24.04.2019 um 10:43 schrieb Ulf Zibis: >> Am 23.04.19 um 11:43 schrieb Jon bae: >>> Makes it a different when I denoise after scaling a video, or is the >>> quality better when I denoise before scaling. >>> >>> In terms of speed it would be better for me, denoising after scaling, but >>> when the quality is better, then I would go that way. >> If I see this correctly, most denoisers define a spacial area to work on. >> So denoising before downscaling in the end will affect a smaller spacial >> area then in opposite order. > > What are the pros and cons of the 8 available denoisers? > Which of them is the best choice for which purpose? > Are there any recommendations? > I did try a few of them (but not all) and found that atadenoise is good > for high-ISO videos of the night sky. This testing is very time > consuming because most denoisers have several parameters that must also > be optimized.
atadenoise: very fast, temporal only with no motion compensation; LGPL hqdn3d: fast, both spatial and temporal, does basically lowpass by destroying high frequencies, blurs with extreme settings; GPL nlmeans: very slow, currently implemented as spatial only, algorithm considered as one of the state of art denoisers; LGPL bm3d: very very slow, currently implemented as spatial only, algorithm considered as one of the state of art denoisers; LGPL vaguedenoiser: slow, spatial only, pretty good, wavelet; LGPL dctdnoiz: very very slow: spatial only, blurs too much; LGPL fftdnoiz: slow, spatial and limited temporal, using Fast Fourier Transform, may have introduce ringing with bad settings; LGPL owdenoise: very very very slow, spatial only, wavelet; GPL removegrain: fast, spatial only, limited usecase _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".