pdr0 wrote > More settings would help too - maybe you can improve the filter. I'll post > an example later similar to one posted by Mark, where it's "solvable" > using > other methods, but not using minterpolate. Minterpolate maxes out at a > block > size of 16, and that causes problems in that and similar examples, nor > does > it have internal pad options to improve motion vectors.
Here are some test videos - https://www.mediafire.com/file/9inkxdvi8iuo5hi/interpolation_test_videos.zip/file I made a source video "interp_test_src.mp4" @23.976p which has simulated camera pan movement similar to Mark's example. "minterpolate_default.mp4" is the using the default settings . Similar artifacts along top and bottom of frame near the letterbox edge. Cropping and padding (both external to the filter) did not help much. Central portion along the windows have some bad areas in some frames too. Typical motion interpolation artifacts Test1_mvtools2 using typical settings (default blksize of 16) . Similar artifacts test2_mvtools2_nocrop_nopad has a blksize of 32, but no crop or pad internally. It's better in the central and top and bottom, but still some "edge dragging" artifacts Test2_mvtools2 has blksize of 32, is cropped and padded internally to improve motion vectors (this makes a difference along the frame borders along the letter box bars), then letterbox bars added back. This is much cleaner with only minor artifacting. This one would actually be usable by most people On this sequence, a larger blocksize of 32 helps with the central artifacts, and the and internal padding helps with frame edges for mvtools2. I suspect if minterpolate had options for larger blocksizes and internal padding it would improve too -- Sent from: http://ffmpeg-users.933282.n4.nabble.com/ _______________________________________________ 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".
