Between 3.0.2 and this new version I really don’t see any difference. Proteus is the same, too bad the quality of these models are in losses. The artemis model is frankly not excellent. the encoding speed is still very slow, this problem will have to be remedied quickly since the official release of this version 3. Still we can’t choose where to put the old models on this version 3 as a lot of people ask here, and it’s better to put the list of models back so that we can choose the model we want ourselves. The technology is 100% good but the interface is assumning too much situations, and not let to avoid a lot of problems.My impression on this new version, still the problem of the preview during video encoding which does not scroll when encoding the video export. Those are my thoughts after maybe 4000 videos processed. Because maybe the picture is clean… but with deinterlacing artifacts, or maybe is well upscaled, but the aspect ratio is not the right and the picture is squeezed. If we mix concepts, 50% of times the results are not improving the original. The deinterlace have to be only deinterlace) I think the problem is the interface should show different stepsġ, input pixel aspect (if not 50% of times we are defforming)Ģ deinterlace (independent of enhancing method. If we have to deinterlace and upscale a video with grain we have to use Dione alghoryhtm that is so bad with the grain… And if we selet proteus or Artemis, the upscale is ok and the degrain is ok, but the deinterlace is destroying the results You are assuming that any video have one problem.īut 90% times the videos have a lot of problems. I want to explain better the issue with the deinterlace.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |