As others have noted, you need more resolution than you have to get workable results.
I’m pushing the limits of what is possible, and unfortunately I have yet to get acceptable results with 720x480i and 720x576i DVD film and video content. I can upscale 720x480p to 1280x720p, with barely acceptable results. But interlaced SD sources, deinterlaced with QTGMC, VEAI can’t yet handle and give acceptable results (IMO). I’m experienced with QTGMC and yet I can’t get 720p that has decent detail. My best results have used:
QTGMC( Preset=“Slower”, EZKeepGrain=1.0, SourceMatch=3, Lossless=2, MatchEnhance=0.8, Sharpness=1.0, Sbb=0, FPSDivisor=2 )
That Sharpness setting is much higher than recommended with Lossless enabled (when not using VEAI). Anything over 1.0 doesn’t help, over 1.5 and halos begin to form.
In my testing, Artemis-MQ-v9, Artemis-HQv9 (in 1.8.0) give the highest detail. I’ve tried most of the models, including Artemis-MQ from 1.2.0, and Gaia-CG in 1.6.1, read a bunch of sharpening and upscaling methods using Avisynth, did some tests, but still can’t get 480i and 576i looking good at 720p. CAS and/or vsMSharpen have provided the best sharpening, but they can only do so much with turds.
I have tried Artemis-MQv9 1.8.0 followed by Gaia-HQv5. I also tried Gaia-CG 1.6.1 as a followup. Either I have exceptional visual perception, or those that think this produces acceptable results are near blind (IMO). To me, the 2 step method looks like overprocessed crap.
Tomorrow I’m going to try the new beta with the deinterlacer model.
I read all the posts on the facebook page, and I gather that deinterlacing is new territory for the developers. My impression is that they have ignored the work that went into making QTGMC and haven’t even studied how it works. That’s my impression. Apologies if they actually did dissect QTGMC. Maybe QTGMC just isn’t compatible with the processing VEAI does?
quoted from the QTGMC wiki:
"The core algorithm is this:
- Bob the source clip. Temporally smooth the bob to remove shimmer then analyse its motion
- More accurately interpolate the source clip (e.g. NNEDI3). Use the motion analysis from previous step to temporally smooth this interpolate with motion compensation. This removes shimmer whilst retaining detail. Resharpen the result to counteract any blurring.
- A final light temporal smooth to clean the result.
Stages 0 & 1 use a binomial smooth (similar to a Gaussian) to remove deinterlacing shimmer. Stage 2 uses a simple linear smoothing. Each stage’s temporal radius (the number of frames out from the current) is given in the settings TR0, TR1 and TR2.
The shimmer reduction is critical for the algorithm so TR0 and TR1 should be at least 1. TR0 only affects the motion analysis and is only indirectly visible, increasing it to 2 will generally give a better motion match. Increasing TR1 and TR2 will create a smoother and more stable output and more strongly denoise; the downside is increased blurring and possibly lost detail, and potentially can cause stronger artifacts where motion analysis is inaccurate. The blur is partially counteracted by the sharpening settings.
The deinterlacer primarily tries to reduce “bob shimmer”: horizontal lines of shimmer created when interpolating an interlaced stream. Consequently any changes made to the initial interpolation (e.g. NNEDI3) are expected to be horizontal lines of change only. The repair stages Rep0, Rep1 and Rep2 occur after each temporal smooth. They only allow such horizontal lines of change - shimmer fixes, discarding other changes. This prevents the motion blur that temporal smoothing could generate. The repX settings control the size of areas to allow through."