The models do not change?
My point is that this software is guaranteed to work for one year it appears because you only get updates for one year. You have to pay to get a new update.
After one year, they could decide not to support older versions and you might not be able to download a model anymore, then you must buy a new update.
So the EOL for this software is 1 year in my eyes.
That seems to work, I just tried it, but the results are different for each instance: 2.6.4 with default models, 3.0.0 with default models, and 3.0.0 with the 2.6.4 model files.
3.0.0 with the 2.6.4 model files produce even softer results than 2.6.4 or 3.0.0. I tested VEAI 3.0.0 with the 2.6.4 model files by just hitting export, and also by opening the command line and pasting the command with scale=0 changed to scale=2. It had no effect, the results were exactly the same.
Hereās an updated animated PNG (with correct 1280 x 960 dimensions now) that includes 2.6.4 model files copied into the 3.0.0 model folder. 2.6.4, 3.0.0 with 2.6.4 model files, and 3.0.0 all produce different results. It does appear to me that the 3.0.0 version of the model is a completely new or different version of the model.
(right click ā view image for full size)
test_sample.zip (745.1 KB)
Hereās the model file information:
Topaz VEAI 2.6.4 model file:
Name: alqs-v2-fnet-fp16-288x288-2x-ov.tz
Size: 6498709 bytes (6346 KiB)
CRC32: A9F23519
CRC64: EBB87CD05D7884AD
SHA256: B5DA76517DEF55D353EAACE3FE1D2DB4C717C803097F87A9F78A3D177839B053
SHA1: 1DEA3904271992D9CE5CBDC83BC5211B48083886
BLAKE2sp: AE65023B0BD61F1C53D9CC1DCD62CE4D198493999BBDBC9A47E1C5928215EA82
Topaz VEAI 3.0.0 model file:
Name: alqs-v2-fnet-fp16-288x288-2x-ov.tz
Size: 6485195 bytes (6333 KiB)
CRC32: 92F4DC31
CRC64: D61B480997D53E73
SHA256: D56296CCC98366BED228ADC71F57A227026F40DEFBAC9C861E8B471C3E16E3B1
SHA1: 679DC9DBB5A061EB00407902C8A66874AAB30C4C
BLAKE2sp: 45A1DB834E858FF1BDDAEA81EA4D681952F5AFCD4BE52AADB5EBF7C894EE3A54
Topaz VEAI 2.6.4 model file:
Name: alqs-v2-gnet-fp16-288x288-2x-ov.tz
Size: 25944939 bytes (24 MiB)
CRC32: DCAA22AA
CRC64: A5C4968C25F2A70A
SHA256: D85280FE1FE7D5515E5A7664DA2085CB189A45CC8EAD66CA7ACB486F4595C781
SHA1: 088A7077BAAD93E31A735484EA80601D37833E02
BLAKE2sp: 34FDAFFF8B0D4D44E1BDA27E96B861D38CEFE9D0F6C6B11E2212602B0AF78F35
Topaz VEAI 3.0.0 model file:
Name: alqs-v2-gnet-fp16-288x288-2x-ov.tz
Size: 25898977 bytes (24 MiB)
CRC32: CF5AF205
CRC64: 590EE5FBD9369E70
SHA256: 1436805048ED6BFDA5BAC654E12E6E3367ABAD0185F9F9BE3E13D17E73C64DC8
SHA1: AC71385827652783A3B765EEBE3DBF1938E4F5A0
BLAKE2sp: 67A0390228C12E5F1FEF80F2C7D824189CEDB33783A54CF93B5E2158067840A5
Topaz VEAI 2.6.4 also has this model file, which seems to be the fnet and gnet files combined, which isnāt used by VEAI 3.0.0:
Name: alqs-v2-fgnet-fp16-288x288-2x-ov.tz
Size: 32453801 bytes (30 MiB)
CRC32: 70123CD7
CRC64: 396AE8450707C20C
SHA256: 6C9EF36CE113413BD983F144E33BCC258625E9F31021A6B2EDB8491172315185
SHA1: 5128E69EF903BFABF864C1BF1B97CC6D8CC0BF71
BLAKE2sp: A40D18B5B41256B7E9E53D6C316355E5646CC8BDCC999229F397025DC685DA65
I only use Proteus V3 in both 2.6.4 and V3 on three separate computers. All three are AMD Ryzen computers. I mostly do 540 to 1080 but sometimes 1080 to 2160. Here is a rundown on the machines and the VEAI speed in sec/frame. Currently Iām seeing only a very slight difference in speed between 2.6.4 and V3, 0.01sec/f in all the computers. Quality wise I still like 2.6.4 but that is because I use h.264 with CRF of 5. I average somewhere around 100Mb/s file. I then do what post processing I need to do. The hardware encoder route in V3 is fine for streaming or very poor original files. The hardware encoder in the AMD RX 6600 is poor compared to the Nvidia RTX 3060ās. Software encoding is still better than hardware encoders(IMO) in GPUās but you need enough CPU cores to make it worth the time to encode difference.
Ryzen 9 3900x RTX 3060TI Windows 11 .11sec/f 540-1080 1080-2160 .41sec/f
Ryzen 5 5600x RTX 306012GB Windows 11 .11sec/f 540-1080 1080-2160 .41sec/f
Ryzen 7 5700G RX 6600 Windows 10 .17 sec/f 540-1080 1080-2160 .62sec/f
Well I sure want that to be the solution. I tried your sample, and no, I could not get the versions to yield matching results. I never use that model so I am personally less invested. I was able to get Artemis High Quality to match with my little number swap.
Your sample does not have the minimum 30 frames that 2.6.4 seems to want. (Maybe I made that up and itās not quite that many.) Probably not related.
I tried a few more variations of the command. Nothing seems to trigger the model change for Strong Dehalo.
I love the idea of manual model swapping. No idea if Iāll ever get around to that.
with AI V3.00 when I process the videoā¦after finishing a video , it repeats the entire process again and again. I have to check the finished clip to see if it is complete because the Topaz Ai 3 does not stop just goes on repeating the entire process againā¦is this an issue or what am I doing wrongā¦did not have problem 2.6 Enhance.
Hi, I noticed that too, after the end of a treatment, itās not over, it happened to me with quite long treatments, probably a check but I waited and it ended me .
When I input a 640x480 mkv source extracted from a DVD, it is judged as 720x480.
And the x2 upscale output is determined and output as 1440x960.
In ver2.6.4, x2 upscale (200%) was judged and output as 1280x960.
It seems that the width of the video is incorrectly determined.
Using Macbook Pro 14inch
No, theyāve not eliminated the ProRes 422 option (in the previous version there was just ProRes 422 HQ and in this version thereās ProRes 422 HQ and ProRes 422 LT). But in their promotion for this version they said it would (also) have a ProRes 444 option but it doesnāt have the ProRes 444 option they said it would. And I want that option (preferably with an alpha channel preserved, ProRes 4444).
Iām always using Topaz Video AI for long time (since first launch). My graphic card always = RTX 2070 Super. The v.3.0 release is rendering very very slow in comparison to the last V 2.6.4 version. I tried so far different settings in v.3.0 for export without any improvement of rendering speed. I hope, that a new v.3.0 version coming up soon with much more faster rendering (minimum as fast as V 2.6.4.
So I stay further with v 2.6.4 for the moment.
Can you test proteus v2 in 2.6.4 vs proteus v3 in Topaz v3. I am getting less artifacts with v2 idk why.
Ugh ā I donāt get the reasoning. Why cherry pick the codecs?
Do they have to pay a licensing fee to use the ProRes codecs on Macs? They are already on the machine.
I wouldnāt think ProRes codecs would be used on PCs. They have plenty of their own.
I am starting to get an odd feeling about the ābehind the scenesā with this software.
I am confused why this even supports MKV.
There is a demand for high-quality private videos saved on DVD.
In this case, mkv would be an excellent means to easily extract the source.
MKVToolnixGUI is a free tool not by Topaz to merge together the video layer and the sound layer of two video files. Just drop in both files and select of which one you want to have the video and of which one you want to have the audio and then it will make a new file having both.
I understand MKV ā it was very popular for pirated movies on the internet.
It just seems to me ā stick with standard video format containers. If you want MKV ā then use a tool to convert your video into it.
MKV just cheapens the software and it is not a widely compatible container.
I have no idea what market they are going after now. If you do MKV then letās have a truly professional container ā MXF. At least MXF is well established and excepted in the video industry.
I think you got way off track. I suggested MKVToolnix GUI for splitting a file into sections to then feed into Topaz. It has NOTHING to do with Topaz itself.
Ok - I apologize. This forum is difficult to to maneuver through. It just appears like an endless list of random responses. lol. Sorry.
this feature is planned for a future update. itās on their roadmap.
Nice to have a roadmap, but useless if not applied. Where is the chief navigator to control the best track?
I did a lot of testing between Proteus V2 and V3 when it was released and I found V3 much better for my use case. It had a much wider range of control so you cannot use the same amount of change in V3 that you did in V2. I also preprocess most of my videos to a more lossless video to feed into VEAI. I try to clean up the video mildly first. If the video is poor VEAI might find patterns in the noise in some frames. If it does it will bring those out and that is hard to regulate. The file that I feed VEAI originally might have been 500Kb/s encoding and a size of 400Mb but what I feed VEAI after preprocessing is 18Mb/s and say 12GB in size after cleaning. Youāre never going to get a Blu-Ray quality video though with such a poor source video but you will get something that looks better once upscaled and slightly enhanced. Always try to test your final video on the target hardware. If thatās a 60 inch TV, a 130" projector or your computer monitor make sure to use it if possible. Try to make smaller changes to VEAI settings and if possible only to a couple of sliders in Proteus after estimating.
