I’m on a 2019 16" Macboo pro with the i9 and the AMD 5500M…
I was wondering, since these models have the T2 chip, which also contains accelerators for Apple ProRes… wouldn’t there be a way to optimize Topaz processing to take full advantage of those additional dedicated chips?
Anyway my other question is, does it make any difference for the processing speed, especially for the stabilization workflow, wether I use an export container and format opposed to any other? Would exporting in MOV and ProRes more efficient than exporting in mpa H264 on a 2019 mac?
Themis - Since my previous post, I have had a chance to test Themis. It is better, but still s bit harsh looking. I found that running it alongside Proteus manual, with only dehalo turned up to 25 (everything else at 0), works well. The dehalo effect softens the harshness of Themis, so it looks more natural and the motion deblur is still effective.
Okay, thanks, but if we use Appolo with the same frame rate, there are no changes on the image? And will we be able to get a good quality if we double the frequency (from 50 fps to 100 fps) with Proteus in addition and we redefine 50 fps in the editing software?
Would you add a feature so that multiple processes can be queued up to run one at a time instead of all ran at the same time? If there already exists this feature, I can’t seem to find it.
If 60 Hz is the max your TV can do then yes 60 fps will probably look smoother as it can’t output 120 fps (maybe it will skip every other frame).
If your GPU/desktop is set to run at 60Hz and your monitor has a max of 60Hz then then 60Hz should look the smoothest on that system (since it won’t skip frames). Or the desktop/monitor might actually be running more like 59.94Hz so it might be a bit better to output at 59.94 fps. Same for TVs. if you want the smoothest motion (if it can’t handle 100/120 Hz).
It depends on your monitor too.
Click on “nvidia control panel” and go to display->change resolution and see what your resolution and refresh rate is and see what refresh rates are available in the list and what it recommends (eg. in mine it only offers 60Hz in that list because that’s what my monitor outputs. I also have a higher refresh monitor but it’s not being used with this pc). You can check the specs of your monitor too re: refresh rate. If the monitor could do >60Hz it might only do that with a certain connection. So check the refresh rate of the monitor - it should say in the specs/product info.
You could also check your TV specs - if that can play through a USB stick at 120 Hz (120Hz refresh rate) you could render a version for the TV at that refresh rate and it may look smoother.
I now have all the monitors 60kHz, but in the future, hopefully there will be 120! If I zoom in from HD to 4k and convert to 120fps, do I need to separate these processes into two passes? And what to do in the first place, 4k or 120 frames? Or just choose Apollo+Artemis
By default it allows you to select a model for frame rate increasing and a model for the enhancement (eg. upscaling). So you could just do that (so it’s basically chaining the process there - probably doing 2 renders internally (or more if you select the other options like stabilization/deblur) with a temporary file). I don’t know if there might be quality improvements doing it in another way (eg. 2 renders that you do yourself) eg. where you have the option changing the order (eg. upscale then the frame rate increase).
As a feature request - maybe there could be an option/model for flicker reduction in video (eg. some CGI can output flickering - eg. if there are thin lines in it), where you could control the amount of flicker reduction.
I don’t really understand what you wrote. I take 4k video and add 120 fps to it with Apollo because Chronos’s incredibly distorts every video where there’s camera movement. Also, I take DVDs, or Blu-ray, and convert them to 4K120fps.
I wanted to hear advice from you in terms of the interface of the TopazAI program.
Is there a difference in the quality of the final video if I convert straight to 4K120fps at a time. Do I need to process the video before 120fps first, and then, the second time, up to 4k. Or vice versa?
There shouldn’t be a quality improvement converting to 120 fps first, then rendering to 4K as that’s probably what it’s doing anyway with temporary files when you select to do both things in one go (when you select to increase the frame rate+increase the resolution). That’s assuming the renders for each one are done in a high enough bitrate and high quality codec. But doing things individually would allow you more control and to change the order of things.
But I haven’t compared the quality of each way of doing it so I can’t tell you for sure. Maybe someone else has done tests for those things that can give you an accurate answer. Or you could try both ways of doing it to see which you think is best.
