What's about this? Do you like the idea? Is there any PAL 1.66:1 DVD that could be used? I thought to use the PaNup technique, but I need both NTSC and PAL for that...

Hi guys! Its great to see so many familiar faces here!

It seems like a nice place to spend the days hahahah

PaNup™ - PAL and NTSC upscaled

This technique should be used to obtain a good quality upscale, when two different standard definition video are available, better than using one source only.

The idea is simple: take two captures of the same content, one PAL, one NTSC, then merge them to “squeeze” every bit of details from it… everyone knows that a PAL capture has 576 horizontal lines, while NTSC has 480… now, when a movie was transferred to video, usually original resolution was higher than that (not all the times, but often); so, the PAL and NTSC “received” different lines of image… see the next image (obviously intentionally exagerated…):



As you can see, the red, green and blue lines have different thickness in PAL and NTSC; the aim of this technique is to combine those different lines to recreate an image closer to the original one.

To test my theory, I took some high definition images, resized each dimension to 1/3 to simulate NTSC, and to 2/5 to simulate PAL, then I wrote a script to mix and upscale the simulated PAL and NTSC images. Here you are the close-ups of the results; PAL and NTSC are the simulated images upscaled with pointresize, PALup and NTSCup are upscaled using a bicubicresize, to simulate a simple upscaler, PaNup™is my script (oh, how much I love acronyms – PaNup™=PAL and NTSC upscaled) – no noise reduction is used:





Of course, the validity of this tests are questionable, as the PAL and NTSC images are simulated; nevertheless, these give an idea of what could be achieved using “simple and poor” low definition media, like VHS or better laserdisc, and DVD too! Not HDTV, OK, but still quite a good result.

The problem is, in real life, it’s close to impossible to find a movie which has a PAL and NTSC version that match each other 100% – usually they use different masters, so cropping and color grading are different… but, in those almost-impossilbe cases where a PAL and a NTSC laserdisc (and VHS) are virtually the same, the ideal condition is to capture the PAL at 768×576 and the NTSC at 640×480 (actual letterbox images at 2.35:1 will be 768×326 and 640×272, at 1.85 will be 768×416 and 640×346); if the capture card could capture at 720×576/480, only the Y axis will benefit – this is also the case of DVD.

***

I tested PaNup using “The Abyss” PAL DVD letterbox, and NTSC R6 DVD, anamorphic; overlaid at 40% PAL and 60% R6 (as it has more resolution); applied at the end a grain plate
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/61161

Another example: Aliens Vs Predator: Requiem
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/63368

Star Wars - A New Hope 1997 (adding Super Resolution):
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/125558
(more comparisons on post #18)

It could be an interesting technique to restore movies that are not available in HD, but only as PAL and NTSC DVDs – or letterbox and anamorphic DVDs, OR, just missing shots not present in HD, but only on PAL and NTSC DVDs... or, if someone would like to make a fan extended edition, this could be used to improve the quality of SD deleted scenes!

KUSH GAUGE™

What is the Kush Gauge™?

It’s a rule of thumb to calculate the needed bitrate for H.264 encoded video; it was written by Kush Amerasinghe, a computer scientist. In this context, the word “gauge” means “a device used to make measurements”

How does it work?

Quoting Kush’s document:
“to estimate the optimal H.264 bit rate value that would give what is considered “good quality” results for a given video, you could multiply the target pixel count by the frame rate; then multiply the result by a factor of 1, 2 or 4, depending on its motion rank; and then multiply that result by 0.07 (the constant, Ed.) to get the bit rate in bps (divide that by 1,000 to get a kbps estimate or by 1,000,000 to get a Mbps estimate).”

The Kush Gauge™ formula:

width x height x FPS x motion rank x constant = final bitrate in bps

Practical example:

1280 × 720 @24fps, medium motion (rank 2):
1280 × 720 × 24 × 2 × 0.07 = 3,096,576 bps = ~ 3000 kbps

What is the motion rank?

The amount of motion could be called “motion rank”; from Kush’s document:
“As a general rule, try to simplify it into three ranks: Low, Medium, High. To define these ranks in real-world terms:
• Low motion is a video that has minimal movement. For example, a person talking in front of a camera without moving much while the camera itself and the background is not moving at all.
• Medium motion would be some degree of movement, but in a more predictable and orderly manner, which means some relatively slow camera and subject movements, but not many scene changes or cuts or sudden snap camera movements or zooms where the entire picture changes into something completely different instantaneously.
• High motion would be something like the most challenging action movie trailer, where not only the movements are fast and unpredictable but the scenes also change very rapidly.”

the motion rank values are as following:

• 1 for low motion (e.g. news)
  
• 2 for medium motion (e.g. movie)
  
• 4 for high motion (e.g. sport)
  

prologue: DON’T (always) TRUST COMPANIES!

Following many HDTV and internet broadcaster advice, a “studio quality” transmission for an H.264 1080p transmission could be achieved with a bitrate of a mere 6mbps; if we use the Kush Gauge formula, we can see that this is true only if the motion factor is lower than average… for example, a 16/9 sport material at 29.97fps needs a 17.4mbps bitrate!


The Kush Gauge™ formula:

width x height x FPS x motion rank x constant = final bitrate in bps

(where constant is 0.07 for H.264/MPEG-4 part 10, or AVC)

Read more here: Restoration tips: Kush Gauge™

ANDREA’S COROLLARY TO THE KUSH GAUGE™

To calculate video bitrate for a codec different from H.264, the Kush Gauge costant value should be changed accordingly to the codec used.


Other lossy video codecs (apart H.264/MPEG-4 part 10, or AVC)

Even if AVC is widely used, also thanks to the x.264 open source encoder, there are many other codecs still in use nowadays; the main ones are:

• MPEG-2 – used in many DTV and HDTV broadcasting, in DVD and sometimes in BD
  
• VC-1 – used sometimes in BD; once used in HD-DVD
  
• H.265, or HEVC – new codec, used in particular for 4K/UHD
  

• 0.045 for HEVC
  
• 0.075 for VC-1
  
• 0.136 for MPEG-2 (software encoders)
  
• 0.116 for MPEG-2 (hardware encoders)
  

• 1 for low motion (e.g. news)
  
• 2 for medium motion (e.g. movie)
  
• 4 for high motion (e.g. sport)
  

THE SLICE TECHNIQUE™

What’s about this so-called “Slice Technique™”?
In few words: achieve the widest (highest) image possible adding a “slice” of another video clip.

Be more specific…
Well, sometimes there are two editions of the same movie, where one has more image on one side, while less on the other side, and vice versa. So I thought to use the missing “slice” of one joined together with all the other, to obtain the widest image possible. Indeed, it could be only (e.g.) 3% wider than any each version, but I much prefer a 100% wide image Vs a “mere” 97%… (^^,)
Of course, it’s quite difficult – sometimes impossible – to use this technique with every movie, because what must be taken in account are the dimensions (eventual image rotation, width and heigth of sources and chosen slice, eventual resizing and cropping, exact point of matching), colors (both versions should have the same color grading, or one should color match the other), video quality (grain, resolution/definition, different compression used in the sources, frame whobbling in a version not present in the other – in particular at the beginning and ending of a shot), etc.
In these examples, I used a vertical slice and two sources, but it’s possible to use an horizontal slice, or even multiple slices from various sources – obviously, in this case, a good result will be astonishingly difficult…
Hint: best results are from two versions with same resolution – like 2 Blu-rays, 2 DVDs, 1 Blu-ray and 1 HDTV.

EXAMPLE:


“Escape from New York” examples (attention: only preliminary tests, not used for final project)
comparison screenshots:
[Image: EFNY_test_201311190111_000001.jpg]
[Image: EFNY_test_201311190111_000143.jpg]
[Image: EFNY_test_201311190111_000774.jpg]
[Image: EFNY_test_201311190111_001152.jpg]
[Image: EFNY_test_201311190111_001747.jpg]
[Image: EFNY_test_201311222331_000156.jpg]
[Image: EFNY_test_201311222331_000333.jpg]
[Image: EFNY_test_201311222331_000451.jpg]
[Image: EFNY_test_201311222331_000816.jpg]

It looks like there’s more image at the bottom in some shots on the XXX Vs. YYY. It is possible to adjust that too?
It is not possible to use it, as the small “slice” on the bottom of the YYY is missing… like the following example:

see the missing piece at the bottom right? Unless there is some method to “invent” the missing piece using surrounding images… and I’m afraid, there is not (yet)! EDIT: if the corner is small enough, inpaint could be used; result may vary from quite noticeable to perfect, depending on source and size.

How about using XXX as the main source and just adjusting the colors, instead of using the YYY?
It depends… if XXX color matched with YYY as color reference is better, then use XXX; if not, then use YYY – I must add that sometimes the best solution is to use XXX for some scenes and YYY for others… your mileage can vary!
Comments, improvements, corrections are welcome!

OVERLAP MATCHING

What is the Overlap matching?

When two images of different sizes are used to improve the final result.

Could you be more specific?

Usually this is used when two different versions of the same movie are available at different aspect ratios.

Let’s say you want to restore a movie that is not available in high definition, and you want to upscale a DVD or a laserdisc capture. If you are lucky, an anamorphic DVD is available, so a theoretical 720×576 (PAL) or 720×480 (NTSC) max resolution could be achievable. But, if the original aspect ratio of the movie is 2.35:1, then you have only 720×432 (PAL) or 720×360 (NTSC). Well, enough resolution left to do a decent upscale. However, if the DVD is not anamorphically enhanced, actual resolution drops to 720×324 (PAL) or 720×252 (NTSC).

But what if the only (or the best) available low definition sources are analog? In this case, a 2.35:1 original resolution in laserdisc could be at maximum 576×324 (PAL) or 576×262 (NTSC), while VHS could be 328×324 (PAL) or 328×262 (NTSC)… pretty poor…

So, how it’s possible to improve the quality of such low resolution sources? It’s easy! Overlap a pan&scan version of the same movie over the letterbox version! The P&S version of a laserdisc could be 576×576 (PAL) or 576×480 (NTSC), while VHS could be 328×576 (PAL) or 328×480 (NTSC). Can you see the differences?

EXAMPLE:

here you can see how a P&S version overlapped to a letterbox version, upscaled, have a better resolution than the latter; this will lead to better details in the center of the image, leaving less detailed image at the borders. It is also possible to use two letterboxed versions (like 1.66:1 and 2.35:1) – even if difference in details will be less than using a P&S version, it nevertheless improve definition a lot.
A lower difference in aspect ratios between sources makes the final resolution only slightly better, but often this avoids all the image cropping and variations that lie in the pan&scan version.

Can I use an open matte version instead of pan& scan?

It is often futile to use an open matte version with a letterboxed version both from the same format, as active image have the same effective vertical resolution; however, it is possible to use an open matte version of an higher resolution source overlapped to a lower resolution source.
So, for example, an open matte DVD (with higher horizontal resolution) overlapped to a letterbox laserdisc; or an open matte laserdisc or DVD (both with higher horizontal resolution) overlapped to a letterboxed VHS, will increase the details clarity of the final upscaled version.

What about high definition formats, like Blu-ray and HDTV sources?

in some rare cases, the open matte version of the same (or comparable) format of the letterbox version has a better resolution – due to several factors like different masters, encoding, bitrates etc. – in such cases, it’s possible to use the Overlap matching method, although usually with lower quality improvement in comparison to previous cases.

NOTE: consider that pan&scan cropping vary usually everytime between shots, and often during a single shot; so this method is really really hard to follow, much more than the “Slice technique”…

Top, upscaled DVD, bottom, upscaled DVD with HDTV overlapped:
[Image: matrix_083217.jpg]
http://s27.postimg.cc/fwskn8q8x/matrix_083217.jpg

same image as the previous second one, not cropped:
[Image: matrix_PLUS.jpg]
http://s22.postimg.cc/3ucfmeuj3/matrix_PLUS.jpg

WARNING: this is a very difficult technique, and could be really hard and time consuming to find out the perfect settings; I did this simple match in an hour, and both previous and next shots have completely different setting… be aware!
Comments, improvements, corrections are welcome!

1. Obtain the original full frame version – if still exist, and is possible to obtain it
   
2. Make a “patchwork” using different versions that exist in the consumer market.
   

Well starting out, here is the project I began on the OT a long, long time ago (to quote a movie). The original thread is here: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.c...pic/17002/

Project Info:

The basis of this project is to color regrade the Blu-ray (BD) to look more like the 1995 THX laserdisc (LD) and include as many diverse soundtracks as possible.

Video:
2010 Blu-Ray (Theatrical Cut) video color regraded to the 1995 THX laserdisc

Audio:
1. 1995 Laserdisc Dolby Digital 5.1. This soundtrack is a rare 70mm mix that was used to test Alien in the Sensurround format before it was abandoned for conventional Dolby Stereo 70mm (track 2). This soundtrack was accidentally put on the 1995 laserdisc when it was thought it was the standard Dolby 70mm mix. It contains different sound effects, musical cues and dialogue.

2. 2010 Blu-Ray (Theatrical Cut) Dolby Digital 4.1 remixed to Dolby Digital 5.1 with mono surrounds. This soundtrack represents the original Dolby Stereo mix as heard in theaters on a 70mm film presentation.

3. 1992 Laserdisc PCM 2.0 Dolby Stereo/Surround. This soundtrack should be the closest to the original Dolby Stereo mix as heard in theaters on 35mm film.

Subtitles:
English (PGS subs from the existing BR)
Spanish
French
German

Pics:

Final MKV Pics


BD/BD regraded to the 1995 LD


Thanks
jonno: For another capture of the laserdisc and for the CE LD's PCM 2.0 (And his knowledge)
spoRv: For the THX LD's Ac3 5.1
Doombot: For testing
Feallan: For testing