New Version: Neat Video v4.0

John_Cline wrote on 5/6/2015, 1:40 AM

New major version: Neat Video v4

The new major version 4 of Neat Video improves the visual quality and adds new features to achieve even better noise reduction results.

Main improvements:

> Higher quality of noise reduction
> More accurate processing in scenes with changing luminance or chrominance: fade in/out, camera auto gain control, etc.
> "Dust and Scratches" filter to remove film scratches, dust, impulse interference
> "Slow Shutter" mode for video containing repeated frames
> Better sharpening quality: less halos, sharper edges
> "High Quality" mode for better detail preservation and sharper image (at the cost of reduced processing speed: 1.5-4 times slower)

Optimized workflow

> Several source frames accessible directly in plug-in window provide a choice of frame for profiling
> Restructured filter settings: better navigation, greater flexibility and easier experimenting
> Improved preview takes all temporal and spatial filters into account
(to adjust filters individually and in combination; to avoid roundtrips to host application for checking the final results)
> "Variants" of filtration to visually compare results achieved with different filter settings
> New filter preset collection to solve typical filtration tasks

Faster processing and more responsive GUI

> Preview is updated faster when filter settings are adjusted
> Multiple optimizations have allowed to preserve the speed of processing despite its greater complexity
> "Skip Neat Video Processing" option to temporarily disable all instances of Neat Video filters

Neat Video Web Site

Full List of Changes in v4.0

Back to post

Comments

Grazie wrote on 5/13/2015, 6:39 AM

Huh! I didn't know that. Learnt something new today - thanks Redpaw.

Grazie

redpaw wrote on 5/13/2015, 7:02 AM

very handy... especially for multicamera shoots.
each camera on separate track, and create the profile for each of them and apply only to the trackFX.
but it's messed up now ;/

vtxrocketeer wrote on 5/13/2015, 9:35 PM

redpaw, I cannot reproduce your results.

I added two clips to one track adjacent to each other, placed the cursor on a frame of one to create a profile, added NeatVideo 4 as track level FX, profiled and noise reduced, and rendered. I placed the rendered video on the same timeline, expanded to view each frame, and I found no black frames between the (previously) two events.

I also cannot reproduce your results when the events are on separate tracks, tail-to-head or even overlapped, both track having NV added as track level FX. The cut is clean with no black frames. Source footage for all of my tests are Cineform avi's.

I'm on 13, build 444.

Have you tinkered with the effects resulting from use of CPU and/or GPU for NV?

OldSmoke wrote on 5/14/2015, 6:03 AM

redraw

Is quantize to frames enabled in your project? If not, that could cause problems.

redpaw wrote on 5/14/2015, 8:15 AM

thanks guys, vtxrocketeer it only happens if they are on separate tracks.
i'm also on v13 b.444, and yes, tried cpu/gpu.
it's also not an issue with quantize to frames.

send an email to Vlad yesterday evening, and today he had a new build ready (wish Sony had that kind of response time!!!), but now instead of black frames the last few frames are repeated...
here's a sample:
https://vimeo.com/127822877
pass: neat

waiting to hear back from them again, and will keep you updated

vtxrocketeer wrote on 5/14/2015, 9:32 AM

I stated that I tried a number of combinations, including yours.

Have you tried to reproduce using other source footage?

redpaw wrote on 5/14/2015, 9:47 AM

ya, i know. just wanted to clear that it only happens if they are on different tracks.

yes, they asked to create a very basic project, so had one and the same (few seconds long) clip repeated on 3 tracks and the same thing happens - different footage, different codec, the same problem.

https://vimeo.com/127828711
pass: neat

vtxrocketeer wrote on 5/14/2015, 10:43 AM

Render just ONE of your tracks, single event on the track, then dump the rendered (de-noised) event onto the timeline, and expand it to frame level. What do you see at the tail and head of the rendered event?

Also, what settings are you using in NV? Temporal, spatial, both? If temporal, how many frames?

redpaw wrote on 5/15/2015, 7:28 AM

thanks for your help vtxrocketeer. i actually got another build today that seems to be fixing the issue altogether! (even tho they couldnt reproduce the problem with the same project) - what can i say - fantastic support!

wilri001 wrote on 4/12/2018, 9:20 AM

Are there filter settings that give faster rendering? Using the trial version on a 4k file with default settings, I got only 1.5 fps rendering at HD1080. I then discovered the performance tab and took the best option (which was GPU only - a Fury x) and got 4 fps. I think with this demo version it's acting on only HD1280 and will be slower on a full HD1080. That's a lot slower than the 30 fps I'm getting without Neat turned on.

Also, that performance testing of all the combinations of CPU and GPU, it says I should get 27 fps, but I don't.

Is this just the price that must be paid, or are there filter adjustments that work faster, and still give pretty good noise reduction?

OldSmoke wrote on 4/12/2018, 11:11 AM

Are there filter settings that give faster rendering? Using the trial version on a 4k file with default settings, I got only 1.5 fps rendering at HD1080. I then discovered the performance tab and took the best option (which was GPU only - a Fury x) and got 4 fps. I think with this demo version it's acting on only HD1280 and will be slower on a full HD1080. That's a lot slower than the 30 fps I'm getting without Neat turned on.

Also, that performance testing of all the combinations of CPU and GPU, it says I should get 27 fps, but I don't.

Is this just the price that must be paid, or are there filter adjustments that work faster, and still give pretty good noise reduction?

NeatVideo is compute intensive. I believe the most computing time is used on the temporal noise reduction which can be set to 2 or more frames forward and backward.

fr0sty wrote on 4/12/2018, 4:15 PM

When you ran the tests, did you set it to use the number of CPU + GPU cores that it recommended? Also make sure you take a nice chunk of VRAM out for it, but leave some for Vegas or expect render hangs and crashes.

wilri001 wrote on 4/12/2018, 8:17 PM

I got 7 fps with HD1080 source file. So even though the render is HD1080, it must work on the 4k size. So I can see that the 27 fps it said I should get was for HD720. And yes, when I turned off temporal it ran almost twice as fast. Thank you both for your help. I'm going to order it. And, I'm going to limit ISO gain on my cameras next time!