Picture quality MP1.0 vs DVBviewer (1 Viewer)

[Mister Bean]

Picture quality of DVB-S MPEG2 transmissions (SD) is in DVB-viewer better than in Mediaportal 1.0. I use exact the same graphs for both applications (Cyberlink PowerDVD 8 decoder --> VMR9 --> Catalyst 8.12 --> ATI HD3450). My HTPC is connected via HDMI to my Panasonic 50PV70 plasma screen.
While watching DVB-S MPEG2 transmissions (standard definition), there is pixelation or alaising (some kind of a strange pattern) noticeable in the small details of the TV picture (for example in the hair of a person).
It's very small but noticeable. My wife don't see it. In DVBviewer are these 'distortions' absolutely not visible.
What can be the cause of this small problem? TVserver? Tsreader? VMR9 settings which are used by MP?

Picture of H264/MPEG4 transmissions is perfect!

Thanks in advance for the replies.

Regards,
Nico

 

[zeebee]

Do you also use VMR9 in DVBViewer? Normally there is overlay set as renderer. If you record something with one program and play it with the another you know if it is the tvserver or playback engine.

I dont see any differences in PQ with SD.

 

[Mister Bean]

zeebee,

I'm using VMR9 in DVBviewer (checked with GraphStudio) not the default overlay renderer. I will make a recording with Mediaportal and playback with DVBviewer, see what happens. . .

Regards,
Nico

 

[Mister Bean]

I've just made a recording in Mediaportal and played back with DVBviewer. In this case the picture quality is perfect (no aliasing/pixelation noticeable). Again: I use exactly the same graph for DVBviewer and Mediaportal (Cyberlink PowerDVD8 MPEG2 decoder --> VMR9 --> Catalyst 8.12 --> ATI HD3450 (I'm using XP SP3)

I think it has something to do with the VMR9 settings in Mediaportal. (I have played around with de renderersetting in MP configuration, but without results). Can a developper take a look at this problem, cause I'm thinking Mediaportal offers not the maximum possible picture quality for MPEG2 transmissions when VMR9 is used?



Regards,
Nico

 

[zeebee]

Can you also try EVR with XP? Or make a screenshot of the differences? I'd really like to see it...

Aliasing: to avoid this in MP I have to use force vsync with CCC.

 

[grubi]

I've just made a recording in Mediaportal and played back with DVBviewer. In this case the picture quality is perfect (no aliasing/pixelation noticeable). Again: I use exactly the same graph for DVBviewer and Mediaportal (Cyberlink PowerDVD8 MPEG2 decoder --> VMR9 --> Catalyst 8.12 --> ATI HD3450 (I'm using XP SP3)

I think it has something to do with the VMR9 settings in Mediaportal. (I have played around with de renderersetting in MP configuration, but without results). Can a developper take a look at this problem, cause I'm thinking Mediaportal offers not the maximum possible picture quality for MPEG2 transmissions when VMR9 is used?

Regards,
Nico

Quite Interresting.
The only thing I can think of is that different VRM9 settings are used.
I'm using a similar setup "PowerDVD8 MPEG2 decoder --> VMR9 --> Catalyst 8.8 --> ATI HD2600 (XP SP3).
I'm also using a full HD display connected via HDMI (pixelperfect).

As I'm always after the best possible picture quality it would be nice if you could share a short recording and describe what difference we should look for. For testing I only have FireDTV viewer which is a DVBViewer OEM verson AFAIK. But that should be ok.

 

[rtv]

Quite Interresting.

Well I enjoy this

The only thing I can think of is that different VRM9 settings are used.

There's only a small set of "options" the VMR9 rendering has (coders might be interested in this).
The few which are quality related are those offered in the GUI.
Of course other apps can "trick" you into another subjective point (like adjusting sharpness, colors or other image manipulation) but the identical render graph will definately produce the exact same results

I'm using a similar setup "PowerDVD8 MPEG2 decoder --> VMR9 --> Catalyst 8.8 --> ATI HD2600 (XP SP3).
I'm also using a full HD display connected via HDMI (pixelperfect).

There are still tons of options here. Some displays e.g. allow to set the correct HDMI mode (which will be a huge increase in contrast).

As I'm always after the best possible picture quality

Sorry, I don't like that fact either but as a matter of fact Vista's EVR renderer is superior here. Especially when it comes to high quality DXVA profiles many will only be available with DXVA2 (The quite common Nvidia 8200 onboard GPU for example only does "BOB" deinterlacing when used with XP and a non Phenom).

You might want to try "DXVAChecker" to check the details on this.

it would be nice if you could share a short recording and describe what difference we should look for.

This is hard to validate:
1. you'd need e.g. the graph details of both (making sure DVBV isn't using overlay, etc).
2. some codec settings are stored per application.
3. some stuff might "look" better while in fact it isn't. Many people e.g. will like high quality 5:5 pulldowns more than the raw film. That's just a matter of viewing habbits - and a common point of "24p" frustration.
4. some differences - especially when it comes to deinterlacing - cannot be caught in screenshots properly.


That said I hope to see a sophisticated discussion here

 

[grubi]

rtv:

Did you see it for yourself that EVR is really superior to VMR?
Of course if one renderer is operating in VA deinterlacing whereas the other does simply BOB there will be a huge difference, but when both are doing VA deinterlacing (which is the case in my setup) is there still a difference (I'm always sceptical when it comes to PQ improvements due to new technologies)?

This is hard to validate

Of course it is. That is the reason I want a short example to be shared so that I can verify this myself.

you'd need e.g. the graph details of both (making sure DVBV isn't using overlay, etc).

If I understood correctly the OP already verified that the graphs in use are identical.

There are still tons of options here. Some displays e.g. allow to set the correct HDMI mode (which will be a huge increase in contrast).

What do you mean exactly?
RGB-PC level / RGB-Studio level / YCbCr 4:2:2?
The possibility to select this has been added since Catalyst 8.11 however it still (Catalyst 8.12) does not operate correctly on displays supporting YCbCr 4:2:2 so I'm still on Catalyst 8.8. However this is negotiated between graphic card/driver and display so as this combo did not change in the OP's scenario it should not be of any influence for this specific case.

some stuff might "look" better while in fact it isn't. Many people e.g. will like high quality 5:5 pulldowns more than the raw film.

Absolutely.
And this is exactly the reason I want to view the differences myself.

 

[tourettes]

If I understood correctly the OP already verified that the graphs in use are identical.

There are still tons of options here. Some displays e.g. allow to set the correct HDMI mode (which will be a huge increase in contrast).

There are still possibilities for difference:

1) Custom EVR / VMR9 allocator can be used (lime MP is doing).
2) Application can change settings that VMR9 / EVR renderer are using (like the resize method etc.).
3) Maybe something more that I don't know off.

 

[grubi]

If I understood correctly the OP already verified that the graphs in use are identical.

There are still tons of options here. Some displays e.g. allow to set the correct HDMI mode (which will be a huge increase in contrast).

There are still possibilities for difference:

1) Custom EVR / VMR9 allocator can be used (lime MP is doing).
2) Application can change settings that VMR9 / EVR renderer are using (like the resize method etc.).
3) Maybe something more that I don't know off.

Thanks for pointing out some additional sources of difference.
For this reason again I want to try to encourage the OP to post some material which makes it possible the phenomen to be verified by others. If there really is a difference/improvement maybe this could be made available for MP also.