[Ned Scott]

Has any one here used smooth video project?

Yes, I have specifically used it before, and that is the biggest reason I don't like it. I've seen it first hand :)

[DJ_Izumi]

Unfortunately most stuff whether TV or movies is filmed in lower frames. Partly because most projectors are limited to 24 fps.

As someone who works in the film industry, I assure you, content is not produced in 24fps because 'Projectors are limited to 24fps'. Even for television, which could READILY display 60fps, or, well, at least 60 'half fields' per second, of interlaced video, which gave you that 'Cops' or 'Home Video' feeling, serious dramatic productions were shot on 24fps film and then transferred to 60i via a telecine. It could have looked MUCH smoother but 24fps was PREFERED as a matter of artistic preference and it is a artistic preference that is almost certainly going to remain with only a few exceptions, breaking from the rule. (And sports, people would like more frames in sports, sports is broadcast natively at 60i for a reason.)

[DJ_Izumi]

But don't take my word for it, allow this distorted, warpy bullshit that SVP generates explain to you why interpolation is bad.

[WereCatf]

I apologize for necroing a thread, but I, for one, wish to express my wish for frame interpolation as an option. Yes, video that was actually shot in 60 fps is obviously going to be better than interpolated video, but that's not an option; I can't think of any place whatsoever where you could obtain movies and TV-shows shot in 60fps. On the other hand, interpolated video is still better than watching 23.976fps or 25fps video, even with the artifacts it may introduce.

No, not everyone likes high-framerate video, but similarly not everyone dislikes it either -- unlike what some here seem to try to imply.

[brazen1]

I purchased a 240Hz panel because it was 'Top of the line' at that time. Had no idea what it was or what it meant since it was all automatic? Adjusted my panels settings just like everyone, everywhere on the internet recommended including to be sure and turn off all that extra garbage that ruins picture quality like interpolation. Always figured capabilities like that must have been an extra bell and whistle a big company like Samsung tossed into the firmware just to help sell TV's now that the feature could be listed in an add and of course no end user even knows what it means let alone be dumb enough to use it. So, I watched my panel for a couple years and one day fiddled with settings, having become more familiar with some of them. Low and behold I enabled that damn Soap opera affect and played a title. 15 mins into the movie I realized I wasn't watching the movie. I was too overcome by how well my picture looked after years of viewing with interpolation turned off.

I don't care how the artist wanted it rendered (grain and all). I don't care how others view their material. I don't care what the pros have to say. I don't care if interpolation is guess work. I don't care if the extra frames are phony. I don't care if 99% of end users purposely turn off this feature. What my eyes see is all that matters and imo, so should yours.

I've said it before: When color TV was introduced, B/W traditionalists gawked at it too. To this day, 5.1, 7.1, 9.1 users are told audio is best listened at stereo settings and we should turn off all the fake channels since after all, we were only born with 2 ears. Oh, and don't upgrade to any blu-rays because VHF and most DVD's are still far more superior since older Blu-ray titles have to actually be re-mastered conflicting with the artists intentions and true frames.

If you're like me, a rebel, and a brazen one, and your main concern is what your eyes find pleasurable to view, do yourself a favor despite what the masses tell you. Turn on the interpolation feature in your panel and play a title or two. Let your eyes be the judge. Realize, you will be called a fool. Dumb. Stupid and the likes. Take comfort knowing Samsung, Sony and the rest thought it a nifty enough little feature to include in their panels though and there is plenty of processor in all of them.

Paragraph 5 http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=229692

[Ned Scott]

Well, that's a big load of crap. Horrible examples.

When color TV was introduced it was horrible. It improved over time, but the early days were not pretty.

Multichannel sound is a lot more complex, but it is entirely possible to have nearly the same audio quality with some high end headphones and not be able to really tell the difference when it comes to direction and quality. It's not even all about direction, but also about frequency separation. Either way, I don't know anyone on this forum who insists that stereo, for a home theater, is just as good as 5.1 or higher. It's a theater, and not everyone is going to wear expensive headphones. That would be silly.

No one has ever said VHS was good. When VHS was new people already knew that it sucked, because the quality reduced over time and it was the lesser format from the betamax/vhs war. No one thought VHS was as good as DVD.

No one thinks blu-ray remastering conflicts with the artists intentions and true frames. Are you just twisting other unrelated statements together to say something new? Bluray, so far, is the closest thing we have to analog film. The bluray standard allows for pretty much every framerate that has been standardized so far, so none of that ever has to be changed.

The real reason these examples are horrible is that frame interpolation is not even close to the level of color TV's introduction, or multichannel sound, or HD video. The idea that it even comes close makes me want to vomit more than frame interpolation.

[WereCatf]

The idea that it even comes close makes me want to vomit more than frame interpolation.

You having an upset tummy doesn't really have anything to do with the subject matter.

[sarbes]

A PC can't do interpolation like this properly under normal circumstances. Instead, why don't you buy a TV which supports this?

[WereCatf]

A PC can't do interpolation like this properly under normal circumstances.

You haven't heard of Smooth Video Project, Cyberlink's PowerDVD or any of the other apps that do it?

[DJ_Izumi]

You haven't heard of Smooth Video Project

I think I've sufficiently proven that the Smooth Video Project is better named the 'Warpy Crap Project'.

[sarbes]

You haven't heard of Smooth Video Project, Cyberlink's PowerDVD or any of the other apps that do it?

I read about it. We are facing a lot of issues here:
1. TVs are far better doing frame interpolation (hardware restriction)
2. Most TVs have this already build in
3. Most users won't use frame interpolation (lowers picture quality)
4. Needs good hardware (depending on the quality)
5. The algorithm is not open source

The time spend in research and coding outranks the extremely limited user base by far.

[WereCatf]

I think I've sufficiently proven that the Smooth Video Project is better named the 'Warpy Crap Project'.

Staring at a single frame is hardly relevant. You're not seeing individual frames when watching content at 60 fps or more, you're seeing constant motion.

[WereCatf]

1. TVs are far better doing frame interpolation (hardware restriction)

Better as in more efficient or in terms of better picture-quality? I can agree with the first one, but that's not entirely an argument against doing it, and as for the latter: I have not seen any proof of this.

2. Most TVs have this already build in

That's exceedingly helpful if you're not using a TV to watch content.

3. Most users won't use frame interpolation (lowers picture quality)

Projection.

4. Needs good hardware (depending on the quality)

Actually, not really all that much. Using e.g. SVP on my laptop to interpolate a 1080p video to 60 fps only pegs the CPU at 40%, and while it is an i7 it's an outdated Sandy Bridge - model (2670qm). At 40% usage not even turbo kicks in yet.

5. The algorithm is not open source

Which one? There are both open-source and proprietary implementations of frame-interpolation, there isn't one, single approach to it that somehow precludes the existence of all others.