8mm Forum: Somikon HD-XL RAW + Neat Video plug-in for FCPX HD 1080p

»	8mm Forum » 8mm Forum » Somikon HD-XL RAW + Neat Video plug-in for FCPX HD 1080p

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

Author

Topic: Somikon HD-XL RAW + Neat Video plug-in for FCPX HD 1080p

Berend De Meyer
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 140
From: Leek, The Netherlands
Registered: Apr 2017

posted August 01, 2017 07:27 AM

Hi all,

I'm on a guest to get an even better output for my Somikon HD-XL scanned Normal 8mm films. I'm now doing some tests with the Neat Video plug-in - I use Final Cut Pro X - for several post production video editing suits.

Neat Video Plug-in website

I would like to share with you my first result and ask for your feedback on it. As I got no hit on searching for "neat video" here on the forums, I wonder what denoiser & dust/scratch remover software you use in post production after your scan or other telecine methods.

Somikon HD-XL RAW + Neat Video plug-in for FCPX HD 1080p

Please note: Due to the DEMO mode the rendered file only has a 720p window - inside the green rectangle - that Neat Video will output . For this test it's just great to show the big difference between the footage with and without the Neat Video plug-in.

Thanks in advance for watching and your feedback.

Cheers

--------------------
Cheers | “I am an advocate of the "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" modus operandi!”

| IP: Logged

James Wilson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 230
From: Norwich, UK
Registered: Jan 2015

posted August 01, 2017 12:53 PM

Hi Berend,

you didn`t tell us how your new Somikon machine was doing? I`d be interested to hear.
Kind Regards,
James.

--------------------
James Wilson

| IP: Logged

Berend De Meyer
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 140
From: Leek, The Netherlands
Registered: Apr 2017

posted August 01, 2017 04:21 PM

Hi James,

Thanks for asking! Posted that on the 27th July [Wink]

Just started with another batch, but trouble in scanning paradise just now. This deck has also died on me and lasted only 4x 120mtr reels. I just can't believe what the heck is wrong with the design and engineering for this machine? Tomorrow I'm going to e-mail Pearl (vendor) and also Somikon (brand) to ask for assistance, this is really driving me nuts atm [Confused]

I just have this idea that the specs of the motor they used in these upgraded models (5" -> 7") just isn't performing for it's new workload. Perhaps the specs of the motor are ONLY for the 3-5" reel pull force - older model - only! Wow, what a disappointment this is. The right side axle isn't turning anymore.

Any help to troubleshoot this issue myself is much appreciated. Keep you posted!

Cheers

[ August 01, 2017, 05:37 PM: Message edited by: Berend De Meyer ]

--------------------
Cheers | “I am an advocate of the "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" modus operandi!”

| IP: Logged

Janice Glesser
Film Goddess

Posts: 3468
From: Sunnyvale, CA USA
Registered: Sep 2011

posted August 01, 2017 08:03 PM

Hi Berend...I've used the Neat Video plug-in in Adobe Premiere Pro and in VirtualDub since it was first introduced. It does help improve video, but tends to have long render times. For my transfer restorations I primarily use Video Fred's Avisynth Scripts thru VirtualDub before putting the file into Premiere Pro for more refined editing. Fred's scripts may not work with the low quality output...but it would be fun to try. I think the use of the Neat Video Plug-in might help reduce the pixelated edges caused by the extreme mp4 compression. Any improvement would be welcomed I'm sure.

Here is a before and after example from a 1947 16mm clip I restored using Fred's scripts It is a realtime capture not frame-by-frame, but Freds scripts still made a significant improvement in the image.

https://youtu.be/WqQfz4ccvy8

You can download Fred's Scripts from here: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=144271

In full disclosure...I'm not a big fan of the output from the Wolverine or it's clones...but pleased to see the interest in DIY film transferring. I just hope that the designers can come up with a more robust and reliable machine. There definitely seems to be a market out there. I'm waiting for a 16mm model...but not getting my hopes up [Roll Eyes]

--------------------
Janice

"I'm having a very good day!"
Richard Dreyfuss - Let It Ride (1989).

| IP: Logged

Berend De Meyer
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 140
From: Leek, The Netherlands
Registered: Apr 2017

posted August 02, 2017 05:00 PM

Hi Janice,

Thanks for your comprehensive feedback, much appreciated. The script looks good on your footage. I'll have a look for sure.

I agree with you that it's a nice start for marketing the scanners, but the engineering and formfactor definitely fails big time. I do hope that a 3rd/4th scanner will last as long as it takes to finish my film batch of our family archive just for the sake of having it digital in acceptable - use -
quality. I've got about 15x 7" reels te go. I'm glad to see that 95% of the footage I've scanned so far is still in very good condition.

No, I don't think there will be a 16mm version, not only because I believe the folks on 16mm block just won't fall for this cheap 'made in china'. Let alone that the negative buzz about these decks is starting to see the light of day.

Nevertheless I'm sending it back again, smile, wait for the 3rd exchange and get my scanning back on track.

Cheers

--------------------
Cheers | “I am an advocate of the "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" modus operandi!”

| IP: Logged

Jean-Pierre Labus
Junior
Posts: 12
From: Puy de Dôme, France
Registered: Sep 2017

posted September 26, 2017 03:36 AM

You can use Film9 free software for restauration film scanned

http://contact41766.wixsite.com/film9/home-1

https://vimeo.com/165747087

best regards
JPL

| IP: Logged

Werner Ruotsalainen
Film Handler

Posts: 97
From: Helsinki, Finland
Registered: Dec 2017

posted February 11, 2018 02:31 PM

Let me also chime in with my demo of Neat Video (and some FCPX features like Optical Flow and stabilization).

Here's the source Super8 (Kodachrome) video at its 18 fps glory (framerate set with my ffmpeg-based shell script): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzsCk9jIrYA

And here's the same video processed with FCPX 10.4 and NeatVideo 4.7 using the following steps:

Before starting post processing the original (from-scanner) video in FCPX, I've changed the framerate flag to 24fps (via a the same ffmpeg script, just with fps=24 instead of 18) so that FCPX can create a project with a native 24p framerate, without inserting any new frames. (The video will be slowed down by 25% (18/24 = 0.75) to its native framerate in the last, fourth step below.) All project creations use Custom (keeping the 1920*1440 resolution) settings and 24p framerate, except for step 4, which uses 60p for the latter.

1, early crop (so that the CPU-intensive NeatVideo doesn't clean up areas that will be later just discarded - note that I've used heavy overscanning to be on the safe side) + Save as Master File with ProRes 422. (From now on, referred to as ‘Save 422’)

2, run NeatVideo on the output of Bullet 1 above. I used the following non-default parameters:

- Quality Mode: High (instead of Normal) in both the Temporal and Spatial Filter.
- Radius: 3 (instead of 2) in Temporal Filter.
- Enbled "Dust and Scratches" in Temporal Filter.

Save 422.

3, apply FCPX's stabilization (default params) to the output of Bullet 2 above and Save 422

4, create project with 60p (not 24p!) from the output of Bullet 3 above, slow down to 75% and change Video Quality to ‘Optical Flow’. Save to H.264 this time (no further steps needed).

The result is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSXQQ9wv0nk

Pretty good improvement, isn't it? [Smile]

| IP: Logged

All times are Central

Printer-friendly view of this topic

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2