Online free porn at mobile phone

mysteryman · 7th January 2021, 11:00

Tried the DVD Fab one. It said I was missing a certain dll. I scanned my whole computer & the scan showed all was well. There's an online one, but only tells you when you uploaded and set the file up for conversion? It will cost this much?? I was like Fock YOU, You Rip Off!

zagoog · 16th January 2021, 20:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertWill

Avidemux has a framerate resample option so you can use that to convert a 29.97 fps video to 60fps, but so far I can't tell significant improvement in this way.

The most reliable method for that goal is still using SVP, the plus side is that there is no conversion needed, your CPU/GPU process that in real time.

SVP isn't particularly good with real-time and you'll notice heavy artifacts regardless of settings and tweaks. I've tried and the result isn't all that impressive.

Now there is a program called DAIN that supposedly does interpolation with greater results but requires conversion and is very time-consuming as opposed to on-the-fly with SVP. Haven't tried it myself but it looks promising.

JeffThorse · 18th January 2021, 18:48

Thanks for sharing!

MasterBates · 25th January 2021, 08:44

Quote:

the girl in this video, looks like Virginia from Famegirls. lol. Maybe it's her mother, since you said these are older porn vids?

Its Yveline the camshow girl from MFC no relation to virginia or any other model I know

flamefrien · 28th January 2021, 19:18

A question for the folks experimenting with AI up-scaling software.

There's tons of video up-scaled from SD to faux HD, and the results are fantastic, albeit at the cost of huge file sizes.

What I haven't seen are instances of 720p or 1080p videos being up-sized, at least not ones labeled as AI enhanced.

A few studios have put out what they label as remastered 720p to 1080p, without being specific as to how they did it. As well, the jump in file size seems low compared to fan created AI SD to HD ones.

I'd be very interested in hearing from anyone who's tried to upscale a 720p video to 1080p or above as to the subjective improvement, and how much bigger the file was.

Thanks very much.

DarkRaven671 · 28th January 2021, 20:36

I think the file sizes can be kept in check and some files are overly large due to sub-optimal default settings used while doing single pass upscaling (upscaling and encoding together in a single pass). I still have to test this properly though and produce comparable results.

Here is an example for a single pass result:
Warning, the file is 3802x1145 px and ~9 MB!

On the left is the 1280x720 2 Mbit/s input, on the right is the 1920x1080 output from Artemis v10 HQ, encoded with h264 with compression 20. There are no additional settings available and while the input file is ~800 MB for ~52 minutes, the output will be more like ~9 GB. Note that the default setting in Video Enhance AI for compression is 17, so the file would be even larger.

Take into consideration that this is a screenshot during the actual process, taken on a 4k screen and the two videos are scaled to the same preview window size but don't have the same resolution. This is 3800 px wide while the combined width of both videos is 3200 px. Here are two frames in their native resolution, saved as 8 bit PNG with lossless compression (as opposed to the lossy h264 above):
http://imgbox.com/aRYAn9Im (1280x720, 1.7 MB)
http://imgbox.com/oYHCNfzM (1920x1080, 3.7 MB)

If you have any particular movie or scene in mind and can provide it, then I might be able to make a small sample for you (might take a while though).

I guess a more thorough method would be upscaling to lossless single frames and recompiling them to a new video later and then use a properly set up encoder. I haven't tried that yet though, so until now this is just an idea.

This whole process is fundamentally different from remastering. Remastering usually means that you have access to the original (raw) footage. We don't since these are already encoded videos.

flamefrien · 28th January 2021, 21:25

Thanks very much DarkRaven671.

In flipping back and forth between your 2 screenshots, it reminded me of the early days of AI, and that was only a year ago, when the differences were subtle at best.

It certainly wouldn't be worth downloading 9 GBs unless the improvements were much more obvious.

More importantly, you confirmed my suspicions on how large the enhanced files would be.

Thanks again

DarkRaven671 · 28th January 2021, 22:57

Maybe you misunderstood me. I never meant to confirm your suspicions. There is no reason for the output files to be overly large compared to non-upscaled videos of similar resolution. The files don't get bigger because they were upscaled with AI, they get bigger because of a lack of settings in the software and/or bad default settings.

What you normally want to do is do 2-pass encoding with average bitrate. Or at least constant bitrate that you set. And not a single big slider with a rather meaningless number that sets your bitrate in a rather abstract way, which is what you get in Video Enhance AI by Topaz. So you are very limited. And that is difficult because you need to find a proper balance because you're already working with compressed video that has been encoded before. That sets a quality limit that you can't bypass with upscaling.

For example, I took a file to run some tests and that has a resolution of 512x384 and a bitrate of 1.400 kbit/s. I've upscaled it to 2878x2158 which is close to 4k but with 4:3 aspect ratio. Because of that aspect ratio the amount of pixels is less than 4k, it's 8.294.400 vs. 6.210.724. So that's around 25% less pixels which will lower the final file size obviously. At least that's what normally happens. But what happened instead was that with the single compression setting that you're offered, by setting it to 17 (or rather leaving it at 17 since that's the default), the 500 MB 1.400 kbis/s input file became a 15 GB ~44.000 kbit output file. Now, recent 4k productions often use a bitrate of 35.000 kbit/s, so much lower, despite having ~33% more pixels, and the file size, let's say, around 10 GB depending on the runtime. My 45 minutes file could be around 11 GB with full 4k resolution of 3840x2160 and 35.000 kbit/s bitrate. Instead I have 15 GB with "4:3 4k" of 2878x2158 because I have a 25% higher bitrate despite having 25% less pixels to store and I started with compressed video that doesn't even offer all the details that you would be able to store in 4k 35.000 kbit/s anyway. You see how this adds up? That 15 GB file could easily be half size if I only had access to the proper encoding settings. That's why I will go with lossless output for my next tests and then do the encoding myself.

The same is true for the HD vs. FHD example above. The file doesn't need to be 9 GB. And it won't be if you do it properly. But it is when you do what I did and just quickly throw it together.

So, tl;dr: No, the upscaled files don't have any additonal size increase with them just because they were upscaled. The only size increase comes from the increased resolution and therefore the needed higher bitrate. That difference is no different from the difference between native productions with these resolutions though. For example, HD could be 2.000 Kbit/s, FHD could be 6.000 or 8.000 kbit/s and that naturally needs more space for the same amount of runtime. I generally believe that upscaled video can go with a slightly lower bitrate compared to native productions if the input file wasn't that decent anyway. But the implementations of the encoder in the software, in this case by Topaz, is rather lacking. That's what makes the files so big, but they don't need to be. It's a bit techy, but I hope it makes sense for you and everybody else.

MasterBates · 30th January 2021, 09:46

if you put your videos thru the handbrake program it cuts the file size in half (only goes upto 1080 tho)

DarkRaven671 · 30th January 2021, 12:02

Handbrake is one of the programs that give you proper access to the settings of the codec. There are presets for specific cases and individual settings as well. You have to set it up properly though and make the right choices, it won't just so cut the file size in half. Like with any encoder, you can produce even larger files if you get it wrong

Not sure why you think that it only goes up to 1080p though, you can process 2160p as well.

30th January 2021, 09:46	#29
MasterBates We all need something to live for... Forum Lord Join Date: Jan 2019 Location: Greatness from Small Beginnings Posts: 1,195 Thanks: 345 Thanked 9,209 Times in 887 Posts	if you put your videos thru the handbrake program it cuts the file size in half (only goes upto 1080 tho) __________________

7th January 2021, 11:00	#21
mysteryman I Got Banned Clinically Insane Join Date: May 2007 Location: New Jersey Posts: 4,742 Thanks: 2,629 Thanked 25,248 Times in 4,403 Posts	Tried the DVD Fab one. It said I was missing a certain dll. I scanned my whole computer & the scan showed all was well. There's an online one, but only tells you when you uploaded and set the file up for conversion? It will cost this much?? I was like Fock YOU, You Rip Off!

18th January 2021, 18:48	#23
JeffThorse Junior Member Virgin Join Date: Jan 2021 Posts: 2 Thanks: 0 Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts	Thanks for sharing!

28th January 2021, 19:18	#25
flamefrien Junior Member Newbie Join Date: Jan 2017 Posts: 42 Thanks: 2,046 Thanked 132 Times in 36 Posts	A question for the folks experimenting with AI up-scaling software. There's tons of video up-scaled from SD to faux HD, and the results are fantastic, albeit at the cost of huge file sizes. What I haven't seen are instances of 720p or 1080p videos being up-sized, at least not ones labeled as AI enhanced. A few studios have put out what they label as remastered 720p to 1080p, without being specific as to how they did it. As well, the jump in file size seems low compared to fan created AI SD to HD ones. I'd be very interested in hearing from anyone who's tried to upscale a 720p video to 1080p or above as to the subjective improvement, and how much bigger the file was. Thanks very much.

28th January 2021, 20:36	#26
DarkRaven671 Super Moderator Forum Lord Join Date: Jun 2015 Posts: 1,295 Thanks: 2,839 Thanked 5,272 Times in 1,037 Posts	I think the file sizes can be kept in check and some files are overly large due to sub-optimal default settings used while doing single pass upscaling (upscaling and encoding together in a single pass). I still have to test this properly though and produce comparable results. Here is an example for a single pass result: Warning, the file is 3802x1145 px and ~9 MB! On the left is the 1280x720 2 Mbit/s input, on the right is the 1920x1080 output from Artemis v10 HQ, encoded with h264 with compression 20. There are no additional settings available and while the input file is ~800 MB for ~52 minutes, the output will be more like ~9 GB. Note that the default setting in Video Enhance AI for compression is 17, so the file would be even larger. Take into consideration that this is a screenshot during the actual process, taken on a 4k screen and the two videos are scaled to the same preview window size but don't have the same resolution. This is 3800 px wide while the combined width of both videos is 3200 px. Here are two frames in their native resolution, saved as 8 bit PNG with lossless compression (as opposed to the lossy h264 above): http://imgbox.com/aRYAn9Im (1280x720, 1.7 MB) http://imgbox.com/oYHCNfzM (1920x1080, 3.7 MB) If you have any particular movie or scene in mind and can provide it, then I might be able to make a small sample for you (might take a while though). I guess a more thorough method would be upscaling to lossless single frames and recompiling them to a new video later and then use a properly set up encoder. I haven't tried that yet though, so until now this is just an idea. This whole process is fundamentally different from remastering. Remastering usually means that you have access to the original (raw) footage. We don't since these are already encoded videos.

28th January 2021, 21:25	#27
flamefrien Junior Member Newbie Join Date: Jan 2017 Posts: 42 Thanks: 2,046 Thanked 132 Times in 36 Posts	Thanks very much DarkRaven671. In flipping back and forth between your 2 screenshots, it reminded me of the early days of AI, and that was only a year ago, when the differences were subtle at best. It certainly wouldn't be worth downloading 9 GBs unless the improvements were much more obvious. More importantly, you confirmed my suspicions on how large the enhanced files would be. Thanks again

28th January 2021, 22:57	#28
DarkRaven671 Super Moderator Forum Lord Join Date: Jun 2015 Posts: 1,295 Thanks: 2,839 Thanked 5,272 Times in 1,037 Posts	Maybe you misunderstood me. I never meant to confirm your suspicions. There is no reason for the output files to be overly large compared to non-upscaled videos of similar resolution. The files don't get bigger because they were upscaled with AI, they get bigger because of a lack of settings in the software and/or bad default settings. What you normally want to do is do 2-pass encoding with average bitrate. Or at least constant bitrate that you set. And not a single big slider with a rather meaningless number that sets your bitrate in a rather abstract way, which is what you get in Video Enhance AI by Topaz. So you are very limited. And that is difficult because you need to find a proper balance because you're already working with compressed video that has been encoded before. That sets a quality limit that you can't bypass with upscaling. For example, I took a file to run some tests and that has a resolution of 512x384 and a bitrate of 1.400 kbit/s. I've upscaled it to 2878x2158 which is close to 4k but with 4:3 aspect ratio. Because of that aspect ratio the amount of pixels is less than 4k, it's 8.294.400 vs. 6.210.724. So that's around 25% less pixels which will lower the final file size obviously. At least that's what normally happens. But what happened instead was that with the single compression setting that you're offered, by setting it to 17 (or rather leaving it at 17 since that's the default), the 500 MB 1.400 kbis/s input file became a 15 GB ~44.000 kbit output file. Now, recent 4k productions often use a bitrate of 35.000 kbit/s, so much lower, despite having ~33% more pixels, and the file size, let's say, around 10 GB depending on the runtime. My 45 minutes file could be around 11 GB with full 4k resolution of 3840x2160 and 35.000 kbit/s bitrate. Instead I have 15 GB with "4:3 4k" of 2878x2158 because I have a 25% higher bitrate despite having 25% less pixels to store and I started with compressed video that doesn't even offer all the details that you would be able to store in 4k 35.000 kbit/s anyway. You see how this adds up? That 15 GB file could easily be half size if I only had access to the proper encoding settings. That's why I will go with lossless output for my next tests and then do the encoding myself. The same is true for the HD vs. FHD example above. The file doesn't need to be 9 GB. And it won't be if you do it properly. But it is when you do what I did and just quickly throw it together. So, tl;dr: No, the upscaled files don't have any additonal size increase with them just because they were upscaled. The only size increase comes from the increased resolution and therefore the needed higher bitrate. That difference is no different from the difference between native productions with these resolutions though. For example, HD could be 2.000 Kbit/s, FHD could be 6.000 or 8.000 kbit/s and that naturally needs more space for the same amount of runtime. I generally believe that upscaled video can go with a slightly lower bitrate compared to native productions if the input file wasn't that decent anyway. But the implementations of the encoder in the software, in this case by Topaz, is rather lacking. That's what makes the files so big, but they don't need to be. It's a bit techy, but I hope it makes sense for you and everybody else.

30th January 2021, 12:02	#30
DarkRaven671 Super Moderator Forum Lord Join Date: Jun 2015 Posts: 1,295 Thanks: 2,839 Thanked 5,272 Times in 1,037 Posts	Handbrake is one of the programs that give you proper access to the settings of the codec. There are presets for specific cases and individual settings as well. You have to set it up properly though and make the right choices, it won't just so cut the file size in half. Like with any encoder, you can produce even larger files if you get it wrong Not sure why you think that it only goes up to 1080p though, you can process 2160p as well.