Mavic pro flickering: Davinci resolve vs Neat video

[Gastone360]

Hi,

the solution to the flickering issues is noise reduction. I've tried Davinci resolve with very very good results, do you have an idea versus Neat Video? Did you use theese and can compare them side by side?

I don't want to spend 100 dollars if the result is the same or even worse with Neat Video.....

thank you very much

 

[Lake_Flyer]

I thought the solution was the correct shutter speed and a good lens hood.
Other than that: if it comes to post processing capabilities Resolve 14 is my choice.

 

[Gastone360]

Well I'm talking about flickering GOP... Shutter speed and hood are totally useless in this....
I know DaVinci is very good but I need a comparison between temporal denoise in DaVinci and neat video plugin...

 

[Lake_Flyer]

Well I'm talking about flickering GOP... Shutter speed and hood are totally useless in this....
I know DaVinci is very good but I need a comparison between temporal denoise in DaVinci and neat video plugin...

Sorry, but I immediately made the connection with a possible MP related issue since you post in the MavicPro Dicussions Forum .
GOP didn't cross my mind. Maybe better search the Resolve and Neat forums for that.

 

[4wd]

What are you doing in resolve, is it the temporal NR?

 

[Gastone360]

yes, just the temporal denoise, not spatial.

 

[Artush]

Hi,

the solution to the flickering issues is noise reduction. I've tried Davinci resolve with very very good results, do you have an idea versus Neat Video? Did you use theese and can compare them side by side?

I don't want to spend 100 dollars if the result is the same or even worse with Neat Video.....

thank you very much

What settings You are using in DaVinci Resolve?

 

[Gastone360]

Just temporal denoise, quality better and chroma and Luma at8-10

 

[black_magic100]

Hi,

the solution to the flickering issues is noise reduction. I've tried Davinci resolve with very very good results, do you have an idea versus Neat Video? Did you use theese and can compare them side by side?

I don't want to spend 100 dollars if the result is the same or even worse with Neat Video.....

thank you very much

Hey man just stumbled upon this post. I too do not want to spend $100 on a piece of software that I am hardly going to use. Is the method through Davinci 100% free? Do you mind explaining the workflow to me?

 

[Gastone360]

I suggest you to spend 299 with Davinci, flexible and complete. Only with the studio version you can have denoise tools active

 

[gjhick]

NeatVideo provides a demo (output has a watermark). Probably best to try it out for yourself. NeatVideo has a wide range of settings/control options when used in Advanced mode.

 

[black_magic100]

NeatVideo provides a demo (output has a watermark). Probably best to try it out for yourself. NeatVideo has a wide range of settings/control options when used in Advanced mode.

The demo version only goes up to 720p, which the mavic doesn't shoot in to my knowledge

 

[Castyn]

I have tried using davinci temporal NR and have not noticed any discernible difference in footage when flying over a bunch of grape vines (footage I am trying to clean).

I set frames to 1, quality better and chroma and Luma at 8-10, also adjusted things and retried export, clip never looked any different to me so unsure what I am doing wrong.

 

[Gastone360]

no set frames to 5

Difference is like night and day

 

[Castyn]

I have tried it at 5, I still don't see a difference when applying temporal NR to a clip and then rendering it.

Here is a base file and then one with temporal NR frames 5, Better, Large motion, 10 chroma and luma.

Base File
Denoised File

 

[Gastone360]

It's not a good test this video... Fast and nervous ecc... Try with different subject or speed

 

[Castyn]

Guess I don't understand what Davinci solves if it doesn't solve the exact problem mentioned in this thread which shows in my videos both before and after

 

[cranngel]

I did some recent test shots and messed with the Davinci Temporal noise settings. If you look carefully, you can see the noise jump every 8 frames in the scopes. Using this, I worked on tweaking some parameters and balancing that with degradation of the sharpness. While I suspect the settings will need to be tweaked for each clip based on the amount of artifacts, I ended up with
5 Frames
Better
Luma/Chroma = 20
Motion at 60

The motion setting is important as it determines how to discriminate moving (Not filtered) and non-moving (Filtered). 0 means nothing is filtered and 100 means everything is filtered. The default of 10.7 was not enough for the clips I looked at.

 

[4wd]

I did some recent test shots and messed with the Davinci Temporal noise settings. If you look carefully, you can see the noise jump every 8 frames in the scopes. Using this, I worked on tweaking some parameters and balancing that with degradation of the sharpness. While I suspect the settings will need to be tweaked for each clip based on the amount of artifacts, I ended up with
5 Frames
Better
Luma/Chroma = 20
Motion at 60

The motion setting is important as it determines how to discriminate moving (Not filtered) and non-moving (Filtered). 0 means nothing is filtered and 100 means everything is filtered. The default of 10.7 was not enough for the clips I looked at.

I have a troublesome low-light snowy sequence I've been experimenting with, and this worked well on it.

 

[Gastone360]

for me,at 100 iso, luma and chroma at 20 is exagerate because you loose all the sharpness.
I noticed that between 10 you have very good sharpness without flickering