Blu-ray video codecs?

[zak88lx]

Why are Blu-ray movies released with different video codecs?

From what I can see it looks like the older movies are using MPEG-2 (Predator) and most of the newer movies are using MPEG-4 AVC (Aliens vs. Predator Requiem) but some of the newer movies are also using VC-1 (The Golden Compass)?

Is this a studio choice or is it based on the original cameras that were used?

On a similar note, is this the correct order for video codec quality?

Good = MPEG-2
Better = VC-1
Best = MPEG-4 AVC

Just curious.

Thanks,
Zak

[WickyWoo]

None are "better" or "best

All have their strengths and weaknesses

It has to do with the choices the studio and/or authoring company make, and nothing to do with the content for the most part. MPEG-2 is often used on older titles that don't feature a lot of high action because it's far faster/cheaper to encode, and ends up looking the same in the end.

[Sonny]

^^Its all about how well they utilize them too...

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by zak88lx

Why are Blu-ray movies released with different video codecs?

From what I can see it looks like the older movies are using MPEG-2 (Predator) and most of the newer movies are using MPEG-4 AVC (Aliens vs. Predator Requiem) but some of the newer movies are also using VC-1 (The Golden Compass)?

Is this a studio choice or is it based on the original cameras that were used?

On a similar note, is this the correct order for video codec quality?

Good = MPEG-2
Better = VC-1
Best = MPEG-4 AVC

Just curious.

Thanks,
Zak

First, the use of a particular codec comes down to a strictly studio based decision. As the codec technology is licensed out for use by the companies that created them, ultimately there is added costs to picking one particular codec over the other. In the early stages of the format war FOX and Lionsgate were notorious for their poor quality MPEG-2 encodes. And I let them know about it in my reviews. But, from a business perspective? Picking the cheapest route in an unstable market makes absolute sense.

Secondly, there is no "best". What can definitely be agreed upon is that both AVC and VC-1 are better than MPEG-2 since MPEG-2 is the old DVD standard. Although MPEG-2 can look great ('Crank' is a great example), it still falls short of AVC and VC-1 quality. When it comes to VC-1 and AVC, there is no clear cut winner. Now that the Warner Bros. and New Line VC-1 releases are maximizing their bitrates there has been a heavy increase in quality that puts up a very strong fight against the AVC codec. With that in mind, the studios will go with whoever offers the best licensing fee.

Thirdly, the codecs have absolutely nothing to do with the cameras used for filming. The codecs don't come into play until after the film has been scanned into a digital format for authoring.