"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Slec

Nah, its gotta be the Man-U pretty boy..

Former Man U pretty boy………………….
http://www.ieeffects.com/work/BeckhamH12.html

Now, the question is, why would one ever capture something/someone with 4K image acquisition (in this case a Dalsa cam like with used on some sequences of the upcoming Quantum of Solace), if one is just going to show it primarily on peoples’ Motorola phones on a 320 x 240-pixel display.

Seems rather counter-intuitive, does it not?
Ah...........but there was a reason.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

I know I am going to try my luck!

You should try your luck at getting a pair of passes for this……………….
http://commanderbond.net/article/5362

And doing a write-up on the event for us.

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Nope, but I’m planning on watching Arsenal/West Ham? (recorded) in a few moments.

Well technically it was West Ham/Arsenal, but you have the idea
I watched the second half actually, but in standard definition because I've had to move out of my house for a few months.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

It still doesn't mean that they are the same when the come out the other end in terms of volume due to how they're mastered. You need to use an SPL meter to make sure you're getting the same levels before doing any comparison.

For example, the TrueHD track on Top Gun is about 7db lower than the DTS HDMA track, but when level matched sound identical.

Jeff,

I'm only talking about comparing the same audio encode on different players (ie, the same TrueHD track, or PCM track, or same DTS track... NOT comparing a TrueHD to a DTS HD MA etc.)

Apples-apples.

The original discussion was about my listenin to the same audio track on the same blu-ray disc but played on various players all outputting "lossless" from the TrueHD, and the Panny clearly sounding better than the PS3. Same Disc. Same audio track. Lossless. Should be no level-change outside of player-introduced processing.

BTW, and if both the TrueHD and DTS-HD MA are cut from the same LPCM master... then they should have identical level. Now... if different mastering houses cook the mix differently for each encode, that's another matter.

read my original post more closely:

If there is any change in level whatsoever between two players handling the same lossless stream, then that would be indicative that some device was altering the signal and adding its own processing stage to the audio. And that would be bad period.

[Mr. Cinema]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

More info needed.
Does this mis-step only occur with the Sony 350 and 550 models, and no other brand of player?

I'll try to find out. This error did not occur on my Panasonic DMP-BD30 or the PS3.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by Paul H

As soon as I read DaViD's post I was going to mention "Top Gun" (Blu-ray) with both English 5.1 Dolby TrueHD and English 6.1 DTS Master Audio, but you beat me to it.

My assumption as to why the D TrueHD track is quieter at the same level was because Dolby has a history of using "Dial-Norm" frequently and in this case and DTS doesn't as a rule.

Paul

if Dolby is changing level with dialog-norm, then it's not bit-for bit.

But that's beside my point... again, I was talking about apples-apples: comparing the same TrueHD (or whatever) track on the same disc on various players all outputting "lossless", and noticing that the BD50 sounded better than the PS3 with the exact same audio material. Not talking about comparing different audio encodes to one another... the exact same track.

In that case, they should be rendered at the same level by two different players, unless one player is doing something additional to the signal, which should NOT be happening with lossless reconstruction (one reason why I don't like TrueHD with it's almost inevitable application of DN). But even in the case of DN, it should affect two different players in the same way since the players should be following the DN instructions in the same manner.

original post:

If there is any change in level whatsoever between two players handling the same lossless stream, then that would be indicative that some device was altering the signal and adding its own processing stage to the audio. And that would be bad period.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I noticed in your review of Baraka (as well as Marty’s [our on-site reviewer]) that neither of you guys noticed any edge enhancement during real time watching of that movie…………despite the fact that *screenshot scientists* have already mounted an attack to spread viewing misery to the film enthusiast demographic by referring to its appearance on compressed jpeg screenshots.

Do you feel you ‘missed’ this alleged *image indiscretion* based on the fact that you were too involved in watching the movie or that the Panny isn’t a capable Blu-ray reproduction player, or your display is too small, or what ?

I would be interested in your thoughts as Mark Magidson reads this thread.

In fairness, I don't have my own personal Panny yet... I'm still using the PS3 (had to send the BD50 back which almost broke my heart given how much it improved both picture and sound).

But certainly on the PS3, I noticed no edge-ringing from a 1-1.5 screen-width distance. I didn't feel the need to get out a microscope to find fault with closer viewing distances not supported by 1080p media.

And yes, the visuals are intoxicatingly engrossing, as they should be... though had there been any egregious EE it would have interferred with the visuals and stiffled the mood. I know what EE looks like including the harsh-glare that it typically adds to the picture, and Baraka showed no signs of any such meddling... at least from 1-1.5 screen widths!

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by Mr. Cinema

I'll try to find out. This error did not occur on my Panasonic DMP-BD30 or the PS3.

Sone other people are hinting that the error occurs on some BD-30's too,
Link

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Former Man U pretty boy………………….
http://www.ieeffects.com/work/BeckhamH12.html

Now, the question is, why would one ever capture something/someone with 4K image acquisition (in this case a Dalsa cam like was used one some sequences of the upcoming Quantum of Solace), if one is just going to show it primarily on peoples’ Motorola phones on a 320 x 240-pixel display.

Seems rather counter-intuitive, does it not?
Ah...........but there was a reason.

Just watching that video, I thought:



Brilliant Becks! You hit the nail on the head-- I just hate it when my Gulfstream G650 drowns out the phonecalls on my bluetooth headset...

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

I remember seeing a PS3 playing a Blu-ray back in October 2006 (before the official launch) and thinking it wasn't that great, but it turned out it wasn't the PS3, but the disc. T5E...

Early HD DVD titles also seemed to have been worked on and worked on (with multiple updates of the MS encoder, and perhaps even custom tweaks for each title).

Compared to some poor efforts in early BD titles, like the original T5E, it caused all sorts of bad early chatter.

And, um, what was that about Samsungs?

Gary

[Anthony P]

I agree completely with you in regards to lossless audio (or lossless anything). All the information is there, so the results should, in theory, always be the same.

not only that but I would hope that the specs would require only one way to go back. It is not hard to believe that there can be issues (after all there is only so much processing power and it is time sensitive) but if people can clearly her a different on stuff then something is wrong imho and calling them lossless codecs would be wrong. Then again, it might not be a decoding issue
David or anyone else with different players is it only in the lossless or also in PCM playback?

I understand that lossy compression does not represent all the original data. But I always thought that the "estimation" / information loss phase of the process was done in the actual encoding, and that decoding was a strict by-the-books operation.

it is not that easy. First the codecs have optional stuff. For example AVC has Thomson's FGT (film grain technology) as optional, if the encoder used it, it "removes" film grain and so the video is easier to compress but then tells the player how to artificially add it back in. So a player that does not have FGT will just show the pics without adding back the missing FGT on the other hand a player that has it activated will show the pic with the artificial grain added back in. On the other hand (one of the reason I brought in the i/p/b frame issue) is that you can search for mpeg-2 drift, this was a relatively common issue in early mpeg-2 decoders where the pixels would be miscalculated and shifted every few frames (right or left a bit) communicatively until the next i frame where it would be corrected (since it is not built on any other data) and you would get what looked like jitter. On the other hand the 1/3*3 example was not completely random. I don't know if such "simple" issues happen video processing, but in IT where I work there are a few database systems that miss characterize floating point values in that way.

That price is marked on the item. Now any cashier you bring that item to will just read the price, so customers will always be charged 0.33. The cashiers don't have to think themselves, they just follow the original simplification.

agree, like I said, it was an example. On the other hand, here in grocery stores they often have 3 for 5$ and the cash register charges 1.66 for the first two and 1.67 for the last one, on the other hand that same store if I bought those three separately would charge 1.66 for each

I did not know about the i/p/b frame stuff, and would be very interested to hear more. I'm a computer engineer (though obviously not working in the field of multimedia encoding ) so don't worry about getting complicated, I can handle it.

not much to say, in order to do 1920x1080 (for example) you need just over 2M pixels, mpeg-2 can only have blocks of 8x8 pixels so if that is all you could do and you could use it for 100% (which then would mean it is not 1080p) you have more then 32k blocks and we need 24 of them (assuming 24p) which gives us 778k blocks per second you add 24 bit colour and at least one bit overhead and you get easily to 20mbps. And this would be the lowest BW possible. These are known as I frames and if they where the only things CODECS used BW would be astronomical and PQ would be crap (let’s face it, like I said before, to get 20mbps I assumed that the whole pick can be divided into nice 8x8 blocks and in essence there is 1/64 the resolution). Since from one frame to the next the pic is mostly the same what they do is have p and b frames. Let’s say we have a person talking in a room, the wall will not change from one frame to the next, the person’s lips on the other hand will so instead of explaining the wall (assuming it can) in 8x8 blocks it forgets about it and then frame will explain how it changes some parts of the face area. Now what is the difference between a p and a b frame? A p-frame is how to move forward (changes from previous frames) while a b-frame is bi-directional (changes from previous frame and next frame so that you can play it backwards). Formats (like BD or DVD) will give the rules on I,p and b frames (maybe one of the insiders can give the rules for BD) so that players can properly FF and rewind, an I-frame will also be used when the encoder thinks that it is more efficient to record the whole pic instead of just the differences (for example when the location changes in the movie).

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by horseflesh

Well technically it was West Ham/Arsenal, but you have the idea ........................

East London got hammered by North London …………..0-2.
http://www.fanchants.com/football-team/arsenal/

[Penton-Man]

^
Best Pro Football (American) Fight Song ………….ever.
At Memorial Stadium back in thee olden colonialist days.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx1Y0Xy6_Yk

P.S.
That would be the same stadium that was just down the road from the greatest medical teaching hospital in the world……………..brainsturgeon.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

In fairness, I don't have my own personal Panny yet... I'm still using the PS3 (had to send the BD50 back which almost broke my heart given how much it improved both picture and sound).

But certainly on the PS3, I noticed no edge-ringing from a 1-1.5 screen-width distance. I didn't feel the need to get out a microscope to find fault with closer viewing distances not supported by 1080p media.

And yes, the visuals are intoxicatingly engrossing, as they should be... though had there been any egregious EE it would have interferred with the visuals and stiffled the mood. I know what EE looks like including the harsh-glare that it typically adds to the picture, and Baraka showed no signs of any such meddling... at least from 1-1.5 screen widths!

You’ve really got to sit closer and buy one of those magnifying glasses that Diagnostic Radiologists use to look for microcalcifications in breast tissue on mamograms………………or watch your movies by online screenshot, frame by frame.

And you call yourself a reviewer!

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

Unfortunately I have family commitments on Wednesday. Can't do anything fun.

Anyway I wouldn't have a pretty girl on my arm to show up with, the gf is in Australia!

Everyone is hoping that the picture takes in at least £13 million this weekend in Britain.

Anyway, I know other people in the business that when they are confronted with your temporary lack of compainionship, they always take their *cousin* with them to the world premiere.

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

Panasonic players give the best value, but if you are going for all out performance, then Pioneer are an excellent choice. If like Penton or myself you can get one out of Pioneer for next to nothing then it is definitely the one to get.

For the average consumer it goes my order of preference is like this:

Panasonic BD35
Sony PS3
Panasonic BD30
Sony S350
Pioneer LX71
Philips 7200

Cheers Max

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

I personally wouldn't recommend Samsung to anyone...

AND they sponsor Chel$ea

[Jeff Kleist]

true, but David is not comparing different tracks on the same machine but the same one on different machines. Why would the DTS-HD MA sound different if it is decoded on the PS3, his receiver or his Pany?

Because the base volume that the Panny is outputting is different than the PS3 would probably be the culprit. The digital value of the volume.

According to Kjack, all decoders these days are pretty much equal in 1080p/24 HDMI performance - at least with AVC and VC-1. I asked the question about PQ differences in units some time ago.

That's what it can send out the pipe, not how the data is handled before it gets there.

[4K2K]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

I just couldn't recommend Samsung to anyone if a Panasonic or Sony player is available at a similar price, which they are...

I thought the Panasonics (eg. Panasonic DMP-BD30) didn't have good upscaling of sd dvds or deinterlacing?

[DaViD Boulet]

Penton,

that Baraka/edge-enhancement AVS thread is a sad, sad statement of how the mentality of false-assumptions, which was given astonishing life with the pro-HD DVD agenda there for so many months, is now desperate to find new false doctrines to attach itself to. I guess that deriding the world's most beautifully mastered Blu-ray was as good a farce to latch on to as anything.

In any case, I finally read the thread and had to post my own two cents:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...=baraka&page=4

[DaViD Boulet]

Quote:
"true, but David is not comparing different tracks on the same machine but the same one on different machines. Why would the DTS-HD MA sound different if it is decoded on the PS3, his receiver or his Pany? "


Because the base volume that the Panny is outputting is different than the PS3 would probably be the culprit. The digital value of the volume.

No player in existance can adjust the volume of a compressed digital signal. And both the bitstreamed TrueHD and extrapolated PCM from the TrueHD were the precise same level on the Panny. The panny was not altering volume for the decoded PCM output, otherwise it would have been a different level from the bitstreamed signal.

Also, there was no difference in level between the PS3's extrapolated PCM output over HDMI and the Panny either sending decoded PCM or native bitstream.

The differences I heard were due to something else other than "level".