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

[Doctorossi]

Esox, I can understand being excited to see the release of a fave movie, but how can you be anxious about Braveheart? I doubt there's anyone at Paramount, from the President to the groundskeepers, who doesn't know it'll sell a couple boatloads of discs, so I think the odds of it not coming out are pushing 1 in a million.

I want Blu-rays of stuff like Pasqualino Settebellezze and Tampopo and those might have a legitimate risk of never seeing the light of day. Last time I checked, though, Braveheart has more than a couple of friends out there. Maybe you should be entitled to , but I have to draw the line at . Fair enough?

[Esox50]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Esox, I can understand being excited to see the release of a fave movie, but how can you be anxious about Braveheart? I doubt there's anyone at Paramount, from the President to the groundskeepers, who doesn't know it'll sell a couple boatloads of discs, so I think the odds of it not coming out are pushing 1 in a million.

Oh I know it's coming...it's been coming for a while now. I just want my tomato, and feel like this poor little guy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTi1B5qr1OQ

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Esox50

I just want my tomato, and feel like this poor little guy...

I like this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kFhkCJ3CyI

[neo_reloaded]

Penton, do you think certain US Blu-ray player manufacturers not supporting specific Blu-ray resolutions is just an oversight, or an attempt at de facto region enforcing? There are some US BD players that support 1080i50, and some that do not.

This has become a growing concern for some, do to the fact that 1080i50 appears to be the native resolution of certain European-produced films / videos. So while there is the immediate problem of not being able to import those BDs, there's also the issue that some form of conversion away from that native resolution would be necessary even if a US version was ever released (which itself is very doubtful for some titles).

I feel that all resolutions should be supported, and region compatibility issues should be handled by the region code mechanism. The region codes are there and presumably easy to implement - so if a studio specifically wants to block importation of their title or they do not own international rights to it, they should just region lock it. Having region free but 1080i50 titles unplayable is quite frustrating.

I understand that this is very similar to the PAL/NTSC days, but I strongly feel that the change in region code policies from DVD to BD changes the situation significantly. There's also the fact that there ARE mainstream US players that can play 1080i50 - I could go buy a Samsung or LG or Oppo and, without hacks of any kind, play 1080i50 content on a TV that supports it. I really wish that, for instance, Sony would embrace it and release a firmware update for machines like the PS3 and the BDP-S350. I'm very happy with the BD player I have in almost all aspects, and don't want to have to purchase a new one just to play a handful of region free titles.

If Paidgeek were still around, I'd love to ask him this question, but I'm also curious what your take on it is.

[Jeff Kleist]

It's the same reason why they never put out multisystem TVs here. There's virtually no demand for it. There is big demand for it in Europe

It's only if they're shipping a universal player or projector that they support it

Europe really needs to stop the 25fps thing, it doesn't solve any problems and just causes them

[Nathan P]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Well, the rational explination is that they naturally would use multiple Stigs, sorta like Polkaroo (I promise you this reference kills here up north... shout out to Simon while we're at TVO reference time...)

But I prefer to think that they just throw the dismembered body of the previous Stig into the cage where they keep the other ones.

Edit:

They don't put him in a cage - they shoot him off an aircraft carrier in an old jag - how British is that
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eiJkQzpzRc

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

It's the same reason why they never put out multisystem TVs here. There's virtually no demand for it. There is big demand for it in Europe

It's only if they're shipping a universal player or projector that they support it

Europe really needs to stop the 25fps thing, it doesn't solve any problems and just causes them

Would it require changed hardware, or is it just a firmware thing? If it's just firmware, it'd be nice to just have those resolutions supported for the people who want to use them. These companies all make European BD players, so it's not like they'd have to code up support from scratch.

[4K2K]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

It's the same reason why they never put out multisystem TVs here. There's virtually no demand for it. There is big demand for it in Europe

It's only if they're shipping a universal player or projector that they support it

Europe really needs to stop the 25fps thing, it doesn't solve any problems and just causes them

Why does Europe need to stop with the 25fps/50i filming?
It's what our TV system has always used - though I do think that if we had 60Hz TV programming or higher it might be even better. It used to be about not causing interference, but it's still useful given the type of lighting that is usually used in this country. 25fps gives slightly better motion than 24fps. Slowing down BBC content as they do now on Blu-ray doesn't make the programmes better.

Why can't the manufacturers be asked to stop disabling the 50hz compatibility for their US machines instead of telling film or programme makers to stop making content at their chosen frame rates?

The TV and player manufacturers should be supporting more frame rates not less, not only to allow for proper playback of everything that has already been created at their proper speed, but to give the film and programme makers more creative choices, both for now and the future, instead of reducing their creative choices.

Would it be possible for player and TV manufacturers - assuming they were connected using a version of HDMI, and assuming they had enough bandwidth, to be able to support absolutely any frame rate, even up to 120fps or even more - especially if the picture was sent to the TV from the player without being uncompressed by the player - ie. the uncompressing of the picture was done by the TV instead? There should be enough bandwidth with the current HDMI standard to send uncompressed 120hz which should allow for immediate switching between different frame rates.

There's a poll here https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=94378 to see how much interest there is in US HDTVs that are compatible with 50hz (ie. for 25p, 50i, or 50p content).

[Jeff Kleist]

Why does Europe need to stop with the 25fps/50i filming?
It's what our TV system has always used - though I do think that if we had 60Hz TV programming or higher it might be even better. It used to be about not causing interference, but it's still useful given the type of lighting that is usually used in this country. 25fps gives slightly better motion than 24fps. Slowing down BBC content as they do now on Blu-ray doesn't make the programmes better.

Because no one else uses 25fps, and it doesn't fit in well with the other base-6 framerates that are used for virtually all major productions. It causes more trouble than it solves, and the pulldown they use to convert it to 60hz results in sudden jerks in the picture (though not as bad as PAL speedup. Fun fact- Farscape was shot native 25fps film so that they wouldn't get PAL speedup and they could use PAL resolution to master at)

Why can't the manufacturers be asked to stop disabling the 50hz compatibility for their US machines instead of telling film or programme makers to stop making content at their chosen frame rates?

Several reasons

1- The equivalent model is often far more expensive than shipping on a US unit in price difference. Not being able to play 50hz helps "region code" for the hardware people

2- The demand to be able to watch PAL in the US is astoundingly low, while the demand to watch NTSC outside the US is very high. PAL playback is similarly left out of major manufacturer DVD players


The difference between 24 and 25fps is very small when it comes to making a smoother picture, but as you've seen 4% slowdown or speedup is completely undesireable for anyone

Therefore, stop shooting 1080i/50 for scripted programming and the problem goes away

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Because no one else uses 25fps, and it doesn't fit in well with the other base-6 framerates that are used for virtually all major productions. It causes more trouble than it solves, and the pulldown they use to convert it to 60hz results in sudden jerks in the picture (though not as bad as PAL speedup. Fun fact- Farscape was shot native 25fps film so that they wouldn't get PAL speedup and they could use PAL resolution to master at)



Several reasons

1- The equivalent model is often far more expensive than shipping on a US unit in price difference. Not being able to play 50hz helps "region code" for the hardware people

2- The demand to be able to watch PAL in the US is astoundingly low, while the demand to watch NTSC outside the US is very high. PAL playback is similarly left out of major manufacturer DVD players


The difference between 24 and 25fps is very small when it comes to making a smoother picture, but as you've seen 4% slowdown or speedup is completely undesireable for anyone

Therefore, stop shooting 1080i/50 for scripted programming and the problem goes away

But the problem still exists that there is already content in 1080i50, and that will never change - that content is permanently 1080i50.

I'm not sure about TVs (besides the fact that some domestic ones do support 1080i50), so I won't address that. But for BD players, is it tough / more expensive to enable support just to output in 1080i50 or do a pulldown so TV support isn't necessary? For instance, the European PS3 models obviously support 1080i50, so the code exists. Could that support be easily added to US PS3s via a firmware update if Sony was willing, or would that require changed hardware?

[4K2K]

But it's definitely easy enough to keep the 50hz compatibility in the TVs and the players, since they do it for the European models, and the same manufacturers who make the European models also make the USA models. And shouldn't it actually work out cheaper in the end? ie. if they're really creating two sets of chips - one for Europe and one for the US, wouldn't it be cheaper to just create the one chip for all - which is compatible with 24p and 50 & 60Hz - I thought they already did that but the US disabled it's function?

I still think we should be giving the film and TV programme makers more creative options instead of removing options from them, as well as allowing us to watch all current content at the correct speed.

On a related point, though I'm not sure whether I should ask this is Kjack's thread, what is the cause of the multiple second delay that you get when switching between 24p content and 60i/p content on a Blu-ray disc? eg. 24p menu and main feature, but 60i making of feature?

If there is a genuine reason why there has to be a delay of multiple seconds while the TV re-syncs to the new frame rate - that you don't get if you always output from the player at 60p (but which adds 3:2 pull-down artefacts to the 24fps content), couldn't players send all content to the TV at 600p? This would mean they could instantly switch between 24,25,30,50 and 60Hz content without haven't to wait seconds while the TV re-syncs.

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by 4K2K

On a related point, though I'm not sure whether I should ask this is Kjack's thread, what is the cause of the multiple second delay that you get when switching between 24p content and 60i/p content on a Blu-ray disc? eg. 24p menu and main feature, but 60i making of content?

If there is a genuine reason why there has to be a delay of multiple seconds while the TV re-syncs to the new frame rate, couldn't players send all content to the TV at 600p ? This would mean they could instantly switch between 24,25,30 and 60Hz content without haven't to wait seconds while the TV re-syncs.

I agree with your first points about 50 Hz support. As for your questions, hopefully I can address them adequately.

The multiple second delays are just what you suggested - sync time. I'm not sure exactly what goes on during a sync, but I expect the multiple seconds are necessary as there's really no reason a TV manufacturer would add random delay in there for no reason.

As for sending data at 1080p600 - well maybe that would be nice in theory, but it's not in the Blu-ray (or any current) spec, and would require much higher bandwidth and TV refresh rates, things that just don't exist right now.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by 4K2K

If there is a genuine reason why there has to be a delay of multiple seconds while the TV re-syncs to the new frame rate, couldn't players send all content to the TV at 600p ? This would mean they could instantly switch between 24,25,30 and 60Hz content without haven't to wait seconds while the TV re-syncs.

No problem. Get yourself a display device and Blu-ray player with about 8 HDMI ports on each and you're in business!

[Bill Hunt]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

But every little penny counts, so ante up Blu people!
Which reminds me, Bill Hunt should really do another fundraising drive for Paul Prischman, who has since moved back to Chicago -
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/paulsb...raintrust.html

So, Hunt-ster, get off the treadmill and get into campaign mode like RAH!

Actually, we're one step ahead of you! The Brain Trust is hard at work on another auction of props and film memorabilia, the proceeds to benefit Paul and his family, and another live screening event with a director is tentatively being planned too. We should have an update and an announcement on at least the auction in the next month or so.

While we're on the subject, Paul is doing well back in Chi-town. Results of most recent scan came back with no sign of the tumor having returned. He's upbeat, the same old Paul, and word is he's enjoying BD movies on the PS3 we all bought him for his birthday a couple months ago...

[Torsten Kaiser TLE]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

It's the same reason why they never put out multisystem TVs here. There's virtually no demand for it. There is big demand for it in Europe

It's only if they're shipping a universal player or projector that they support it

Europe really needs to stop the 25fps thing, it doesn't solve any problems and just causes them

Originally Posted by 4K2K

Why does Europe need to stop with the 25fps/50i filming?
It's what our TV system has always used - though I do think that if we had 60Hz TV programming or higher it might be even better. It used to be about not causing interference, but it's still useful given the type of lighting that is usually used in this country. 25fps gives slightly better motion than 24fps. Slowing down BBC content as they do now on Blu-ray doesn't make the programmes better.

Why can't the manufacturers be asked to stop disabling the 50hz compatibility for their US machines instead of telling film or programme makers to stop making content at their chosen frame rates? (...)

Hi Jeff, long time no see
Sorry, but your analysis is quite off here. To begin with, it is not the European frequency that is the problem re: conversion if needed, but the "60Hz" variant. Remember - what you are seeing in SD (such as DVD or broadcast) is not 24fps but 59.94i in NTSC with a 3:2 (and therefore uneven) pulldown. The 60 Hz often mentioned is actually 59.94i, not exact 60; and the overwhelming majority of those masters is also DROP FRAME mode, which means that frames, albeit a few in some minutes, are literally not present in the master.
The jitter you were referring to is also not caused by a conversion from PAL or 25psf at all. During playback of a camera pan of, let's say, a car race captured on film at 24f/s- the 3:2 pulldown(ed) 59.94i master(s) in either 1080(HD) or 525(NTSC) show very visible jitter caused by the uneven pulldown in order to make the 24 frames appear within the "60Hz" or actual 59.94Hz "confines". This can only be "undone" with the aid of a so-called "reverse telecine" mode that some monitors and better equipped projectors feature.

At the same time, 50i masters do not have those jitter effects at all, but they have the problem of the 4% speed up. No doubt, it would be best if we all were to agree on ACTUAL 24psf 1080 with later double or triple refresh or actual 48 or 72psf framerates. But, the world is unjust, and reality is: we are stuck with two systems. 23.976 would be fine by me, but most displays still need frequency rates above 50Hz. Now, back to 50i - this variant is using the 2:2, and therefore an even, pulldown. Please also remember that 50i 1080 is merely used for broadcast transmissions as a standard. On Blu-ray the 25psf 1080 is the one that should be applied. Re: P&PR this is, indeed, an issue. I'll come back to that momentarily.

With conversions to NTSC the picture quality barrier is very much an issue; PAL does provide better resolution all things being equal - but the conversions both from NTSC to PAL or from PAL to NTSC are visibly falling short of the original either way. However, In High Definition the story becomes different. Cross conversions such as 25psf 1080 to 59.94i 1080 are with regard to picture quality not so much the issue anymore (except for the 3:2 pulldown, that if no "reverse telecine" feature is available in the monitoring EQ is still evident) - a simple speed down from 25psf to 23.976psf is all it needs and then at the same time apply the 3:2 pulldown to achieve 59.94i.

A little history: 25 f/s filming in Europe is tied directly to the power frequency and chosen PAL frequency at the time of development of television for wider use. Since the 1950s, films would be made in 25f/s as it also was easy in audio and post production to record, edit and playout the desired materials. In Europe, a film recorded with sound was literally ready for broadcast. That was an advantage. Thus, mastering P&PR to 23.976psf is, of course, the wrong choice to make (re: speed down thus lowering sound pitch). This BBC production was made at 25f/s; and neo_reloaded is right that all manufacturers should at least provide the 25psf 1080 option for that reason, along with 50p 720 as well.

By the way, the "before and after" sample from A&E on P&PR is a bit misleading: 1) the comparision was made between video masters, not the film elements themselves. I am sure the print element does have more potential than shown on the old 1"C (now D3) master, which was made on a tube telecine such as URSA Gold or Diamond (the reference made in that comparison to the "effect" of video noise being embedded into the video master by those types of telecines is quite correct). If transferred, for instance, on a SPIRIT, the results would have been more favourable. However, the negative is still superior, no question. It is just a question of whether it is necessary to use it.
2) The differences being shown in that clip are also so dramatic because of the color timing (also referred to with new productions as grading) made on the (in this case PANDORA) color correction console. The choices of color values and hues made by the colorist is not necessarily reflecting what's on the film element itself.

[JamesN]

Originally Posted by Torsten Kaiser TLE

Hi Jeff, long time no see
...and the overwhelming majority of those masters is also DROP FRAME mode, which means that frames, albeit a few in some minutes, are literally not present in the master...

Sorry to intrude, but just to clarify: doesn't DROP FRAME refer to frames "not being counted" in respect to the timecode, and not that frames are literally missing from the master?

[Torsten Kaiser TLE]

Originally Posted by JamesN

Sorry to intrude, but just to clarify: doesn't DROP FRAME refer to frames "not being counted" in respect to the timecode, and not that frames are literally missing from the master?

No apologies necessary . The reference was to non existing frames of the video time code, not film frames. The reason I mentioned this is because it makes editing problematic to say the least, something that does not exist in the 25f/s "world". To edit without problems the delivered master would have to be NDF (Non-Drop Frame) Time Code.

The original SMPTE frame-rate of true 30 frames/sec (60 interlaced fields to achieve 60Hz) that is still used today in audio production by the way, had its origins in the now obsolete US mono television standard. The American colour television standard changed that to the slightly different frame-rate of about 29.97 fps, or more correctly 59.94i(nterlaced fields) a second. On both, NDF (Non-drop frame) and DF (Drop frame) Time Codes can exist. NDF for raw recordings, DF mostly used for broadcast. In the DF TC "world" the number of frames in each second is not an integer, so an approximation is used; it is based on 30 fps, but two frames counts are dropped (skipped) at the start of every minute, except for every tenth minute.

[4K2K]

Isn't 24.0fps a valid frame rate in the Blu-ray spec, as well as 23.976fps? I think there are a couple of titles encoded at 24.0fps, but the vast majority of film titles are encoded at 23.976fps aren't they?

Seeing as nearly everything is now digital instead of analogue, why don't they go to using exactly 24.0fps for all 24fps film titles on Blu-ray (I was going to ask why they don't also use exactly 60hz for 60hz titles instead of about 59.94fps but I don't think exactly 60.0i/p is in the Blu-ray specs, just 59.94, etc.)

[Jeff Kleist]

Hi Torsten, thanks for the education

Many of the 25fps conversions I have use drop frame. It's quite noticeable in several episodes of Farscape for example Since all European sets can do 24fps, but US sets cannot, agreeing not to shoot 25fps/50i is in everyone's best interest. I was aware it was tied to power cycles, and why the world couldn't agree on a standard there either 100 years is beyond me (well, not really given politics but yeah)

I find PAL speedup incredibly intolerable, the pitch shift drives me nuts (i can detect it even in something I've never seen), and if that's corrected, I can still tell because all the cuts have an unnatural rhythmn.

I still stand by my point that 25fps is no longer necessary and creates more problems than it solves, and should go into the dustbin of history along with the PAL format from whence it came

[neo_reloaded]

Since I last posted, I've found things have gotten even worse in the PS3 world re: 1080i50. In previous firmwares, the PS3 would skip 1080i50 segments - that didn't help with full 1080i50 movies, but it let 1080p24 movies play fine if there was just a 1080i50 commercial before the menu or something.

But as of firmware 2.70, the PS3 will immediately quit when it encounters any 1080i50 segment. So titles that previously played now will not.