Why aren't all movies authored on 50 gig Blu-ray

[Canada]

Why arn't all movies authored on 50 gig Blu Ray disks? Are the 50 gig disks more expensive to produce or something? I know 50 gigs is a lot of space.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Apparently some releases don't require the full 50GB.

[JadedRaverLA]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

Apparently some releases don't require the full 50GB.

I can't think of ANY release that uses 50GB of space (most dual-layered discs are 30-40GB). Anyway, if you have a short title and limited special features, the production house likely couldn't get the disc over 25GB in size even if they maxed out the video bitrate throughout the movie.

Also, there is a (not insignificant) cost-differential between producing single layer and dual layer discs. In addition, many of the Blu-ray disc production lines installed currently are only capable of producing single layer discs, though that will be changing as time goes on.

[Anthony P]

I can't think of ANY release that uses 50GB of space (most dual-layered discs are 30-40GB).

that is not true

[cajmoyper]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

that is not true

Proof? Reasoning?

[BStecke]

I'm pretty sure the Pirates movies are pretty damn close, hence the use of the second BD25. I wouldn't know where to find that kind of info to be sure though. I know there are computer programs that can do it, but I don't have any of them. lgans usually has that type of info.

[blu2]

Originally Posted by cajmoyper

Proof? Reasoning?

There is a wealth of statistics on disc content size here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...highlight=size

Here's a large one for example:


Title Codec Length Movie Size Disc Size
Close Encounters of the Third Kind (seamless) AVC 2:14:41 36,620,150,784# 49,688,551,851

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by cajmoyper

Proof? Reasoning?

The lists

Lots of them bumping up on 50GB.

Gary

[JadedRaverLA]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

that is not true

I said MOST were between 30-40GB, which was true. And I said, none were 50GB... which was also true. You sited ONE example that was LESS than 50 GB as proof that some part of that was wrong. Then many posted links which show a minority of 50GB discs had over 40GB... also doesn't change the facts of what I presented.

People here are touchy. What I said was right... and the fact that more discs are (finally) coming out that use closer to 50GB doesn't change that.

Anyway, if you're all so worried about 50GB discs actually using closer to that amount of space, then yell at Warner... not me.

[Anthony P]

I said MOST were between 30-40GB, which was true.

no it is noty, do the math.

And I said, none were 50GB... which was also true

none will be exactly 50GB but there are a few that are over 49GB

CE3K, Crank, Damages: The Complete First Season Disc 3,Dirty Dancing, Ghost Rider, Hellboy....

but yeah why let facts stand in the way of your BS

[cpgator]

Originally Posted by JadedRaverLA

I can't think of ANY release that uses 50GB of space (most dual-layered discs are 30-40GB). Anyway, if you have a short title and limited special features, the production house likely couldn't get the disc over 25GB in size even if they maxed out the video bitrate throughout the movie.

Since uncompressed video, even for a short movie, takes up enough space to fill many 50GB BDs, why would they have a problem getting it past 25?

[4K2K]

Originally Posted by cpgator

Since uncompressed video, even for a short movie, takes up enough space to fill many 50GB BDs, why would they have a problem getting it past 25?

Blu-ray doesn't support uncompressed video.
It supports compressed video up to a maximum data rate of around 48 mbit/s (video+audio+subtitles)

[cpgator]

Originally Posted by 4K2K

Blu-ray doesn't support uncompressed video.
It supports video up to a maximum data rate of around 48 mbit/s

Yes, but when you are compressing the video, don't you get to decide how much. If I have a movie, can't I decide I want to compress it to 50GB, or down to 20GB?

[WickyWoo]

BD25 are in the minority, but what's your take on why there are some titles still being released on BD25?

The studios are being "cheap" in some cases, and/or they feel these titles don't "deserve" the extra space?

A lot of it is because it's simply not needed.

25mbps video, which is very respectible (reference titles like Pirates 2 average around 20) is 11GB an hour (and thats constant bitrate, not variable like all the video actually is.

Reign of Fire uses uncompressed PCM and looks fantastic on a BD-25. If you use AVC and Dolby THD, it's very easy to get a lot for movies onto a BD-25, especially stuff like romantic comedies.

Max constant bitrate video (40mbps) is 18GB an hour. Seriously, especially if you don't have a lot of high action you can easily get away with mid-teens and still maintain top quality. Disney is doing great stuff in the 18-20mbps(8-9GBs/hr) range for video. Mind you those figures are assuming constant rates, and all those titles are spiking above for high action scenes and such.

BD-25s I thought looked great include

Devil Wears Prada (MPEG-2, DTS-MA)
Predator (MPEG-2 DTS-MA, complaints are source, not encode based)
RoboCop (MPEG-2 DTS-MA, complaints are source, not encode based)
Reign of Fire (AVC, PCM)
Aeon Flux (MPEG-2 DTS)
Terminator (MPEG-2/PCM complaints are source, not encode based)
Big Fish (MPEG-2/PCM)
Blade Runner (VC-1/THD)
Brothers Grimm (AVC/PCM)

[4K2K]

I think I've worked it out

1 megabit = 125 Kilobytes

48 megabit/s = (48*125)=6000 kilobytes/sec

6000 x 60 = 360,000 kilobytes per minute

= 351.5625 megabytes per minute

351.5625*60=21,093.75 megabytes per hour


So if the movie was up to around 1.2 hours long (72 minutes), even if it used the 48 megabits/sec constantly, it would fit on a 25GB disc.

Though most movies I think are longer than 72 minutes, so, if they were to constantly use the maximum, they would need a 50GB disc. But they don't generally use the 48mb/s - more like half that .

[Blu-Raider]

Originally Posted by Canada

Why arn't all movies authored on 50 gig Blu Ray disks? Are the 50 gig disks more expensive to produce or something? I know 50 gigs is a lot of space.

1. Availability of media
2. Manufacturing cost

[mb3]

*I just looked at the dates and realized how old this was after posting... sorry about necro-posting*

Originally Posted by Blu-Raider

1. Availability of media
2. Manufacturing cost

add to that the additional cost of the authoring software requiring more money to author DL discs.

Scenarist charges more for their DVD9 and BD50 capabilities compared to the DVD5 and BD25 package. DLs cost additional licensing fees, which are already very high, and are done for a time period; a license is not good forever, atleast not the way the software is "sold" now. A serial code with a dongle lasts for a finite period.

So, consider that some manufacturers or authoring studios probably save money producing SL DVDs and BDs strictly due to a monetary savings on the software.
Especially if they don't do a lot of BD titles, having to pay even more for authorng the rare BDs to BD50s, before even pressing to the much higher -priced media... well it just doesn't seem worth it to them. BDs are already difficult to sell in some markets (Manga UK routinely kills anime BD ttles in mid-series), so keeping costs down in any way seems the smart thing to do, and the savings on media and software is pretty significant here. They can manufacture tons more BD25s for the cost of a few BD50s.

[blueshadow | Kosty]

Originally Posted by mb3

*I just looked at the dates and realized how old this was after posting... sorry about necro-posting*



add to that the additional cost of the authoring software requiring more money to author DL discs.

Scenarist charges more for their DVD9 and BD50 capabilities compared to the DVD5 and BD25 package. DLs cost additional licensing fees, which are already very high, and are done for a time period; a license is not good forever, atleast not the way the software is "sold" now. A serial code with a dongle lasts for a finite period.

So, consider that some manufacturers or authoring studios probably save money producing SL DVDs and BDs strictly due to a monetary savings on the software.
Especially if they don't do a lot of BD titles, having to pay even more for authorng the rare BDs to BD50s, before even pressing to the much higher -priced media... well it just doesn't seem worth it to them. BDs are already difficult to sell in some markets (Manga UK routinely kills anime BD ttles in mid-series), so keeping costs down in any way seems the smart thing to do, and the savings on media and software is pretty significant here. They can manufacture tons more BD25s for the cost of a few BD50s.

Thanks for sharing those authoring considerations for smaller studios and content providers.

From a production standpoint for major studio releases BD50 capacity or cost is really no longer an issue. More Blu-ray replication capacity is needed tokeep up with demand Singulus is selling Blueline II lines as fast as they can build them 50 sold in 2011, but there really is not much difference in cost or availability of BD50 over BD25 production now a days.

Pretty much now the difference to manufacture a BD50 vs a BD25 is pennies and most replication lines are BD50 capable. It may save a small amount of money for a niche title but from a larger studio provider its trivial .

Pretty much is a title needs the space in any way or even in planning is close its probably going to be runon a BD50. Only for content that clearly and easily fits on a BD25 or is duplicated and copied produced on a BD-R for a small run for a small production run and not pressed and replicated on a replication line like a studio title for mass distribution is the authoring software and cost a major factor.

If you see a studio disc maybe for an older title new to Blu-ray catalog release on a BD25 its because all the content was found to easily fit there without compromise.

Back when this thread was made BD50 production capacity was noticeably more expensive and the yield rates were much lower for BD50 dual layer production and BD50 capable replication lines were scarce and running at capacity but that's no longer the case. Most lines now and all being made now IIRC are all BD50 capable and if something is replicated on a BD25 now a days its because it meets the need.

For niche content that you are talking about for smaller content providers those costs that for a studio are trivial may be important considerations on the authoring side of the equation.