Ask the Insiders: Putting the Last Nails in the Coffin

[kjacobs03]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

I wouldn't hold out much hope for anything beyond 50GB for movies. We might see 100GB for data storage, but even that doesn't seem likely now.

My biggest blu-wish is that they would use BD100's for the LotR EE trilogy. That way they don't try to cram each movie on a single BD50 or have to switch discs half way through the movie.

[DaViD Boulet]

My biggest blu-wish is that they would use BD100's for the LotR EE trilogy. That way they don't try to cram each movie on a single BD50 or have to switch discs half way through the movie.

I *hate* disc swapping. Even for bonus material. I'd love 75 and 100 GB movie software so we basically have a "four disc BD set" on a single platter. Oh the joy...

LOST season 1... on one disc!

dave

[kjacobs03]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

I *hate* disc swapping. Even for bonus material. I'd love 75 and 100 GB movie software so we basically have a "four disc BD set" on a single platter. Oh the joy...

LOST season 1... on one disc!

dave

I really think they should consider trying to make BD100's work for exceptions such as long movies (LotR) and TV show seasons. It would be a shame if they didn't even try.

[TheRealBob]

I think the LOTR movies themselves will fit easily on a BD-50. Just doing some quick calculations tells me that if they used the maximum bandwidth of 40 Mbps continuously, they could put 167 minutes on a BD-50. Since the best looking movies have average bit rates well below that, they shouldn't have a problem putting close to four hours on a BD-50. (I believe this LOTR question has been hashed over and pretty much settled here and on AVS, so search for more details if you're not buying my simple calculations.)

One thing arguing against BD-100s is that marketing people pretty much have established that people feel like they're getting more if they get more discs, and there is plenty of evidence in the DVD world of them using more discs than is needed.

So while I personally agree and would like to see one disc containing LOTR and tons of extras, and show seasons on a single disc, I think that we're not going to get our way on this.

[fitprod]

Originally Posted by TheRealBob

I think the LOTR movies themselves will fit easily on a BD-50. Just doing some quick calculations tells me that if they used the maximum bandwidth of 40 Mbps continuously, they could put 167 minutes on a BD-50. Since the best looking movies have average bit rates well below that, they shouldn't have a problem putting close to four hours on a BD-50. (I believe this LOTR question has been hashed over and pretty much settled here and on AVS, so search for more details if you're not buying my simple calculations.)

One thing arguing against BD-100s is that marketing people pretty much have established that people feel like they're getting more if they get more discs, and there is plenty of evidence in the DVD world of them using more discs than is needed.

So while I personally agree and would like to see one disc containing LOTR and tons of extras, and show seasons on a single disc, I think that we're not going to get our way on this.

Considering how bit budgets have to have allowances built in to compensate for spikes, I pretty sure it will take two BD-50's to fit the extended cuts of the Lord of the Ring films on Blu-ray. And if New Line intended to but both versions on the Blu-ray's, there no question that they'll have to be on two discs, seamless branching also eats bit budgets.

fitprod

[Mr_Bester]

Max has said in the past, the problems would be trying to get good yeilds. The same reason we haven't seen the mythological TL51 HDDVD. That's why the A-man said BD50 was science fiction(along with the fact he is Fud-Meister Supreme). And you still hear insiders talking about low yeilds on BD50 and they say only Sony is producing them, which real insiders have pointed out to be false.

[TheRealBob]

Originally Posted by fitprod

Considering how bit budgets have to have allowances built in to compensate for spikes, I pretty sure it will take two BD-50's to fit the extended cuts of the Lord of the Ring films on Blu-ray. And if New Line intended to but both versions on the Blu-ray's, there no question that they'll have to be on two discs, seamless branching also eats bit budgets.

Again, the experts on encoders and what they can handle and what can go on a BD-50 disc have said there would be no problem doing the highest quality encode for the extended editions of LOTR movies on BD-50 discs. As I said, search here and AVS and you'll find that this is the case.

As for your bit budgets, I pointed out you can get close to three hours with the maximum bitrate. This is what would be the spikes. Nothing runs at that rate all the time, or even close to it. LOTR is longer, but its average bitrate would be much lower since it's not constantly at spike levels.

You don't have to allow extra "bit budget" for spikes such that you can't use the entirety of the disc, as you seem to be implying. This isn't a single-pass real-time encode where they have one crack at it so they err on the side of making it fit. They can encode it in multiple passes and keep changing it and optimizing it until it fits the space exactly. Again, the experts that have addressed this have said you could get the highest quality encode of LOTR on a BD-50 without a problem.

They can put about four hours of good quality video on a BD-25 with the modern codecs. They're not going to have problems putting four hours of excellent video on a BD-50. Again, this has been discussed before and the people that are experts in this area do not dispute it. The only dispute was whether a top-notch LOTR EE encode could fit on a 30 GB HD DVD, with the consensus being no.

[blindcat87]

That was the impression I had gotten from all of the various discussions I have read. What I took away from them was that the EEs could fit on a single BD 50 with lossless audio, which was the important question. If including both versions with seamless branching would not be possible without compromising the image, I think it would be better to just go with the EE. I guess others may feel different, but I have had no interest in the theatrical versions since the EEs came out.

I think that the best route would be the EEs on single BD 50s with the extras and theatrical versions on additional discs. You know that they are going to release these as ultimate collector's versions anyway, so with the more discs = more value perception of the general consumer, this should help them justify the MSRP they are going to ask for no matter how the release ends up being presented.

I really wish people could get over the fewer discs means lesser value foolishness. Even as a kid videotaping shows off of tv, I always tried to go for the most movies or episodes I could fit without wrecking the quality. Even then, I dreamed of one day being able to sit down, press play, and watch a whole season of a show without changing tapes. I still curse the authors of TV DVD sets that make yu watch individual episodes without a 'play all' option or with one that is hard to set up. Maybe someday the idea that more enjoyment with less work to access it is added value, not the other way around. Changing discs or selecting episodes individually is not a lot of work for the average viewer, but saving that work is an improvement and it makes the experience a lot easier for folks like me that can't read menus.

Chris

Chris

Originally Posted by TheRealBob

Again, the experts on encoders and what they can handle and what can go on a BD-50 disc have said there would be no problem doing the highest quality encode for the extended editions of LOTR movies on BD-50 discs. As I said, search here and AVS and you'll find that this is the case.

As for your bit budgets, I pointed out you can get close to three hours with the maximum bitrate. This is what would be the spikes. Nothing runs at that rate all the time, or even close to it. LOTR is longer, but its average bitrate would be much lower since it's not constantly at spike levels.

You don't have to allow extra "bit budget" for spikes such that you can't use the entirety of the disc, as you seem to be implying. This isn't a single-pass real-time encode where they have one crack at it so they err on the side of making it fit. They can encode it in multiple passes and keep changing it and optimizing it until it fits the space exactly. Again, the experts that have addressed this have said you could get the highest quality encode of LOTR on a BD-50 without a problem.

They can put about four hours of good quality video on a BD-25 with the modern codecs. They're not going to have problems putting four hours of excellent video on a BD-50. Again, this has been discussed before and the people that are experts in this area do not dispute it. The only dispute was whether a top-notch LOTR EE encode could fit on a 30 GB HD DVD, with the consensus being no.

[WickyWoo]

That was the impression I had gotten from all of the various discussions I have read. What I took away from them was that the EEs could fit on a single BD 50 with lossless audio, which was the important question. If including both versions with seamless branching would not be possible without compromising the image, I think it would be better to just go with the EE. I guess others may feel different, but I have had no interest in the theatrical versions since the EEs came out.

They COULD, but people wouldn't want them to

BD-50, like DVD-9 before it really taps out at 2.5 hours for optimal audio and video performance

[blindcat87]

If that is the case, I would definitely take quality over convenience.

I would dearly love to have 100 Gb BD movies, but as I understand it, the difficulty in getting good discs grows exponentially with each additional layer. If that is the case, I can't see quad layer discs becoming commercially viable for anything beyond storage. There will always be someone willing to pay massive bucks for more storage, but movie fans would never pay what studios would have to charge for such a tricky medium.

Chris

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

They COULD, but people wouldn't want them to

BD-50, like DVD-9 before it really taps out at 2.5 hours for optimal audio and video performance

[darinp2]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

BD-50, like DVD-9 before it really taps out at 2.5 hours for optimal audio and video performance

Even 25Mbps ABR for video and 5 Mbps ABR for audio would allow about 3.7 hours if extras and things were put on a second disc. What average bitrates do you assume for optimal audio and video performance to get to your 2.5 hour number?

--Darin

[WickyWoo]

Even 25Mbps ABR for video and 5 Mbps ABR for audio would allow about 3.7 hours if extras and things were put on a second disc. What average bitrates do you assume for optimal audio and video performance to get to your 2.5 hour number?

That for one thing- You're not going to just get 5mbps for your audio. The name of the game these days is to cover as many countries as possible on your masters. You're also failing to take into account the huge spikes and high bitrates you'd see on LOTR for the action scenes.

Look at Pirates 3, there's several bitstarved scenes in there (Where Will has tea and Davey Jones shows up for one).

[darinp2]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

That for one thing- You're not going to just get 5mbps for your audio. The name of the game these days is to cover as many countries as possible on your masters. You're also failing to take into account the huge spikes and high bitrates you'd see on LOTR for the action scenes.

No, I'm not. How high do you think the bitrates would go in the action scenes? We are talking about a 2.35:1 movie for one thing (so free black pixels on every single frame compared to 1.78:1 or 1.85:1). Even with 40Mbps PBR a 25 Mbps ABR would be a ratio of 1.6:1 for PBR:ABR. You aren't expecting peaks above 40Mbps for just the video, are you? A 25Mbps ABR for video should leave lots of bitrate for scenes that need higher rates.

As far as audio, it depends on whether they want to do lossless in multiple languages and how many countries they want to cover, but they don't need to make one worldwide release, especially if it means having to split the movie across 2 discs. A main audiotrack in TrueHD 5.1 at 20/48 should take under 3 Mbps ABR. Even with 24/48 a Dolby paper lists the ABR at 3.4 Mbps for one example with 5.1 audio. They list 4.7 Mbps ABR for 7.1 with 24/48. DTS HD MA may be a little higher, but I don't know of a place with numbers for those.

Is your position that they will split these LOTR movies across 2 discs in order to get more languages on there total, more with lossless, or to allow video ABRs above 25 Mbps?

What is your standard for the audio on a disc for your 2.5 hour claim? As a recent example of a new release from Sony, Across the Universe is listed on highdefdigest as having 24/48 TrueHD track in English, plus Spanish and Portuguese in DD at what looks like 448Kbps. All that should be under 5Mbps ABR. It is when they start doing lossless in multiple languages or things like both TrueHD and PCM in English that those really start to push up, but I sure hope they wouldn't split a movie across 2 discs for the 2nd case (to put the same audio track in both TrueHD and PCM).

And basically, where does your 2.5 hour claim come from? How much do you think is needed (in Mbps) for ideal audio? Then how much for video? Have you actually done the math with some bitrates to come up with 2.5 hours for 50GB?

--Darin

[NutsAboutPS3]

Originally Posted by darinp2

basically, where does your 2.5 hour claim come from? How much do you think is needed (in Mbps) for ideal audio? Then how much for video? Have you actually done the math with some bitrates to come up with 2.5 hours for 50GB?

I can't tell you Wicky's maths, but personally I see 30Mbps video average bitrate as the minimum for top notch quality. For audio, looking at Spiderman 3 as an example, that has TrueHD and PCM main tracks plus about 7 further non-lossless tracks. So I'm looking for a total average bitrate of around 42Mbps, which is about 18.5GB per hour. For a 3.5 hour movie, you need 65GB to achieve that.

Personally I think they will release LOTR EE as one BD-50 per movie, but I'd much rather they either split it across two discs or did something a bit special by using a BD-100 and maxing out the bitrate (assuming current players could play such a disc).

Is there such a thing as a triple layer BD-75 that might fall somewhere between a BD-50 and BD-100 for cost and yield?

[darinp2]

Originally Posted by NutsAboutPS3

I can't tell you Wicky's maths, but personally I see 30Mbps video average bitrate as the minimum for top notch quality.

I realize this is going off the insider track and should maybe have a thread of its own, but where did you come up with that number? Can you name a Blu-ray release using AVC (H.264) which has an ABR of 30Mbps or higher for just the video? Are there any Blu-ray releases that you consider top notch quality?

Originally Posted by NutsAboutPS3

For audio, looking at Spiderman 3 as an example, that has TrueHD and PCM main tracks plus about 7 further non-lossless tracks.

TrueHD and PCM for the same audio track is a waste just because some players can't support TrueHD or DTS HD MA. I would rather see them do one TrueHD or DTS HD MA track for English than 2 high bitrate tracks for just the same audio (English). Especially if the PS3 and other players can do the DTS HD MA at that time.

Originally Posted by NutsAboutPS3

Personally I think they will release LOTR EE as one BD-50 per movie, but I'd much rather they either split it across two discs or did something a bit special by using a BD-100 and maxing out the bitrate (assuming current players could play such a disc).

Or don't put all that extra audio on the US release. I believe that most BDs have 3 or less languages on there. I understand their desire to put lots of them on there, but I hope they won't if it will either affect the video quality, or cause them to have to split a movie across 2 discs. I do like that Blu-ray has extra bandwidth and space over HD DVD to decrease the chances that when push comes to shove the studios will sacrifice the video quality, but I prefer that Blu-ray releases not sacrifice the video for some of these other things.

--Darin

[NutsAboutPS3]

Originally Posted by darinp2

I realize this is going off the insider track and should maybe have a thread of its own, but where did you come up with that number? Can you name a Blu-ray release using AVC (H.264) which has an ABR of 30Mbps or higher for just the video?
..
Or don't put all that extra audio on the US release. I believe that most BDs have 3 or less languages on there.

Yes, mods please feel free to shunt this sub-thread away to a new thread.

Deja Vu seemed to be around 30Mbps VC-1 whenever I looked at the bitrate meter.

Problem with the audio is that even if they miss the alternative language tracks off the US release, they'll still want to re-use the video encode worldwide. This has caused some UK releases to omit commentary tracks as there was no room for them without re-encoding the video. The US version is likely to have its video bitrate compromised by needing to use the same video encode as a European release with loads of dubbed language tracks.

[Mystery Clock]

Originally Posted by darinp2

I realize this is going off the insider track and should maybe have a thread of its own, but where did you come up with that number? Can you name a Blu-ray release using AVC (H.264) which has an ABR of 30Mbps or higher for just the video? Are there any Blu-ray releases that you consider top notch quality?

IIRC, CE3K had peak bitrates well north of 40+ mbps for some scenes. I can't really comment on the ABR, however -- perhaps somebody else can chime in on that. Of course, it has both dts HD-MA and TrueHD soundtracks which push the total up, so I'm not sure what the math works out to be for video.

I can say I've never seen my bitrate meter go higher, though.



-John

[patrick99]

Originally Posted by Mystery Clock

IIRC, CE3K had peak bitrates well north of 40+ mbps for some scenes. I can't really comment on the ABR, however -- perhaps somebody else can chime in on that. Of course, it has both dts HD-MA and TrueHD soundtracks which push the total up, so I'm not sure what the math works out to be for video.

I can say I've never seen my bitrate meter go higher, though.



-John

Man on Fire has pretty high peaks as well.

[DaViD Boulet]

Many Disney titles also push the meter. AVC on Chicago peaks over 40 quite a bit... and seems to average in the high 30's.

[mycroft]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

Many Disney titles also push the meter. AVC on Chicago peaks over 40 quite a bit... and seems to average in the high 30's.

I assume that's total bitrate though, not just video? Since the max bitrate for video on BD is 40Mbps, either the bitrate meter is wrong (which Max has alluded to before) or it's measuring total bitrate.