Has Warner finally started using format-specific encodes?

[JBlacklow]

While browsing er...certain corners...of the series of tubes, I came across evidence of the size of the HD DVD versions of Harry Potter 2 and 4 and Blu-ray versions of Harry Potter 3 and 5. Apart from the weird numbering/even-odd versions, there's a pretty big discrepancy in size:

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets HD DVD (2h41m): 25.16 GB
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban Blu-Ray (2h22m): 39.46 GB
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire HD DVD (2h37m): 28.09 GB
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix Blu-Ray (2h18m): 47.79 GB

I'd love to believe that Warner has suddenly seen the light and started using encodes specific to the bandwidths of each format on these titles, but I'm still doubtful. Could I be missing something? I know that on Blu-ray, all five films are using PCM and that OOTP has some extras in 1080p (as opposed to 480p on HD DVD), but would that really account for a 15-20GB difference, especially considering the longer length of the HD DVDs?

EDIT: Added runtimes.

[UTVOL06]

Originally Posted by JBlacklow

While browsing er...certain corners...of the series of tubes, I came across evidence of the size of the HD DVD versions of Harry Potter 2 and 4 and Blu-ray versions of Harry Potter 3 and 5. Apart from the wierd numbering/even-odd versions, there's a huge discrepancy in size:

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets HD DVD: 25.16 GB
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban Blu-Ray: 39.46 GB
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire HD DVD: 28.09 GB
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix Blu-Ray: 47.79 GB

I'd love to believe that Warner has suddenly seen the light and started using different encodes on these titles, but I'm still doubtful. Could I be missing something? I know that the BD versions are using PCM and that OOTP has some extras in 1080p, but would that really account for a 15-20GB difference?

All are encoded using VC-1, but perhaps the Blu-ray versions are receiving a higher bitrate?

[Disco_And]

Maybe WB have finally pulled there finger out and seen the light of Blu-rays 50gb

[CptGreedle]

remember, Disney just released Santa Clause 3 encoded in VC-1, but high encode to show Microsoft that even their lower quality codec can produce good results with enough space on the disc.

It is possible it is a higher rate and better quality. I would LOVE to see these maxing out the Blu-ray disc. WB says they love BD, this would be a great way to show it.

[ack_bak]

Do the Blu-Ray movies have extras in HD? This could allow for the difference (plus PCM versus TrueHD, where PCM takes up more space).

[bajor27]

We can only hope. I'd settle for them putting the encode and extras in HD for us and SD for them if that's the case as well (at least for now until they go BD exclusive)

[UTVOL06]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

remember, Disney just released Santa Clause 3 encoded in VC-1, but high encode to show Microsoft that even their lower quality codec can produce good results with enough space on the disc.

It is possible it is a higher rate and better quality. I would LOVE to see these maxing out the Blu-ray disc. WB says they love BD, this would be a great way to show it.

Yeah, Santa Clause 3 got nearly a 5/5 on PQ and was said to have a very high bitrate in VC-1. They said these lower bitrates used with most VC-1 transfers to date have soiled the reputation of that particular MS encode.

hopefully WB used a higher bitrate on the HP films..I know a person from the UK reported the PQ was as good as Spider-man 3 if not better.

[JBlacklow]

It's more surprising given that the HD DVDs are actually longer!

[Frode]

3 hours of 5.1 LPCM would be around 5.8 gigs. The runtime isn't 3 hours though, and the size difference much larger. This makes me doubly glad that I have the discs on order.

[Frode]

Okay lets do some numbers:

161 minutes at 25.16 GB = 20.8Mbps
142 minutes at 39.46 GB = 37.0Mbps
157 minutes at 28.09 GB = 23.9Mbps
138 minutes at 47.79 GB = 46.2Mbps!!!

Keep in mind that any extras will reduce that somewhat, and also that those numbers still include audio.

[JBlacklow]

Interesting finds, Frode. I've posted this over at AVS. I'm still not convinced yet, since there could be another 45m+ of featurettes/deleted scenes on each disc. If those are in 1080p that could up the size, especially if they're in MPEG2.

[Frode]

Originally Posted by JBlacklow

Interesting finds, Frode. I've posted this over at AVS. I'm still not convinced yet, since there could be another 45m+ of featurettes/deleted scenes on each disc. If those are in 1080p that could up the size, especially if they're in MPEG2.

According to HDD, there is no HD extras for OotP, but they share the SD DVD ones. In addition the HD DVD has IME and web stuff. No information on the other discs however.

EDIT: Looking at it, I can only come to two possible conclusions: 1. Either they put all three language tracks in LCPM (13.8Mbps), or 2. they increased the video bitrate.

[jorg]

Originally Posted by JBlacklow

While browsing er...certain corners...of the series of tubes, I came across evidence of the size of the HD DVD versions of Harry Potter 2 and 4 and Blu-ray versions of Harry Potter 3 and 5. Apart from the weird numbering/even-odd versions, there's a pretty big discrepancy in size:

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets HD DVD (2h41m): 25.16 GB
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban Blu-Ray (2h22m): 39.46 GB
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire HD DVD (2h37m): 28.09 GB
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix Blu-Ray (2h18m): 47.79 GB

I'd love to believe that Warner has suddenly seen the light and started using encodes specific to the bandwidths of each format on these titles, but I'm still doubtful. Could I be missing something? I know that on Blu-ray, all five films are using PCM and that OOTP has some extras in 1080p (as opposed to 480p on HD DVD), but would that really account for a 15-20GB difference, especially considering the longer length of the HD DVDs?

EDIT: Added runtimes.

for the last oen i remember hd dvd is two disc but blu-ray they fit on 1 disc

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by JBlacklow

While browsing er...certain corners...of the series of tubes, I came across evidence of the size of the HD DVD versions of Harry Potter 2 and 4 and Blu-ray versions of Harry Potter 3 and 5. Apart from the weird numbering/even-odd versions, there's a pretty big discrepancy in size:

Since you listed 4 different movies instead of comparing the two formats... we don't really know what it means... BUT some of the difference could be caused by the difference in PCM and Dolby TrueHD...

~Alan

[JBlacklow]

Originally Posted by Alan Gordon

Since you listed 4 different movies instead of comparing the two formats... we don't really know what it means... BUT some of the difference could be caused by the difference in PCM and Dolby TrueHD...

~Alan

I just posted a response to this theory at AVS. I'll copy it here:

As I posted above, the audio may account for a couple extra gigabytes, seeing as how both versions have lossless soundtracks (the LPCM space above is total, not amount above TrueHD). The real x-factor here seems to be the extras. While most of the extras on OOTP seem to be 1080i/p, a quick glance at the back cover art for films 2-4 shows only 480p. So again, we come back to the fact that despite being shorter and sharing the same SD extras, the BD releases would be much larger. The PCM track on POA would only be an extra couple of GB (let's be extremely generous and say 4GB) over the TrueHD. Yet the film is almost 10GB larger than a completely full HD DVD, and judging by the other HD DVDs it won't be full, so it would be even more!

So, here we are. After "throwing in some PCM audio and HD extras", we can maybe explain OOTP. But it doesn't explain the other movies.

[richteer]

Originally Posted by Frode

According to HDD, there is no HD extras for OotP, but they share the SD DVD ones. In addition the HD DVD has IME and web stuff. No information on the other discs however.

<rant>
If this is true, that's what really pisses me off with Warner. On the one hand, they want to offer the same to both platforms, by crippling their BDs by using HD DVD bit rates, and on the other they're taking advantage of HD DVD's IME stuff.

If they're gonna stay neutral, it would be nice if they played to both formats' strengths. If RB Films can do it, why can't Warner?
</rant>

[JBlacklow]

According to Warner's announcement and the back cover, most of OOTP's featurettes will be 1080i/p.

[Luis_A51]

Im hoping this is true (video bitrate increase and PCM) because ive been less than thrilled with the specs on warner movies (DD on Oceans box??)

That and Harry Potter DESERVES to be fully optimized. Theres just so much going on in that castle. Cant wait.

[WickyWoo]

Don't forget at least order of the phoenix has some Blu-exclusive documentaries that may account for some of those extra gigs

[mikenike]

Ooh... Look at Prisoner of Azkaban. That one is my favorite (book and movie) and the transfer onto Blu-Ray will look gorgeous!