Industry Insiders Master Q&A thread IV: ONLY Questions to Insiders - Page 90 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #2671 of 4687 Old 12-04-2007, 07:05 PM
Senior Member
 
Andy Pennell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kirkland, WA, USA
Posts: 329
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

Amir isnt it time for Microsoft to issue a statement about the "rumour" that MS wants HDM to fail. And settle the thing once for all.

When even directors starts to spread fud it getting a little annoying.

I don't think we have the time (or the inclination) to respond to every crazy rumour that gets made up about us.

HD DVD Veteran
Andy Pennell is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2672 of 4687 Old 12-04-2007, 07:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
R Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 1,669
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkilian View Post

Provisions were made in the spec. You can check Amy's post on the subject at her blog. We've encouraged studios to include this ability in their titles.

Thanks! It seems easy enough to do. Are there any HD DVD titles that you're aware of which implement this functionality?
R Johnson is offline  
post #2673 of 4687 Old 12-04-2007, 08:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bobgpsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkilian View Post

Provisions were made in the spec. You can check Amy's post on the subject at her blog. We've encouraged studios to include this ability in their titles.

Has Studio Canal been using that way to do Resume? I have their Total Recall and also their The Pianist HD DVD titles and they will do a Resume.
bobgpsr is offline  
post #2674 of 4687 Old 12-04-2007, 08:54 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 17,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 545 Post(s)
Liked: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcgarnagle View Post

I don't see how this is crazy.

I think he meant the part about us paying Paramount $100M. I think just about everyone including the Pope know we didn't do that .

Quote:


But MS DOES have a video on demand service via XBOX live.

True. And Apple has the itunes video service despite bieng a board member of BDA and showing no investment whatsoever there. At least we are contributing to these formats. How come there is no negative talk about Apple if this is a genuine concern?

Quote:


Frankly speaking, how would MS benefit financially IF HDDVD wins?

We build and license our implementation of HDi. And some players use our Windows CE under it. Both make money for us.
Quote:


I can see where MS would be in an advantagous position if both formats fail, and the XBOX live infrastructure could be further strengthened to provide full HD programming.

There is no assurance that we come out ahead if both formats fail. Digital distribution has its challenges when it comes to profitability or CinemaNow and MovieLink would be multi-billion dollar businesses. The mainstream solution that makes money is called DVD. And the one that has 100% consumer adoption. Until such time consumers vote decisively for digital distribution, all you have here is a large company serving the varying needs of millions of its customers though multiple product lines. If one or the other succeeds, it is because you, our customers, chose for that to happen. Go ahead and buy nothing like HD optical and I am sure we would stop investing in digital distribution on the net. Do the opposite, and I am sure we will manage accordingly. The folks who never invested any R&D there, would be in hot water then, not us, as some have realized in portable music player business...

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #2675 of 4687 Old 12-05-2007, 01:48 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Kosty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North East USA
Posts: 14,683
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

...
And it would be really great if widescreen standard definition titles (that are not anamorphic) could be viewed without massive borders on all four sides (though this will be less important as the titles are replaced - if they ever are - or we have more HD content, but I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult for the manufacturers to enable this to allow us to watch our SD-DVDs in the best quality....?

Can players support a zoom function so that these non-anamorphic standard DVD can be digitally zoomed to fit a 16:9 frame.

I understand that the current HD DVD players see a non-anamorphic image as just a 4:3 image that happen to have black bars made of black pixels and by default they add in side pillerbars for the window box effect.

The problem is that window boxed 720p or 1080i/p image is a HD image that mosts HDTV displays cannot zoom HD content. The only way most displays can zoom it back to fit a 16:9 screen without the window box is to down res the image to 480i/p so the HDTV can then use its zoom capabilities.

Is this a CSS legacy issue? Why can't a player have a 4:3 letterbox to 16:digital zoom option for its HD output so I can get rid of window boxes on those old non-anamorphic widescreen DVDs without going down to 480p output? How complicated should this be to implement?

.
"A lot of good arguments are spoiled by some fool who knows what he is talking about." - Miguel de Unamuno


follow me on Twitter
Kosty is offline  
post #2676 of 4687 Old 12-05-2007, 07:25 AM
Senior Member
 
Andy Pennell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kirkland, WA, USA
Posts: 329
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancescoP View Post

I'd like to see a comment from Microsoft insiders about this:

source:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2228134,00.asp

First off the dashboard update has nothing to do with the HD DVD player. And secondly the alleged 1080i test failures have litte to no impact on actual movies: there are as I recall exactly three titles encoded as 1080i. We prefer to put our priorities into features that titles use (e.g. 1080p content) rather than arbritary benchmarks designed to sell chipsets. HD DVD PQ on the 360 is the equivalent of or surpasses any other HD DVD player on real content, and that is the most important thing.

(I can't speak for the DVD claims as I have no knowledge of that Xbox player).

HD DVD Veteran
Andy Pennell is offline  
post #2677 of 4687 Old 12-05-2007, 08:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PaulGo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Potomac, MD
Posts: 3,625
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Any insider want to comment on Michael Bay's new comments on his preference for Blu-ray?

"michaelbay
Director

Do you think you know my film look? - Today, 04:13 AM
Does anyone out here want to challenge what I feel suits my films better in terms of look. I see every frame of my films over a hundred times before it is ever released. I know the lighting conditions I shot it and the result on the DI. I know the range. I know what the final product should look like - Blu Ray suits my films better. But that said - I don't a care about this format war because I have both formats in my screening room - I'm just filling you in on what people deep in the film industry feel ultimately is going on -

Transformers looks great even in DVD!!"

http://www.shootfortheedit.com/forum...9&postcount=40
PaulGo is offline  
post #2678 of 4687 Old 12-05-2007, 09:05 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 17,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 545 Post(s)
Liked: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulGo View Post

Any insider want to comment on Michael Bay's new comments on his preference for Blu-ray?

"michaelbay
Director

Do you think you know my film look? - Today, 04:13 AM
Does anyone out here want to challenge what I feel suits my films better in terms of look. I see every frame of my films over a hundred times before it is ever released. I know the lighting conditions I shot it and the result on the DI. I know the range. I know what the final product should look like - Blu Ray suits my films better. But that said - I don't a care about this format war because I have both formats in my screening room - I'm just filling you in on what people deep in the film industry feel ultimately is going on -

Transformers looks great even in DVD!!"

http://www.shootfortheedit.com/forum...9&postcount=40

A few comments:

1. It is great that he has both formats! And that he thinks even DVD looks great. Imagine how much better HD DVD is then (and how it is possible then for something to be better than it!).

2. We would be happy to invite him to a screening to show him how incredible HD DVD picture quality is on a proper projector/display. And let him find any fault using his own material.

3. Both HD DVD and BD have the same "range." Both are 8-bit products and with 4:2:0 sampling. So the look he describes does not change in that respect no matter which format is used. Indeed we have different encodes of Paramount titles and not a single review that I recall has commented on the range or lighting condition being different on the formats.

Ultimately though, I personally respect the creative person deciding different things that us engineers. For example, AVC was used on Transformers not because it produced the best fidelity/transparency, but the best look in the eye of the “creative” making the call. And we respect that also, even though it meant our codec was not used at the end of the day.

4. The interactivity in HD DVD lets his creativity travel far past the linear movie experience created in theater. That I would think would be music to anyone's ear that cares about creative experiences. BD format is far behind right now in this area so he would take a step back if his wishes came through. We have shown these capabilities to many directors and they can't wait to see their future titles in HD DVD with these features.

Anyway, I love the fact that Michael is active in forums and stays so in touch with his audience. In that respect, he could say VC-1 and HD DVDs sucks a thousand times and that would still be cool with me . I hope though, that like me, he does allow the possibility that folks posting may teach him stuff about things he may not know. I know that I have learned a lot from your postings….

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #2679 of 4687 Old 12-05-2007, 09:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PaulGo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North Potomac, MD
Posts: 3,625
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

A few comments:

3. Both HD DVD and BD have the same "range." Both are 8-bit products and with 4:2:0 sampling. So the look he describes does not change in that respect no matter which format is used. Indeed we have different encodes of Paramount titles and not a single review that I recall has commented on the range or lighting condition being different on the formats.


Since Blu-ray has a greater disc capacity and allows higher encode rates for a two and a half hour movie such as "The Transformers" would not the picture and sound quality be better?
PaulGo is offline  
post #2680 of 4687 Old 12-05-2007, 09:40 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 17,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 545 Post(s)
Liked: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulGo View Post

Since Blu-ray has a greater disc capacity and allows higher encode rates for a two and a half hour movie such as "The Transformers" would not the picture and sound quality be better?

Haven't we been around this water hole a few thousand times? Or is the a softball for me to post the following?

A few snippets I found in a two second search on "Transfomers HD DVD review."

http://www.dvdreview.com/reviews/pages/2703.shtml

"The HD-DVD version of the film that Paramount Home Entertainment is serving up here is also very impressive. The film looks breathtaking, to say the least. Razor sharp with details that make a mockery of any standard definition television, this transfer is among the best high definition presentations I have ever seen. It flawlessly reproduces the gritty and grainy look that Michael Bay used for the military sequences, while going for a much gentler and smoother look during moments of less action. Both styles are [b]flawlessly reproduced[b] and reveal definition that is simply beautiful to behold. Edges are sharp, shadows are deep with the solid black levels of the transfer, and the colors are every bit as vibrant as real life. Simply speaking, this is about as good as high definition transfers get every bit as good as you would expect from a blockbuster movie such as this."

I don't think he could have used the word "flawless" more often .

http://dvd.themanroom.com/dvd-review.php?id=561

"Transformers is presented in a 1080p/AVC MPEG-4 encode (2.35:1 theatrical ratio) and it is nothing short of breathtaking. Michael Bay's movies always use a color palette that is bright and occasionally oversaturated, and this disc represents that gloriously. As one would expect from a three-month old film, the print is in perfect shape. Details are as sharp as a tack, black levels are solid and the transfer is completely free of video noise, edge enhancement and compression artifacts. If I have one complaint, it would only be that a few nighttime scenes here and there are a tad on the murky side, but that is such a minor quibble in contrast to just how great this disc looks. "

As I said, I don't consider this encode perfect. But let's not pick Michael's movie as an example of HD DVD not fit for best picture quality. It is capable of that and then some given the fact that we had even more headroom with VC-1. And for sure let's not rehash tired format war arguments for the nth time. I think the forum is past that....

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #2681 of 4687 Old 12-05-2007, 05:24 PM
Super Moderator
 
Kysersose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 5,500
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Cleaned up the thread.

The next Member to continue the bickering and to bring up Bay's comments will be suspended. Enough is enough already.

Kyser

"Good... Bad... I'm the guy with the gun."

Ash - Army of Darkness
Kysersose is offline  
post #2682 of 4687 Old 12-05-2007, 08:54 PM
Member
 
Outlaw Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Pennell View Post

The HD DVD cat2 spec allows players variations in which trick play speeds/directions are supported. As Toshiba have frame trickplay working for cat1 I'm honestly not sure why they didn't enable it for cat2, unless maybe it conflicted with subvideo support.

Every DVD player could not do this originally. I had one of the first that could trick-play backwards, including per frame (Sony DVP-S7700). How soon we forget...

Andy I'm really confused by this. I have tried the slow feature on 300, Alpha Dog and Transformers using my HDA2 and it works perfectly. It only works in the forward direction but it works. The frame by frame doesn't work.

Does your comment only apply to frame by frame?
Outlaw Z is offline  
post #2683 of 4687 Old 12-05-2007, 08:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ChuckZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This question is posed to any Blu-ray or HD DVD insider:

I recently read that the HD DVD spec has a provision for Film Grain Technology. Could you please explain how this is being used in your encodes or what advantages it brings to the table? Does it simplify pre-processing?

Does Blu-ray have some sort of similar technology?
ChuckZ is offline  
post #2684 of 4687 Old 12-05-2007, 09:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 17,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 545 Post(s)
Liked: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckZ View Post

This question is posed to any Blu-ray or HD DVD insider:

I recently read that the HD DVD spec has a provision for Film Grain Technology. Could you please explain how this is being used in your encodes or what advantages it brings to the table? Does it simplify pre-processing?

The work actually came from research during the development of MPEG-4 AVC. In general, grain is random in nature which means that perserving it is more challenging than other parts of the picture. At the time, AVC also used fixed blocks which made this problem worse. So proposal was made to "model" the grain, i.e. pick from a set of pre-sets that mimic grain in real film stock, filter it out of the source, and then insert it back in at decode time. The addition of grain at decode time was thought to counter the soft look of the filtered content because its "high frequency" nature tends to fool the eye into thinking the picture is sharper than it is.

Of course, the challenge is that filtering the source also filters out picture detail that will not be put back in. So while in some sources, especially at lower data rates (say, below 7 or 8 mbit/sec) FGT has some merit, in the domain we are talking about, it has not found much use. I can't think of any AVC titles which is using FGT. But Thomson does have an encoder for it.

Quote:


Does Blu-ray have some sort of similar technology?

Per above, this is really a feature of AVC codec. However, the profile picked by BDA does not allow it. So it cannot be used. Ironically, the hardware is there as the silicon is often shared with HD DVD...

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #2685 of 4687 Old 12-05-2007, 11:06 PM
Senior Member
 
Andy Pennell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kirkland, WA, USA
Posts: 329
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outlaw Z View Post

Andy I'm really confused by this. I have tried the slow feature on 300, Alpha Dog and Transformers using my HDA2 and it works perfectly. It only works in the forward direction but it works. The frame by frame doesn't work.

Does your comment only apply to frame by frame?

I mean frame-by-frame, and slow backwards, both of which are pretty tricky.

HD DVD Veteran
Andy Pennell is offline  
post #2686 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 02:34 AM
Senior Member
 
TheGizzard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 328
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Is this a studio or retailer decision? I imagine sales (like BOGO) increases units sold (which everyone is watching) while reducing profit per disc sold (which presumably some people care about -- studios?)

Who authorizes such a trade off? As an outsider it would seem that only units sold matter. But I find that hard to believe.
TheGizzard is offline  
post #2687 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 08:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
MikeSp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: south of metro Kansas City
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I am a noob at high def DVDs and am format neutral since I have players for both formats.

A white paper from a well-known Web site states that all video encoded for today's high def DVDs is limited to 8 bit color as are the studio archive masters and that if a studio were to use 16 bit Deep Color, those disks would be totally incompatible with today's players.

This leads me to wonder if all of the hype about adding a few billion more colors is not reality.

Thoughts/opinions?

MikeSp

Pioneer Elite Kuro, McIntosh amplifiers -- MC501 monos (3) and MC352's (2), McIntosh MX150 pre-pro; Oppo 83SE; speakers -- Aerial Acoustics Model 9's for mains and CC5 for center, Def Tech BPVX/P's and BPVX's for surrounds and JL F113's (2) for subs; Roku 3; PS3; Wiii; Tivos; and Monster HTPS...
MikeSp is offline  
post #2688 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 08:35 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 17,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 545 Post(s)
Liked: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeSp View Post

I am a noob at high def DVDs and am format neutral since I have players for both formats.

A white paper from a well-known Web site states that all video encoded for today's high def DVDs is limited to 8 bit color as are the studio archive masters and that if a studio were to use 16 bit Deep Color, those disks would be totally incompatible with today's players.

This leads me to wonder if all of the hype about adding a few billion more colors is not reality.

Thoughts/opinions?

MikeSp

The paper is right. A lot of what happens in CE land is hype. This is no different . There has been other threads on this by the way. The color space one that is still running may have had some notes in it.

The part about the mater being limited though, is not quite right. The master can easily be 10-bits or higher. It is that the delivery format which like broadcast, has lower color and dynamic range.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #2689 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 08:40 AM
Advanced Member
 
MikeSp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: south of metro Kansas City
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Being a noob to the wonderful world of high def DVDs (both formats), I am confused about where the lossless audio formats will be decoded.

When the disks are authored in the advanced mode, according to a white paper from a well-known Web site, they cannot be decoded in any receiver, but must be decoded in the player because of live mixing.

As I eagerly await a new pre/pro from my favorite audio company with decoding for all HD audio formats, they state that a new pre/pro is not necessary and are not even developing one at this time since in the future, decoding will have to be done in the players.

This is a bit confusing as I await players that can decode DTS HDMA. Will receivers or high end pre/pros be capable of decoding disks authored in advanced mode or will it have to be accomplished in the players themselves.

Please help me with my confusion that my aging brain is stumbling with.

(In answers, please remember that I am a noob at this, so please be gentle and answer on a pretty elementary level -- thanks)

MikeSp

Pioneer Elite Kuro, McIntosh amplifiers -- MC501 monos (3) and MC352's (2), McIntosh MX150 pre-pro; Oppo 83SE; speakers -- Aerial Acoustics Model 9's for mains and CC5 for center, Def Tech BPVX/P's and BPVX's for surrounds and JL F113's (2) for subs; Roku 3; PS3; Wiii; Tivos; and Monster HTPS...
MikeSp is offline  
post #2690 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 08:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dave Vaughn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vacaville, CA
Posts: 4,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Mike,

Even in advanced mode, the bitstream data sent out over HDMI can be decoded by an AVR, but there is a tradeoff. You can't get any of the manu sounds our picture-in-picture audio from the stream. In order to use any "advanced features", then the audio needs to be mixed in the player.

David



Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeSp View Post

Being a noob to the wonderful world of high def DVDs (both formats), I am confused about where the lossless audio formats will be decoded.

When the disks are authored in the advanced mode, according to a white paper from a well-known Web site, they cannot be decoded in any receiver, but must be decoded in the player because of live mixing.

As I eagerly await a new pre/pro from my favorite audio company with decoding for all HD audio formats, they state that a new pre/pro is not necessary and are not even developing one at this time since in the future, decoding will have to be done in the players.

This is a bit confusing as I await players that can decode DTS HDMA. Will receivers or high end pre/pros be capable of decoding disks authored in advanced mode or will it have to be accomplished in the players themselves.

Please help me with my confusion that my aging brain is stumbling with.

(In answers, please remember that I am a noob at this, so please be gentle and answer on a pretty elementary level -- thanks)

MikeSp


David Vaughn

Blu-ray Reviewer / Technical Writer

Sound & Vision Magazine (Print & Online)

Dave Vaughn is offline  
post #2691 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 09:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sharkshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto, eh?
Posts: 2,424
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

The paper is right. A lot of what happens in CE land is hype. This is no different . There has been other threads on this by the way. The color space one that is still running may have had some notes in it.

The part about the mater being limited though, is not quite right. The master can easily be 10-bits or higher. It is that the delivery format which like broadcast, has lower color and dynamic range.

Hello my friend, it seems retirement is keeping you busy....

A throwback to a far earlier conversation regarding bit depth for audio - while a general concensus was reached that 24bits for -playback- of audio material was overkill (with the higher order bits mostly noise), at the editing/mastering stage it is beneficial to have as much headroom as possible. The allusion I made at the time was to your beloved hobby of photography, editing pics in 16 (or 32!) bits from the RAW files, doing as much colour correction and tweaks as possible before locking the changes into the 8bit file for viewing (ie., JPEG).

Can the same thing be applied to video? Namely, a 4:4:4 telecine DI master being a better choice for creating a 4:2:2 VC1 encode than something that has already been bit-truncated? What about for CGI films - is it best to do a "native" 8-bit rendering pass directly for home video, or to use the digital 12bit master and re-encode?

What is the bit depth for 4k archive scans that Warner et. al. are doing? Have there proven to be challenges in encoding these files for consumer HDM that aren't shared by lower resolution files?

Finally, what at the moment is the bestest, most awesomest digital film format that's actually being used to archive a film, and what are the specifications for the frame storage? Like, let's say I have a pristine 65mm neg of Lawrence of Arabia and want to keep it on digital for all eternity, what would the most hardcore telecine/storage solution be given today's tech?

sharkshark is offline  
post #2692 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 09:11 AM
Advanced Member
 
MikeSp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: south of metro Kansas City
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Vaughn View Post

Mike,

Even in advanced mode, the bitstream data sent out over HDMI can be decoded by an AVR, but there is a tradeoff. You can't get any of the manu sounds our picture-in-picture audio from the stream. In order to use any "advanced features", then the audio needs to be mixed in the player.

David

Thanks David for confirming what I thought was truth and that my favorite audio equipment company had not distorted the truth since they are well behind the leading edge in their equipment (for which they are famous).

This raises three more questions, the second of which has probably been beat to death:

1) Will all or nearly all future high def DVDs be authored in the advanced mode since HD-DVDs already are and Blu-rays either recently got that part of their Java OS or soon will?

2) Can receivers to a better job of decoding the high def audio tracks than the players -- I had the impression that lossless was lossless was lossless... so the digital data converted to PCM would be the same no matter where it was decoded?

3) Why is bitstreaming the audio tracks to receivers so popular (this is related to question 2 above) and one well-received BD player does no decoding but bitstreams all audio tracks out to the receivers for decoding?

MikeSp

Pioneer Elite Kuro, McIntosh amplifiers -- MC501 monos (3) and MC352's (2), McIntosh MX150 pre-pro; Oppo 83SE; speakers -- Aerial Acoustics Model 9's for mains and CC5 for center, Def Tech BPVX/P's and BPVX's for surrounds and JL F113's (2) for subs; Roku 3; PS3; Wiii; Tivos; and Monster HTPS...
MikeSp is offline  
post #2693 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 11:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dave Vaughn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vacaville, CA
Posts: 4,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeSp View Post

Thanks David for confirming what I thought was truth and that my favorite audio equipment company had not distorted the truth since they are well behind the leading edge in their equipment (for which they are famous).

This raises three more questions, the second of which has probably been beat to death:

1) Will all or nearly all future high def DVDs be authored in the advanced mode since HD-DVDs already are and Blu-rays either recently got that part of their Java OS or soon will?

2) Can receivers to a better job of decoding the high def audio tracks than the players -- I had the impression that lossless was lossless was lossless... so the digital data converted to PCM would be the same no matter where it was decoded?

3) Why is bitstreaming the audio tracks to receivers so popular (this is related to question 2 above) and one well-received BD player does no decoding but bitstreams all audio tracks out to the receivers for decoding?

MikeSp

1) I have no idea, but I would assume that advanced authoring is pretty much the standard into the future.

2) On certain discs, the audio is better being done in the receiver. Phantom of the Opera on HD DVD is one. There was an error in the HDi environment that caused the TrueHD soundtrack to be sent out 15 dB low. When set to bitstream, this error is ignored and the audio is 15 dB louder and sounds MUCH better. This is the exception rather than the rule though. On properly authored discs, there is little to no difference to my ears.

3)I can't answer this one. It is just everyone's personal opinion. It is nice to have both options open to you though.

David Vaughn

Blu-ray Reviewer / Technical Writer

Sound & Vision Magazine (Print & Online)

Dave Vaughn is offline  
post #2694 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 12:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
maxleung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 3,495
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Dave, does the error in the Phantom of the Opera soundtrack apply to the blu-ray version as well? (I don't remember if the Blu-ray has a truehd track though - maybe it just uses PCM)
maxleung is offline  
post #2695 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 01:45 PM
Senior Member
 
Tom McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Playa del Rey, CA
Posts: 374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Is Deep Color the equivalent of vaporware?

A couple of points. "Deep Color" is associated with the overall dynamic range or the difference between min and max for any given color (roughly). The number of bits allocated to quatify that range determines the number of steps in-between.

Think of two starways, one going from zero to 50 feet and the other going from zero to 75 feet. Both could have 256 steps (think 8 bits). On the first the steps would be smaller; the latter having steps that were bigger-per-step.

So: There is nothing inherently 10 or 16 bits about Deep Color.

HOWEVER: When the steps get bigger you *may* start to see banding or contouring artifacts on soft gradients - say across a sky or in some CGI content. So having more steps (more bits) is usually a better thing as you go to more dynamic range.

It is important to understand the difference.

Tom McMahon
Technologist
DelRey
Former Co-Chair of H.264/AVC Hi Profiles
Tom McMahon is offline  
post #2696 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 01:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dave Vaughn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vacaville, CA
Posts: 4,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxleung View Post

Dave, does the error in the Phantom of the Opera soundtrack apply to the blu-ray version as well? (I don't remember if the Blu-ray has a truehd track though - maybe it just uses PCM)

The BD only has DD+.

David Vaughn

Blu-ray Reviewer / Technical Writer

Sound & Vision Magazine (Print & Online)

Dave Vaughn is offline  
post #2697 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 01:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sharkshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto, eh?
Posts: 2,424
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
forgive the -minor- lapse in etiquette, but as per my questions above, wouldn't you know that this launched today...

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/fea...d-is-made.html

It's a fun article that addresses things that many people ask about here of our (patient) insiders, and thought for those nerdy enough for AVS, this might be of use...

any insiders wish to add anything of note to the article?

sharkshark is offline  
post #2698 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 02:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
benwaggoner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,616
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkshark View Post

Can the same thing be applied to video? Namely, a 4:4:4 telecine DI master being a better choice for creating a 4:2:2 VC1 encode than something that has already been bit-truncated? What about for CGI films - is it best to do a "native" 8-bit rendering pass directly for home video, or to use the digital 12bit master and re-encode?

Normally we start with a 10-bit 4:2:2 master, and then run through our own special dithering software to convert to the 8-bit 4:2:0.

Scans and archives are normally at more than that yet, but most titles start the HDM workflow with the 10-bit 4:2:2 at native resolution.

Digital Media Technology Insider with Microsoft

My compression blog
benwaggoner is offline  
post #2699 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 02:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,494
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 84 Post(s)
Liked: 43
In the link about scanning films (such as Blade Runner)
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/fea...d-is-made.html
they say "sometimes you have to add grain". Isn't this a bad idea? If the film itself didn't have visible grain why would they want to add it? Forget what is said in the article. That can't be the correct way to do it can it?
Joe Bloggs is online now  
post #2700 of 4687 Old 12-06-2007, 04:02 PM
Senior Member
 
Andy Pennell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kirkland, WA, USA
Posts: 329
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeSp View Post

3) Why is bitstreaming the audio tracks to receivers so popular (this is related to question 2 above) and one well-received BD player does no decoding but bitstreams all audio tracks out to the receivers for decoding?

MikeSp

Some of this is hopefully made a bit clearer by the diagrams on my blog. For HD DVD I think the reasons for decoding everything in the player are so that any receiver that has 5.1 analog inputs can play them at maximum quality: no new receiver required. Those that don't have analog in can take an S/PDIF stream of re-encoded audio at lesser quality, but it still works.

I think BD bitstream stuff because (i) audio mixing isn't a feature until profile 1.1 titles appear, (ii) the mandatory audio codecs list is much shorter than HD DVD and maybe (iii) its cheaper for them to do (no licencing fee for the decoders)

HD DVD Veteran
Andy Pennell is offline  
Closed Thread HDTV Software Media Discussion

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off