King Kong comparison *PIX* - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 05:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lgans316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Barking, Essex, London
Posts: 6,863
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_HD View Post

Could someone give an explanation for so much empty space on this disc?
Andrew

1) Unwillingness to re-encode at a higher bit rate.
2) Unwillingness / lackluster attitude to feature film extras in the remaining space when UNI had created separate encodes and featured all film extras on the overseas release of Jarhead and The Thing.
3) The studio is planning to feature extra materials and/or provide high bit rate treatment on the inevitable and unannounced Collector's Edition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

Hey, isn't that Warner Bros?

All that's implied in it. Isn't it ?

Blu-ray : 340
lgans316 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 05:08 AM
Advanced Member
 
Andrew_HD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 509
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

Hey, isn't that Warner Bros?

Sorry, I've forgotten
Andrew_HD is offline  
post #183 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 05:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
patrick99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgans316 View Post

PS3 bitrate meter goes low = Excellent PQ. Lower bit rate rules. Author movies for DVD and not BD. Long live Warner. I am quite surprised to see many people having prejudiced thoughts on why NOT higher bit rates can't produce better PQ.

Indeed. It almost seems sometimes as if the format war was still going on.
patrick99 is offline  
post #184 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 09:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,521
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 222 Post(s)
Liked: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrick99 View Post

Indeed. It almost seems sometimes as if the format war was still going on.

Without mentioning names, the format war is certainly still going on in some heads.

DavidHir is online now  
post #185 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 10:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rob Tomlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,752
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

Without mentioning names, the format war is certainly still going on in some heads.

Very true and sad.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #186 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 10:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
butsu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,661
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Saw this BD already,Speaking hornestly I did not see any flawed of ths film's picture as mentioned in my cinemascope screen 96".This BD is perfect for sight and sound,cheap too.May be you picked a bad one,I guess?
butsu is offline  
post #187 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 10:49 AM
Advanced Member
 
Vincent Pereira's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Monmouth County, NJ
Posts: 519
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgans316 View Post

1) Unwillingness to re-encode at a higher bit rate.
...

Although the average bit-rate is almost the same as the HD-DVD, doesn't the fact that the Blu-ray hits several peaks in the 40 mb/s range (as indicated by Xylon's posted graph) indicate that this WAS re-encoded, since HD-DVD couldn't go anywhere near that high? Or am I missing something (i.e., spikes due to seamless branching perhaps...)?

Vincent
Vincent Pereira is offline  
post #188 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 11:46 AM
Member
 
Gareth Flynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, UK
Posts: 90
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgans316 View Post

3) The studio is planning to feature extra materials and/or provide high bit rate treatment on the inevitable and unannounced Collector's Edition.


Perhaps they intend to use the same encode on international editions which may need more space for extra languages?
Gareth Flynn is offline  
post #189 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 11:49 AM
Member
 
HighDeath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 96
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Pereira View Post

doesn't the fact that the Blu-ray hits several peaks in the 40 mb/s range (as indicated by Xylon's posted graph) indicate that this WAS re-encoded, since HD-DVD couldn't go anywhere near that high?

29.4 is the maximum AVERAGE bit rate for a HDDVD, it doesn't mean you can't get peaks of a higher bit rate. What you guys have to understand is that the compression is based on the quality of the master, one of the things that determines its bit rate and compression adjustments is the granularity of the master. There is no reason to jump to a 30Mb/s average if you can grab more meaningful info from the master. Depending on the software you use, you can't even decide what is the average bit rate, you just leave it to the software itself, you just adjust the parameters.

You guys give too much credit to the compression...
HighDeath is offline  
post #190 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 11:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ILJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 1,435
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighDeath View Post

29.4 is the maximum AVERAGE bit rate for a HDDVD, it doesn't mean you can't get peaks of a higher bit rate. What you guys have to understand is that the compression is based on the quality of the master, one of the things that determines its bit rate and compression adjustments is the granularity of the master. There is no reason to jump to a 30Mb/s average if you can grab more meaningful info from the master. Depending on the software you use, you can't even decide what is the average bit rate, you just leave it to the software itself, you just adjust the parameters.

I thought average bit rate was always determined after the encoding has "done its thing" anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HighDeath View Post

You guys give too much credit to the compression...

Ya think?

*************************************************

Still looking for a movie theatre that shows movies the way they're SUPPOSED to be viewed...



...with a bitrate meter and screencaps.
ILJG is offline  
post #191 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 12:08 PM
Member
 
HighDeath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 96
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILJG View Post

I thought average bit rate was always determined after the encoding has "done its thing" anyway.

Not always, it depends on the software and the people working on the compression. You can aim for an average bit rate, and that is why some BDs come with a higher bit rate than actually needed, and some times lower due to size limits.
HighDeath is offline  
post #192 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 02:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andrew_HD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 509
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighDeath View Post

Not always, it depends on the software and the people working on the compression. You can aim for an average bit rate, and that is why some BDs come with a higher bit rate than actually needed, and some times lower due to size limits.

Hehehe- do you work in authoring house?
I do and I've done hundreds encodes for DVD and Blu-ray and there can be such a thing like unspecified average bitrate, but in 95% cases everything is planned (especially when you have such a long movie).

I don't know Universal rules and future plans, but there is no reason to leave so much empty space, when movie is so long. If they have plans to put more extras on the next release than they should do new encode for it.
King Kong has very good master that's why they could go so low and still have very good quality, but in the same time this video can be improved and be a real demo material.


Andrew
Andrew_HD is offline  
post #193 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 02:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andrew_HD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 509
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Flynn View Post

Perhaps they intend to use the same encode on international editions which may need more space for extra languages?

Can be- but this is just lazy way and done to save money.
Come on- encoding is relatively cheap (BD-J programing is expensive) and it's a Warner, so they should do it in a right way.


Andrew
Andrew_HD is offline  
post #194 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 02:16 PM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 13,338
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 268 Post(s)
Liked: 560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

Some Blockbuster, Walmart and Best Buy stores have copies already on the shelves $19.99. A heads up to those who wants to get it early.

I also saw one at my local Blockbuster. No luck at Best Buy though in my area.

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is online now  
post #195 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 02:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Deviation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post

I also saw one at my local Blockbuster. No luck at Best Buy though in my area.

How much was it at Blockbuster? Then tend to overcharge pretty heavily in my experience.
Deviation is offline  
post #196 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 02:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andrew_HD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 509
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighDeath View Post

Not always, it depends on the software and the people working on the compression. You can aim for an average bit rate, and that is why some BDs come with a higher bit rate than actually needed, and some times lower due to size limits.

You aim for it and you get it. Encoders do it with quite good tolerance (eg. 1%). There is no such a thing like higher bitrate than needed. Higher bitrate better quality. There is a point when differences which you get are very small, but increasing bitrate still improves video. If there is macroblocking in KK encode it's definitelly not a good sign. Sometimes you can't get rid of it, becuase of the very complicated scene, but in most cases you can.
Another bad sign of this encode is that some scenes look worse than on HD-DVD encode. This should not happen if done properly and this is the main reason to say that it can be improved.


Andrew
Andrew_HD is offline  
post #197 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 02:30 PM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 13,338
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 268 Post(s)
Liked: 560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deviation View Post

How much was it at Blockbuster? Then tend to overcharge pretty heavily in my experience.


I actualy saw it for rent so I dont know how much they are selling it for.

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is online now  
post #198 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 02:31 PM
 
FoxyMulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_HD View Post

Can be- but this is just lazy way and done to save money.
Come on- encoding is relatively cheap (BD-J programing is expensive) and it's a Warner, so they should do it in a right way.


Andrew

It's Universal....Warner owns the original 1933 version which i hear is coming out this year.
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #199 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 02:34 PM
Member
 
HighDeath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 96
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_HD View Post

Hehehe- do you work in authoring house?
I do and I've done hundreds encodes for DVD and Blu-ray and there can be such a thing like unspecified average bitrate, but in 95% cases everything is planned (especially when you have such a long movie).

Yes i do, i actually own one! And although i don't see where our posts clashes, since i clearly said you can do it both ways, 95% seem a BIG number in my experience. I would say that most of the time there is a size limit, and the encoding will be based on this size limit, but not rarely just based on parameters. But usually this size limit is MORE than enough for a quality transfer of the MASTER.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_HD View Post

King Kong has very good master that's why they could go so low and still have very good quality

.

It is very good that you brought this up, maybe people will start giving more credits to the master instead of the compression which they think is the devil behind every picture problem. The master is what should dictate the quality.

But i disagree about this logic of throwing the bit rate down if you have a good master, it doesn't make much sense if you have space left. When you get a good master you should encode it the best way possible to keep the details and avoid introducing artifacts. Lowering the average bit rate for such a good master is counterproductive, does not save any money (if space is not a problem) and throws away all the money spent in the mastering and all the quality work behind the mastering process. So it is really a nonsense.
HighDeath is offline  
post #200 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 02:52 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andrew_HD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 509
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighDeath View Post

Yes i do, i actually own one! And although i don't see where our posts clashes, since i clearly said you can do it both ways, 95% seem a BIG number in my experience. I would say that most of the time there is a size limit, and the encoding will be based on this size limit, but not rarely just based on parameters. But usually this size limit is MORE than enough for a quality transfer of the MASTER.

I have almost always size limit issue, but I do operas which are sometimes 4 hours long + I need lossless stereo and surround track to be on the disc (+ extras). When size is not an issue than BD maximum bitrate limit is the next factor. So I have either full disc or bitrate peaking to the limits. So far everyone is very happy
I wish good movies where also released in this way. I've seen already few discs with 40% empty space and not very good encode- it doesn't make a sense for me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HighDeath View Post


It is very good that you brought this up, maybe people will start giving more credits to the master instead of the compression which they think is the devil behind every picture problem. The master is what should dictate the quality.

But i disagree about this logic of throwing the bit rate down if you have a good master, it doesn't make much sense if you have space left. When you get a good master you should encode it the best way possible to keep the details and avoid introducing artifacts. Lowering the average bit rate for such a good master is counterproductive, does not save any money (if space is not a problem) and throws away all the money spent in the mastering and all the quality work behind the mastering process. So it is really a nonsense.

Exactly. It's even more important when you have a good master to do it in the best possible way.


Andrew
Andrew_HD is offline  
post #201 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 02:53 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andrew_HD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 509
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

It's Universal....Warner owns the original 1933 version which i hear is coming out this year.

Sorry

Andrew
Andrew_HD is offline  
post #202 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 03:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr. Hanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Pereira View Post

Although the average bit-rate is almost the same as the HD-DVD, doesn't the fact that the Blu-ray hits several peaks in the 40 mb/s range (as indicated by Xylon's posted graph) indicate that this WAS re-encoded...

This brings up another interesting point- were any of the pix comparisons we have seen so far, associated with those bitrate pks? If so, which ones? If not, why weren't any posted? It seems those would be the ones we would want to concentrate on if we were really interested in seeing the differences between the 2 encodes. If we are just noting image differences in the moments where bitrate is plodding along at 16 Mb/s (just picking a number, here), should it be any surprise that the results are nearly identical? It's like comparing a Camry to a Corvette at 30 mph. What is even the point of the test, if 30 mph is the criteria? No one is disputing that either one would do any better a job at that speed, but it is fairly certain that Corvette drivers overwhelmingly choose the Corvette for reasons that occur elsewhere than 30 mph.

It still doesn't erase the fact that there was plenty of room left on the disc that could have been used for a higher avg bitrate, though. If it is enough to eliminate the blocking artifacts and preserve detail down to the grain/noise, whether at full white level or full black level or anywhere in between, it would be worth it.

I need your sweet love, Rosetta Stone girl!
Mr. Hanky is online now  
post #203 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 03:44 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andrew_HD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 509
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
As I said some time ago another problem is that screengrabs are not taken from the same type of frame (or maybe Xylon improved it and they are).
If one frame is an "I" and than the same scene in 2nd encode is a "B" frame than "I" frame will almost always look better, even if the whole encode is worse.
Solution for this is to take few frames in row from both encodes and compare all of them. If the difference is constant than you can more accurate say which one is better.

Andrew
Andrew_HD is offline  
post #204 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 04:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighDeath View Post

It is very good that you brought this up, maybe people will start giving more credits to the master instead of the compression which they think is the devil behind every picture problem. The master is what should dictate the quality.

I'm curious, how are digital intermediates and old HD masters stored? Is it a lossless (or close to it) format?
42041 is offline  
post #205 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 05:21 PM
Member
 
Gareth Flynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, UK
Posts: 90
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_HD View Post

As I said some time ago another problem is that screengrabs are not taken from the same type of frame (or maybe Xylon improved it and they are).
If one frame is an "I" and than the same scene in 2nd encode is a "B" frame than "I" frame will almost always look better, even if the whole encode is worse.
Solution for this is to take few frames in row from both encodes and compare all of them. If the difference is constant than you can more accurate say which one is better.

Andrew

Is there any way of 'guessing' where an I frame is? For example, if the film features a quick edit where the entire scene changes from one frame to the next (no fades or anything), would that have to be encoded as an I-frame?
Gareth Flynn is offline  
post #206 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 05:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Flynn View Post

Is there any way of 'guessing' where an I frame is? For example, if the film features a quick edit where the entire scene changes from one frame to the next (no fades or anything), would that have to be encoded as an I-frame?

If you have the capability of opening a blu-ray video stream on your computer, the ffdshow video decoder has on on-screen display that can display the frame type on AVC encoded material and a lot of other information. Doesn't seem to work for VC1 though. On all the blu-rays I've got, the scene change frames are I-frames.
42041 is offline  
post #207 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 06:05 PM
Member
 
HighDeath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 96
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

I'm curious, how are digital intermediates and old HD masters stored? Is it a lossless (or close to it) format?

You can keep the lossless file you get from the scanner, but it will take about 50MB per frame in a 4K sample (More than 7TB for 100 minutes). Some do keep this.

You usually backup in the same format used for mastering, Apple ProRes 4:2:2 or Cineform 12-bit 4:4:4 raw for instance, an average of 250Mb/s. You can also get DVCPRO HD 4:2:2 around 100Mb/s, quite common when the source is a digital camera. And, in this last case (DVCPRO HD), a H.264 4.1 High Profile (8-bit 4:2:0 subsampled) transfer from this source, with an average bit rate of about 25Mb/s, should be more than enough.

I don't know what you mean by OLD, but tape was (and you can say still is...) a way to go.

About the frames, I frames are the base used by the B frames around it. A B-frame (compressed frame) does not necessarily means worse quality (You also have to consider the decoder and the specific frame), B-Frames are actually the compression per se (or a considerable part of it), the more B-frames more quality per Mb can be fit, the more I-frames (Full picture data) you decide to use the less compressed the video will be (In a way, better say "will be able to be"...) but since the B-frames will have more reference with more I-Frames, the motion will/should look better.

The B-frame holds only part of the data necessary to construct the whole frame, the rest is captured from the near I-Frames around used as references. Suppose you have a stationary background, you don't need to repeat all the data for the background in the B-frame, you can just reference it to an I-Frame next to it and before it. And that is what B-Frame stands for, Bi-predictive frame. H.264 also allows you to use a previous decoded B-Frame as a reference frame.

I suggest you guys visit http://forum.doom9.org/ lots of useful tech info about all this there.

The compression and ecoding follow many parameters, like motion estimation, the kind of B-Frames, the reference method, the entropy, decoding intensity, time and money...

In the end, bit rate does not mean much, you have to check the parameters not the Bit Rate. You may get the same quality with a lower bit rate, or you can waste bandwidth to facilitate decoding (Less compression). Pirates can often teach you a think or two about this bit rate thing...
HighDeath is offline  
post #208 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 06:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ILJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 1,435
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighDeath View Post

In the end, bit rate does not mean much, you have to check the parameters not the Bit Rate. You may get the same quality with a lower bit rate, or you can waste bandwidth to facilitate decoding (Less compression).

^




*************************************************

Still looking for a movie theatre that shows movies the way they're SUPPOSED to be viewed...



...with a bitrate meter and screencaps.
ILJG is offline  
post #209 of 390 Old 01-17-2009, 06:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kram Sacul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Who cares about wasting bandwidth? This is friggin Blu-ray not HD-DVD. They should've cranked the bitrate up if they weren't going to put any effort into extras.
Kram Sacul is offline  
post #210 of 390 Old 01-18-2009, 12:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Hughmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighDeath View Post

29.4 is the maximum AVERAGE bit rate for a HDDVD, it doesn't mean you can't get peaks of a higher bit rate. What you guys have to understand is that the compression is based on the quality of the master, one of the things that determines its bit rate and compression adjustments is the granularity of the master. There is no reason to jump to a 30Mb/s average if you can grab more meaningful info from the master. Depending on the software you use, you can't even decide what is the average bit rate, you just leave it to the software itself, you just adjust the parameters.

You guys give too much credit to the compression...

Wouldn't a new compression scheme that does use a higher bitrate and that does better deal with the granularity of the master make a difference? Isn't that a given and wouldn't it have to if one did exist?
Hughmc is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

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