Planet Earth banding issues *sigh* - Page 9 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #241 of 248 Old 05-14-2007, 06:15 PM
Senior Member
 
Spektricide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildfire99 View Post

That, and the center channel volume (the narrator's voice) is way too low.

Now that you've mentioned it, I also noticed that I kept turning up the volume because I couldn't hear the narrator but the ambient sounds would be blasting out. I just figured it was me.
Spektricide is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #242 of 248 Old 05-14-2007, 06:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Bunga99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,271
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Does anyone else notice banding on a Blu Ray player that is NOT the ps3?
Bunga99 is offline  
post #243 of 248 Old 05-15-2007, 07:50 AM
 
AaronSCH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 1,923
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I notcied an issue on disc one: The beginning of the "Fresh Water" episode has shots of Victoria Falls. As the camera moves forward I notice an increased amount of grain, almost like snow and the brightness seems to pulsate. This phenomenon does not continue past the scene and I was wondering whether anyone else noticed it or do I have a defective disc?
AaronSCH is offline  
post #244 of 248 Old 05-15-2007, 08:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chris Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 6,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by akosoft View Post

Man, this feels like having great sex with a beautiful woman and complaining she wears the wrong underwear.....

If that is your complaint, you are not doing it correctly. She shouldn't be wearing any underwear if you are doing it the best way I have ever read about.

I only have this series recorded to D-VHS from Comcast in Little Rock. These episodes probably include the best D-VHS recordings I have ever made. I have noticed some issues, but issues with D-VHS are frequent compared to Blu-ray and HD DVD which I also own. Low bitrates and some source limitations seem to cause most issues I have seen, but overall this is a great series and looks terrific, even on D-VHS. I am delighted with it.

Chris
Chris Gerhard is offline  
post #245 of 248 Old 05-15-2007, 09:44 AM
Advanced Member
 
bluechunks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Maple Grove, Minnesota, USA
Posts: 933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronSCH View Post

I notcied an issue on disc one: The beginning of the "Fresh Water" episode has shots of Victoria Falls. As the camera moves forward I notice an increased amount of grain, almost like snow and the brightness seems to pulsate. This phenomenon does not continue past the scene and I was wondering whether anyone else noticed it or do I have a defective disc?

This is a known defect and has been mentioned in other threads. BBC stated that they were having RF interference with the recording device on the helicopter and did not notice the problem until they returned from the shoot. Several aerial sequences during Planet Earth were affected and BBC used heavy post-processing in an attempt to clean up the image. I'm not sure if the issue was exasperated during the encoding process for Blue Ray and HD-DVD.

Edit: I also discovered that my Sony KDL-40XBR2 was making the problem worse with its standard internal processing. I normally have that turned off anyway so once I went back to my custom settings the problem nearly (but not quite) disappeared.

Hope this helps.
bluechunks is offline  
post #246 of 248 Old 05-15-2007, 01:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wildfire99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Wet Northwest
Posts: 1,471
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluechunks View Post

This is a known defect and has been mentioned in other threads. BBC stated that they were having RF interference with the recording device on the helicopter and did not notice the problem until they returned from the shoot.

Sounds like the focus/auto-gain problems on the early XL-1 SD cameras. Man, those were annoying. Possibly not RF, but bad camera design.

Anyway, while I don't like cross-posting (from the HD-DVD PE topic), here's my problem gallery from Planet Earth. Discuss.

Planet Earth Visual Problems Gallery
wildfire99 is offline  
post #247 of 248 Old 05-16-2007, 05:53 PM
 
HDHTPC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Silicon Valley Area Posts: 14,303
Posts: 889
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
An intro to banding for any readers who still don't know what is being discussed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_banding

If there are very subtle differences in luminance level with uniform color (e.g.: light blue graduated to slightly lighter blue) some banding is almost expected with the bitdepth of color being encoded on current systems. We need "deep color" encoding and delivery (e.g.: HDMI1.3) before this sort of thing will be banished.

http://www.hdmi.org/learningcenter/hdmi_1_3_faq.asp#q3
HDHTPC is offline  
post #248 of 248 Old 05-16-2007, 10:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr. Hanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 32
The wikipedia example is a very nice example, but ironically, can lead to a lot of confusion, as well. It should be noted that the 24-bit gradiant example achieves a nicely smooth gradiant (ymmv, depending if you are viewing on an LCD or CRT), so that should suggest that the bit depth of the color used in these enduser formats is quite sufficient to do the job (naturally, footage capture and mastering should continue to strive at a higher bit depths, to ensure that the best of 24-bits can make it to the consumer). "Deep color" would not solve the problem, if the problem is occuring elsewhere. It would just result in even more bits getting "lost" at the problem point, rather than more bits making it to the end result. The problem point is lossy compression, which attempts to eliminate finer bit depths it thinks we would not see, if they were missing from the picture. The result is a reduction in data size, but also the subtle loss (or sometimes not so subtle) of intermediate shades of color which would smoothly fill in a gradient. What's left is a gradient with clearly visible steps, where adjacent colors fail to blend together. It's not that 24-bit color is not enough. It's the lossy compression that leaves the end result with only a subset of colors available from that 24-bit color pallette.

So what of this "confusion" I mentioned earlier? The Wikipedia example chooses a single primary color of red to show a gradient. Hence, it is no longer using the "full" 24-bits to achieve that color. It is only using 1 of three primary components, since it is red. Technically, this isn't a 24-bit gradient, but an 8-bit gradient (since the red only can utilize 1 channel out of the 3).

So it is actually possible to show a pretty smooth gradient of a single primary color with a "mere" 8-bits of actual data (shown in the 3rd figure). So what about the very coarse gradient that is labeled "8-bit gradient"? Why is it so coarse at 8-bit (the 1st figure), when I just explained that 8-bit is enough to show the color red in a very smooth gradient (the 3rd figure)? The answer is that the 1st figure is not technically using all 8-bits to achieve that gradient in that color. Just like before, the color red corresponds to 1 of 3 available color channels. So it is only a sub 3 bits out of 8 bits that are getting used to show the red gradient. If you count the shades in the coarse gradient example, you see it works out to 6 discrete shades, which is what would be possible in a colordepth greater than 2 bits but not quite 3 bits (4 shades vs. 8 shades).

Naturally, if the example used a color resulting from a mixture of red, green, and blue, then all 3 channels with their associated bits would get a work out, and the labeling of 8-bits and 24-bits would be more technically valid.

Also forgot to mention, the whole situation as it relates to incidences of banding on PE gets even more complex, as the bits get shuffled here and there when/if a colorspace conversion has to occur during the production process between rgb and yuv, or vice versa. Shades of colors don't match up quite right between the 2 systems, so therein lies another opportunity for subtle color information to get lost/mangled between generational cycles. The end result is, again, color performance which is only using a subset of what would be available in a fully intact 24-bit pallette.

There are even colors in one system that are outright illegal in the other color system. In this scenario, I believe this applies to the high intensity shades of the primary colors, rather than the near black intensities. So it is certainly possible for high saturation colors to get clipped to a lower level when converting between colorspaces.

So it is possible that the right scenario gives a double whammy in sacrificed color depth. You lose some bits on the low end, get clipped on the high end, and maybe the end result has to contend with a shockingly limited color range of that possible with a fully intact 24-bit pallette.

I need your sweet love, Rosetta Stone girl!
Mr. Hanky is online now  
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