[TheCableMan]

How long do you think they will come out with superbit style blu rays. To those not familiar with superbit dvd it is where the studio would sacrifice bonus material in order to have more room on the disc to encode for a more higher avg bit rate for audio and video. I know Fifth element did this with the remaster but do you think studios will follow with them or do you think the current disc size a acceptable for a high enough bit rate and bonus material.

 

[Htdude14]

BD's are all "superbit", nothing is sacrificed for bonus material.

 

[Rach]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Htdude14 /forum/post/18254702


BD's are all "superbit", nothing is sacrificed for bonus material.

This is true. There is no need for Superbit as Blu Ray has all the space you need for the best picture and sound already.

 

[MovieSwede]



Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCableMan /forum/post/18254641


To those not familiar with superbit dvd it is where the studio would sacrifice bonus material in order to have more room on the disc to encode for a more higher avg bit rate for audio and video.

Actually it was just one studio that used it. Mostly marketing anyways. The other studios got their own "superbit" DVDs when they started to issue 2 disc editions.


Most movies cant even fill a BD50 even if they wanted to.


But of course that doesnt stop a studio to market BDs as superbit as long as anyone pays for it.

 

[Fanboyz]

The Japanese T2, 40mbps AVC!!!!!!!!!

 

[eric.exe]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanboyz /forum/post/18254977


The Japanese T2, 40mbps AVC!!!!!!!!!

It was 22mbps AVC. Check the bitrate thread.


Anyway, there'll never be superbit Blu-rays (I hope). On Blu-ray it's possible to create a zero visible artifact encode with as little as 25mbps. On DVD even with the highest bitrate video encode there was always going to be visible macroblocking.

 

[luigionlsd]

The only "Superbit" Blu-ray Disc I care about is Lawrence of Arabia.

 

[eapleitez]

In this case it would be totally unnecessary. In fact, I'd be pissed if they went this route because then it gives them an excuse to leave out the bonus features

 

[42041]

hey, maybe that's why studios are leaving half-empty discs, so they have another excuse to re-release them later

This is a videophile format, every release should be "superbit".

 

[ambientcafe]



Quote:
Originally Posted by luigionlsd /forum/post/18255208


The only "Superbit" Blu-ray Disc I care about is Lawrence of Arabia.

+1! (lol)....all this updateless silence from Sony is killing me....it'd better be the equivalent of a 'Superbit/Sapphire/&Criterion' release all rolled up in one for testing our patience. Oh well, Aurens will come when it is his pleasure

 

[Spizz]



Quote:
Originally Posted by luigionlsd /forum/post/18255208


the only "superbit" blu-ray disc i care about is lawrence of arabia.

+2

 

[GizmoDVD]

Wasn't Superbit just a scam?

 

[wmcclain]



Quote:
Originally Posted by GizmoDVD /forum/post/18256477


Wasn't Superbit just a scam?

No (in many cases at least) the discs had upgraded video, sometimes adding DTS audio.


If you mean "Was Superbit just the same technology as all other DVD Video discs?", yes, that is true. Any studio could have produced discs just as good and sometimes did.


-Bill

 

[18 Brumaire]



Quote:
Originally Posted by GizmoDVD /forum/post/18256477


Wasn't Superbit just a scam?

I remember someone posting screenshots on another forum showing the difference between regular DVDs and Superbit. In some cases, you could see an improvement. More bitrate was better. It just wan't Blu-ray better. And as wmclain says, the Superbits had DTS. I bought some of them merely for the DTS.


Also, I believe Robert A Harris said some corrections were made in the Superbit version of Lawrence that made it a more accurate transfer than the SE DVD. Don't remember now what they were.

 

[ChrisWiggles]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Htdude14 /forum/post/18254702


BD's are all "superbit", nothing is sacrificed for bonus material.

Hah!

That's certainly not always the case.

 

[IanD]

If they had dropped the interlaced filtering and produced progressively encoded DVDs, I think that might have looked even better than superbit. Progressive is actually more efficient, so for the same bitrate as normal DVD, it would be a pseudo-superbit: give it more bitrate and it would probably have looked awesome.


I've always been disappointed that DVD was never utilised to its maximum potential before migrating to HD, especially once natively progressive TVs were introduced.


Rather than Superbit Bluray (for bitrate sake), I would prefer to see "Theatrically Transparent" Bluray which is as close to the original film presentation as possible, grain included. This might require a higher bitrate to achieve faithfully.

 

[Faceless Rebel]

The DVD Video specification is interlaced 720x480i MPEG2. That is the actual spec, it specifies encoding as interlaced frames. You can't release a DVD with video encoded as 720x480p MPEG2 and expect it to play on the billions of existing DVD players worldwide.


The Blu-ray disc spec specifies 1920x1080p or below encoded as progressive, not interlaced, frames.

 

[IanD]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Faceless Rebel /forum/post/18259453


The DVD Video specification is interlaced 720x480i MPEG2. That is the actual spec, it specifies encoding as interlaced frames. You can't release a DVD with video encoded as 720x480p MPEG2 and expect it to play on the billions of existing DVD players worldwide.

Progressive encoding is obviously supported somewhere: perhaps it is in the mpeg2 specification.


I have created progressive encodes and authored DVDs from them and they seem to play fine on my DVD player, so obviously some devices can support the format, even if it is not strictly DVD Video specification compliant.


Just as laserdisc was not for the millions of VHS owners, I would have expected progressive DVD to be a niche product with its own (perhaps) specialised players: it wouldn't be designed to appeal to the average consumer (who would likely be perfectly happy with standard DVD). Probably it would have a new specification created for it for compliancy reasons.


I do not favour a rigid adherence to a single specification, that excludes other possibilities that may be of interest to the community.

 

[Stevie76]

There are quite a few disc out there that need higher bitrates.

I got the UK disc of Matrix this week and there is quite a lot of artifacting and blocking going on in the darker scenes.

And I´ve noticed this more and more with other discs as well.


Man on Fire got some terrible blocking in a couple of scenes as well.


They got 50gb to work with, why not use ALL of that for the movie and put the extras on another disc?

 

[rezpekt]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Htdude14 /forum/post/18254702


BD's are all "superbit".

Especially all those Warner's dull-looking filtered 10-15Mbit encodes.