AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 52 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,525 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
For unknown releases, LionsGate has released two versions of the Stargate 15th Anniversary Edition in North America. One with a AVC video encode and the other with a VC1 encode. Both have the same audio and bonus features.


Bitrates are almost identical, so this makes a good codec comparison. The AVC disc averages 24mbps, while the VC1 disc averages 23mbps: http://comparescreenshots.slicx.com/comparison/36362/


As expected the VC1 encode is decidedly softer with worse grain preservation in almost every shot.


Update: The pattern seems to indicate that the first batch sent to most retailers was the VC1 version (though some members got AVC from Amazon from the start). Possibly the AVC version is replacing the VC1 version because of an menu authoring issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
383 Posts
Well, I'm just glad to see confirmation of two different encodes. Ever since it was brought up in the original thread I found it hard to believe.


Now I'd just like to hear the explanation as to why there are two different encodes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,525 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckNaked /forum/post/18130177


I know the VC1 version had authoring problems with the pop-up menu causing freezing during playback. I wonder if this is a fix....

Possibly. The AVC version was authored a little more than 2 weeks after the VC1 version (10/18/09 vs 10/01/09).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,546 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir /forum/post/18130182


On any rate, I still have yet to see just one example of a VC1 screenshot that is better than an AVC.

Wasnt the US Warner Terminator Salvation better looking than the AVC Sony release? Can't say there are many (or any) more examples though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,525 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by stumlad /forum/post/18130415


Wasnt the US Warner Terminator Salvation better looking than the AVC Sony release? Can't say there are many (or any) more examples though.

Terminator Salvation VC1 version had a 6mbps advantage over the AVC version, with only a small improvement. Here the AVC only has a 1mbit advantage with a large improvement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
383 Posts
This makes me wonder why they didn't use AVC in the first place. It's not like they're pressed for space on that 50 gig disc. Does the Microsoft vs. Sony debate play into a studio's choice of codecs at all?


I got mine at BB back in early November and it's the VC-1. I was blown away by this release, definitely a benchmark for catalog titles as others have said. The video definitely looks like - ahem - video at times and not film (for those of you with the VC-1, watch some of the wide shots in the Giza 1928 scenes to see what I'm talking about). Seeing these screen shots, yes I can see a difference, but this is a single moving image we're talking about and not 24 jpegs per second. If the AVC looked definitively better in motion than the VC-1, I would probably feel slightly ripped off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
785 Posts
Has anyone with the AVC version experienced playback issues as was reported in the initial thread?


I'm not sure if the issues were only with Pannys or if other players were affected, but I seem to remember a number of issues relating to players unable to read the discs, pop-up menu malfunctions, and the need to have the memory card in the player even though there was no BD-Live content.


If the AVC version fixes these issues, I wonder if Lionsgate has instituted a quiet replacement program......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
577 Posts
Bummer...mine's the VC-1; not gonna cry about it, though, since the screenshot differences are so minimal that, in motion, I doubt they'd be readily evident. Sure wish, if Lionsgate's gonna keep this practice up, they'd go with the better encoding first, though, since I regularly pre-order...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,072 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang Zei /forum/post/18131269


Now I'm just curious what using VC-1 instead of AVC has to do with all these playback problems....

Absolutely zero. There are playback problems because Lionsgate can't get a handle on what it's doing with BD-Java. There was a quiet replacement for Descent discs for similar reasons (something with the menu not working), and Lionsgate is also having problems with titles like Crank 2 and Gamer. VC-1 has nothing to do with the playback trouble, and is used juuuust fine by other studios.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,546 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by eric.exe /forum/post/18130445


Terminator Salvation VC1 version had a 6mbps advantage over the AVC version, with only a small improvement. Here the AVC only has a 1mbit advantage with a large improvement.

To be fair... the US blu-ray of Underworld (AVC) has a 5 or 6 mbps advantage over the European VC-1 encode, and the improvement of the AVC over the VC-1 wasn't as big as the 1 mbps advantage that we're seeing with stargate.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...8#post12997458
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post13107309


There may be more scattered throughout that thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,948 Posts
A codec doesnt do that much on its own. Its just a fixed set of "rules" that the encoding program must follow or else the playback systems cant decode the encode.


The codec doesnt as an example decide what area in an image that should get less encoded and what should get heavier encoded. Nor does it decide what scenes should use more bits and what scenes should use less bits. Thats up for the encoding program.


EDIT


As for grain perservation, its good to remember that everything that looks like grain is not grain. My own test when I encoded grain has showed me that grain can actually been enforced by an encode. So that an encode actually have more grain then the source. But looking at the screencaps, I dont believe this is the case here.


My theory is that it is 2 different authoring houses that has made the encodes. Were one actually used the noisereduction tool that is included in many pro encoding programs. If like someone here says that the first disc was defective due to an authoring mistake, its not unreasonable to guess that the studio switch authouring company, and if its another company then we have like 20 other variables to take into the equation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,268 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by stumlad /forum/post/18131752


To be fair... the US blu-ray of Underworld (AVC) has a 5 or 6 mbps advantage over the European VC-1 encode, and the improvement of the AVC over the VC-1 wasn't as big as the 1 mbps advantage that we're seeing with stargate.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...8#post12997458
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post13107309


There may be more scattered throughout that thread.

Encoders can get better though. Some of the early MP3 encoders sounded worse at 192kbps than mature encoders like LAME do at 128.
 
1 - 20 of 52 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top