Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 51 to 59 of 59

Thread: Blu Bits

  1. #51
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    REDICULOUS.
    As you can see by my pic its easy to tell what "sex" I am.
    very miffed at you GM( does that stand for "girly man"?)
    Pat?
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  2. #52
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    More marketing BS, in order to save cash older titles arent using the full rate , and the rate of some is surprizing.
    speed for instance is a pretty constant 25mbs.
    Mosy surprizing is the highest bit rate I have seen yet, Cris Boti
    live in concert.
    Heres a guy blowing a horn, and teh bit rate is teh highest I have seen yet, 48MBS!!!
    The LPCM is amazing, btw, best sound ever and that covers a lot of territory.
    I HAVE BEEN A BIG sacd booster, but its almost dead, don't see how it
    (or anything else) can compete with this.
    Pixel, you really need a lesson in video compression. First, you do not need to use the entire bit budget to encode an image. Speed should show you this. 25mbps is quite high a bit rate to encode an image in MPEG-2. 22mbps is the sweet spot for MPEG-2 encoders, so 25mbps puts Speed in great territory.

    Chris Botti is a 1080i sourced video which would require a lot higher bit rate to get the picture right. Speed is sourced from a 1080p master, so encoding a progressive image takes fewer bits than a interlaced image. Then there is the encoder sweet spot. Chris Botti uses AVC-MPEG-4, and with a interlaced image, its sweet spot is about 25-30mbps. Considering that the audio only takes up about 14mbps in the pipeline, and there are few extra's running up the bit rate, it looks like they opened up the bit bucket for the video without bothering to tweak the encoder for maximum efficiency. That is why you are getting 48mbps which is the peak bit rate for bluray video. It does not require 48mbps to encode a image using AVC. However the studio can open up the bit budget to get a max peak of 48mbps, as long as there is not too many audio tracks running, and no commentary running at the same time.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  3. #53
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    Pixel, you really need a lesson in video compression. First, you do not need to use the entire bit budget to encode an image. Speed should show you this. 25mbps is quite high a bit rate to encode an image in MPEG-2. 22mbps is the sweet spot for MPEG-2 encoders, so 25mbps puts Speed in great territory.

    Chris Botti is a 1080i sourced video which would require a lot higher bit rate to get the picture right. Speed is sourced from a 1080p master, so encoding a progressive image takes fewer bits than a interlaced image. Then there is the encoder sweet spot. Chris Botti uses AVC-MPEG-4, and with a interlaced image, its sweet spot is about 25-30mbps. Considering that the audio only takes up about 14mbps in the pipeline, and there are few extra's running up the bit rate, it looks like they opened up the bit bucket for the video without bothering to tweak the encoder for maximum efficiency. That is why you are getting 48mbps which is the peak bit rate for bluray video. It does not require 48mbps to encode a image using AVC. However the studio can open up the bit budget to get a max peak of 48mbps, as long as there is not too many audio tracks running, and no commentary running at the same time.

    Thanks for the info, I do know a "bit" about encoding, but am not too familar with blu as of yet.
    AND YES 25mbs is rather wide for video, true, but Speed is an action movie.
    And while the pic is great its not that far off from a DVD.
    All I am saying is that with such a high bandwidth would it hurt to use
    some of it? Couldn't hurt.
    ALSO the industry is underestimating the love some have for older movies. In other words a little remastering wouldnt hurt , especially for older flicks.
    I(and others) have noticed that the newer the film the better looking it is on Blu, probably because the new ones are made with HD in mind.
    To use a master authored for DVD just wont cut it, expecially since some of these masters are ten years old or older.
    Truth is the upscaling my player does is so good that the difference
    between my "regular" version of total recall isn't much different
    than my BLU VERSION.
    True the Blu version was only 13 bucks, but even that small cost
    wasnt justified for the small difference in Q(although I admittedly only
    watched it in 720p, haven't tried the 1080p yet)
    Sadly a lot of "blu" discs just give a full res version of a DVD master,
    which, while good, isnt fantastic.
    And is this gonna continue?
    Will I get a Blu copy of Cinema Paradisio or CHINATOWN and
    not be able to tell much difference between them and a DVD?
    On some they havent even changed the menu, just greyed out the buttons and "layered" a popup in front to meet the standard.
    I KNOW THEY ARE UNDER PRESSURE to get product out there,
    and appreciate the selection, which is quite good for such a young format.
    Just tell your cronies at the BDA that when it comes to the classics,
    to stop and smell the roses and put out more effort.
    Goonies and crap like that you can churn out, but I am about to buy
    my first copy of the Shining, and would hate to think that it is jus a rehash of the botched DVD
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  4. #54
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Cool

    And another thing you can tell your cronies at the BDA,
    they have a geniune AUDIO format ready to go right in their greedy little hands.
    LPCM is FRIGGIN AMAZING, I thought SACD was good.
    IT WOULD cost next to nothing to put out a few 2 channel audio
    BLU discs in lossless lpcm.
    COULDN'T HURT.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  5. #55
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    Thanks for the info, I do know a "bit" about encoding, but am not too familar with blu as of yet.
    AND YES 25mbs is rather wide for video, true, but Speed is an action movie.
    You have to consider this. The DVD of speed has been filtered before encoding which robs the DVD of all of the high frequency information which is where the resolution is. Not to mention it has an average bit rate of 6mbps compared to the bluray's 25mbps, unfiltered images.

    And while the pic is great its not that far off from a DVD.
    All I am saying is that with such a high bandwidth would it hurt to use
    some of it? Couldn't hurt.
    Actually the PQ of the bluray is far better than the DVD, even when it is upscaled. An upscaled image does not have any more information than a non upscaled video. The DVD just does not have the spatial information the bluray encoding has. It does not have the color information either. When you make these kinds of comparisons, you need to look not just in the foreground, but look in the backgrounds. The edges of images are much more defined on the bluray than the DVD.

    ALSO the industry is underestimating the love some have for older movies. In other words a little remastering wouldnt hurt , especially for older flicks.
    I(and others) have noticed that the newer the film the better looking it is on Blu, probably because the new ones are made with HD in mind.
    You need to take a look at Blade Runner, or 2001. Also look a Passage to India, or How the west was won. These are older titles that have been remastered and look fantastic.

    To use a master authored for DVD just wont cut it, expecially since some of these masters are ten years old or older.
    You don't master for any format. You either use a DI(digital intermediary) that has been scanned at 2k(or in some cases 4k), or you go the film source itself. It is then scaled down(down rez'd) to fit the source. So quite a few high definition masters can be used on both DVD and Bluray.

    Truth is the upscaling my player does is so good that the difference
    between my "regular" version of total recall isn't much different
    than my BLU VERSION.
    True the Blu version was only 13 bucks, but even that small cost
    wasnt justified for the small difference in Q(although I admittedly only
    watched it in 720p, haven't tried the 1080p yet)
    I would urge you to watch in 1080p. Down rezzing from 1080p to 720p is problematic for most all bluray players. And considering you are throwing almost half the information of a 1080p image away, I do not think this is a good way of judging image quality on bluray. Its best to go 1080p to 1080p, pixel for pixel

    Sadly a lot of "blu" discs just give a full res version of a DVD master,
    which, while good, isnt fantastic.
    And is this gonna continue?
    You cannot quantify this statement until you have seen ALOT of bluray disc. I have close to 450 of them, and 96% of them look much better than their DVD cousins. I have personally reviewed over 50 disc, and I could not find a single instance where the picture quality of DVD was equal to bluray.

    Will I get a Blu copy of Cinema Paradisio or CHINATOWN and
    not be able to tell much difference between them and a DVD?
    On some they havent even changed the menu, just greyed out the buttons and "layered" a popup in front to meet the standard.
    I KNOW THEY ARE UNDER PRESSURE to get product out there,
    and appreciate the selection, which is quite good for such a young format.
    Just tell your cronies at the BDA that when it comes to the classics,
    to stop and smell the roses and put out more effort.
    Goonies and crap like that you can churn out, but I am about to buy
    my first copy of the Shining, and would hate to think that it is jus a rehash of the botched DVD
    I would say to you is get your television calibrated. I think you are seeing more of a botched image by your television, than what is coming from the disc themselves. With the exception of MGM, most all studios are putting great care into their releases.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  6. #56
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    And another thing you can tell your cronies at the BDA,
    they have a geniune AUDIO format ready to go right in their greedy little hands.
    LPCM is FRIGGIN AMAZING, I thought SACD was good.
    IT WOULD cost next to nothing to put out a few 2 channel audio
    BLU discs in lossless lpcm.
    COULDN'T HURT.
    Buy more disc Pixel. 5.1 16/48khz and 24/48khz PCM has been on most all Sony and all Disney discs from day one. Why put two channel PCM when you have 6 channel PCM? 2 channel PCM is for DVD, not bluray.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  7. #57
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Cool

    [QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible]You have to consider this. The DVD of speed has been filtered before encoding which robs the DVD of all of the high frequency information which is where the resolution is. Not to mention it has an average bit rate of 6mbps compared to the bluray's 25mbps, unfiltered images.



    Actually the PQ of the bluray is far better than the DVD, even when it is upscaled. An upscaled image does not have any more information than a non upscaled video. The DVD just does not have the spatial information the bluray encoding has. It does not have the color information either. When you make these kinds of comparisons, you need to look not just in the foreground, but look in the backgrounds. The edges of images are much more defined on the bluray than the DVD.



    You need to take a look at Blade Runner, or 2001. Also look a Passage to India, or How the west was won. These are older titles that have been remastered and look fantastic.



    You don't master for any format. You either use a DI(digital intermediary) that has been scanned at 2k(or in some cases 4k), or you go the film source itself. It is then scaled down(down rez'd) to fit the source. So quite a few high definition masters can be used on both DVD and Bluray.



    I would urge you to watch in 1080p. Down rezzing from 1080p to 720p is problematic for most all bluray players. And considering you are throwing almost half the information of a 1080p image away, I do not think this is a good way of judging image quality on bluray. Its best to go 1080p to 1080p, pixel for pixel
    WOULD BE INTERESTING TO TRY now that I HAVE A 1080P set.
    I have been trying to say the same thing to buyers of 720p plasma
    sets, who could have had an LCD for the same price in 1080p

    You cannot quantify this statement until you have seen ALOT of bluray disc. I have close to 450 of them, and 96% of them look much better than their DVD cousins. I have personally reviewed over 50 disc, and I could not find a single instance where the picture quality of DVD was equal to bluray.
    Keep looking, and quit preaching to the choir.
    Let me expand, even on Blu discs that seemed the equal in res the total lack of artifacts has alone been worth the price in some cases.
    Artifacts like rainbow edges, moire patterns, etc.
    Even on "upscaled" dvds' there is a noticable lack of artifacts.
    However they still dont measure up to newer releases.
    DONT WORRY, I know that a Blu disc of anything IS BETTER THAN A dvd.
    But in some cases they could be better.
    Mainly, what I am saying (and I think we could agree) is that in a highq format like Blu as much care as possible needs to be taken

    I would say to you is get your television calibrated. I think you are seeing more of a botched image by your television, than what is coming from the disc themselves. With the exception of MGM, most all studios are putting great care into their releases.
    I dont have a problem with my sets picture, and wont pay 200 to 400 to calibrate a 900$ set, AND DONT NEED TO.
    What you still dont get(and probably never will) is that a display
    made up of TFT transistors is a lot more stable and needs less "tweaking" than most other, more fragil displays.
    On CRTs you have to allow for the earths magnetic field , for gods sake.
    On my set I adjusted the green color temp down a bit, cut the color a bit, turned down the backlight to 32 to improve blacks, and tne result ,
    while not as "perfect" as a full calibration still looks amazing, whether
    watching deinterlaced 1080i cable or Bluray or upconverted DVD
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  8. #58
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    I thought resolution existed throughout the frequency response.

  9. #59
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    I thought resolution existed throughout the frequency response.
    Neither has anything to do with the other.
    "Scan lines" is the number of lines in the pic. This is often confused with resolution.
    With resolution you put up a test pattern with vertical lines, as you go
    across the screen they get closer and closer together.
    When you cant tell them apart, look at the number at the top,
    thats the resolution of the pic.
    There probably is a newer way of guaging this, but this is what I know.
    Anyway there is 1,000 titles out there now on blu, they can slow down a bit and put decent menus and actually work on making this format as good as it can be.
    Its like when CD got started, they just put masters cut for records on CD'S, and they sounded like crap.
    Mostly because they had the dynamic range cut to fit the recording on a record, on a CD this stuck out like a crack ho in church.
    Ironically the early CD disasters are what pushed a lot of audiophiles
    away from CD.
    I just don't want the same effect with this promising new format.
    The "early adopters" are the highq crowd, the laserdisc crowd.
    They are gonna have little patience with some of teh stuff being put out on Blu.
    ALL I AM SAYIN.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •