Strange Blu-ray Encoding Problem using AME

[SameSelf]

Now that I have recovered from the disaster that is One Direction's Zayn quitting (jk), has anyone seen this before?

I am trying to encode native 1440x1080p29.97 video for Blu-ray. Up until now, I haven't messed with BD. All my encoding was destined for the web. The first problem is what to do about 29.97p since BD doesn't support it. I went with a straightforward conversion to 1440x1080i29.97, so no temporal resolution. No big deal right?

Here is my problem. When I export from PP using the BD preset, the timeline ends up being a little longer. For example, I have a clip that is 12:51:01 in the PP timeline. When I export it, it gets stretched to 12:51:14, about a half second longer. When I load the encoded clip back into PP, the extra half-a-second is green screen? Really strange. As you can imagine this is causing problems when I bring the timeline into Encore.

Maybe the problem is AME is just bad at converting 30p to 30i? I haven't tried another encoder yet, like HCEnc. I am going to fiddle around some more, but wanted to see what you gurus might know. Thanks!

[smrpix]

Do your encoding as part of your authoring, not separate from it. You still have access to all the presets and customizations of AME but Encore will ensure you stay to spec.

[SameSelf]

Oh, didn't think of that. I have always tried to avoid transcoding in Encore for DVD. Since this is my first foray in BD, will give it a try. Thanks.

[smrpix]

With DVD there are better encoders than AME, so it made sense to do it externally. In this case you are using the same encoding engine either way. Best of luck.

[SameSelf]

I set Encore to transcode the timeline and build an ISO. After burning that to blu-ray, the last half second is quite strange. Here is an image:

So clearly that extra half second that AME is creating causes issues. This is a real head scratcher. Is there a way to export the timeline out of PP without encoding? I tried doing a lossless export but it was so slow I killed it. Something like 10 fps.

Maybe blu-rays are a pipe dream and I should just stick to DVD.

EDIT: Picture removed for privacy

[LMotlow]

The first problem is what to do about 29.97p since BD doesn't support it.

Not true. Where did you get that information? 1920x1080 and 1440x1080 have the similar specs: either 29.97 interlaced or 23.976/24 fps progressive. BD supports 29.97p if it's encoded with fake interlace flags.
https://www.videohelp.com/hd#tech
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=154533

I agree with the previous comment. There are better encoders and authoring apps than AME.

[smrpix]

What version are you using? PPro CS6 (and I believe back to CS4) you could simply drag the sequence from the Premiere Project window into Encore. Later versions and earlier versions required an export. If your original footage is HDV or P2 you can smart render from Premiere.

Sounds like your final half second is an open-GOP. Why not just add a second of black at the end of your sequence?

[SameSelf]

Not true. Where did you get that information? 1920x1080 and 1440x1080 have the similar specs: either 29.97 interlaced or 23.976/24 fps progressive. BD supports 29.97p if it's encoded with fake interlace flags.
https://www.videohelp.com/hd#tech
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=154533

I agree with the previous comment. There are better encoders and authoring apps than AME.

I got that info from the link you provided. None of the options list 29.97p for either 1440 or 1920 (although my tired, old eyes had to scan the list numerous times in case I missed it, so correct me if I am wrong). The only progressive option is 24 fps. What gives? Is this Hollywood's attempt to corner a market? So, unless I misunderstand the listed specs, 29.97p is not a compliant BD spec. I have never heard of the fake interlace flag. Is that some setting to make a non-compliant BD? Where is that found in PP or Encore?

As for authoring apps, I guess I am partial to Encore simply because I have authored so many DVDs and feel comfortable. What would you recommend above Encore?

[SameSelf]

Sounds like your final half second is an open-GOP. Why not just add a second of black at the end of your sequence?

Hmm, that is interesting thought. I need to do some research into closed versus open GOPs. Certainly aware of the terms but have no understanding of their implications.

Wow, this video stuff is incredibly complex.

[poisondeathray]

"fake interlace flag" is to make 25p and 29.97p compliant for BD, since they are not officially supported. Adobe's encoder (Mainconcept/Rovi) can't encode it, x264 is the only one that I'm aware of that can

You can also do minor edits in AME, to cut off that bit, but you might have some other problems going on. I hate it when something doesn't work as-is since there might be other issues not identified yet

[newpball]

I went with a straightforward conversion to 1440x1080i29.97

How?

Whether 1080/30p is supported seems to depend on the prevailing winds on this forum, it goes from fully supported, to not officially, to not supported but we can fake it.

I personally think the correct answer is it is absolutely definitely totally not supported but we can fake it.

AME may not be your best tool for this kind of 'hacking'.
Better render lossless and have some recommended tool go at it.

[SameSelf]

Thanks, pdr, for weighing in on this. Yeah, it is a really strange problem that I have never seen before. Encore actually lets me trim those extra frames as if I was editing in PP. But I haven't tried burning an ISO yet. On further reflection, I may be over thinking this. Just trim it in Encore and be happy.

My research on the web seems to indicate that Encore is a little buggy when it comes to authoring compliant Blu-rays. Given that I spend an inordinate amount of time struggling with Adobe issues that have nothing to do with me (IOW, it just doesn't work perfectly), I am wondering if it is time to try another NLE. I am thinking maybe Vegas, but I don't know if I am just asking for a different set of headaches. Sometimes you are better off with the devil that you know.

[SameSelf]

How?

How you ask? I just chose that option in the list of Blu-ray specs available in PP. Seemed the closest to my content. PP does not give me a 29.97p option for Blu-ray.

[poisondeathray]

Thanks, pdr, for weighing in on this. Yeah, it is a really strange problem that I have never seen before. Encore actually lets me trim those extra frames as if I was editing in PP. But I haven't tried burning an ISO yet.

Right, you can do it in Encore as well. I was suggesting if you were using AME to encode using the BD preset, you could do it there as well

My research on the web seems to indicate that Encore is a little buggy when it comes to authoring compliant Blu-rays. Given that I spend an inordinate amount of time struggling with Adobe issues that have nothing to do with me (IOW, it just doesn't work perfectly), I am wondering if it is time to try another NLE. I am thinking maybe Vegas, but I don't know if I am just asking for a different set of headaches. Sometimes you are better off with the devil that you know.

Vegas doesn't author (it's Adobe counterpart would be PP) , DVDA does the authoring (it's Adobe counterpart would be Encore) . Yes, it can be problematic as well. You need to step up to more professional authoring tools like Do Studio, Scenarist, but they are much more expensive but the error checking , resiliency are much higher.

But you posts suggest this NOT to be an authoring issue, rather an issue with PP or encoding

[SameSelf]

Vegas doesn't author (it's Adobe counterpart would be PP) , DVDA does the authoring (it's Adobe counterpart would be Encore) . Yes, it can be problematic as well. You need to step up to more professional authoring tools like Do Studio, Scenarist, but they are much more expensive but the error checking , resiliency are much higher.

But you posts suggest this NOT to be an authoring issue, rather an issue with PP or encoding

Yes, I think you are right. None of this is Encore's fault. Some strange bug in AME. But rather than pull my hair out any longer, just be content with trimming the extra frames and move on. Life is too short to stress about these things.

Thanks for the heads up on authoring apps though. Professional tools are out of my league. You know you are trouble when a website directs you to authorized resellers instead of just offering their wares

EDIT: Just looked closer at DVDA and it seems they use MainConcept as well? Haha! No escaping these guys.

[LMotlow]

Jeez, folks, here's lil ole me looking at two threads at the same time. I fixed it. And just one thread open from now on, hm?

[smrpix]

We still don't know what your source footage is... HDV? P2? Camera original? Download? Game capture? (1440x1080 29.97p is pretty rare generally.) We still don't know what version of Premiere, Encore and AME you're using (and there are substantial differences.) Did you try adding a second of black at the end as I suggested earlier?

[LMotlow]

I repaired that one. Thanks for bringing that idiotic mistake to my attention.


I've seen HD progressive video at 29.97 ouit there, and have one here at home. Plays well, I guess my OPPO has no problem with it. Motion is a little clumsy, though, when things get really fast.

[turk690]

Maybe the problem is AME is just bad at converting 30p to 30i? I haven't tried another encoder yet...

I have tried AME since CS3 and it has remained the same chockful of quixotic little limitashuns: (very) poor resizing (avisynth runs rings around it), blocky noisy quality at low-level bitrates (for MPEG2, TMPGenc, CCebasic, and HCenc produce better, all other things equal), and finally, creation of possible non-compliant files despite choosing appropriate templates. Encore balks at open-GOP files (which themselves are, ok, not necessarily non-bluray compliant); hard to tell what AME creates. With x264, deliberately not including --open-gop in the arguments creates closed-GOP output files that Encore very happily accepts. Here's the rub: Encore won't show error messages if an open-GOP file is imported; my experience shows it will either just freeze then, or go ahead and let you author but the resulting disc will display green flashes where operation in an (open) GOP caused search for picture info outside that GOP (which is what open-GOP is all about, to, I'm told, increase encoding efficiency), and all other little problems in between.
All my blu-ray compliancy problems were solved (and quality infinitely became better) when I used x264/x265 (through Simple x264 launcher) instead of AME, by way of frameserving through Debugmode. If x264 quality can be good enough for some commercial blu-ray releases, it can be good enough for me; that it's free doesn't hurt http://www.x264bluray.com/

[SameSelf]

Turns out Encore CS6 has been EOL'd. Adobe never ported it over to CC. At the time (circa 2013), Adobe made some pretty crazy statements that DVD/BD development was stagnant/dying with the rise of streaming. They said, there was no need to continue developing Encore and tried to soften the blow to users by promising to continue supporting CS6 as a companion to CC. However, now it seems even that promise has been reneged on.

A more likely story is that Adobe was well aware of the bugs in Encore. They looked around at the market and realized that they were way behind their competitors and simply gave up. At least that is what correlates to my experience.

One reason why I am interested in Sony Vegas and DVD Architect is, I don't ever see a scenario where I would become a CC customer. With the Encore EOL, Adobe has visibly highlighted how they can capriciously destroy value in their suite on a mere whim while the subscription fee remains the same or even increases. Adobe did that from the transition from CS2 to CS3 when they killed off Audition replacing it with the pathetic excuse of a DAW called Soundbooth. They resurrected it in CS5.5, but I don't think that is any reason to think they are going to resurrect Encore at some point.

I am very familiar with frameserving out of PP. But, I guess I don't have a Blu-ray authoring program at the moment

[smrpix]

Turns out Encore CS6 has been EOL'd. Adobe never ported it over to CC. At the time (circa 2013), Adobe made some pretty crazy statements that DVD/BD development was stagnant/dying with the rise of streaming. They said, there was no need to continue developing Encore and tried to soften the blow to users by promising to continue supporting CS6 as a companion to CC. However, now it seems even that promise has been reneged on.

My experience and understanding has been somewhat different than yours. First, Encore is still available if you have a CC or CS6 license. My best guess is that the CC codebase was different enough Adobe chose not to spend the resources on what they viewed as a dying format. The result being Encore still works fine as a standalone, but direct linking form Premiere timelines is no longer available.

A more likely story is that Adobe was well aware of the bugs in Encore. They looked around at the market and realized that they were way behind their competitors and simply gave up. At least that is what correlates to my experience.

As of CS6, I honestly don't know what bugs you're referring to. It's pretty solid. As a medium-priced disk author their only competitors as far as features are DVD architect and TMPGenc Authoring Works. Personally I've always found Encore more intuitive. Naturally YMMV. Again, in what way do you think they were behind?

With the Encore EOL, Adobe has visibly highlighted how they can capriciously destroy value in their suite on a mere whim...I don't think that is any reason to think they are going to resurrect Encore at some point.

I doubt it's capricious, but I take them at their word it's EOL.

[SameSelf]

Here is a partial list of documented problems in Encore CS6:

- No way to animate buttons/graphics menus
- No low-level access to HDMV commands so a lot of jump-back and remember previous settings/button don't work properly
- No proper scripting, so no complex discs
- No BD masters
- No 3D
- Region coding is buggy
- No BD-J
- Setting UOPs is buggy

And that is just a partial list from what I have gathered on the web. As I stated in my OP, this is my first foray into Blu-ray using Encore. I have authored tons of DVDs using Encore and naively assumed that Blu-ray would be as easy as editing SD versus HD in PP. Sadly that is not the case. I am having other problems that I haven't even bothered posting here because I don't feel like this is the right forum for Encore problems.

Sadly, it seems the only alternative is, as pdr said, step up to pro authoring program like Sony's DoStudio. However, that is out of my price range. I am not certain if DVDA is any better than Encore, I may try the 30-day trial and see. However, I will noodle around with Encore some more, but my ambition has been severely squashed. I am coming to the conclusion that authoring Blu-rays is a dead end and I should just stick to the interwebs.

[poisondeathray]

And there is a slight "pause" when transitioning between menus

DVDA has basically the same problems as those above, and no popup menus - but at least no pause. The DVDA interface is slighter harder to use for most people

None of them are real deal breakers for "casual" discs. Certainly there is nothing better in that category/price range. The advanced features only come with stepping up.

You have to understand that both Encore and DVDA are really DVD authoring software. They evolved from DVD authoring and it shows. BD for them is sort of an afterthought. Their BD's follow DVD style authoring rules. They even look like DVD's, except higher resolution. (ok, Encore has a bit more like pop up menus, but that's it). In order for them to make dramatic improvements, a lot would have to be re-written on the BD end. Sony definitely has no interest in that because they bought Do Studio, and they don't want to cannibalize their high end.

[smrpix]

As poisondeathray says:

None of them are real deal breakers for "casual" discs. Certainly there is nothing better in that category/price range.

I wouldn't consider most of those things bugs so much as non-included features. You pay a lot more if you want that stuff.

[SameSelf]

Thanks for the heads up, pdr. I suspected as much that DVDA was not much better than Encore. From what I can gather, DVDA is only better in that it hasn't been EOL'd by Sony, but at the same time Sony hasn't progressed its functionality for quite some time. I think I will save my $200 for something else.

As for the "casual" Blu-ray that looks like hi-res DVD, yuck.

[poisondeathray]

As for the "casual" Blu-ray that looks like hi-res DVD, yuck.

There is nothing wrong with that. That statement was in regards to the actual authoring functionality, not the video quality. The video quality is usually unrelated in an authoring tool - most people don't use the authoring tool to do the actual encoding. Putting the same video asset in scenarist bd doesn't make the actual video "look" any better than those done in Encore or DVDA - All BD authoring tools will pass through a compliant stream so you get exactly the same thing in terms of image quality.

And it wasn't meant to be a very negative comment - They do decent menus, motion menus just fine (except for the transition pause in encore) . Anything you could expect from a fancy DVD. You just can't produce very fancy Hollywood type BD authored discs - you need to step up for that. You can still do pretty neat motion menus - but the trick to that isn't in the authroing tool - the trick to that is using other tools like photoshop, AE .

Most viewers don't care about fancy menus , popup menus, or extras - they want to watch the actual content

[SameSelf]

Most viewers don't care about fancy menus , popup menus, or extras - they want to watch the actual content

Thank you pdr for the clarification. I just have one issue:

Why can't menus be considered part of the actual content? I agree that viewers don't care about crappy menus, myself included. Menus need to be artful, well thought out, and creative, at which point, menus add to the experience. I have several commercial DVDs where the menus and extras are just as memorable as the movie in my mind's eye. I myself have created some absolutely stunning and compelling DVD menus that pack as much emotion as the video. Conversely, if the menu is crap, I can't click through it fast enough. The raison d'etre of an authoring program, coupled with AE, PS, a suitable DAW, etc., is making menus that achieve that ideal. I don't need an authoring tool if I just want to burn a movie that is a straight play in a player; there are plenty of free tools for that. But then I am not even sure what is the point of burning a movie anyway if that is all you want.

Many studies exist on why people stopped buying music CDs, and we now have the strange phenomenon of rising vinyl sales. One of the main reasons is that CDs are bland and stale and offer the owner nothing tangible in relation to the artist. IOW, a CD serves one purpose only, to be ripped. Vinyl however offers artwork in terms of the album cover, sleeves, the vinyl label, etc. What the music industry is slowly realizing is that these things have value to music buyers.

End of rant

[poisondeathray]

Well apparently some viewers do care about fancy menus

(I'm one of them too, mainly because I can appreciate the type of work that goes into it - but I hope you realize we are a vast miniority - most people will just skip over)

[newpball]

Well apparently some viewers do care about fancy menus

(I'm one of them too, mainly because I can appreciate the type of work that goes into it - but I hope you realize we are a vast miniority - most people will just skip over)

I do not mind menus the problem is that they are excruciatingly slow.
I see no technical reason we cannot navigate them instantly.

I wonder if it was designed like that!

[smrpix]

Well apparently some viewers do care about fancy menus

(I'm one of them too, mainly because I can appreciate the type of work that goes into it - but I hope you realize we are a vast miniority - most people will just skip over)

As commercial DVD evolved, the menus generally got simpler for just this reason. Folks want to watch movies, not authoring prowess. (Though I certainly appreciate good design and clever hiding-the-seams too.)