VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Consider supporting us by disable your adblocker or try DVDFab Passkey and copy Blu-ray and DVDs! :)
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2
FirstFirst 1 2
Results 31 to 39 of 39
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Since apparently the video on the BD wouldn't even have to be H.264, or VC1, or MPEG-2 let alone authored to label the thing "Blu-ray Disc TM", I'd say misunderstanding what the words "Blu-ray Disc TM" really mean (as far as the BDA is concerned) is virtually guaranteed.
    Last edited by usually_quiet; 18th Jul 2018 at 12:45.
    Ignore list: hello_hello, tried, TechLord
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Denmark
    Search Comp PM
    Now you're trying to start another discussion, that I don't wanna get into. So this is my last reply. BDA has made these decisions, so those are the rules that apply.

    The BD logo on a disc means the disc complies to the Blu-ray specs - and will play in any Blu-ray player.
    The label "Blu-ray Disc TM" on a disc basically just means there's content on a Blu-ray disc yes. Various players will handle this differently. E.g. if it is full of digital photos, some players will show these, and others won't. That's besides the point in this discussion.

    The point is that Highwinder's disc is a Blu-ray Disc. Complain all you want - doesn't change the facts.

    To me it makes a lot of sense that you of course have to be allowed to identify what kind of disc it is somehow. It was very puzzling to see so much resistance towards that here.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Originally Posted by mr_lou View Post
    What Highwinder is saying is absolutely true, and I share his frustration very much when seeing wrong info here and there.
    Except for the parts where he was clearly wrong . eg. h265 ? HEVC ? come on... his own screenshot even shows h264 .

    He's making a AVCHD2.0 disc @ 59.94 (which already has proven failure rates, higher % with older units). PD is using <28Mb/s as per the AVCHD2.0 spec (In actual tests with a stream analyzer , the video bitrate is closer to 23-24Mb/s on higher quality source material that should elicit a much higher bitrate). Try making one higher real BD bitrates like 35Mb/s-40Mb/s . Good luck even try to author this.

    When someone asks "Can I make a Blu-ray with 1080p60fps video?" the answer is of course "Yes you absolutely definitely can", and then you can add "- but it's not part of the official specs (from 15 years ago)".
    Yes, not officially - but you should add it's not really BD with the ability to use BD bitrates. And there is a significant chance of failure which increases the older the unit (PD even warns you it might now work). And it won't pass BD verification, you cannot create an actual BDCMF image, and it cannot be replicated or pressed in a facility as an official BD.

    But units that claim to support AVCHD2.0 should playback the lower bitrate AVCHD2.0 variant.



    A while back I wanted to put my personal family video recordings on Blu-ray - but they were all recorded at 1080p@30fps - another non-standard Blu-ray. So I decided to investigate: I created a disc with a lot of 1080p@30fps video and another disc with a lot of 1080p@29,97fps.

    The results: Almost all players I tested on (more than 30 different old and new players), would play the 1080p@29,97fps fine.
    And only very few players refused to play the 1080p@30fps disc.

    So in my experience, 29,97fps is to prefer over 30fps. I'm guessing the same will apply to 59,94fps vs 60fps. So I will be using 59,94 fps in my upcoming project.

    EDIT: Looking at most replies in this thread I can see I better add this too: My discs are absolutely 100% compliant Blu-ray discs, with BDMV structure and even a Java Blu-ray Disc Xlet running as menu (which you can't do with AVCHD - so you know I'm not talking about AVCHD here). So there's no doubt that my test revealed that 99% of players had no problem playing a Blu-ray Disc with 1080p@29,97fps video.
    Thanks for sharing your experiences, but this is expected because it's within spec. You're making it sound like it's completely out of spec. It's 29.97p content, but you're outputting a 29.97i signal. Which is legal.

    There is a distinction between 1) content, 2) encoding type, and 3) flagging type .

    I'm surprised you'd even find 1 failure, unless it was a java or authoring issue (eg. tsmuxer has known compatibility muxing issues with some units, with buffer overflows). Note that what you're making isn't truly native progressive (progressive content, encoded progressive, flagged progressive) - which isn't in the BD spec. You're using the "fake" interlace flag (progressive content, encoded progressive but FLAGGED interlaced) - you're actually outputting a 29.97i signal. Recall that 1920x1080i29.97 is in the BD spec. It's up to the playback setup to assess this correctly weave the fields correctly. But only a tiny tiny about 0.001% of playback setups will actually not play it correctly, they will actually deinterlace and degrade the picture (ie. not handle the 2:2 pulldown correctly). Whereas true native progressive has zero chance of mixups because content is progressive, encoding is progressive, flagging is progressive. But truly native progressive is only allowed for 24.0pN and 23.976pN for BD . But for all intents and purposes this 29.97p (using MBAFF, PAFF or interlace flag) is perfectly legit and will pass verification.

    It's analogous to the 25p case. It's not native progressive either, but either encoded with MBAFF/PAFF or fake interlace flag too. You can find many official titles (e.g. BBC dramas) produced on BD . 100% of playback setups in PAL areas handle 2:2 pulldown correctly (even since DVD days) . Fake interlace is preferred quality wise because it progressive encoding , higher quality than MBAFF > PAFF . But compatibility is slightly lower with "fake interlace flag" and some muxers and unit still have problems with it. For this reason, almost all retail 29.97p and 25p BD's use MBAFF method. When you're doing this for clients, you don't even want 1 failure. You don't need the headaches.



    In case it wasn't clear, 1080p59.94 isn't the same thing as 1080p29.97 Completely different ballgame. Requires much higher decoding power, definitely not in BD spec and definitely older players limited to L4.1 will fail. I tested the PD AVCHD2.0 lower bitrate output in the other thread and even that has problems 2/4 local failures. PD even warns you about problems (see the screenshot in the other thread) . This absolutely will not pass BD verification. But many new players absolutely have the power to play it through USB or as a data disc flawlessly, with even with higher than BD bitrates (I mean completely out of spec). So it's not a HW/chip decoding power problem. Pretty stupid that it fails as an authored disc, but that's life.

    In case it wasn't clear, AVCHD2.0 isn't the same thing as BD either. AVCHD2.0 is limited in terms of bitrates <28Mb/s maxrate. PD actually produces ~23-24Mb/s for the video stream using a stream analyzer. I posted screenshots in the other thread. Quite a bit of quality loss and temporal quality fluctuations (keyframe popping). "BD" implies the ability to use BD bitrates. Which isn't the case for PD because it's actually conforms to AVCHD2.0 spec. 1080p59.94 can look good, but you need adequate bitrates and encoding otherwise it can look like crap. For some types of content and scenarios, this <28Mb/s (24Mb/s for PD) just won't cut it. It can be sufficient for others (low motion, simple content)




    Originally Posted by mr_lou View Post
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    Notice that the BDA explicitly states that playability is not guaranteed for this type of disc. From their perspective, using the words "Blu-ray Disc TM" only means that some type of burned BD media was used to contain the video.
    And no one ever denied that. All I said was that Highwinder's disc was a Blu-ray Disc. And now you know that it is. So we can end the discussion now.
    It depends on the your definition , I guess...

    You're using "Blu-ray Disc" definition loosely as a media type. Technically anything is a "Blu-ray Disc" as long as you use the media. It doesn't even define the content - so a data disc, a video game, pictures, text files.... anything is a "blu-ray disc" as long as you use the physical media. So it doesn't have to be authored. It's doesn't even have to work or play (e.g like the PD output didn't work in 2 of my players.) You just can't use the official logo.

    "Blu-ray video" is something else specific. There are clear specifications. That's what this thread was originally about if you look at the title. Yes you can make out of spec video, and some players might play it, but you're taking a risk


    So now we can end the discussion
    Quote Quote  
  4. Though I truly appreciate it, anybody that replies to this thread and attempts to defend me (or "60p blurays") should know that you will immediately be accused of blasphemy.

    60p blurays are advertised and supported by all popular hardware manufacturers who are obviously way more informed and technically advanced than these support forums - regardless of what is written in the ancient dogmatic scrolls of video formats. The hardware manufacturers themselves (Sony, Samsung, Philips, etc) advertise their bluray player specs as supporting 1080p60 and a typical max speed of 40Mbps to support it (read the specs for yourself).

    Is it AVCHD 2.0? Yes, of course it is. Does it work? Yes it does. Am I personally responsible for it? No, I'm not.

    Is this reckless, hedonistic debauchery to be shunned? Um - No. Seriously, try it for yourself and enjoy it instead of slamming it outright.
    Last edited by Highwinder; 18th Jul 2018 at 14:05.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Originally Posted by Highwinder View Post
    Though I truly appreciate it, anybody that replies to this thread and attempts to defend me (or "60p blurays") should know that you will immediately be accused of blasphemy.
    and for good reason j/k

    60p blurays are advertised and supported by all popular hardware manufacturers who are obviously way more informed and technically advanced than these support forums - regardless of what is written in the ancient dogmatic scrolls of video formats. The hardware manufacturers themselves (Sony, Samsung, Philips, etc) advertise their bluray player specs as supporting 1080p60 and a typical max speed of 40Mbps to support it (read the specs for yourself).
    Yes, as a data disc or usb . Or as an HDMI signal output as 60Hz . This does not indicate support for 59.94p authored BD video disc . This is to differentiate from models that support true "24P" as 24Hz in cinema mode. As you might be aware, typical North American displays run at 60Hz, so 24p BD's get a 3:2 judder cadence. But there are some cinema models that have 24Hz or some integer multiple alike 120Hz (24*5 =120) . So no judder.

    I don't see any that claim to support 1080p60 bluray video as authored disc. Kindly post some links. Thanks
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by mr_lou View Post
    Now you're trying to start another discussion, that I don't wanna get into. So this is my last reply. BDA has made these decisions, so those are the rules that apply.

    The BD logo on a disc means the disc complies to the Blu-ray specs - and will play in any Blu-ray player.
    The label "Blu-ray Disc TM" on a disc basically just means there's content on a Blu-ray disc yes. Various players will handle this differently. E.g. if it is full of digital photos, some players will show these, and others won't. That's besides the point in this discussion.

    The point is that Highwinder's disc is a Blu-ray Disc. Complain all you want - doesn't change the facts.

    To me it makes a lot of sense that you of course have to be allowed to identify what kind of disc it is somehow. It was very puzzling to see so much resistance towards that here.
    Feel free to quit this discussion any time you want, but as you can see, everyone else will continue to add to it.

    People who come here for help with putting their video on a "Blu-ray" to play with their Blu-ray player or someone else's Blu-ray player don't know that BDA's "Blu-ray Disc TM" terminology only refers to the media itself and says nothing about the disc's content or its compatibility with hardware Blu-ray players. These people asking for help mean authored, compliant Blu-ray.

    A burned BD containing authored video and audio which are fully compliant with the spec provides the best chance at compatibility. A burned BD containing anything else is less likely to play.

    You and Highwinder can do whatever you wish, but the rest of us will continue to tell people to follow the Blu-ray spec for maximum compatibility.
    Last edited by usually_quiet; 18th Jul 2018 at 14:47.
    Ignore list: hello_hello, tried, TechLord
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    I'm with pdr.
    I see NO advertising that supports 1080p60/59.94/50 AUTHORED HD BD discs. Only UHD, or AVCHD 2.0, or raw data files, or in the outputting (of lower framerates) as 60Hz. Similar to difference between UHD player that outputs 4k at 4k, and std player that upscales HD to 4k. Highwinder is conflating different things, either purposefully to support his claim, or inadvertently because he's not aware of the distinction.

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  8. aBigMeanie aedipuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    666th portal
    Search Comp PM
    you can put text files on a blu-ray disc. doesn't mean anything is going to play them. standalone blu-ray players expect to spec blu-ray if it's authored as a blu-ray movie.
    --
    "a lot of people are better dead" - prisoner KSC2-303
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    France
    Search Comp PM
    Blu-ray does not support 1080P 60fps. I think you can do 720P 60fps. More than the 60fps, what the bit rate of the file that is encoded is what really counts. Most MFT and DSLR's offer 24 or 28 mbps , the GH3, is so popular for video because it is one of the few, maybe the only, that offers options of 50 and 72 mbps, and No time limit, only the size of your memory card. Your frame rates are for motion and style rather than resolution.
    Audacity Find My iPhone Origin
    I shoot 1080P 24fps, at 50mbps, then in post do any cropping, color grading, and sharpening, then a lot of times I will downsize to 1280x720P No problems at all, I have done and viewed 1920x1080P, different fps, and I have a hard time seeing the difference, especially on well exposed video.
    Last edited by bimaloy30; 27th Sep 2018 at 13:21.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads