BD-Rebuilder, Feature Requests

[Sharc]

......The only drawback is that any custom size less than a BD25 has its max bitrate capped at 15mbps (AVCHD spec), even if strict isn't used. That's a shame since I copy it into a BD25 disc later.....

Just wondering if the capped 15Mbps are really a practical limitation, because it only applies to heavily compressed extras once you keep the main feature untouched.

[jdobbs]

Just wondering if the capped 15Mbps are really a practical limitation, because it only applies to heavily compressed extras once you keep the main feature untouched. You can't keep the main feature untouched on BD-5/9. It would violate the disc's maximum speed.

[DoctorM]

You can't keep the main feature untouched on BD-5/9. It would violate the disc's maximum speed.

Indeed, and I understand that's why you set it up like that. I know you don't want people encoding in one size to be copied to another size because of (likely) self-inflicted problems.

But then what is the purpose of 'Custom Target Size'? Each disc size can already be adjusted manually by the hidden BDXX_Size=.

I would think Custom Size would function in a manner that BD specs are applied unless 'Strict AVCHD' is enabled and then AVCHD limits engaged. Of course the problem there is Strict AVCHD applies to movie-only rebuilds.

I don't know how useful a hidden option like CUSTOMTARGET_MAXBITRATE=n would be to other people.
Mind you I was only asking because I thought there might already be such an option.

Of course, I only really just need the ability to not re-encode specific VIDs. So that would have my preference for an added feature.

Edit: @Sharc - Even at lower average bitrates, the ability to peak higher can still improve quality. I think practicality doesn't enter into it, just AVCHD specs.

[jdobbs]

I don't agree at all.

Custom Target Size has any of a few thousand possible uses. The hidden options you mention are for advanced users, and are hidden for a reason. They aren't meant to be changed except when someone wants to "stretch" or "limit" the target a little.

Strict AVCHD is meant for a specific group of players that have limitations in the file structure they will accept.

It just makes sense that when someone creates a disc to fit on something smaller than 8.5GB -- you can assume it is BD-5/9 since there is no BD-R smaller than BD-25.

[omegaman7]

Please forgive Jdobbs, but that's not entirely accurate. There are mini BD-R 7.5GB discs. Those would fall under an interesting set of circumstances(Their disc speed would handle higher bitrates). But those are rather expensive. Who would backup movies to HD cam Discs? Frankly, most my backups end up on hard drives. Only my more precious backups end up on reliable BD-R.

[jdobbs]

Please forgive Jdobbs, but that's not entirely accurate. There are mini BD-R 7.5GB discs. Those would fall under an interesting set of circumstances(Their disc speed would handle higher bitrates). But those are rather expensive. Who would backup movies to HD cam Discs? Frankly, most my backups end up on hard drives. Only my more precious backups end up on reliable BD-R.Exactly. Those are specialized for recording on camera. So from you PC all you'd do is read. Only a crazy person would backup their movies to a $16 7.5GB specialized disc.

[DoctorM]

Understood. Again, I was largely asking if it was already implemented since there are a lot of other hidden features that seem to venture into extreme tweaking.

[jdobbs]

Understood. Again, I was largely asking if it was already implemented since there are a lot of other hidden features that seem to venture into extreme tweaking.I'll see how hard it would be to add a hidden option that will override the BD-5/9 limitations.

I hesitate though... the majority of people who create self-inflicted problems don't understand enough to know that it is self-inflicted. But they think they do (Toilet-Duck comes to mind). They just tell their friends and post in forums that BD-RB creates a disc that skips, freezes, and has problems. They always seem to leave out the "I set a hidden option that caused it" part.

[HWK]

I'll see how hard it would be to add a hidden option that will override the BD-5/9 limitations.

I hesitate though... the majority of people who create self-inflicted problems don't understand enough to know that it is self-inflicted. But they think they do (Toilet-Duck comes to mind). They just tell their friends and post in forums that BD-RB creates a disc that skips, freezes, and has problems. They always seem to leave out the "I set a hidden option that caused it" part.

Sadly yes, to make more interesting they don' t want to cooperate. As you may know by experience and expect us to be mind reader some how.

.

[DoctorM]

Has anyone asked about a "Play All" button for the quick play menus?

[Lathe]

Has anyone asked about a "Play All" button for the quick play menus?

I think YOU just did! :)

[DoctorM]

I was playing around with a Disney animated film today. Like many of them, there are multiple playlists for the movie for different languages. The movie itself then covers multiple M2TS files some of which are non-English.

BD Rebuilder cannot currently blank linked playlists because some segments are used on more than one list. If BD RB allowed individual segments in a linked playlist to be blanked there is likely to be nothing but problems.

Manually I can extract just the version of the movie I want using TsMuxer (which makes the movie a single M2TS file), copy the new M2TS and English playlist over all the language versions (to catch any errors), copy the CLIPINF and BACKUP data, and delete all the now unreferenced segments. In the case of the disc I'm working on, it saves more than 3gb before doing a rebuild.

I'd love BD Rebuilder to be able to do the same thing, but it seems near impossible without it being rewritten to select by playlists.

I guess mostly, out of curiosity, I wanted to know why BD RB works by vid streams rather than playlists.

[Lowpro]

I tested my first Quick Play menu today and thought it looked good. I was surprised that the selections were all top justified with a lot of empty space below it.

I understand dynamically sizing the overlay region where the text appears is probably not simple, but I wouldn't mind seeing the text centered vertically within it.

I've been creating background images for my Quick-Play discs which take into account the overlay area. I'll add graphical text across the top which I center up between the top and where I know the overlay area will begin. I'll then give the background a title treatment which I place at the bottom ensuring that it's placed in such a way that once the overlay is displayed the title treatment doesn't run outside the overlay area. Gives the Top Menu a nice finished looked. A perfect example of this can be seen below per the discs I worked up for "AHS: Coven". (Click on the preview images below to view the full 1920x1080 screen captures.)

https://www.lowpro.net/bdrb/quick_play/bdrb_ahs_s3_d1_menu_thumb.jpg (https://www.lowpro.net/bdrb/quick_play/bdrb_ahs_s3_d1_menu.jpg)

https://www.lowpro.net/bdrb/quick_play/bdrb_ahs_s3_d2_menu_thumb.jpg (https://www.lowpro.net/bdrb/quick_play/bdrb_ahs_s3_d2_menu.jpg)

https://www.lowpro.net/bdrb/quick_play/bdrb_ahs_s3_d3_menu_thumb.jpg (https://www.lowpro.net/bdrb/quick_play/bdrb_ahs_s3_d3_menu.jpg)

Additional examples per some of the background images I've worked up can be found here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1688399#post1688399).

[DoctorM]

I was watching a few BDs lately with LPCM audio tracks and thinking that the only step down for this in BDRB is 640kbps DD.

Anyway, does anyone know if ffmpeg's E-AC3 encoding is mature enough to be a reasonable BD-RB feature request?
I know it doesn't yet support 7.1, but Dolby Plus would still be a pretty good option between 16/48 640kbps DD and full lossless.

[jdobbs]

I guess mostly, out of curiosity, I wanted to know why BD RB works by vid streams rather than playlists.Because they are the highest independent/unique level. If you step up to playlists, you may have a single M2TS that exists in 20 (or 500) different playlists. Playlists are ok if you are are doing nothing but movie-only -- but they break down for full backups. In the streams list they wouldn't represent truly what is being done and could only lead to confusion. Even if you displayed them -- you'd still have to work at the M2TS/CLPI level when you reencode and rebuild, so in my mind its better to show reality.

[DoctorM]

Ah good point. I hadn't thought of multiple references to the same M2TS. Thinking about it MultiAVCHD handles it by playlist and warns you that a change effects another playlist and that does make for awkwardness.

[Lathe]

Ah good point. I hadn't thought of multiple references to the same M2TS. Thinking about it MultiAVCHD handles it by playlist and warns you that a change effects another playlist and that does make for awkwardness.

FWIW, I used MultiAVCHD for a long time; it was a great program. But, it was getting SO outdated and hadn't been updated since like 2010.

I am SO thankful that I have in time learned to do just about EVERYTHING I need with BDRB! So, that I don't have to rely on that once great, but outdated program now :)

I LOVE how JD has gone to such lengths to allow us to do SO much with BDRB, including adding AVS script, x264 tweaks, etc.

I remember the day when I was able to learn how to utilize BDRB more fully and FINALLY leave MultiAVCHD behind.

WONDERFUL! :D

[jdobbs]

FWIW, I used MultiAVCHD for a long time; it was a great program. But, it was getting SO outdated and hadn't been updated since like 2010.

I am SO thankful that I have in time learned to do just about EVERYTHING I need with BDRB! So, that I don't have to rely on that once great, but outdated program now :)

I LOVE how JD has gone to such lengths to allow us to do SO much with BDRB, including adding AVS script, x264 tweaks, etc.

I remember the day when I was able to learn how to utilize BDRB more fully and FINALLY leave MultiAVCHD behind.

WONDERFUL! :DDeank is a good guy. In the early days of BD backups we exchanged information back-and-forth about formats, etc. I'm not sure what happened to him. But my guess is that he discovered (like anyone who has tried it) that "freeware with donations" isn't a very good business model. It's roughly equivalent to a newspaper route. ;)

[jdobbs]

@Lowpro

Nice looking menus. If there was one thing you wished was different (or better) about the way BD-RB created menus, what would it be?

[Capsbackup]

@Lowpro

Nice looking menus. If there was one thing you wished was different (or better) about the way BD-RB created menus, what would it be?

The ability to move the menu buttons to a selectable location on the screen? ;)

[Lathe]

Deank is a good guy. In the early days of BD backups we exchanged information back-and-forth about formats, etc. I'm not sure what happened to him. But my guess is that he discovered (like anyone who has tried it) that "freeware with donations" isn't a very good business model. It's roughly equivalent to a newspaper route. ;)

Sorry, I just got this (don't know why my cookies or whatever keep disappearing) Yeah, he really seems like a very sharp guy. But, you are likely quite right since you yourself have unfortunately had to deal with this :(

[meadrocks]

This is just a question, not a feature request. I output the movie to a .mkv, 1920x1080, auto-aac, auto-GOP. I see 2 output options, with & without auto-gop, what is auto-gop?

[jdobbs]

auto-gop will set the GOP (Group Of Pictures) size to 10x the framerate, setting a keyframe every 10 seconds or so. Typically (for example in BD) you'll see shorter gop sizes. This gives greater efficiency.

[meadrocks]

auto-gop is a .mp4 option, not mkv, my bad.

[jdobbs]

It's available for both MKV and MP4.

[meadrocks]

It's available for both MKV and MP4.

I don't see a mkv container, 1920x1080, auto-gop, auto-aac option. Do I need to enable a hidden option?

[jdobbs]

I don't see a mkv container, 1920x1080, auto-gop, auto-aac option. Do I need to enable a hidden option?Look at the ALTERNATE.TXT file in the MISC folder of BD-RB. You can edit it and create/remove whatever presets you want. The ones that are there were just defaults that I created (common output formats) -- they also show how it works.

[SquallMX]

An hidden option to keep the x264 metadata would be nice for those of Us who want to remember the settings used on a specific disc :).

[Lathe]

An hidden option to keep the x264 metadata would be nice for those of Us who want to remember the settings used on a specific disc :).

I'm not sure if you mean the x264 settings, but after the encode is done, all you need to do is go into the Workfiles folder and right-click on the .264 file (video file) and MediaInfo will give you all the x264 parameters. You are correct that once the re-encode is placed inside the BDMV folder as m2ts file(s) you cannot read the x264 settings then, but you can read the raw .264 file before it is muxed into the final BDMV folder.

Don't know if that is what you were asking, but I hope it helps...

[Nico8583]

Hi,
Could you explain (or perhaps you have already explained that) what settings are used for MVC 3D encoding ? Is there a choice for video quality ? Is it possible to keep original 3D depth for subtitles ? And is it possible to create MKV with AVC/MVC video track (like MakeMKV) or 3D MVC is only for BD9/BD25 ?
Thanks !

[Sharc]

Hi,
Could you explain (or perhaps you have already explained that) what settings are used for MVC 3D encoding ? Is there a choice for video quality ? Is it possible to keep original 3D depth for subtitles ? And is it possible to create MKV with AVC/MVC video track (like MakeMKV) or 3D MVC is only for BD9/BD25 ?
Thanks !
So what is your feature request .... ?
(This is the feature request thread)

[Nico8583]

So what is your feature request .... ?
(This is the feature request thread)
My features requests are :
- Add a quality choice for 3D if not available
- Add original 3D depth support if not available
- Add MVC support into MKV if not available
But these features requests need a response to my questions ;)

[Sharc]

My features requests are :
- Add a quality choice for 3D if not available
- Add original 3D depth support if not available
- Add MVC support into MKV if not available
But these features requests need a response to my questions ;)
Isn't the 3D MKV packing as used by MakeMKV very specific or even proprietary? I can only playback these files in 3D using Stereoscopic Player. Neither my TV nor my standalone recognize this format and play it as 2D only.

You can produce 3D MKV as SBS with DB-RB, or MVC in blu-ray compliant .m2ts container (in-muxed as single .m2ts file) but not as mkv AFAIK.

[jdobbs]

My features requests are :
- Add a quality choice for 3D if not available
- Add original 3D depth support if not available
- Add MVC support into MKV if not available
But these features requests need a response to my questions ;)1. The quality setting works the same as for 2D. You choose it under SETTINGS/ENCODE SETTINGS.
2. The 3D depth is left unchanged from the original. So that is already there.
3. I wasn't aware an MKV supported MVC. I'll have to check that out. Right now only SBS output to MKV is supported.

[Edit] Just read Sharc's post. That may be a factor for #3.

[Nico8583]

1. The quality setting works the same as for 2D. You choose it under SETTINGS/ENCODE SETTINGS.
2. The 3D depth is left unchanged from the original. So that is already there.
3. I wasn't aware an MKV supported MVC. I'll have to check that out. Right now only SBS output to MKV is supported.

[Edit] Just read Sharc's post. That may be a factor for #3.
Thank you ;)
1 - I believed settings under settings/encode settings was only for x264. So is it possible to choose 2 pass or only ABR ?
2 - 3D depth for subtitles is include in MVC stream, so it's lost during encode
3 - MVC is not supported officialy, I have asked to Matroska if it will be added a long time ago but it was at the end of their to-do list, so it seems to not be implemented. I have never tried to play MVC MKV but I would try it.

[jdobbs]

1. No, you can't choose 2 pass. The Intel SDK doesn't support 2 pass encoding.
2. You didn't say anything about subtitles. I'm working on that.
3. If it isn't supported officially -- then I can't support it until it does. Standards are there for a reason.

[Sharc]

Thank you ;)
3 - MVC is not supported officialy, I have asked to Matroska if it will be added a long time ago but it was at the end of their to-do list, so it seems to not be implemented. I have never tried to play MVC MKV but I would try it.
The muxing format is left-right interleaved as far as I know. There exist free muxing tools which produce the format profile "Stereo High@L4.1 / High@L4.1" which is probably somewhere standardized. The bigger problem may be with the players supporting this profile.

[Nico8583]

Thanks !

[Sharc]

Here is the 3D Muxer "DGMVCCombine.exe" from Donald Graft:

http://rationalqm.us/mine.html

Edit:
You can mux the base and dependent view with Donald's tool and pack into .mkv container using mkvmerge. It puts the left-right interleaved stereo file into the .mkv container.
Seems to be the same as what you would get with MakeMKV.

[Nico8583]

Thanks, I'll try if my TV can read MVC into MKV (it can read MVC into M2TS so perhaps)

[Sharc]

I'll look at it.
Did you have a look at it, and if so, any conclusions?

[jdobbs]

Did you have a look at it, and if so, any conclusions?No, I haven't. I apparently didn't add it to my to-do list. I'll see what I can do this week if I find some time.

[Sharc]

No, I haven't. I apparently didn't add it to my to-do list. I'll see what I can do this week if I find some time.
No rush. I thought it could perhaps also serve as a quality based 2-pass encoding.

[jdobbs]

Did you have a look at it, and if so, any conclusions?Ok. I've implemented an automatic second pass when one-pass CRF encodes are over the target size more than 2%. Does that sound about right based on your experience? Too strict? Too loose?

[Sharc]

Ok. I've implemented an automatic second pass when one-pass CRF encodes are over the target size more than 2%. Does that sound about right based on your experience? Too strict? Too loose?
I think the 2% should be fine considering that BD-RB's default target size is about 98% of the disc capacity.
(Would a lower limit make sense as well e.g. when the CRF encode is under the target size of say -15%?)

[jdobbs]

I think the 2% should be fine considering that BD-RB's default target size is about 98% of the disc capacity.
(Would a lower limit make sense as well e.g. when the CRF encode is under the target size of say -15%?)Yeah, there could be a lower limit too. I have to be careful with that, though. There are times when the maximum allowable bitrate can be a limiting factor (e.g. BD-5).

[Sharc]

Yeah, there could be a lower limit too. I have to be careful with that, though. There are times when the maximum allowable bitrate can be a limiting factor (e.g. BD-5).
Ah yes, I didn't think of that pitfall. Undersize is the harmless case anyway. So no need to overcomplicate this.

[Sharc]

The time for 2-pass encoding could be significantly shortened by reducing the frame resolution for the first pass, still preserving the file-size accuracy of a 2-pass encode.
I did some initial tests by including "ReduceBy2()" in the script for pass 1 (producing the .stats file) which halved the time for pass 1 at least.
Quality-wise I found the final result clearly superior to 1-pass ABR, and for exceptionally demanding scenes (like fading noise) I found it to be slightly inferior compared to a normal 2-pass encode. I have found no major flaws for "normal" scenes so far.
Has anyone done similar tests? Would this possibly be a candidate for a hidden option?

Edit:
HorizontalReduceBy2() already brings a significant speed benefit for the 1st pass and seems to produce almost identical visual quality as a regular 2 pass encode.

[Lathe]

The time for 2-pass encoding could be significantly shortened by reducing the frame resolution for the first pass, still preserving the file-size accuracy of a 2-pass encode.
I did some initial tests by including "ReduceBy2()" in the script for pass 1 (producing the .stats file) which halved the time for pass 1 at least.
Quality-wise I found the final result clearly superior to 1-pass ABR, and for exceptionally demanding scenes (like fading noise) I found it to be slightly inferior compared to a normal 2-pass encode. I have found no major flaws for "normal" scenes so far.
Has anyone done similar tests? Would this possibly be a candidate for a hidden option?

Edit:
HorizontalReduceBy2() already brings a significant speed benefit for the 1st pass and seems to produce almost identical visual quality as a regular 2 pass encode.

Hmmm... that is quite intriguing... You really did not notice any discernable difference in picture quality? Is this being referenced on a large screen and with moderately demanding source material...?

[Sharc]

Comparing the "shortcut" version with the "regular" 2-pass encode:
PSNR is 42....46 dB for the vast majority of frames. This is without black borders which would bias the result positively.