questions/problems rendering AVC for blu-ray from DV AVI in Vegas

[maman]

I've got some DV AVI files I captured from my dv cam, and I'd like to put these on blu-ray so I can keep the high quality and bitrate (not because I expect the resolution to be higher or anything like that). I'd like it to be able to play on any regular blu-ray player. The AVI files have a bitrate of roughly 30mbps I believe.

After I imported everything in sony vegas, I rendered the video and audio seperately. I chose the "sony avc" type, chose a blu-ray template (Blu-ray 1920x1080-60p, 16 Mbps I believe), and then used the customize button to make changes to fit my file. The changes I made were to change the frame size to 720x480, raise the bitrate to 20Mbps and that was it (the framrate was already NTSC)

The questions I have are
1) The resulting file was of decent quality, but the motion looked very jittery compared to the source file were it is extremely smooth. Is there something obvious that I did wrong to produce that? I rendered mpeg2 for dvd from the same source files before and even though the bitrate was much lower the motion was still very smooth.

2)I thought the max bitrate for blu-ray was around 40mbps or something? I learned recently with dvd that although the max is 9.8mbps, 8 is the highst 'safe' bitrate for most players. So I know I may not be able to hit max, but 50% of max seems fairly low as a limit. Why can't I set something higher than that?

Some other info that may be relevant- my project template is NTSC DV Widescreen (720x480), full-resolution rendering quality is set to "best", motion blur is Gaussian, and deinterlace method is Bland Fields"

I also have "adjust source media to better match..." checked.

[Lyris]

1. Check the field order settings of the project and the render. DV is bottom field first. The BD templates are probably set up for top field first.
2. Yes, 40mbps is the max bit rate for BD. If the encoder in Vegas isn't letting you go near that, it's probably crippled by design somehow. Use x264 for your AVC encoding needs and all should be fine :)

[Lam3rD]

You don't have many options (assuming your footage is 30i and not 30p/24p):
1. Disable de-interlace - Blend is utter garbage; Edit/render in interlaced mode
2a. Deinterlace it properly in avisynth and then input the result in Vegas (edit in progressive mode with disabled deinterlace!).
2b. Smart-bob it properly and screw the BD-compliancy (480p60 isn't supported) or upscale (720p60 is supported) (again progressive mode edit with disabled deinterlace)

Bonus: In case you're changing the speed of the footage somewhere that parts are destined to look bad.

If you don't mind having massive files as input/output render to uncompressed AVI and encode the result with x264, this way you will know your result is stored in the most efficient way possible.

[maman]

thanks, I will experiment with changing the first field and not deinterlacing. I'll have to learn more about using avisynth and "smart-bob" before I give those a shot.

I'll give x264 a look too. I don't care at all about large input/output file size, I have lots of free HD space, and both single/dual layer BD-Rs. So are you saying that I just need to join all my captured dv avi files (those are already uncompressed as I understand it), and then encode with x264? Do I need to mess with any settings to make sure it doesn't get deinterlaced?

I plan to use DVD Architect to author the blu-ray as well. If I encode with x264 is there anything I need to do to make sure it doesn't try to re-encode or transcode the video?

[Lyris]

DV isn't uncompressed; it uses the DV codec for compression (yes, for once the name of the codec is the same as the tape format).

http://sites.google.com/site/x264bluray/ has info on using x264 for BD; DVD Architect apparently has some issues that need to be considered.

[maman]

Ok, thanks.

I still haven't experimented with x246 yet, but I did try using the main concept avc template instead of sony avc. That ouputs a .mp4 file instead of .avc and allowed me to set the bitrate higher.

I did what you guys suggested and made sure the lower field was first (it wasn't before, you were right), and also set the deinterlace method to none. Now the resulting file playback is smooth, but I can clearly see that it's interlaced because the edges of things look really jaggy when they move. Will this go away when I play it back in a blu-ray player and the player (or my tv) deinterlace it? (assuming they do a decent job at deinterlacing).

Im wondering why the original DV AVI files don't look like that if they are interlaced too. I used variable bit rate between 25 and 30Mbps and the output file size nearly the same size as the input, so I imagine it shouldn't be that compressed, right?

EDIT:
hmm, actually it only looks bad if I play it back with WMP. When I use total media theater it looks very good. Still, I wonder why my AVIs don't look like that in WMP.

[MrVideo]

Im wondering why the original DV AVI files don't look like that if they are interlaced too. I used variable bit rate between 25 and 30Mbps and the output file size nearly the same size as the input, so I imagine it shouldn't be that compressed, right?

If you were to do frame grabs of areas of the video that have motion, and import those images into programs like Photoshop, you would see the interlace "jaggies." A result of the two fields having different content.

BTW, when it comes to digital video, there is no such thing as NTSC or PAL. Those are standards that describe the ANALOG video formats of the two. Digital video does not have sync pulses, does not have VBI and does not have color subcarriers.

Digital video is more accurately described by the vertical image resolution, format (i or p) and the frame rate. NTSC analog video that is captured and converted to digital should be listed as 480i29.97. PAL analog captured and converted to digital should be listed as 576i25. NTSC, or PAL, should never be used to describe digital video, as it in wrong.

Yes, DVD releases list them as NTSC or PAL, which is not really describing the digital content, but what the output is supposed to be. That isn't cast in stone either, as I have a NTSC DVD player that will take 576i25 and converted it to 480i29.97 before feeding it to the NTSC analog output stage. It is also for the general public that doesn't know any better.

[Lam3rD]

The NTSC/PAL naming of digital is getting on my nerves as well, to be exact these are the names of the Color systems of the analogue broadcasts and the two types of DVDs ("Normal"/FHA 576i/p; "Normal"/FHA 480i/p/p24) are back-compatible to each these obsolete standards. I guess listing the exact format with those 10 different, but similar variations of the DVD specs could be confusing for the people, who only care to put the movie/or whatever/ in the player and watch it.

Back to your question - your footage is (most likely) interlaced (could be with shifted fields, but it's quite less likely coming from a camera, that records on DV), so I'm assuming it's interlaced. The reason for the difference in image is that 1 player is deinterlacing it and the other is assuming it's progressive. Smart-bobbing is a deinterlacing process, where the horizontal resolution is doubled and the temporal (e.g. framerate) resolution is kept, removing the judder lines and keeping the motion fluid, at least on theory (with regular deinterlace the temporal resolution is halved).

Some of the easy and fairly good ways to perform that is via nnedi3(2) (or -2, depending on the field order), there are others, which are slower (and sometimes better) http://avisynth.org/mediawiki/External_filters#Deinterlacing like QTGMC (there are enough topics here and around the web comparing deinterlacers, so feel free to pick the one you find good enough).


As for combining multiple sources - assuming you use vegas only to join them you can use AVISynth to replace it, but this subject isn't for this sub-forum. Once you do so you can feed the output to x264 via commandline or some gui like Simple x264 Launcher and encode it. There is a sticky with all BD-compatible modes, that could help you with the settings.

[maman]

whew ok, that's a lot of info, thanks. For the NTSC/PAL thing- I did know that those don't really describe digital video, but I didn't know about them to the depth that you described, so I was probably still off. I just meant that the settings in vegas for the output was NTSC. I'm sure a lot of my descriptions aren't totally accurate since I'm new to a lot of this though...

Anyway, so the difference between my output file playback in wmp vs tmt makes sense if one is deinterlacing; the part I don't get is why the /source/ file (also interlaced) plays smoothly in WMP. If that is not deinterlacing it, shouldn't it look jaggy too?

Maybe if I'll notice it if I freeze frame as mentioned, but I don't get why there's such a large noticeable difference when just watching it normally.

[Ghitulescu]

The specs for BD-RE v3.1 and up allows the direct storing of DV material (no conversion, other than byte-alignment and repacking into a TS container). These files will have the .DVSD extension instead of the usual .M2TS.
Who knows, maybe there will be once BD players that could play such streams directly.

However I'm not that sure that the [all] BDplayers would accept NTSC/PAL (SD resolutions) encoded in AVC or VC-1, as the public whitepapers recommend their use for HD content.

[nm]

the part I don't get is why the /source/ file (also interlaced) plays smoothly in WMP. If that is not deinterlacing it, shouldn't it look jaggy too?

WMP is deinterlacing your original source but not the re-encoded one. I don't know what it looks for when it decides one way or the other, but if you are making an interlaced Blu-ray instead of MP4 files, WMP's autodetection shouldn't matter.

Personally I'd bob-deinterlace with QTGMC and upscale to 720p (for BD compatibility) if I wanted high quality output. Good deinterlacing is more important than spending the maximum amount of bits, and realtime deinterlacers suck compared to TGMC. I'd archive and backup the original DV video though, for other possible uses.



However I'm not that sure that the [all] BDplayers would accept NTSC/PAL (SD resolutions) encoded in AVC or VC-1, as the public whitepapers recommend their use for HD content.

SD support is mandatory for all codecs and I haven't heard of a player that wouldn't play such streams.

[Maccara]

Anyway, so the difference between my output file playback in wmp vs tmt makes sense if one is deinterlacing; the part I don't get is why the /source/ file (also interlaced) plays smoothly in WMP. If that is not deinterlacing it, shouldn't it look jaggy too?

Probably WMP (or DV codec) automatically assumes DV is interlaced and deinterlaces it on playback.

I had issues (long ago when I needed it) with interlaced h264, and noticed many decoders required interlaced x264 encodes have --nal-hrd vbr --aud and VBV options set (in addition to --tff/--bff) before they recognized interlaced material properly and did automatic deinterlacing on playback without intervention. Haven't tested this recently, though, if anything has changed about those requirements.

Maybe Vegas simply does not set all the needed flags?

[Ghitulescu]

SD support is mandatory for all codecs and I haven't heard of a player that wouldn't play such streams.
I have no access to the specs so I have to believe you that SD support of all 3 codecs is mandatory. The whitepapers I have unanimously say that SD is recorded as MPEG-2 video and stored as .M2TS, for compatibility reasons, but not a single word about the other two codecs and SD. Is the word as such present, or you got it from generic tables? Because as long it's not specified as mandatory it's optional and the manufacturers may choose not to implement it for reasons of costs.

[mp3dom]

The whitepapers I have unanimously say that SD is recorded as MPEG-2 video and stored as .M2TS, for compatibility reasons, but not a single word about the other two codecs and SD. Is the word as such present, or you got it from generic tables? Because as long it's not specified as mandatory it's optional and the manufacturers may choose not to implement it for reasons of costs.

SD supports all three codecs according to Sonic PDF docs. The fact that a lot of BDs out there have SD contents encoded with MPEG-2 is because they re-use the same video encoded for DVD (for costs reason). Only the 1440x1080 resolution (24p/50i/60i), which is 16:9 not square, doesn't supports MPEG-2 (so it can only be encoded as VC-1 or AVC)

[Ghitulescu]

SD supports all three codecs according to Sonic PDF docs.
Thanks.
The fact that a lot of BDs out there have SD contents encoded with MPEG-2 is because they re-use the same video encoded for DVD (for costs reason).
That's what I said myself. This is explicitly mentioned, but not AVC nor VC-1. Thus the question to people having access to better documents.
So the OP can use any of the three codecs for DV material (SD) stored as BDMV/BDAV/AVCHD on discs.

[maman]

Damn, after spending 6 hours per render experimenting with not deinterlacing in vegas, I got files that i SAW render fully, produced 20+ GB worth of data (about the size you'd expect), yet only show about 20 min worth of video..

Sounds like from my experiences so far and all your suggestions it's time to ditch vegas. I will try bob deinterlacing and encode with x264 as you suggested.

nm-
will QTGMC also do the upscaling? I also have virtual dub which came up in my first search on bob-deinterlace, will that work for both, or is QTGMC better?

You mentioned I should upscale for BD compatibility, but then also say that SD is supported on all codecs for BD. Clearly i'm missing something here, but not sure what :)

[mp3dom]

SD is supported but if you deinterlace the footage you double the framerate which is not supported anymore at SD resolution. For SD you can have only 480i60 (ntsc) or 576i50 (pal). If you deinterlace to 60p/50p, you also needo to upscale to 720.

[Lam3rD]

nm-
will QTGMC also do the upscaling? I also have virtual dub which came up in my first search on bob-deinterlace, will that work for both, or is QTGMC better?

You mentioned I should upscale for BD compatibility, but then also say that SD is supported on all codecs for BD. Clearly i'm missing something here, but not sure what :)
BD players are supposed to supported all (H.264/H.262/VC-1) when it's SD, however they doesn't support 480p60, this is why you need to upscale. Use Spline36Resize or Lanczos4Resize to do that (the result is a tiny bit different, some prefer one, others the other, both are very good, though).

If your video is FHA (e.g. 16/9) then you can write **Resize(1280,720) (where ** is either Spline36 or Lanczos4), after you have bob-deinterlaced the video (via your preferred smart bobber, like QTGMC). If it's 4/3 you will have to add bars on the sides to perserve the aspect ratio and have BD-complaint resolution, e.g. **Resize(960,720).addborders(160,0,160,0)

[nm]

will QTGMC also do the upscaling?

Nope, you'll need to resize after deinterlacing as Lam3rD explained.

I also have virtual dub which came up in my first search on bob-deinterlace, will that work for both, or is QTGMC better?

QTGMC is better.

[maman]

Gotcha. My source is 16:9, but all of this is good to know.

Thanks again for all the help and detailed explanations, I really appreciate it!