encoding to blu-ray

unix_sansei · 16th March 2009, 20:27

looking for a bit of knowledge.

i'm going to make a blu-ray for my film. my images are 4k x 6k @16bit, all audio tracks are 32/192, running time about 23 minutes or ~32,000 frames

quality is absolute benchmark, no artifacts, don't care if takes a week to encode.

for the blu-ray target at aspect ratio of 1.66, what's a good encoder and downsampler?

cheers

Biggiesized · 19th March 2009, 23:40

Is there a reason you are targeting MPEG-2 versus VC-1 or AVC?

Are you looking for a professional tool?

unix_sansei · 20th March 2009, 01:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biggiesized

Is there a reason you are targeting MPEG-2 versus VC-1 or AVC?

Are you looking for a professional tool?

Thanks for reply.

I'm looking for the best 'professional' but low-cost solution. It's only a short film.

From what i've seen and read and experimented with the VC-1 codec seems lacking a bit, and the only tools besides Microsoft are expensive. The specs for VC-1 in pro mode is very good at 135MB/s for 1080p frames at 24fps. To be honest I haven't researched AVC very much, but it seems it is more well suited for maximum compression. I'm looking for opposite, minimum compression.

What do you suggest?

Inspector.Gadget · 20th March 2009, 03:55

Quote:

To be honest I haven't researched AVC very much, but it seems it is more well suited for maximum compression. I'm looking for opposite, minimum compression.

This is somewhat misleading, as it appears to conflate two meanings of the word "compression": noticeable compression artifacts on the one hand, and compressing raw video on the other - a process that need not introduce unpleasant artifacts. Up to the point of bitrate saturation - a location codec developers are much more qualified to discuss than I am - AVC provides better image quality than MPEG-2 at a given bitrate. On that basis, you should use AVC where you're working with a player that can handle it: either you hit the bit rate at which MPEG-2 would be transparent, and thus you're at a point where AVC would be transparent too, or you fall short of MPEG-2 transparency, in which case AVC should provide a better picture at that bitrate. FYI, the free software encoder x264 is considered to be at worst tied for first with Ateme's H.264 codec and at best the highest-quality H.264 encoder available, according to past codec comparisons here. So I wouldn't worry too much about cost

Audionut · 20th March 2009, 12:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by unix_sansei

The specs for VC-1 in pro mode is very good at 135MB/s for 1080p frames at 24fps. To be honest I haven't researched AVC very much, but it seems it is more well suited for maximum compression. I'm looking for opposite, minimum compression.

You are aware that the maximum bitrate for blu-ray is 40MB/s?

I would say AVC is superior to MPEG2 at all (sane) bitrates.

Dark Shikari · 20th March 2009, 12:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by unix_sansei

maximum compression. I'm looking for opposite, minimum compression.?

That doesn't make any sense.

"Better compression" means lower bitrate for the same quality... or better said, better quality at the same bitrate. Why would you want worse quality at the same bitrate (minimum compression)?

laserfan · 20th March 2009, 13:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by unix_sansei

I'm looking for the best 'professional' but low-cost solution. It's only a short film.

If it were longer then it might be worth a "high-cost" solution? I laughed when I read this.

Quote:

I'm looking for opposite, minimum compression.

I have a friend who's made a short film (maybe 25min) and it takes a couple hundred gigabytes on his Mac. He's having a hard time imagining that it might be squeezed to a DVD+5 or a DVD DL and still look good. You gotta jump into the pool (i.e. start trying things and learning what is possible). I'd start with x264; can't get cheaper than free.

unix_sansei · 20th March 2009, 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by laserfan

If it were longer then it might be worth a "high-cost" solution? I laughed when I read this.

I have a friend who's made a short film (maybe 25min) and it takes a couple hundred gigabytes on his Mac. He's having a hard time imagining that it might be squeezed to a DVD+5 or a DVD DL and still look good. You gotta jump into the pool (i.e. start trying things and learning what is possible). I'd start with x264; can't get cheaper than free.

I know the feeling, I'm sitting on 1.5 TB of images wonderiing how to get quality on a DVD, so I gave up DVD and just jumping into a Blu-Ray encoding.

I have noticed that it's slightly better to downsize in two or more stages, don't go for broke reducing to final size, let the resize divide by 2 then 2 again, I can't say numbers but qualitatively, the edges seem to be sharper.

unix_sansei · 20th March 2009, 21:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by ark Shikari

That doesn'ake any sense.

"Better compression" means lower bitrate for the same quality... or better said, better quality at the same bitrate. Why would you want worse quality at the same bitrate (minimum compression)?

i would rather have 'minimal' compression at maximum bitrate, a big fat, fast pipe shoving data at the decompressor.

similarly, if you look at LZW, it does zero compression, so it has tremendously large files but quality is absolute. if you look at the same jpeg2000 image it's a joke.

unix_sansei · 20th March 2009, 21:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Audionut

You are aware that the maximum bitrate for blu-ray is 40MB/s?

I would say AVC is superior to MPEG2 at all (sane) bitrates.

yes but the VC-1 spec supports 135MB/s at 1080p, although i haven't seen anyone implement this mode. even if the Blu-Ray is used a storage medium and not playable, i.e., just pull the data off the disk and let the computer play the file.

VC-1 specs
L4 135 Mbps 1920 × 1080 @ 60 Hz (1080p)
2048 × 1536 @ 24 Hz

Dark Shikari · 20th March 2009, 21:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by unix_sansei

yes but the VC-1 spec supports 135MB/s at 1080p

135MB/s is greater than the bitrate of raw YUV.

Even at 60fps, huffyuv would be smaller.

And it makes no sense to say "the spec supports" since actual specs don't place real limits on the bitrate the encoder can use. The "limits" are only for compatibility with certain defined levels, not the spec as a whole.

Sagittaire · 20th March 2009, 23:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark Shikari

135MB/s is greater than the bitrate of raw YUV.

Even at 60fps, huffyuv would be smaller.

You are sure ... its 135 Mbps and not 135 MB/s.

135 Mbps is extremely high quality but inferior at lossless bitrate in general case for 1080p60 even with really high efficiency lossless codec.

unix_sansei · 21st March 2009, 02:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sagittaire

You are sure ... its 135 Mbps and not 135 MB/s.

135 Mbps is extremely high quality but inferior at lossless bitrate in general case for 1080p60 even with really high efficiency lossless codec.

i did mention that my images are B&W full 16-bit, 2bytes, I'd like to keep instead of dithering or rounding.

Dark Shikari · 21st March 2009, 02:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by unix_sansei

i did mention that my images are B&W full 16-bit, 2bytes, I'd like to keep instead of dithering or rounding.

Impossible. Blu-ray doesn't support bit depths beyond 8-bit.

unix_sansei · 21st March 2009, 02:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark Shikari

135MB/s is greater than the bitrate of raw YUV.

Even at 60fps, huffyuv would be smaller.

And it makes no sense to say "the spec supports" since actual specs don't place real limits on the bitrate the encoder can use. The "limits" are only for compatibility with certain defined levels, not the spec as a whole.

i'm only concerned with 24fps, i'll let whatever player worry about the pulldown.

well the "specs" are a reference point.

unix_sansei · 21st March 2009, 02:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark Shikari

Impossible. Blu-ray doesn't support bit depths beyond 8-bit.

does it support log LUT?

Dark Shikari · 21st March 2009, 02:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by unix_sansei

does it support log LUT?

No. It supports exactly what you'd think it would--and nothing more, i.e., YV12. It might support 4:2:2 if you're lucky, not sure about that.

unix_sansei · 22nd March 2009, 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sagittaire

You are sure ... its 135 Mbps and not 135 MB/s.

135 Mbps is extremely high quality but inferior at lossless bitrate in general case for 1080p60 even with really high efficiency lossless codec.

what lossless codecs are available to encode to a blu-ray stream then question is are there tools to merge the lossless stream with dds or 5.1 surround? i've worked with usual tools for DVD but not with Blu-ray.

setarip_old · 22nd March 2009, 19:40

Hi!

Quote:

are there tools to merge the lossless stream with dds or 5.1 surround?

"tsMuxer" can do that for you - and also create the required folders/files for BluRay discs...

Audionut · 23rd March 2009, 10:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by unix_sansei

what lossless codecs are available to encode to a blu-ray stream

None. If your using PC for playback just mux the video and audio to MKV and burn the file to disc.

16th March 2009, 20:27	#1 \| Link
unix_sansei Wreaking havoc for years Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: LA Posts: 125	encoding to blu-ray looking for a bit of knowledge. i'm going to make a blu-ray for my film. my images are 4k x 6k @16bit, all audio tracks are 32/192, running time about 23 minutes or ~32,000 frames quality is absolute benchmark, no artifacts, don't care if takes a week to encode. for the blu-ray target at aspect ratio of 1.66, what's a good encoder and downsampler? cheers Last edited by Guest; 16th March 2009 at 21:01. Reason: rule 12: don't ask what's best!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

19th March 2009, 23:40	#2 \| Link
Biggiesized Registered User Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 225	Is there a reason you are targeting MPEG-2 versus VC-1 or AVC? Are you looking for a professional tool?