New Ken Kutaragi interview (1) @ PC Watch

[scooby_dooby]

May I enquire where it's said Sony are responsible for the encoding? Are there only Sony movies out there ATM, or are Sony telling the other movie houses how to produce their BRDs?

See I'm not sure how this works. Who provides the authoring tools to the studios? Sony/BRA I *think*

The way I understand it, it's up to the studios to choose from the available encodings(in their authoring aoftware) and create their transfers. The BR studios don't have VC1 as an option, I *think* they can use MPEG4 (in the specs, but i'm not sure if it's included in the authoring tools) while the HD-DVD studios can choose from any of the 3 using their authoring tools, and 96%(48/50) have chosen VC1.

 

[hongcho]

For a foreseeable future (next few months), it is very likely that all BD titles will be BD25 with MPEG-2 because Sony is the only one doing the BD authoring at the moment (even for other studios).

Microsoft has offered to help BD studios (or Sony currently) in authoring with VC-1, but Sony reported refused. It is rumored that BDA has been talking with Microsoft on VC-1 after the lackluster responses from the initial BD titles (some people are really mad that BD "Fifth Element" didn't look better than even the upscaled Superbit DVD version), but Sony Pictures still has not shown any interested in H.264 or VC-1.

I've heard that Sony's insistance on MPEG-2 is mostly because of the compatibility reasons. They want to get things out the door fast (they were still behind HD-DVD) without more extensive compatibility testing. This is because the H.264 tools are not yet mature and they already had quite a few MPEG-2 HD transfers. Not going with VC-1 is probably their thing with Microsoft. And I get a hint of feeling that this might be related to PS3's BD player capability and schedule...

Anyway, I'd say wait on BD or HD-DVD for now. The 1G players are functioning, but not much else. Also the titles seem very limited (for BD, due to its BD25 MPEG-2 capacity issues, most titles are relatively "short").

[Hmm... What does it have to do with the interview? ]

Hong.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

See I'm not sure how this works. Who provides the authoring tools to the studios? Sony/BRA I *think*

The way I understand it, it's up to the studios to choose from the available encodings(in their authoring aoftware) and create their transfers. The BR studios don't have VC1 as an option, I *think* they can use MPEG4 (in the specs, but i'm not sure if it's included in the authoring tools) while the HD-DVD studios can choose from any of the 3 using their authoring tools, and 96%(48/50) have chosen VC1.

Hmmmm. A quick Google throws up http://www.widescreenreview.com/news_detail.php?id=11238

With the HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc formats anchored on the highest-quality consumer electronics video possible, Sonic developed the CineVision encoding system to complement Scenarist 4 and deliver master-quality video streams across all of the next-generation HD formats: H.264/AVC, VC1, and MPEG-2. Designed to integrate seamlessly within the HD authoring workflow, the CineVision encoder not only links directly into Scenarist 4, but offers comprehensive support for a broad range of HD video input formats including QuickTime, AVI, and DPX image sequences.

So that's Sonic producing authoring tools., who seem to be the first. More investigation shows Sony have Sony DADC that do authoring and duplication, and Avid are advertising BRD authoring with all codecs. An article mentions Sonic seems popular

The best way to play this new field without getting burned Betamax-style would be to invest in a company that's positioned to win no matter what. Sonic Solutions (SNIC: 14.38, +0.02, +0.1%) sells its DVD-authoring software to both consumers who fancy themselves homegrown directors, and professionals, including Hollywood studios that use its technology to create DVDs and prepare them for mass replication. The Novato, Calif.-based company, with $148.7 million in sales and diluted earnings of 70 cents a share for the year ended March 31, has been selling software for both Blu-ray and HD DVD authoring since April 24 (they diplomatically released the two products on the same day). Studios have already been lining up to use Sonic's high-end Blu-ray and HD wares to create some of the first titles in the market.

http://www.smartmoney.com/Techsmart/index.cfm?story=20060615

From the sounds of it there's a couple of options, one key one supporting all three codecs for sure.

 

[SPM]

See I'm not sure how this works. Who provides the authoring tools to the studios? Sony/BRA I *think*

The way I understand it, it's up to the studios to choose from the available encodings(in their authoring aoftware) and create their transfers. The BR studios don't have VC1 as an option, I *think* they can use MPEG4 (in the specs, but i'm not sure if it's included in the authoring tools) while the HD-DVD studios can choose from any of the 3 using their authoring tools, and 96%(48/50) have chosen VC1.

I thought VC1 and mpeg4 were supported options on Bluray.
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,117681,00.asp

 

[SPM]

Ya it's a pointless statement. 18-20mbps for VC1 seems to be fine for the nuts over on avsforums.

At 32mbps the 25gb BR disc would only be able to hold 1:45 hours worth of video content, with no extras. It's a complete waste of space and is completely unnescesary if you just use a better codec. Currently, from my calculations, BR is using ~24mbps MPEG2 (Underworld BR contains 150mins of video + Audio in 25gb)

24mbps MPG2 can not compete with 20mbps VC1.

This is particularly distressing if you're a BR buyer IMO:

If someone can confirm this info please do, it was taken from a post at avsforum

Why is sony being so stubborn with the MPG2 encoding? They're shooting themselves in the foot, and all signs are point to the BD50 disc not being available until 2007. I don't get it, seems like an extremely stupid decision.

You can't compare MPEG2 with MPEG4(H264) or VCI. According to this article
http://data.memberclicks.com/site/hopa/2005TR_MG_H264_VC1.pdf
MPEG4 is superior to VC1 in picture quality (VC1 makes some compromises to reduce computational needs) with about similar compression (2x MPEG2) but puts more stress on the decompression hardware. VC1 is designed more for general purpose use eg. PCs.

Design approaches:
WM9V/VC-1: Lower computational quality without significant performance loss.
MPEG-4 AVC: The most complex within reason of practicality.

Possible reasons why studios might choose MPEG2 are that they are waiting for MPEG4 but MPEG4 tools are not ready yet and they don't want to license VC1 as well for use on BD in the meanwhile because it would cost them more.

With increasing computational power, MPEG4 might gain over VC1 for HD movies in the longer term, while VCI might dominate for video clips. Of course I could be completely wrong.

 

[zed]

BLU-RAY

A compliant BD-ROM player must be able to decode at least the following codecs: MPEG-2, the standard used for DVDs; MPEG-4's H.264/AVC codec; and VC-1, a codec based on Microsoft's Windows Media 9. Realistically, when using MPEG-2, quality considerations would limit the publisher to around two hours of high-definition content on a single-layer BD-ROM. The two more advanced video codecs can typically attain four hours of high quality video.

For audio, BD-ROM supports up to 7.1 channel surround sound using the linear (uncompressed) PCM, Dolby Digital and DTS formats also used on DVDs. In addition, it also supports Dolby Digital Plus and the lossless formats Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD. The linear PCM 5.1, Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS 5.1 formats are mandatory, meaning that one of them may be used as the sole soundtrack on a disc, because every player will have a decoder that can process any of these three bitstreams.[2]

For users recording digital television broadcasts, the Blu-ray's baseline datarate of 36 Mbit/s will be more than adequate to record high-definition signals. Support for new codecs will evolve as they are encapsulated by broadcasters into their MPEG-2 transport streams, and consumer set-top boxes capable of decoding them are rolled out.

HD-DVD

Both of the new formats are likely to be backward compatible with DVDs and both employ the same video compression techniques: MPEG-2, Video Codec 1 (VC1) and H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.

HD DVD can be mastered with up to 7.1 channel surround sound using the linear (uncompressed) PCM, Dolby Digital and DTS formats also used on DVDs. In addition, it also supports Dolby Digital Plus and the lossless formats Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD. Currently, most DVD movies are made with 5.1 channels of surround sound. There are relatively few titles that offer 6.1 channels of surround sound. On HD DVD the Dolby formats are mandatory, meaning that a Dolby Digital, Dolby Digital Plus, or Dolby TrueHD track may be used as the sole soundtrack on a disc, because every player will have a decoder that can process any of these three bitstreams.[1]

from the wiki

 

[scooby_dooby]

Big difference between specs and reality. The BR studios are not using VC1 at all even though it would offer far better quality on a 25gb disc, and we don't even know if the Sammy BR player can decode VC1 at all.

 

[Mmmkay]

and we don't even know if the Sammy BR player can decode VC1 at all.

Don't be so silly scooby. Whether the authoring tools are ready or not is a very different matter to a player conforming to the Blu-ray spec.

 

[RobertR1]

Big difference between specs and reality. The BR studios are not using VC1 at all even though it would offer far better quality on a 25gb disc, and we don't even know if the Sammy BR player can decode VC1 at all.

It can. If not, it wouldn't be Blu Ray certified and you could see a class action suit from Blu Ray owners. The more interesting thing is that it only support Single Layer media for now and when/if 50gb discs do come out, it'll need a firmware upgrade.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Big difference between specs and reality. The BR studios are not using VC1 at all even though it would offer far better quality on a 25gb disc.

That seems to be the case. Certainly though, until there's some real clarification, it seems to me some parties are very quick to lay all the blame on Sony as though they're the only people with any influence, when in fact there's lots of different companies involved in BluRay films from production through authoring to players. Have they all signed their souls away to become Sony's mindless lackies and stick to MPEG2 only because Sony demands it?

 

[RobertR1]

That seems to be the case. Certainly though, until there's some real clarification, it seems to me some parties are very quick to lay all the blame on Sony as though they're the only people with any influence, when in fact there's lots of different companies involved in BluRay films from production through authoring to players. Have they all signed their souls away to become Sony's mindless lackies and stick to MPEG2 only because Sony demands it?

Think promises of 50gb discs and convincing the rest of their partners that mass production wouldn't be an issue. Unforunately, even 25gb single layer discs is an issue (40% yields). I wouldn't be shocked if the BD is a bit ticked at Sony at the moment. I find it interesting that Samsung quickly started talks of a Hybrid player after they got slammed for their Blu Ray and hung out to dry by less than stellar Sony picture releases.

I wouldn't put much stock into AVC either. The Toshiba HD DVD's discs in Japan use AVC and they look noticably inferior to VC1 encdoed media from all accounts.

So Sony's choices are:
1. Get 50GB media in mass quantities.
-Not going to happen anytime soon.

2. Switch to AVC.
- Authoring tools still need quite bit of work.

3. Switch to VC1
- First step would be to atleast contact MS about this

4. Keep riding it out and hope everything will fall in place and consumers will keep holding off waiting for Sony to produce what they kept promising and hyping up.
- Current scenario.

 

[patsu]

With all the talks about VC-1 and MPEG2... what happened to MPEG4 AVC ? The last time I checked, it's still in the Blu-ray profile. The studios can opt to use it right ?

 

[mckmas8808]

With all the talks about VC-1 and MPEG2... what happened to MPEG4 AVC ? The last time I checked, it's still in the Blu-ray profile. The studios can opt to use it right ?

Yep they sure can.

 

[RobertR1]

They can. It's just not that mature. As I said you can compare the Japanese HD DVD releases using Mpeg4/AVC with the VC1 encoded US releases and there's quite a difference. VC1 is the superior format for next gen DVD's.

Here's a nice post about AVC/Mpeg4:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7890408&&#post7890408

Off topic:
It's only a moment of time before someone calls me a "Sony Hater" or a "HD DVD ******." I'm simply trying to inform the consumers of the actual situation and what to expect in the near future. I find it ridiculous that these companies sit there and fuck with us with BS promises that often don't materialize and then we simply have to suck it up. I'm not a HD DVD or Blu Ray supporter. What I do support is true next gen DVD's in Hi Def and right now one side falls short of that. HD DVD is not perfect by far. No variety in players, still missing studio support and supporting studios not releasing major block buster titles frequently enough.

 

[mckmas8808]

They can. It's just not that mature. As I said you can compare the Japanese HD DVD releases using Mpeg4/AVC with the VC1 encoded US releases and there's quite a difference. VC1 is the superior format for next gen DVD's.

Here's a nice post about AVC/Mpeg4:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7890408&&#post7890408
.

Keep in mind the guy that wrote that post about Mpeg4 works or used to work for Microsoft. I will trust only my two eyes.

 

[SPM]

That seems to be the case. Certainly though, until there's some real clarification, it seems to me some parties are very quick to lay all the blame on Sony as though they're the only people with any influence, when in fact there's lots of different companies involved in BluRay films from production through authoring to players. Have they all signed their souls away to become Sony's mindless lackies and stick to MPEG2 only because Sony demands it?

It may be a lot simpler than that. As I suggested, maybe the studios are intending to go to MPEG-4 AVC on Blu-ray in future but it isn't ready/mature yet and so they are falling back on MPEG-2 for now rather than licensing VC-1. On HD-DVD they don't have a choice because of limited disc capacity, so they are opting for VC-1.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

On HD-DVD they don't have a choice because of limited disc capacity, so they are opting for VC-1.

Current HDDVD's have higher capacity than current BRDs.

 

[RobertR1]

It may be a lot simpler than that. As I suggested, maybe the studios are intending to go to MPEG-4 AVC on Blu-ray in future but it isn't ready/mature yet and so they are falling back on MPEG-2 for now rather than licensing VC-1. On HD-DVD they don't have a choice because of limited disc capacity, so they are opting for VC-1.

The only one limited by space is BluRay. Keep praying for those 50gb discs......any other vapourware and paper specs you'd like to throw out there?

 

[one]

The only one limited by space is BluRay. Keep praying for those 50gb discs......any other vapourware and paper specs you'd like to throw out there?

Is a 30GB dual-layer HD DVD disc cheaper than a 25GB single-layer BD?

 

[RobertR1]

Is a 30GB dual-layer HD DVD disc cheaper than a 25GB single-layer BD?

Not sure of actual cost per disc but the yeilds for Dual Layer HD DVD are over 90% and BD single layer hovering around 40%.