BD Rebuilder Beta - Bug Reports Only

[Capsbackup]

@Persecutor;
What are you trying to play the movie back with? Standalone or PC, PowerDVD, etc... Also, if you play the BD-RB encoded file 00000.m2ts with MediaPlayer Classic, do you hear the audio?
If you open the 00000.m2ts file with tsMuxeR, does it show an audio file present?

[chudm]

jdobbs i need an advice, like you know, i commented before about some problems with music blurays (like foo fighters, elton john), after bd rebuilder works its done, no letters on option are displayed on the menu, i was wondering, if i do a movie only and use that 00000.m2ts on the original bluray, and burn it, maybe it should work as normal? cause i had only compressed the main movie, and everything else would be untouched, or it isnt so easy as i say? hope you can answer me, thx , cause i had several music bluray i would like to backup, thx!

[dukefame]

hey JD.
Still trying to figure out the best way to correct an audio offset.
Basically, after rebuild , a feature length movie remains in sync for the first 1/3rd. then the sync drifts further and fyrther out.

Is there a one time fix, or does eash file require tweaking/

Thanks.

[DK]

Originally Posted by dukefame

Is there a one time fix, or does eash file require tweaking/

Could you possibly deal with a bad rip?
Can / have you tried a different ripping routine?

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by chudm

jdobbs i need an advice, like you know, i commented before about some problems with music blurays (like foo fighters, elton john), after bd rebuilder works its done, no letters on option are displayed on the menu, i was wondering, if i do a movie only and use that 00000.m2ts on the original bluray, and burn it, maybe it should work as normal? cause i had only compressed the main movie, and everything else would be untouched, or it isnt so easy as i say? hope you can answer me, thx , cause i had several music bluray i would like to backup, thx!

That won't work. If it were that simple you wouldn't need BD Rebuilder.

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by dukefame

hey JD.
Still trying to figure out the best way to correct an audio offset.
Basically, after rebuild , a feature length movie remains in sync for the first 1/3rd. then the sync drifts further and fyrther out.

Is there a one time fix, or does eash file require tweaking/

Thanks.

What is unique about your source, your method, or your system? I've done several hundred backups and have had no sync problems -- you have to be doing something different. If you tell me what that is, I may be able to help you.

[chudm]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

That won't work. If it were that simple you wouldn't need BD Rebuilder.

what else can you suggest me? thx for any tip man

[setarip_old]

@dukefame

Hi!

1) What is your system configuration?

2) Are you playing back on your PC or on a standalone player? If on your PC, what software are you using for playback?

[turbojet]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

Don't know that I can agree with all this. Keyint must be less than one second. If, however, the maxrate goes below 15Mbs, then you can go up to 2 seconds. But, the effect of lowering maximum bitrate to less than 15Mbs (as opposed ot the current max of 17.5Mbs for BD-5/9) may have more negative impact than anything positive you'd get out of increasing keyint -- especially when you're only talking about the difference between 24 and 48 or 30/60.

15 and 17.5 mbps max is very little difference for x264 in most cases and using almost half the amount of keyframes is more efficient. The only difference that may be noticeable rarely is not being able to fill a BD9 with content < 72 minutes. Where 17.5 mbps won't undersize until 65 minutes or less of content. I'm not suggesting that it be default but allowing people to use all compliant options would be a plus.

The DPB is always limited to to 4 pictures (REF) for 1920x1080 (Level 4.1). For 720p and below it can go up to 6, but is there really any good reason to go above 4?

IMO it's of no use going above --ref 4 but there are many that argue that. Using more for 720 or 480/576 might complicate things a lot but it's up to you. I was suggesting limiting all resoultions to 4.

Actually I was planning on not allowing any changes to these settings... it just becomes too much of a maintenance/bug report nightmare. The biggest problem, as I've stated in the past, is that people never seem to acknowledge when a problem is self-inflicted -- because they are all convinced they are smarter than the rest of us.

I understand your concern but with just a few restrictions all the reports except major undersize by someone settings --vbv-maxrate too low which can also be elimiinated with a restriction.

Frankly I would be content if you set high quality settings (only setting I use for final results) back to how they were originally or just allow a few changeable options through ini. With the latter I can see users coming back saying there settings weren't used even though they are fully compliant.

Also I did another full backup with 2 pass extras and output was again within 1000 KB if 1 MB = 1000 KB. I notice with CRF extras the more extras there are the more it goes over. Have you been able to look into seeing if 1 MB = 1000 KB?

[PurpleMan]

@jdobbs:

Are there any plans for feature enhancements in the near future? One that I'm personally waiting for is the ability to "blank" certain m2ts's (trailers, fbi warning, etc..) on full-disc backups (in a similar way that VOBBlanker does it for DVD).

Do you think that would happen soon?

[samtroy]

Short encoding question:

Is it qualitywise *absolutely safe* to use One-Pass CRF encoding (HQ) for BD-25 Movie-Only?

Or would it be better to use Two-Pass encoding even at those high bitrates? I suspect there would be no benefits except for an more exact output size, right?

[PurpleMan]

Originally Posted by samtroy

Short encoding question:

Is it qualitywise *absolutely safe* to use One-Pass CRF encoding (HQ) for BD-25 Movie-Only?

Or would it be better to use Two-Pass encoding even at those high bitrates? I suspect there would be no benefits except for an more exact output size, right?

2-pass encoding will always result in better quality. Only you can decide whether or not you see the difference, But I certainly do, especially on long (over 90mins) movies.

[Rumbah]

1 pass CRF and 2 pass use the same mechanics in x264 so for equal file size the quality is almost identical. Of course if your CRF encode is smaller, you'll get less quality. But I'll doubt that you'll notice any difference for 50-100kbit/s (if the CRF encode is slightly smaller) at these high bitrates so it should be safe to use the CRF mode.

It would be best to use a hard to encode sample (e.g. a very long action movie) and try both ways and compare the quality.

[PurpleMan]

Originally Posted by Rumbah

1 pass CRF and 2 pass use the same mechanics in x264 so for equal file size the quality is almost identical.

Not really, bit distribution would be different.

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by samtroy

Short encoding question:

Is it qualitywise *absolutely safe* to use One-Pass CRF encoding (HQ) for BD-25 Movie-Only?

Or would it be better to use Two-Pass encoding even at those high bitrates? I suspect there would be no benefits except for an more exact output size, right?

CRF Encoding uses the exact same command line as two-pass. The only difference is that the bitrate is replaced by a CRF value. The only risk of CRF is possible oversizing/udersizing.

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by PurpleMan

Not really, bit distribution would be different.

True. But CRF has been optimized very well, and the difference isn't as great as some think.

Hmmm.... I wonder if there is a graph around anywhere in which the bit distribution has been analyzed for comparison between the two. I'm sure sombody has done that by now.

[PurpleMan]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

True. But CRF has been optimized very well, and the difference isn't as great as some think.

Hmmm.... I wonder if there is a graph around anywhere in which the bit distribution has been analyzed for comparison between the two. I'm sure sombody has done that by now.

To my understanding, CRF will prefer assigning less bits to fast motion and more bits to slow motion (to accommodate for human eye perception).

To me, this sounds like a bad thing for quality fanatics, and a good thing for not very perceptive people. I'll admit, however, that I don't fully understand the way it operates so I could be wrong.

If there's a tool to analyze h264 streams, I'll make two encodes and compare the graphs.

[Dark Shikari]

Originally Posted by PurpleMan

To my understanding, CRF will prefer assigning less bits to fast motion and more bits to slow motion (to accommodate for human eye perception).

To me, this sounds like a bad thing for quality fanatics, and a good thing for not very perceptive people. I'll admit, however, that I don't fully understand the way it operates so I could be wrong.

If there's a tool to analyze h264 streams, I'll make two encodes and compare the graphs.

No, both CRF and 2-pass use the exact same method of bit distribution.

[PurpleMan]

Originally Posted by Dark Shikari

No, both CRF and 2-pass use the exact same method of bit distribution.

Are you saying that if I do a 2-pass encode and a CRF encode, and both (let's say) turn out the exact size, then they are both identical?

[Dark Shikari]

Originally Posted by PurpleMan

Are you saying that if I do a 2-pass encode and a CRF encode, and both (let's say) turn out the exact size, then they are both identical?

Not literally identical, but generally quite close.