BD Rebuilder Beta - Bug Reports Only

[soneca]

Jdobbs, i do not usually use an alternative mode in mkv(MKV Container, 1920x1080p, 640Kbps DD5.1) but the second time(below) I get no subtitles, maybe I'm missing something.
Can check?

LABEL=MISTERIOS_DO_NILO
VERSION=v0.44.09 (beta)
SOURCE_SIZE=11256176640
SOURCE_VIDEO_SIZE=11256176640
TARGET_SIZE=4686086144
REDUCTION=.41631242062669
RESIZE_1080=0
RESIZE_1440=0
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=-1
SUBS_TO_KEEP=por;
BACKUP_MODE=1
MOVIEONLY_TYPE=10
USE_LAVF=0
INSTANCES=2
DGDECNV=-1
QUICK=0
ENCODE_STEP=0
COMPLETED=1
REBUILD_COMPLETE=1
[00000]
AUDIO=100
PGS=1
APULLDOWN=0
S1440=0
VIDEO2=0
V2MBRATE=0
M2TS_TARGET=4686086144
SPLITS=2
NSIZE=0
FLINK=0
MLINK=0

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by soneca

Jdobbs, i do not usually use an alternative mode in mkv(MKV Container, 1920x1080p, 640Kbps DD5.1) but the second time(below) I get no subtitles, maybe I'm missing something.

Writing SUPs to MKV is not the default (although it will be on the next release). So, if you created the MKV with BD-RB it would not (by default) include the subtitles.

Look in HIDDENOPTS.TXT -- and add this hidden option:

MKV_MUXSUPS=1

If the subtitles exist in the MKV, BDRB will import them automatically.

[soneca]

Writing SUPs to MKV is not the default (although it will be on the next release).

Thanks!
Rarely use this option so I had not paid attention to the hidden option...
Glad that option is no longer hidden in the next version!

If the subtitles exist in the MKV, BDRB will import them automatically.

I've been doing some tests with mkv(sup embedded), and it has worked very well!!!

[omegaman7]

Originally Posted by soneca

I've been doing some tests with mkv(sup embedded), and it has worked very well!!!

So have I. And it is good. Oddly, I swear I've outputted MKV with Sups embedded, without forcing any setting :S I could be mistaken.

[soneca]

May have activated configuration and forgotten that.

[omegaman7]

Nope, it's not activated. I probably am mistaken about it outputting with SUP. I greatly look forward to the auto embed feature. But the hidden option could due for now

90% of the time (Lately), I output to AVCHD BD-9 movie only. The 'Great' movies though, I backup to BD-25.

[AmigaFuture]

I've been testing the Alternate Output (MKV) pretty extensively with AC3 because of recent events.. Thus far, I'm very pleased. Most of my Blu-ray originals I've used the 25GB Backup with. For when Friends and Family come over. Massive thumbs Up to Digistor for their quality BD25 disks (or Euro...disc), too! However, (Huuuuge) thanks to JDobbs and recent events, I've been able to make backups for my TV and LG player via USB. My originals are even now ..more... closely protected than before...as well as "Here, connect this Hard Drive.." I'll never replace the portable HDD, for my disks (discs), and thanks to the JDobbs, BD-RB fits many desires. Everyone should donate...it's Brilliant software by a passionate programmer!

Another note, once I moved OUTPUT_FOLDER from being after [Paths] in the config............Whooo!! Very nice option. I haven't really tried it until tonight. Good speed difference to a completely different partition as I knew!!


JDobbs... Watch "Paul" (or don't)..No Matter --> Thanks............Man!!

[omegaman7]

Mmmm, I have some digistor BD-25 discs. They seem agreeable.
It's a CMCMAG-BA5 dye.

[Yannes]

A few days back I did a batch queue of 3 blu-rays to BD25 format (I use custom size: 24000 for that), it turned out that the first blu-ray was perfect in size like usual, but the 2 other blu-rays turned out to be about 25.500.00.000 in size, about a GB larger than I indicated. After changing the output setting to the default BD25 mode, this problem still occurred, the size didn't even change. I checked the .inf files for the settings and it looks just like previous BD25 back-ups I did. This problem occurred with version 0.44.04 as well as 0.44.09.

The source blu-ray was a stripped criterion blu-ray with only two 400MB menu files and 1 video .m2ts of about 33GB. The output size is always between 24.000.000.000 and 24.500.000.000 just like I want it to be. The output size in this case was 25,556,638,909 bytes.

[Status]
LABEL=
VERSION=v0.44.09 (beta)
SOURCE_SIZE=36859881741
SOURCE_VIDEO_SIZE=36016257024
TARGET_SIZE=25165824000
REDUCTION=.675311686797229
RESIZE_1080=0
RESIZE_1440=0
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=-1
SUBS_TO_KEEP=all
BACKUP_MODE=0
MOVIEONLY_TYPE=0
USE_LAVF=-1
INSTANCES=1
DGDECNV=0
QUICK=0
ENCODE_STEP=0
COMPLETED=1
REBUILD_COMPLETE=1
[00274]
AUDIO=1
PGS=1
APULLDOWN=0
S1440=0
VIDEO2=0
V2MBRATE=0
M2TS_TARGET=24322199283
RATE=22904
SPLITS=1
NSTART=27000000
NEND=362947275
NSIZE=24713017344
FLINK=0
MLINK=0

[05/23/13] BD Rebuilder v0.44.09 (beta)
[10:32:28] Source:  
  - Input BD size: 34.33 GB
  - Approximate total content: [02:07:52.289]
  - Target BD size: 23.44 GB
  - Windows Version: 5.1 [2600]
  - Quality: Highest (Very Slow), Two Pass
  - Decoding/Frame serving: X264/LAVF
  - Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=0 HD=1 Kbs=640
[10:32:28] PHASE ONE, Encoding
 - [10:32:28] Processing: VID_00274 (1 of 1)
 - [10:32:28] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00274]
 - [10:49:31] Reencoding video [VID_00274]
   - Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
   - Rate/Length: 23.976fps, 178,993 frames
   - Bitrate: 22,904 Kbs
 - [10:49:32] Reencoding: VID_00274, Pass 1 of 2
 - [12:45:40] Reencoding: VID_00274, Pass 2 of 2
 - [21:15:04] Video Encode complete
 - [21:15:06] Processing audio tracks
   - Track 4352 (eng): Keeping original audio
 - [21:15:06] Multiplexing M2TS
[21:23:13]PHASE ONE complete
[21:23:13]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
 - [21:23:13] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[21:23:26] - Encode and Rebuild complete
 - WORKFILES folder removed.
[21:23:27] JOB:  finished.

This was the result:



My settings:



I use the LAVF decoding method because that is apparently the only one that works on Linux.

Config file:

[Options]
VERSION=0.44.0.9
MODE=0
ENCODE_QUALITY=3
ONEPASS_ENCODING=0
AUTO_QUALITY=0
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
SUBS_TO_KEEP=all
SD_CONVERT=0
OPEN_GOP=0
RESIZE_1080=0
RESIZE_1440=0
DEINTERLACE=1
SD_TO_1080=0
CONVERT_WIDE=0
DTS_REENCODE=0
AC3_REENCODE=0
AC3_640=1
AC3_192=0
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=1
AVCHD=1
REMOVE_WORKFILES=1
MOVIE_ONLY_LOOP=1
REMOVE_OUTPUT=0
USE_FILTERS=0
BDMV_CERT_ONLY=0
USE_LAVF=1
IVTC_PULLDOWN=0
ASSUME_DVD_PAL=0
UNMASK_CHAPTER=0
COMPLETION_BEEP=0
DGDECNV=0
OUTPUT_3D=0
AUDIO_TRACK_LIMIT=0
SUBTITLE_TRACK_LIMIT=0
CUSTOM_TARGET_SIZE=24000
TARGET_SIZE=24000
[Paths]
SOURCE_PATH=Y:\
WORKING_PATH=Y:\WORKING\

.inf file of a previous backup that did succeed:

[Status]
LABEL=AMELIE
VERSION=v0.43.04 (beta)
SOURCE_SIZE=37716099931
SOURCE_VIDEO_SIZE=37246629888
TARGET_SIZE=25165824000
REDUCTION=.663049355908482
RESIZE_1080=0
AUDIO_TO_KEEP=eng;
KEEP_HD_AUDIO=-1
SUBS_TO_KEEP=all
BACKUP_MODE=0
MOVIEONLY_TYPE=0
USE_LAVF=-1
INSTANCES=1
DGDECNV=0
QUICK=0
ENCODE_STEP=0
COMPLETED=1
REBUILD_COMPLETE=1
[00800]
AUDIO=11
PGS=111
APULLDOWN=0
VIDEO2=0
V2MBRATE=0
M2TS_TARGET=24696353957
RATE=21074
SPLITS=1
NSTART=27000000
NEND=356496480
NSIZE=23924809728
FLINK=0
MLINK=0

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by Yannes

A few days back I did a batch queue of 3 blu-rays to BD25 format (I use custom size: 24000 for that), it turned out that the first blu-ray was perfect in size like usual, but the 2 other blu-rays turned out to be about 25.500.00.000 in size, about a GB larger than I indicated. After changing the output setting to the default BD25 mode, this problem still occurred, the size didn't even change. I checked the .inf files for the settings and it looks just like previous BD25 back-ups I did. This problem occurred with version 0.44.04 as well as 0.44.09.

That setting is measured in megabytes. One megabyte is 1048576 bytes. 24000 * 1048576 = 25,165,824,000. The 1% difference is simply rounding due to encoding and muxing accuracy.

What can I say? If you tell BD-RB to output to a size that won't fit on a BD -- you'll get a size that won't fit on a BD. I'd suggest you use the default BD-25 setting.

[RobertM]

(I use custom size: 24000 for that), it turned out that the first blu-ray was perfect in size like usual, but the 2 other blu-rays turned out to be about 25.500.00.000 in size

24000 MB will certainly fit within the capacity of a 25GB BD-R. The problem is that true final size won't be known until the encode has been completed. The bit-size of each frame of film will vary depending upon the content, and BD-RB cannot predict that with 100% accuracy ahead of time. So your 24000 setting is just a target, and BD-RB tries to hit it as best it can.

If you do as JDobbs suggests, and use the default setting (23500 MB), then there will be a little more elbow room for an undersized estimate to still fit on a BD-25 disc.

I use a custom setting of 24200 MB and this almost always gives a burn size of 98% according to ImgBurn. I always use good quality media, so that edge problems (burning close to the max capacity of the disc) should be minimized. I've never detected a problem. I do occasionally get an over-sized rebuild, of course, but probably less than 10% of the time. I just reduce the target and run the process again for that title.

Hope this helps.

[Capsbackup]

Originally Posted by RobertM

I always use good quality media, so that edge problems (burning close to the max capacity of the disc) should be minimized. I've never detected a problem.

Maybe not a problem right away from the initial burn/verify, but after playing the disc a few times, in and out of the disc tray and case, touching with our fingers, etc... makes the disc more susceptible to premature failure.

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by Capsbackup

Maybe not a problem right away from the initial burn/verify, but after playing the disc a few times, in and out of the disc tray and case, touching with our fingers, etc... makes the disc more susceptible to premature failure.

Agreed. I would never trust the outer edges -- even on the most expensive high-quality disc. Is it really worth losing your valuable data to get that last 1% of the disc (which will not noticably affect quality)?

24000 MB will certainly fit within the capacity of a 25GB BD-R

If it fits it is pure luck because of undersizing. A BD+R will hold 25,025,314,816 bytes. So I would never recommend a setting of 24000 - as if it sized perfectly it would be 25,165,824,000 and would not fit.

[omegaman7]

I've had Taiyo Yuden discs age at the outer edge. Thankfully, the credits ended up at the edge of the disc I don't even mind undersizing by 1Gb. The difference is negligible, in my opinion. Though I have ran into a few discs, where some material could benefit from that 1Gb, if prioritizing bitrate were possible. Not really hinting here, just an observation.

Though one defect, can compromise a complete backup I no longer use those Disc booklets. Notorious for scratching discs over time. I prefer envelopes, and hard drive backups now.

[RobertM]

If it fits it is pure luck because of undersizing. A BD+R will hold 25,025,314,816 bytes. So I would never recommend a setting of 24000 - as if it sized perfectly it would be 25,165,824,000 and would not fit.

I can't argue with your math: it's spot on.

But...

BD-RB under-sizes my re-encodes all the time. With the default settings I was regularly getting disc image sizes of 94% to 96% (and one 92% IIRC), which I thought was a bit small. Since I switched to 24200 MB (23.63 GB) I regularly get 98%. In fact, for the last 10 rebuilds which required re-encoding none were oversized and none were over 98.5%. Here's the list:

Image size  	Disc fill %
24,633,278,464	98.4%
24,632,688,640	98.4%
24,549,098,440	98.1%
24,640,028,672	98.5%
24,624,824,320	98.4%
24,629,018,624	98.4%
24,472,190,976	97.8%
24,626,135,040	98.4%
24,639,075,496	98.5%
24,603,376,672	98.3%

By way of comparison, I ran a couple of encodes recently after d/l the latest version of BD-RB, and I forgot to set my custom size, so the target was the default of 22.95 GB. Here's what I got:

Image size  	Disc fill %
23,923,326,976	95.6%
23,883,546,624	95.4%

I do get the occasional over-size, and anything that comes in at >99% I re-run with default settings.

All I'm saying is if you use a custom setting of 24000 MB in BD-RB it will fit virtually all the time. This isn't the right thing for everybody, but I feel it works well for me.

And it's not a bug anyway, so I won't belabour the point any more.

[EDIT]And I should say that ALL of my backups are High-Quality, 2-pass, Movie-Only. So it's possible that my results might not apply when doing a Full-Backup, for instance.[/EDIT]

[jdobbs]

Yep. Too each his/her own. The undersizing is purposeful. Whenever there is variability (especially in estimating muxing overhead, and it is truly an educated guess) I always make sure to err on the side of caution. People get mean when they spend a few hours encoding only to have the output not fit on their target (even when they use a custom size and cause the oversize themselves ).

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by omegaman7

I've had Taiyo Yuden discs age at the outer edge. Thankfully, the credits ended up at the edge of the disc I don't even mind undersizing by 1Gb. The difference is negligible, in my opinion. Though I have ran into a few discs, where some material could benefit from that 1Gb, if prioritizing bitrate were possible. Not really hinting here, just an observation.

Though one defect, can compromise a complete backup I no longer use those Disc booklets. Notorious for scratching discs over time. I prefer envelopes, and hard drive backups now.

The ones that really tick me off are the dual-layer backups that start screwing up right in the middle of the movie (at the layer change). These days, though, you can get inexpensive BD-25's for about a nickle more than a Dual Layer DVD+R blank, so I only see it on the occasional test backup.

[omegaman7]

Yeah, I haven't used a Dual layer dvd since I got my first BD burner The BD-9 size, just seems to be agreeable. I plan to play around more though, in an attempt to save hard drive space. I have seen Excellent results under 3Gb. Typically the CGI movies.

[soneca]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

The ones that really tick me off are the dual-layer backups that start screwing up right in the middle of the movie (at the layer change). These days, though, you can get inexpensive BD-25's for about a nickle more than a Dual Layer DVD+R blank, so I only see it on the occasional test backup.

I agree, it is difficult to get reliable medias, I have had many problems and 95% of them just at the point of changing layers.
Here, "the country of high taxes", this type of media is still a bit expensive.

[Yannes]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

That setting is measured in megabytes. One megabyte is 1048576 bytes. 24000 * 1048576 = 25,165,824,000. The 1% difference is simply rounding due to encoding and muxing accuracy.

What can I say? If you tell BD-RB to output to a size that won't fit on a BD -- you'll get a size that won't fit on a BD. I'd suggest you use the default BD-25 setting.

The thing is that i've used 24000MB a few dozen times before and the output size was always between 24 and 24.5m bytes. And if you read my post you'd see that I did use the BD25 mode and the result was the same as the custom 24000 size, the movie file turned out to be a GB too large for no apparent reason.

There is bug somewhere in there, there is no denying that. The same problem occurred with another blu-ray I tried to shrink down as well, which had an end result of 25.5m bytes.

But sure, i'll do it again with BD25 mode and give some more in-depth details.