BD Rebuilder Beta - Bug Reports Only

[Adub]

Have you been overclocking your system recently? If so, you may want to try running some stability tests to make sure your computer is actually stable.

This is not the fault of BD Rebuilder.

[sidneysides]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

Whether it uses pulldown and if it is VC-1 picture (field) based.

I will get hold of the original again and have a look. What do I need to change if it is one of these then?

[Mark_Venture]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

Wierd. Here's what I get when I run it.

- Windows Version: 6.1 [7600]
- AVISYNTH Version: 2.5.7.0, Ok
- HAALI Splitter: Ok
- FFDSHOW: 3326, Ok
- WIN7 preferred AVC CODEC: Ok
- WIN7 preferred VC-1 CODEC: Ok
- WIN7 preferred MPEG2 CODEC: Ok
- FFDSHOW VC-1 set to "wmv9", Ok
- FFDSHOW MPEG2 set to "libavcodec": Ok
- FFDSHOW AVC set to "libavcodec": Ok
- BD Rebuilder v0.32.0.8, Ok
- X264: Ok
- AFTEN: Ok
- FAAC: Ok
- MP4BOX: Ok
- WAVI: Ok
- TSMUXER: Ok

Oh... I got it now. I'd used a fixed path in my code for testing and never changed it back. I just replaced the "inspect.exe" file on the download. Note: The MP4BOX/FAAC is actually related to the next release.

Sorry, I'm late to this thread so I might have missed it, and I have to ask...

The first post of this thread talks about using "recommended versions" and for FFDSHOW links to an older version than inspect.exe apparently reports about your system. (3133 is linked in the first post, 3326 on your system per the above post)

Is FFDSHOW 3326 ok to use with BD Rebuilder 0.32.08 (March 8th, 2010)? or should we stick with the version linked in the first post?

[Kampfwurstwasser]

Originally Posted by Mark_Venture

Sorry, I'm late to this thread so I might have missed it, and I have to ask...

The first post of this thread talks about using "recommended versions" and for FFDSHOW links to an older version than inspect.exe apparently reports about your system. (3133 is linked in the first post, 3326 on your system per the above post)

Is FFDSHOW 3326 ok to use with BD Rebuilder 0.32.08 (March 8th, 2010)? or should we stick with the version linked in the first post?

I would like to know this too, because FFDShow revision 3326 supports DXVA playback for h264, right?

[woodman]

I have just done 2 full backups of the incredible hulk, the first one with “quicker” encode for extras checked and that came out under size(movie about 8gb with the hd audio)and over size extras around 13gb, just like District 9 backup. The second one unchecked “quicker” encode for extras and that came out ok size wise, although it did take 50 hours to do. I would like to use “quicker” checked because of the time difference on encoding. The other problem I’m having is jerky video, on this movie and others, not sure what the cause is I’m getting no errors from BD rebuilder. Using 0.32.08

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by Mark_Venture

Sorry, I'm late to this thread so I might have missed it, and I have to ask...

The first post of this thread talks about using "recommended versions" and for FFDSHOW links to an older version than inspect.exe apparently reports about your system. (3133 is linked in the first post, 3326 on your system per the above post)

Is FFDSHOW 3326 ok to use with BD Rebuilder 0.32.08 (March 8th, 2010)? or should we stick with the version linked in the first post?

That's the one I've been testing (and why it shows "Ok"). I've been running it for a couple of weeks with no issues. It's probably ok. I'd suggest you try it, and if you have no issues, report back. I'll probably update the first link soon if I don't see issues. If you do, please step back to 3133 and report that too.

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by woodman

I have just done 2 full backups of the incredible hulk, the first one with “quicker” encode for extras checked and that came out under size(movie about 8gb with the hd audio)and over size extras around 13gb, just like District 9 backup. The second one unchecked “quicker” encode for extras and that came out ok size wise, although it did take 50 hours to do. I would like to use “quicker” checked because of the time difference on encoding. The other problem I’m having is jerky video, on this movie and others, not sure what the cause is I’m getting no errors from BD rebuilder. Using 0.32.08

"Jerky video" on what playback device? If it's not a standalone player you are probably seeing issues with the playback, not the encode.

If it's taking 50 hours to encode, I'd suggest you move up to a modern processor... even in high quality mode a reasonably recent processor (two years old or so) should only take a quarter of that time (e.g. my Phenom 9500).

[woodman]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

"Jerky video" on what playback device? If it's not a standalone player you are probably seeing issues with the playback, not the encode.

If it's taking 50 hours to encode, I'd suggest you move up to a modern processor... even in high quality mode a reasonably recent processor (two years old or so) should only take a quarter of that time (e.g. my Phenom 9500).

tested on standalone player. i have a dual core 2.50 proccessor

[Mark_Venture]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

That's the one I've been testing (and why it shows "Ok"). I've been running it for a couple of weeks with no issues. It's probably ok. I'd suggest you try it, and if you have no issues, report back. I'll probably update the first link soon if I don't see issues. If you do, please step back to 3133 and report that too.

Ok, I'll give it a try... I plan on doing a backup of Toy Story (Movie only to DVD9) later today.. I'll post back how I make out, after it finishes and I get to watch the movie from the backup (probably tomorrow).

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by woodman

tested on standalone player. i have a dual core 2.50 proccessor

You'll have to give me an example or description of what you're seeing. "Jerky" can mean lot of different things. I can't imagine why this would happen on one computer and one standalone player but not others...

1. Please post your results from running INSPECT.EXE.
2. What kind of video is the source (that is jerky)?
3. What disc is it? Is it an original?
4. Is it output to BD-5, BD-9, BD-25?
5. What encode quality settings?
6. Is it all encodes, or certain ones? Main feature or extras?

Looking back at your previous posts, you've been experiencing a lot of very odd problems... I have to believe you have some type of configuration issue.

[woodman]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

You'll have to give me an example or description of what you're seeing. "Jerky" can mean lot of different things. I can't imagine why this would happen on one computer and one standalone player but not others...

1. Please post your results from running INSPECT.EXE.
2. What kind of video is the source (that is jerky)?
3. What disc is it? Is it an original?
4. Is it output to BD-5, BD-9, BD-25?
5. What encode quality settings?
6. Is it all encodes, or certain ones? Main feature or extras?

Looking back at your previous posts, you've been experiencing a lot of very odd problems... I have to believe you have some type of configuration issue.

thanks, will try that

[deank]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

That's the one I've been testing (and why it shows "Ok"). I've been running it for a couple of weeks with no issues. It's probably ok. I'd suggest you try it, and if you have no issues, report back. I'll probably update the first link soon if I don't see issues. If you do, please step back to 3133 and report that too.

Since I'm tired of reports of failed encodes (just like you are I guess), sometime next week I'll try to post a link to a small tool I'm preparing. It includes H.264/AVC, MPEG-2 and VC-1 short samples and does a basic encoding of few seconds of video to check if user's PC is able to handle these codecs via directshow.

It will check avisynth presence, haali ability to split video and audio and x264 ability to encode video served by avisynth from directshow source with these video codecs.

I think it will make life much easier for both coders and users.

Dean

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by deank

Since I'm tired of reports of failed encodes (just like you are I guess), sometime next week I'll try to post a link to a small tool I'm preparing. It includes H.264/AVC, MPEG-2 and VC-1 short samples and does a basic encoding of few seconds of video to check if user's PC is able to handle these codecs via directshow.

It will check avisynth presence, haali ability to split video and audio and x264 ability to encode video served by avisynth from directshow source with these video codecs.

I think it will make life much easier for both coders and users.

Dean

Good idea.

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by Adub

Have you been overclocking your system recently? If so, you may want to try running some stability tests to make sure your computer is actually stable.

This is not the fault of BD Rebuilder.

I assume you're the same Adub that made the video here? Pretty cool.

[shon3i]

If someone not notice, x264 now have official Blu-Ray support. So if anyone can update to r1050 form www.x264.nl and test on player to see is everything work normaly

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by shon3i

If someone not notice, x264 now have official Blu-Ray support. So if anyone can update to r1050 form www.x264.nl and test on player to see is everything work normaly

I assume you mean r1510... I'm testing it now, looks good so far.

It may be my imagination -- but it seems to be a bit faster also.

[saphire199]

Hey, first of all, I really like the new "inspect" tool. Let's you know right away that you have all your basics in and provides a first debug for any problems.

And on that note, my inpect shows all ok and I am wondering if anyone else has run into this - I am trying out the feature to make an iso file with Imgburn after BDRB finishes, but I am finding it takes hours to complete. When I take the same file (the completed BDRB file) and make an iso seperately, it does it in about 5 minutes tops. I am making DVD9 discs mostly, movie only. Thanks

[jdobbs]

Originally Posted by saphire199

Hey, first of all, I really like the new "inspect" tool. Let's you know right away that you have all your basics in and provides a first debug for any problems.

And on that note, my inpect shows all ok and I am wondering if anyone else has run into this - I am trying out the feature to make an iso file with Imgburn after BDRB finishes, but I am finding it takes hours to complete. When I take the same file (the completed BDRB file) and make an iso seperately, it does it in about 5 minutes tops. I am making DVD9 discs mostly, movie only. Thanks

Hmmm... I'll do some testing -- but when I tested it right after implementing it, it took only a few minutes. Any chance your disc is getting close to full? That could make a huge difference.

[Dark Shikari]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

I assume you mean r1510... I'm testing it now, looks good so far.

It may be my imagination -- but it seems to be a bit faster also.

Not your imagination

[shon3i]

Originally Posted by jdobbs

I assume you mean r1510... I'm testing it now, looks good so far.

It may be my imagination -- but it seems to be a bit faster also.

Yes my mistake :P i mean r1510

btw i inspect commandlines you use, and saw that High Quality not use real High Quality option's that should and x264 can provide. I mean this can be very usefull for BD5/9. Why not just stick with x264 profiles, will be nice, with some tweaking like for example deblock.