Paramount BD titles... will they be VC1/AVC?

DaViD Boulet · 08-22-2006, 09:40 AM

from the bits today: (thedigitalbits.com)

Quote:

Well... it's been a bit of a busier day than we expected. Paramount has just officially informed us of the details of its first full waves of catalog Blu-ray Disc releases. And you probably won't be too surprised as to which titles they've chosen. Due on 9/26 (SRP $29.99 each) are Tomb Raider, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, Four Brothers and Tim Burton's Sleepy Hollow. Following on 10/10 are Sahara, U2: Rattle and Hum, Æon Flux and The Italian Job (SRP also $29.99 each). Due on 10/30, of course, is the already announced M:i:III. According to the studio's press release, "Paramount Home Entertainment plans to support the Blu-Ray format with a strong slate of titles moving into 2007." Like the HD-DVD releases before them, don't expect these titles to include any real extras. However, audio on all of these releases should include both Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 and DTS 5.1.

What I'm really curious to know is whether Paramount will be using the same video codecs (VC1 and in the case of Rattle and Hum AVC) they used on their HD DVD versions on their BD titles as well. WB plans to move forward using the same encode-file for both formats and I know that at this time VC1/AVC authoring is taking place for BD at WB.

Anybody have any more details about Paramount's plans or disc specs in regards to video codecs?

p.s. this isn't a "which format is better" debate thread. Please do not thread-fard with editorializing about which format you prefer or think will win. Let's have an informed discussion about the state of VC1/AVC encoding for BD and whether Paramount plans to release BD titles using the same compressed video streams used for HD DVD.

Gekkou · 08-22-2006, 12:28 PM

My guess is that unless there is some agreement that they must use MPEG2, they'll probably use VC-1 and H.264 since they already mastered them that way for the HD-DVD releases.

Sean Bryan · 08-22-2006, 07:39 PM

Yeah, I'd expect the same encodes that they used for the HD DVD releases. So I'm betting on VC-1 for all except Rattle and Hum, which should be in AVC.

Rob_Walton · 08-23-2006, 03:21 AM

It'll certainly be interesting to see if the VC-1 or AVC authoring tools are ready yet for BD. As far as preferences go the last I hear Fox were leaning heavily towards AVC, but that was some time back. For now it does seem to all come back to availability (or otherwise) of the appropriate authoring tools. The next WB titles, and the first Paramount titles, should be very interesting to watch and see what happens.

Paul Arnette · 08-23-2006, 09:04 AM

I was under the impression that the reason MPEG2 compression was being used on the initial BD was due to space constraints. If that is the case, why would anyone expect these Paramount DVDs to be any different, unless they've addressed the storage issues?

**HTF Ads**

DaViD Boulet · 08-23-2006, 10:04 AM

Paul,

it's actually the opposite. MPEG2 is the least efficient codec of all and uses (wastes) the most space. That's why the early BD titles often have artifacts and (generally) look worse than HD DVDs which are using VC1 right from the start.

The reason MPEG2 was used at all is because:

1. Sony likes it because they get royalties from its use.

2. Sony doesn't want to pay royalties to MS to use VC1 (though they could still use AVC which is a real head-scratcher why they don't).

3. Sony thought that it would make it easier for studios to make BDs if they used MPEG2 since that's what mastering/compressionists have been using for DVD.

4. Though Sony listened to WB and put VC1 and AVC into the BD spec, they did so late in the game and didn't get authoring tools for VC1/AVC finished in time for the first round of BD titles. That's fixed now and WB is getting ready to release their 2nd wave of BDs all using VC1.

Rob_Walton · 08-23-2006, 01:36 PM

I suspect the Sony patent reason often given for MPEG2 usage on BD is a red herring. Certainly at the licence cost per disc I've seen Sony would be getting very little money on even huge numbers of discs. The most likely reason is the last one that David mentions: that the other codecs were added to the spec late in the game, and that the lauch has happened earlier than the organisers had originally planned. It's my understanding that many HD cable and satelite providers will continue to use MPEG2 for quite some time (due to their entire network being configured for it's use) and BD was developed from the ground up to be a recordable medium. That is what required the 50Gb capacity on dual layer discs: to be able to fit an HD movie compressed in OTA MPEG2, and at a decent quality. I believe the other codecs were added later on and only due to pressure from other companies. And thank God they did apply that pressure!

DaViD Boulet · 08-23-2006, 01:44 PM

Rob,

excellent points. I concur.

Larry Sutliff · 08-24-2006, 02:40 PM

On the AVS forums, Amir says that he is "99% certain" that the MI:3 BD is going to be MPEG2. That sucks, if true.

Marc Colella · 08-24-2006, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Sutliff

On the AVS forums, Amir says that he is "99% certain" that the MI:3 BD is going to be MPEG2. That sucks, if true.

If true,

@ Sony/Blu-Ray

DaViD Boulet · 08-24-2006, 04:20 PM

Larry,

can you point a link? I've checked there and can't find info. If true, that totally sucks.