Seamless Branching versus Locked Out Angles

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by John Leaning, Oct 26, 2002.

  1. John Leaning

    John Leaning Agent

    Joined:
    May 1, 2002
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    I see that the Platinum Edition of Beauty and the Beast uses locked out angles to switch between the different versions of the film, and a number of studios appear to be using this method to show different language titles and credits.

    What are the benefits of this over seamless branching?

    Is it just that there are less problems with players handling angles as opposed to seamless branching?

    I personally prefer seamless branching because my player has no problems with any of the branching titles, but always displays an angle symbol whenever there is more than one angle on a disk and it gets a bit irritating as there is no way to make it go away.
     
  2. Jesse Skeen

    Jesse Skeen Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 1999
    Messages:
    4,322
    Likes Received:
    226
    I've never seen a player that won't let you turn off the onscreen angle indicator, though it is a bit strange that they'd assume you'd want it to be on as most come with it default-set to on. My player's on-player display also has an angle indicator that lights up without ruining the picture onscreen.
    These titles use the angle function probably because the audio stays the same, and the running times are identical. Branching can add to or take away from the running time as needed. It is possible though for the audio to change along with the camera angles, though I'll admit I don't get how that works.
     
  3. Jeff Kleist

    Jeff Kleist Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 1999
    Messages:
    11,267
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  4. Christian Preischl

    Christian Preischl Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2001
    Messages:
    1,376
    Likes Received:
    6
    Real Name:
    Christian Preischl
    Hi,
     
  5. John Leaning

    John Leaning Agent

    Joined:
    May 1, 2002
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jeff, How does that fit with the statement from Disney that they have not used branching?
     
  6. Jeff Kleist

    Jeff Kleist Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 1999
    Messages:
    11,267
    Likes Received:
    0
    John, they didn't use branching in the traditional sense. Basically it branches to a completely seperate file on the disc depending on which version of the movie you're watching
     
  7. John Leaning

    John Leaning Agent

    Joined:
    May 1, 2002
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, for Beauty and the Beast does it work like this?

    From the Start to the layer change.
    All three versions are on a common branch with a different angle to show the uncompleted sections of the work in progress.

    From the layer change on.
    Theatrical and work in progress use a common branch with the uncompleted sections of the work in progress on a different angle. Special edition continues on a seperate branch.

    Now back to my original question, why use angles rather than seamless branching?
    Is there a technical benefit of one over the other?
    Are angles easier to author?
    Do less players have problems with angles versus seamless branching?
     
  8. Lyle_JP

    Lyle_JP Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2000
    Messages:
    1,009
    Likes Received:
    2
    John,

    Your understanding of the technical layout of the BATB DVD is correct.

    One advantage of angles over branching is that you can use the same audio and subtitle streams for both. You don't have to duplicate all the audio and subtitle tracks for all the different video branches.

    -Lyle J.P.
     
  9. John Leaning

    John Leaning Agent

    Joined:
    May 1, 2002
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks Lyle,

    It sort of begs the question then as to why so many reviews refer to artifacts caused by over compression, due to 3 separate versions of the movie being on the disk.

    There is maybe only 2.5 hours of real content on the disk and 20% unused space on the disk. Are these artifacts caused by over compression or something else?
     
  10. Jeff Kleist

    Jeff Kleist Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 1999
    Messages:
    11,267
    Likes Received:
    0
    Over compression. You still can only fit so much in the bitstream at one time.
     
  11. John Leaning

    John Leaning Agent

    Joined:
    May 1, 2002
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jeff, it just confuses me a bit when people talk of over compression
    1. a decision made to over compress or a requirement to over compress to fit within the disk capacity. (too much content)
    2. subject matter that cannot be compressed without artifacts with the DVD format bitrate budget.

    You would think/hope that with plenty of spare space on the disk that the over compression was a result of hitting the bitrate ceiling. Out of curiosity, has anyone looked at the bitrate?
     

Share This Page