Blu ray

Discussion in 'RED DWARF UNIVERSE' started by carsher, Apr 26, 2009.

  1. HDCriticalFan

    HDCriticalFan Third Technician

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Have you watched the "Leopard Lager" sign between 1m and 1m02s (not at 53s, when it first appears) ?

    I see it breaking up during the pan. This DID NOT happen when broadcast on Dave. I still have the Dave recording on my Sky+HD and can compare them.

    If you step through one frame at a time you can clearly see that the Dave recording comprises (presumably) 50 distinctly different interlaced fields whilst the BD shows (presumably) 60 fields ... some of which are a "blur" of multiple images. This is an unavoidable effect of the makers taking a 50Hz video and s-t-r-e-t-c-h-i-n-g it out to 60Hz. They need to display 60 images per second (otherwise the show would be 20% shorter !) and to do this they insert an extra frame after every fifth "real" frame - presumably just a mash up of the real frames on either side. This "confuses" the deinterlacing circuitry in a BD player or TV and show up during movement. Ironically the still shots look very nice indeed on the BD :-(


    Does anyone know who I can complain to ?





    Regards

    HDCriticalFan
     
  2. Andrew

    Andrew Executive Officer

    Messages:
    1,665
    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2001
    That would be the company who had the DVD authored - 2entertain.
     
  3. sundayforsammy

    sundayforsammy Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    2,402
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Location:
    Newcastle UK
    I've just re-checked my blu ray disc at the time frame you say, there is a very small amount of judder as the camera pans from left to right, but it really is so small that if i wasn't looking for it i would not have noticed, the sign is fully readable and clear.

    Could it be possible your disc is faulty ?

    I've even seen this judder on some BBC high def programs as well.
     
  4. HDCriticalFan

    HDCriticalFan Third Technician

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    I've now looked at the disc in "step" mode (i.e. pause, then repeated manual single-frame advances).

    It's clear that the show is made up of a set of frames from the 50Hz master converted to 60Hz.

    From every five original (and excellent) frames they have shown three perfectly and then used the next two to create three "blended" frames. The resultant six frames can then be played out at 60Hz and take up the same one-tenth of a second of screen time.

    The overall result is a kind of "filmic" effect of juddery-ness which persists throughout the entire show - although admittedly it only "hits you in the face" when there is movement. However I am quite sensitive to it. And the fact that its impact "comes and goes" only serves to make it more annoying. You can't even get used to it and ignore it !

    The fact that I stopped watching at time code 1m02s when the Leopard Lager sign stuttered so badly speaks volumes about how obvious it was to me (especially when the titles only finished at 35 s !). In fact, from the moment the show started (and Lister is walking down the corridor with the window frames passing in the foreground) I thought it looked odd. The Leopard Lager sign was just the undisputed proof that this disc is flawed (compared to the original broadcast on Dave). I had sat down to enjoy it - not find fault with it :-(

    I can only envy people who somehow don't notice this !





    Regards
     
  5. roebeet

    roebeet Third Technician

    Messages:
    49
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    I only had "unofficial" means to see BTE, so it's hard for me to compare (USA location).

    I just tried my US Blu-ray in my PS3, and I see a bit of juddering on the sign, as well. I initially thought the overall issues with movement might have been related to it being interlaced, but I guess that was an incorrect assumption on my part.
     
  6. HDCriticalFan

    HDCriticalFan Third Technician

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    I don't have a PS3, so I don't know if you can freeze-frame and step forward one frame at a time. But when I do this I can see that at least one of the frames of the fast-moving Leopard Lager sign (just after the 1 minute mark) is one of the 50/50 blended ones and is completely unreadable. I doubt that any deinterlacing algorithm is going to be able to fix this for display on a flat panel.

    So the problem, is not in the interlacing per se, but it is buried there when the 50Hz to 60Hz conversion was carried out.

    Out of interest, as a US viewer, do you know if your system can play 50Hz material natively ? I would have thought that any Blu-ray player would be able to read 50Hz material and either pass it to an HD display which could display it or convert it to 60Hz on the fly for HD displays that couldn't (if any even exist !).

    It's sad that the authors of this disk have spent time, money and effort converting the original master to 60Hz. It doesn't seem to help US viewers and actually hinders the enjoyment of UK viewers :-(





    Regards
     
  7. sundayforsammy

    sundayforsammy Deck Sergeant

    Messages:
    2,402
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Location:
    Newcastle UK
    After having another look at the bluray dvd i now agree with you, on mine stepping through the frames its every 5 frames that are unreadable. I have noticed the same thing on other dvd's also but in the past have just put it down to the amount of data that is being changed when a camera pan happens. After this little test it just shows that the authoring of the disc is comprimised for whatever reason, surely bluray is meant to give a better viewing experience so what is the point of inserting interlaced frames when its not really needed. Iv'e just watched the normal dvd and although the pic quality isn't as good i found the lack of picture judder throughout made for a much more enjoyable watching experience.
     
  8. dvd3500

    dvd3500 Catering Officer

    Messages:
    439
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    I just read a review for another Blu Ray done by 2Entetain and they said setting the output to 720P got rid of the jutter...
    bad since it is in 1080i but worth a try to see if it resolves...
     
  9. currymonster

    currymonster First Technician

    Messages:
    181
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Location:
    London
    Hey guys, been a while since I posted anything but have been keeping an eye every now and again at what is being said.

    HD Critical Fan, I have a friend that works at 2Entertain. Only as a facilities manager but I let her know your comments and she passed them on to the correct department. Below is the response she got

    - There are very good reasons why material is cross converted from 50i to 60i (its actually 59.94i)
    Tell him to e-mail to dvd.support@bbc.co.uk and we will respond.

    It would be interesting to see the response you get if you do e-mail them.
     
  10. HDCriticalFan

    HDCriticalFan Third Technician

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Thanks for the support. I now know that I'm not going mad !

    Couldn't agree more. It's doubly crazy given that this was actually shown on TV at the "proper" 1080/50i without any such juddering/tearing.

    Oh, BTW, it's not that they've inserted interlaced frames ... all of the frames are actually interlaced. It's that they've increase the number of frames (technically "fields") from 50 to 60 each second by adding one new one after every five (In fact it's a bit trickier than that - they keep three of each original five and use the remaining two to create three).

    Although that might sound extreme I know what you mean. I can watch a show in SD and, once I am into it, I don't feel like saying "Hey, this isn't HD" every now and then. However, when watching a botched job like this, I do find myself being distracted every now and again by the tearing and juddering of movement.





    Regards
     
  11. HDCriticalFan

    HDCriticalFan Third Technician

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    I see no technical reason why that would work. I have previously set my BD player to 1080p and it made no difference.

    As you say, with 1080 source material, a 1080 BD player and a Full HD 1080 screen set to 1:1 pixel mapping there is little point in downscaling the output of the BD player to 720 !!!





    Regards
     
  12. HDCriticalFan

    HDCriticalFan Third Technician

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    It warms the cockles of my heart to know that my message got through. Isn't the internet amazing !


    I think we all know that the US 60Hz TV system actually runs at 59.94 fields per second but even I am not so pedantic as to refer to it as anything other than 60Hz !

    The "good reason" is no doubt that it will allow one single master disc to be manufactured which can be used to create BDs which will play on all TVs worldwide. A cost-saving exercise. This probably made sense for DVDs because, in the "old days", many US TVs supported 60Hz but not the other "international" standards (like 50Hz). However, here in the HD 21st century, we use BD players and HD TVs. I'm pretty sure that all of this modern kit can cope with a 50Hz disc.

    And even if it couldn't, there is no excuse for messing up a perfectly good 1080/50i video by converting it to 1080/60i for the UK market. If anything they should have invested time and professional processing power to convert it to 1080/50p - I'm sure (I think !) that if they put their minds to it they could do this better than our home equipment does. It would be even best of all if they could have got hold of the 1080/50p master (if such a thing ever existed).

    As it is I am left very worried about future "TV" BD purchases (especially from 2Entertain).




    Regards
     
  13. currymonster

    currymonster First Technician

    Messages:
    181
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Location:
    London
    Your probably right, and I'd be upset if that is the case, however I have not yet seen the Blu Ray production so I cannot really comment.
    I'm getting a copy in the next few days so will let you know what I think then.

    Are you going to e-mail them? It would be great to get the official answer from them. I would ask myself but I'm sure if they were prepared to do it via, "unoffical channels" lets say then I'm sure they would have given a more detailed answer to me via my friend there. Similarly I would e-mail myself, just out of curiosity, but I don't know anywhere near as much as you do in this area and wouldn't want to commit myself to anything and wind up looking a fool ;-)
     
  14. Andrew

    Andrew Executive Officer

    Messages:
    1,665
    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2001
    Basic rule with feedback - you don't need to be an expert. If there is an issue, one person sending an opinion will mean less than several. The trick is to be polite, reasonable, but clear in what you perceive the issues to be. But one response if easier to ignore than many.
     
  15. currymonster

    currymonster First Technician

    Messages:
    181
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Location:
    London
    I agree, and I am happy to write to them to see what the response is. However I thought HD Critical Fan may want to opportunity to express full the problem he sees, as it is he who is experiencing the issue more than most
     
  16. dvd3500

    dvd3500 Catering Officer

    Messages:
    439
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    That, and lots of candy, lots and lots of candy...
     
  17. currymonster

    currymonster First Technician

    Messages:
    181
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Location:
    London
    So, I've watched the Blu ray. I notice the blurry judderyness of the digital images HD Critical Fan has been complaining about, but only when looking for them. Once I saw the larger sign I did the whole freeze frame thing etc and then just went back to watching the show and didn't notice it after that. As most / if not all of the digital images are in the back ground and as eyes are focus on the cast in the foreground any imperfections go unnoticed.

    I agree that it seems a pointless exercise to go to the expense of filming something on the amazing new red camera and producing the show in HD, then releasing a video product that defers from this, but as it didn't affect my viewing pleasure, or most of the other people who have the blu ray version viewing pleasure ... its in my opinion a minor detail that can be excused! After all, 1 of the many things people talk about on the board is how classic the old wabbley sets were ... now we have a 21st century version of that :-)
     
  18. dvd3500

    dvd3500 Catering Officer

    Messages:
    439
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    2Entertain also produced the UK version of Wallace and Gromit COmplete collection... and it was far from complete... Nearly ALL the extras on the US BluRay were missing AND it was in 1080i instead of 1080p. I have the US version as it is region free....
    And I am starting to see a pattern here...
     
  19. HDCriticalFan

    HDCriticalFan Third Technician

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    I have no argument with CurryMonster and I tend to take on board what he says. However I will address the many well-made points of his post :

    I'm glad to hear that it's not just me and my setup then !

    I honestly envy you. The overall "flickery" effect makes this look like a US show (or a film) to me - and completely breaks down the "immediacy" of TV video image with which I usually associate Red Dwarf.

    But it isn't limited to the background (or digital images). Anything that moves is blurred. The faster and longer it moves, the worse the effect. An actor merely shaking their head from side to side brings the effect to one's attention. The fact that they are closer (and in focus) only makes it more noticeable.

    The only reason I pointed out the lager sign was that it was so easy to see - and so near the start. I saw the effect as Lister was walking along in the opening shot. The lager sign "glitch" occurs within the first 30 seconds of action ... that's how obvious it was to me. I didn't sit there for several minutes before noticing this - it was immediate (and I wasn't even looking for it either - I was actually settling down to enjoy the show !).

    Absolutely agree. I fear it can only be a penny-pinching exercise to save making a separate 50Hz region disc and a 60Hz one. But why not just "do nothing" and leave the 60Hz regions to experience a flickery RD ?

    I honestly envy you ... as it did mine.

    That may well be true - in which case 2Entertain made a good commercial decision. But it doesn't stop me being annoyed.

    Whilst I don't think that messing around with the frame rate is "a minor detail", I suppose if most people don't notice it (or just accept it) then it has to be excused if it saves money.

    Hehe - we all love the 1980s stuff.

    If this had been made to a budget which didn't allow (say) really good CGI, then we could all giggle at the use of (say) "Blake's 7" style spacecraft. But that is not what happened here. This is a case where the actual show was made (and broadcast) in state of the art 1080/50i and it has now been damaged when "upgraded" to Blu-ray.





    Regards
     
  20. currymonster

    currymonster First Technician

    Messages:
    181
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Location:
    London
    I haven't a lot to say to this, other than I didn't notice it all round, just on the digital images when looking for it. Will have another look later and see what I see!

    I agree though, if I understand correctly. Leave it at 50 and let the yanks have a damaged version??
     

Share This Page