Release notes: Fix the ringing, slight de-noise with de-band and detail preservation mask to prevent destruction on dark scenes. That was encoded in HEVC 10-bit with safe compression settings to produce transparent quality video.
| Author | Language | Format |
|---|---|---|
| JPN BD | ENG | pgs |
| JPN BD | CHS | pgs |
| JPN BD | JPN | pgs |
| Author | Language | Format |
|---|---|---|
| BD_Audio 2.0 | JPN | DTS-HD Master Audio |
| BD_Audio 5.1 | JPN | DTS-HD Master Audio |
| BD_Audio 2.0 (Bonus) | JPN | DTS |
Telegram: https://t.me/BeatriceRaws | Discord: https://discord.gg/Hry7EkU
Comments - 5
golgoth-13
Thank you very much Jensen!
Blanchimont
Heard the regular BD has higher bitrate compared to the UHD (35mbps vs 28mbps) and that the UHD is heavily degrained while the regular BD has more dirty edges. …Guess I’ll try this one as I prefer my grain, I can always switch later…
Edit; Also this stuck to my eye on the description part of #1719793;
"UHD BD 2.0 DTS-HD had higher bitrate (2044 vs 1726) but after converting to FLAC the bitrates and hashes were identical so used the audio from the regular BD."
So they intentionally bloated the audio for the UHD?
ShadowVlican
wasn’t the regular BD encoded in AVC while the UHD in HEVC? if so, it’s not an apples to apples bitrate comparison
Jensen
As far as I understand, there is simply a different kernel bitrate for some reason. (Maybe they forgot to change the default value 1509 to 768 and that’s it).
And what? The publisher simply did not want to release the BD-100. For 4k, bitrate values range from 60 to 100+. According to Dolby recommendations for DV, the bitrate is generally strictly prescribed from 70 mb/s when using some format profiles.
HEVC is an excellent codec, but it does not save the bitrate by 50%, as they say in promotional materials. This UHD edition could have had much better quality if the video had a higher bitrate.
DarkArrowsDLL
Thanks, Jensen!! <3