Delivering HD content
 

I've been an addict of this site for nearly a year now and have been moved and amazed by the work that is displayed regularly. Just a question. All of those stunning HD trailers and SDEs that I've been watching are beautiful.

How do you deliver them to your brides? I've done 3 Blu Ray weddings and 3 or 4 HD dvd weddings before that (sad to say... probably the only guy in America who thought that was the format that was going to catch on!) . I shoot all my weddings 16:9 and HDV 1080i. But don't sell many Blu Ray packages, so I'm delivering most of my work down formatted to SD.

So do I have any options in delivering HD to the customer outside of the widescreen SD dvds that they are getting? Your thoughts will be appreciated and I'm sure valuable.

Thanks,

Steve Pustay

I have an option that I can burn HD files converted into mp4 (h.264) format, so they can play it on their computer. More and more customers have Media Center PC's connected to LCD in their living room. Simple solution, yet great quality.

Only 1 out 10 couples ask us for a Blu-ray. Most don't have blu-ray players. I would assume even less would even know it's possible to hook a computer up to a TV.

But that's a great option to give couples, fo sho.

Steven,

There are ways to greatly increase the quality of your HD-SD footage. I used to be absolutely disgusted with the down-converted quality from HD, but after learning some tricks - I'm very happy with the final delivered HD to SD DVD these days.

In addition to designing advanced motion menu templates for Blu-ray and DVD, I also work closely with a high end production company in Southern California who specializes in Indian / South Asian Weddings. 9 out of 10 of our clients request a Blu-ray version of their video. I think location and who your market is plays a big part in demand for the Blu-ray format.

Prior to Blu-ray burners becoming available, we delivered our clients a data dvd containing an HD video file(s). Unfortunately one of the major components that made our videos unique and desirable, our advanced motion menus, were not able to be used with just a data file. Our clients did appreciate having an HD version of their video, but it just wasn't the same without the menu which really engages the viewer. If you do decide to offer this, you should definitely use the h.264 codec.

I have included a post dated Blu-ray disc for the past year with all my packages. I edit/render in HD then compress to SD and keep the HD renders. I recently ordered 50 discs from B&H and have started sending out my blu-ray discs to clients.

I have been shooting in HD and outputing to both DVD and BluRay since late 2007. More, more and more customers opt for HD package with BluRay disc. I have customers come to me because I have BluRay offering. I"m sure there're other better HD delivery format and method. But for most people, loading a disc to a player and enjoy it on a big screen TV is the easiest.

- Set top bluray player is getting cheaper and cheaper. I bought a Sylvania BD player from Amazon for $150. It's getting more and more affordable.

- LG BluRay burner is also around $150 from newegg.com

- Inkjet printable blank media goes from $18 a disc to now about $3 a disc.

Many people already have PS3 and more and more getting a BluRay player. There is a bit of learning curve in outputing HD, authoring BD, and a workflow change. So, to stay in the business, it's no excuse not to output BluRay as an offering.

We are probably within months of the definitive, noticeable market shift to BR... Refurb Samsung BR players are showing up sub $100, new ones are coming down, and as Taky notes, apparently burners and media are becoming almost reasonable...

I wouldn't be surprised to see the BR player be a hot "cyber Monday/Black Friday" item, at around a $99 price point...

I know the last movie I bought, I debated quite a lot... BR... DVD... BR... DVD... went DVD, but I think I saw that "UP" releases today with BOTH formats in one package (and a digital version as well, if I heard right!). Will check that out, and if the price is right, there won't even be a debate - I have BR capability in a laptop now (plays my jerry-rigged BR on DVD disks, and they look simply stunning...), so it's becoming a viable economic option IMO...

I can produce those improvised BR-DVD's for now, and it won't be long before that $150 burner comes down sub $100...

Steven:

I think we all have the same questions as you. Like Ken said, there are ways to make the downconvert to widescreen DV look really good like using a Lanczos algorithym image scaler, but it takes work.

I wish they made burnable combo discs so one side would be DV and the other Blu-Ray. Currently Im thinking about just producing a Blu-Ray disc along with every DV widescreen delivery since it's very little work.

Funny HD-DVD note: On the Black Friday sale a few years ago I bought all the $99 Toshiba HD-DVD players they had at the local Wal-Marts and gave them to clients as part of the package with a HD-DVD disc (burned from Ulead). Well, that turned into a bust for HD-DVD. So you were not the only HD-DVD early adopter. The HD-DVD scenario has made me wonder about my plan for delivering Blu-Rays. The technology could change before someone without Blu-Ray ever got a player.

My LG BD Burner bought in 2007 was over $350. It is now around $150. That's a great price to get start. Not a whole lot of investment. Of course if it's your hobby, $150 might not be justified. If that's for business, that's the investment that makes you stay ahead of the game. Well, not really ahead these days but at least it makes your business competitive.

I noticed a Blu-ray player in Sam's Club the other day for $122.

I think we are near to the shift away from DVD.

Blu-ray has been seen by the consumer as that "high end" format. But I believe once people see the images and can buy a player at wal-mart for $100 DVD will be left in the dust.

With the demise of CRT TV's, virtually any TV that one buys now is a HD TV. When more people find that players are within their budget, most will want to take advantage of HD on their HD capable TV.

If you have concerns about Blu-ray, you can also use other means of HD delivery such as the WD TV player. These simply plug into the TV via the HDMI port.

It's worth offering HD as a delivery option. If presented properly, some will choose it. I suspect that over the next year more people will want it. It's probably a good idea to offer HD in more than just Blu-ray. The WD TV player is just a bit over $100. If you offer a HD delivery choice, you won't sound like a Blu-ray "missionary."

Well, if one was to follow Disney/Pixar...

Just came back from Wally-mart:
"UP", DVD $15.96...multi disc DVD set w/ some extras, 19.96...

4 disc set, BR, BR extra features, DVD, and a "digital copy" disc with unlock code for iTunes and Windows Media... $19.96

HMMMM, which one to get??? If I only had a brain...duh...

I think it sets a pretty solid "media delivery" precedent - BR, DVD and a digital copy (which I suppose could be HD? Have to check it and see what the exact format is on the disc, but no reason not to deliver both HD and SD once you've rendered anyway...). The proverbial writing is on the digital wall, the days of SD are numbered.

IMO it's just a matter of how soon BR players and burners break the $100 street price point, and the tech becomes mainstream. With backwards compatibility with DVD and CD, it's just a matter of when the BR players and burners become "affordable" - the media has already come down a lot. It's hard to argue the economics when DVD players and burners are around $30 for a decent one, BUT, it's also hard to argue with the improvement in quality (and you get 4x the pixels!)

Although the BD format is still difficult to handle (but much easier since 2007), for me it's the best option for HD delivery. The reason is simple (and mentioned before). Motion menus. I hope I don't sound arrogant but we build very good menus, movie-like style. Always custom, almost hand made, animated with submenus and extra features. We spend time building the menus and the couples really enjoy them every time. Offering the job in a removable Flash drive so they can play it on PC or through the -also mentioned- excellent WDTV is not elegant I think. Good menus add too much to the overall presentation that we just can't go without them.

Another option, but not without its limitations, is the AVCHD discs. Depending on the duration of your events (a really big wedding couldn't fit in a single disc, even double layer) you can create a DVD with HD quality for using in both desktop Bluray players AND PCs with the usual DVD-ROM drives (provided the PCs have an adequate video card). The advantages of AVCHD disc are that you can create it like you create your regular DVDs or BDs, with full menus and such. The disadvantages are the encoding times of AVCHD (compression is AVC and that means sloooow) and the limited capacities (you can put 1 hour and 5 minutes in a double-layer DVD in full quality AVC from HDV source, that means around 14Mbps, more if you drop the quality). The basic advantage though is the playback using a PC without the need of a Bluray player and the extreme requirements BD demands.

If we were really close to widespread Blu-Ray adoption, it would be prudent to just start delivering both a DV & HD disc right now at no additional cost.

However, I don't think we are even close to Blu-Ray being mainstream. When I count up every TV system I have seen in my extended family, there is not one Blu-Ray player, and no plans for one (unless a DVD player breaks). And frankly, no need for one. The quality on the latest commercial DVD releases is really good. On small HDTVs (40" & smaller) a commercial DVD produces a great image.

Jeff, I agree with you. Sony seems to have some problems trying to establish Bluray as the new standard and they have a long road to walk till they get there. But the difference in quality is so awesome, that we show to the couples the same wedding in SD and HD and they always go for the new one (later they buy the BD player)! Of course weddings are not enough to make the format go fully mainstream, but I think during 2010 we'll see some things changing.

Jeff, we all have different reasons and objectives.

I made a large effort last year and moved to HD. It was a bit early, but I had two main reasons:

1) I wanted to show my customers/clients that I am always looking for the best product output.

2) I wanted to be well versed in the new space once the tide turned.

HD content aquisition is very complex and I am very glad I made the switch as I am still figuring out how to best use all of the framerates and formats.

The images are stunning and I do think once people see it done well, they will not want an SD DVD anymore. (given it only costs $99 for the player).

I happened to notice on a visit to Target last evening that they had a Memorex Blu-ray player on sale for $99. I suspect we will see some of the "secondary" brands hit $79 pretty quickly. I believe we are on the cusp of a much wider adoption of HD. There are always the "rugged individualists" who resists change. You know the type; his dad wouldn't dump his B/W TV in favor of color because color TV's were "frivolous". But these social mutants are the minority and are not indicative of the typical user. The delivery format / player is a secondary issue; I don't believe the "march" of HD is going away.

Tim:

I had some of those ideas back in 2003 when I started shooting HDV and also got my first HDTV. Although a lot has changed, a lot of basics remain the same; A. We still need better editing and authoring tools, B. We still need a widely available/accepted delivery media.

One reason lots of HD shooters are adamant about HD delivery is that they have never figured out how to downconvert their HD to DV widescreen with commercial bought DVD quality. That's partially because the NLEs still wont do it.

Im not saying anything is wrong with Blu-Ray, but I do believe the media HD is delivered on will change due to the pace of technology before Blu-Ray even gets a chance.

I used to deliver HD on D-VHS, anyone even remember that? It had full studio support for new releases.

Then came HD-DVD, everyone in the business remembers it, but consumers dont anymore. It had some studio support.

Blu-Ray will most likely be the same as HD-DVD in another 5 years. Remembered but not supported or used.

Blu Ray Wedding Ratio
 

Thanks to all of you. I'm so glad to see that we're all making attempts to push the envelope for our customers in offering them the highest quality we can.

I've been using an LG burner, a Mac Pro and Encore so that i could include my standard motion menus. A lot of work compared to the SD burn but I think for the brides, well worth it.

I'm encouraged by your comments and thanks to all who have responded.

Steve Pustay

I understand the limitations of Blu-ray right now, but I think it's crucial to try and sell the format to clients, especially if we are talking about newlyweds.

If they already spend a lot of $ on pro shooting, they should understand the benefits of the higher quality. It's their most important day.
Show them a demo before they decide and tell them to register for a Blu-ray player or PS3 instead of that dinner set. :)

First real post here, yeah!

I used to show clients DVD, then use a PC to show them the HD files. That doesn't sell. Now I show clients BluRay with the $150 Sylvania BD Player. The HD package is a lot easier to sell since.

Blu Ray Wedding Ratio
 

Taky,

It's very interesting that you mentioned how you show the Brides the final product and that doing a demo off a pc didn't work.

I agree. At my last two Bridal shows I took two Blu Ray discs and played them with my Sony Playstation. I've had positive response from Brides when I suggest that the Playstation is a great option for playing Blu Ray.

Steve Pustay

AND I bet you get pretty positive responses from the GROOMS too <wink>! A PS3 can come in handy around the house...

The main challenge with HD is that if the SD DVD is produced reasonably well, it will look "OK", if rendered from an HD source. Until you get it on a fairly large screen, the differences are subtle for about 99% of people who don't know what to look for, but once you know what to look for, you realize what's missing...

I will respectufully disagree as I do not see the current situation through those points.

A) I use Edius and am able to edit multiple cameras in Hd in reatime. The footage edits like DV and I don't even have an i7 system, at least not yet.

B) With Blu-ray coming down in price, I think this is an example of that medium. I do not think the major studios want to release on SD cards nor do they want to have people download 25gb files for a purchase.

C) I want to deliver in HD because it looks better. I still deliver mostly on DVD and downconverting is not an issue. One has to shoot in more DVD freindly framerates. 720p60 is my favorite if I know a DVD delivery is in the mix.

The media will always change, it is the install base that keeps a format alive.

Personally, I don't think we need better. We are getting close to the edge of percieved visual gains here. I would think the studios know this and they can't sell everybody on Blu-ray then tell them to buy a 4000x4000 player when the people will really not be able to tell the difference. They might want to, but sales will just not be there. I think Blu-ray & 1080p is the last major hurrah for a while, so I jumped in.

No animosity, just discussion :)

Tim:

Don't fool yourself that 1080 is even close to the edge of high resolution. Do a search for UHD and you will come across the research that show 7K is about the max humans can resolve.

4K is still 5 years out most likely. However, Blu-Ray does not support it. So we are destined to keep adopting technology that gets obsolesced. It's just a part of the current technology marching on. Im not saying not to use the latest & greatest (Blu-Ray), just it won't be the latest & greatest for long.

Survey: slow adoption for Ultra-High Definition TV | Broadband TV News

Sorry to go back and fourth here, but I think you are missing my point.

I am not fooled about 1080p, I am saying in the overall marketplace, resolution beyond 1080p is going to ever harder to sell to the public.

The visible quality gains will be ever and ever diminishing as we go beyond 1080p.

Sure it might conjure up testosterone, but it will not be a market success or be worth the R&D to make it happen.

SD Youtube is "good enough" for a lot of people. Trying to get somebody to buy a 4000k television when they have a 1080p television at home looks pretty difficult from my perspective.

From television viewing distances, 4000k and 1080p is not going to be that big of a visual jump. But the money spent to get us to 4000k is not a wise investment imho.

The broadcasters are just catching their breath after the millions spent just to get us to 720p/1080i.

I think HD is here to stay from an economic point of reality and the fact that in ten years, 1080p is still going to look sharp.

Tim:

I do generally agree with all your points.

In another 10 years there will still be people watching their 25" CRT televisions, which actually have a pretty good picture.

And there will also be lots of people watching 4K on their 70" television of some sort.

And everything in between.

The 1999 CES:
Consumer Electronics Show 1999 Las Vegas

That's scary to look back.

I remember reading about HD back in the late 90's as if it was right around the corner.

It took a little bit longer than most thought.

I am not concerned about new resolutions, but please don't change the aspect ratio again! Lets stay with 16:9 for many years.

Might be going off-topic a little bit but here's a device I use that was made by Western Digital. I present HD video I make exported to a .mov format, load it onto a flash drive, and insert it into this player. The player's outputs are composite and HDMI.

Newegg.com - Western Digital WD TV HD Media Player WDAVN00BN - External Hard Drives

Quality is great, may be too much for one person to buy to see one video but to show a preview of your HD video in your home or studio it is an efficient solution and saves from burning lots of discs (primarily Blu-Ray).

Just ordered 25 pack TDK inkjet printable DVDs on Amazon. It was $250 I ordered in June this year. Now it goes down to $170.

Looks like Blu-Rays are getting cheaper finally.

A Wal-Mart ad:

Blu-Ray players may well be coming down in price but could I offer a word of caution based on my own experience?

I purchased a Samsung BD2500 “quality” Blu-Ray player about a year ago. It was sold to me as “second generation” - evidently there’s been some software developments which mean that earlier players don’t play certain features which the most modern disks include on them.

Like all professionals in our business I test newly burned masters on a variety of players including a bog-standard DVD player bought from the local supermarket, a top-line multi-everything DVD player that will play the image on a dirty saucer and on the Samsung BD.

Recently I discovered that a dual sided disk failed to play correctly in the BD player once it had passed the point at which the programme was playing from the second layer. It played perfectly on all the DVD players.

I authored a second disk and got the same results. I then took both disks to my pal’s studio which has a “quality” new generation Sony Blu-ray player and both dual layer DVDs played perfectly.

I searched the Internet and discovered that certain Samsung Blu-ray players have a variety of faults none of which Samsung seems interested in solving.

My Samsung player has now been sold on eBay and a new Sony is to be installed.

So two pieces of advice, beware older generation Blu-ray players and choose even the latest Blu-ray players with care if you want them to do more than play Blu-ray disks.

The Samsung example is spot-on. We are using Verbatim BD-R and at a point we discovered that certain Samsung players wouldn't play the discs at all. Initially we thought we have some bad media, but they worked with Panasonic players and of course PS3 (after an Internet update). And we're talking singe-layer BD-Rs, so I wouldn't imagine the double-layer problems. Of course Samsung never updated the particular models with a firmware that should support a best-seller like Verbatim BD-R media (at least they hadn't last time I checked). So the solution is the one I propose to the couples when they ask. "Buy a PS3". It's an excellent machine, it has now a reasonable price, the firmware updates will never stop, plus it has some amazing games (good for the groom, not so for the bride)!

Were your BD-Rs encoded with AVC or Mpeg-2?

For larger distribution, I stay with Mpeg-2 for the format.

I had a Samsung player at a customer's house that would not play my AVC discs but would play the Mpeg-2 discs.

A player that can't play AVC must be really-really old! I think that the first Bluray players didn't have support for AVC, a format that came later since it became obvious that the size of Bluray was not enough for fitting a movie without sacrificing the quality. But I go AVC only when my project tends to last well beyond 2 hours. Otherwise, MPEG is much faster to author.

This one is a little better but twice the price:

I believe it is safe to say that full-fledged competitive forces have now kicked-in. When Blu-ray first came out, there was very little price competition. Now, there is. I believe that during the course of 2010, sub $100 prices will become the "normal" prices.

Flaky players were also a problem in the early days with DVD players. In fact, among the worst were Sony players that were manufactured prior to recordable DVD media availability. These players weren't designed to accommodate the different reflectivity characteristics of recordable DVD media. I won't be surprised to see similar problems with early Blu-ray player models.

Yes, but who actually wants it? I remember when the TV station I work at made the HD switch two years ago, and I spent an hour working with one of our anchors and the engineers reducing the detail levels on the new studio cameras because you could see all of her wrinkles and the bags under her eyes. I'm pretty sure no bride will want to see that on her wedding video =)

Plus, cable/satellite compression being what it is, you're not going to see that much detail in TV broadcasts. 4k resolution might be a bit of overkill for the evening news or "Dirty Jobs with Mike Rowe"

Some folks may adopt it, but I have a sneaking suspicion that 1080i/p will be "good enough" for the overwhelming majority of people for a very long time.

The Good Enough Revolution: When Cheap and Simple Is Just Fine

"I'm pretty sure no bride will want to see that on her wedding video =)"

Actually I find it's the bride's mother rather than bride who is sensitive - but that may just reflect our different markets, Mike!