Why the Wembley 86 show is not on Blu Ray?

jacksonmerc wrote:

There's the option for switchable cameras for the entire concert on blu ray release

That is a very clever idea. How many angles they used in Wembley, 16?

They did something like that in the extras of some re-release, with Freddie/Brian/John/Roger cams for four songs. Maybe in a BR they could do it with the entire gig.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJLLdQnA5tw

Someone should call Brian and tell it.

Doga wrote:

jacksonmerc wrote:

There's the option for switchable cameras for the entire concert on blu ray release

That is a very clever idea. How many angles they used in Wembley, 16?

They did something like that in the extras of some re-release, with Freddie/Brian/John/Roger cams for four songs. Maybe in a BR they could do it with the entire gig.

Someone should call Brian and tell it.

I have this line sitting in my head "17 cameras, plus a helicopter on the night before" by Gavin Taylor on the 2003 DVD interview.

Please remember that a blu-ray disc only has 6x the storage capacity of dvd.

With 17 different cameras to choose from, the bitrate (ie. image quality) would be roughly 1/3 of the dvd version!

Don't think that including all 17 angles it's even possible.

What i would like to see is what we have on the 2003 edition, the "Queen Cam", but the full show, not just 4 songs. Maybe that could be done with PIP, on one side the normal concert edit, and on the other side we could choose a Queen Cam.

tero! 48531 wrote:

Please remember that a blu-ray disc only has 6x the storage capacity of dvd.

With 17 different cameras to choose from, the bitrate (ie. image quality) would be roughly 1/3 of the dvd version!

DVDs have a maximum of 9 GB. Blurays can have a maximun capacity of 100 GB.

And i didn't meant the full 17 angles, just the normal movie, and 4 more movies following each one of the band members, with a new audio mix in the best possible quality, how much that will be?

pittrek wrote:

Because PAL tape has 576 lines, Bluray resolution is 1080 lines. It wasn't shot on film but on tape so they'd had to upscale it and most of the HD upscales of 80's tapes look like shit

Good God.
How many more times?
Bluray is a medium NOT a resolution.
You can put bloody VHS 250 line recordings on Bluray if you like.

Rainbow 74 looks cracking on SD Bluray. It uses a different compression algorithm than DVD and is an incredibly higher bitrate.
The most amazing thing about it is that even though it's had additional frames added to it to make it 60i (when it should be 50i), it hasn't the drag or jerking associated with other previous conversions.
Wembley 86 should look fantastic on SD Bluray. Much better than the shitty NTSC conversion they did last time.

Oh, and Doga. BD capacity is 50gb, not 100....

Triple layers Bluray can storage 100 GB. They are more expensive of course.

brians wig wrote:

pittrek wrote:

Because PAL tape has 576 lines, Bluray resolution is 1080 lines. It wasn't shot on film but on tape so they'd had to upscale it and most of the HD upscales of 80's tapes look like shit

Good God.
How many more times?
Bluray is a medium NOT a resolution.
You can put bloody VHS 250 line recordings on Bluray if you like.

Rainbow 74 looks cracking on SD Bluray. It uses a different compression algorithm than DVD and is an incredibly higher bitrate.
The most amazing thing about it is that even though it's had additional frames added to it to make it 60i (when it should be 50i), it hasn't the drag or jerking associated with other previous conversions.
Wembley 86 should look fantastic on SD Bluray. Much better than the shitty NTSC conversion they did last time.

Oh, and Doga. BD capacity is 50gb, not 100....

There are still people that think of Blu-Ray discs as HD only. Blu-ray discs support 720x576 50i and 720x480 60i. There are Blu-Rays that have SD content as extras. I don't see any problem if the main content is SD. It's a great way of releasing TV material, for example long-running TV series.

An example: 'Allo 'Allo series boxset has 16 DVD discs. Imagine it on Blu-Ray with many less discs.

The problem is that, for marketing reasons, Blu-Ray has always been advertised "best quality possible" "get your movies in HD with the best picture and sound" and other similar things. That way it "brain-washed" people into thinking that the discs are only for full HD content (video and audio), when it's not. Blu-Ray discs support SD content in their original resolution, they don't need to upscale the video. The plan is that Blu-Ray discs will replace DVD's in some point in the future and, yes, that includes releasing SD content.

Also by late 2015 early 2016 4k resolution will arrive to Blu-Ray discs. Maybe Queen Rock Montreal will be released by then in Blu-Ray 4k http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=14923

Doga wrote:

DVDs have a maximum of 9 GB. Blurays can have a maximun capacity of 100 GB.

And i didn't meant the full 17 angles, just the normal movie, and 4 more movies following each one of the band members, with a new audio mix in the best possible quality, how much that will be?

Let's break it down to numbers. We all love numbers, don't we?

Standard DVDs (single side, dual layer) has a capacity of 8,5 GB.
While there are BDs with a capacity of 100 GB, the industry standard is 50 GB per disc. That's the format all the players are compatible with, while the 100 GB discs are available only on some players. (Just like there are 100 minute CDs, but all equipment can't play them!)

The data speed of a BD is 36 Mbps, versus the 11Mbps on DVDs.

With the maximum data rate you would have:
105 minutes of space on a DVD
190 minutes of space on a BD

A cd quality (linear PCM) stereo soundtrack takes 1,5 Mbps on a DVD, and a 96kHz 24bit stereo sound (like the Rainbow BD) takes 4,5 Mbps.
111 minutes of audio would take about 3 GB, leaving 47 GB for the video.

With the theoretical maximum bitrate of DVD that would equal to about 11,5 hours (or 6x the length of the entire show).
With a typical DVD bitrate of 6,5 Mbps it would equal to about 16 hours (or 8,75x the length of the entire show).

The 2013 edition of Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert:

Blu-Ray- one disc.
DVD- 3 discs.

popy wrote:

The 2013 edition of Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert:

Blu-Ray- one disc.
DVD- 3 discs.

The more important question is what's the bitrate on the blu-ray?
Does it actually have a better quality than the dvd?

tero! 48531 wrote:

popy wrote:

The 2013 edition of Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert:

Blu-Ray- one disc.
DVD- 3 discs.

The more important question is what's the bitrate on the blu-ray?
Does it actually have a better quality than the dvd?

Even if they used the same bitrate, the Blu-ray would look better because of the superior encoding used.

brians wig wrote:

pittrek wrote:

Because PAL tape has 576 lines, Bluray resolution is 1080 lines. It wasn't shot on film but on tape so they'd had to upscale it and most of the HD upscales of 80's tapes look like shit

Good God.
How many more times?
Bluray is a medium NOT a resolution.
You can put bloody VHS 250 line recordings on Bluray if you like.

Yes and no.
Of course Bluray is a medium but for 99% people "Bluray" means "a 12cm disc with 1920x1080 @23.976 fps video on it". Just like for 99% people "DVD" means automatically "a disc with 720x576 @25fps or 720x480 @29.97fps mpg2 video". Almost nobody knows you can put a 352x258 mpg1 video stream on a DVD too, or that "DVD" can stand for a data DVD, DVD-audio etc - for most people "DVD" = "DVD-Video" = standard definition PAL or NTSC video. For most people also "BD" = "disc containing high definition video".

I'm not sure however if you can put a 250 line recording on it, I always thought BD specs support only 720x576@25, [email protected] or 97, 1280x720@24p, 50p or 60p, 1440x1080@24p, 50i or 60i and 1920x1080@24p or 50i or 60i encoded with mpg2 or mpg4.

Rainbow 74 looks cracking on SD Bluray. It uses a different compression algorithm than DVD and is an incredibly higher bitrate.
The most amazing thing about it is that even though it's had additional frames added to it to make it 60i (when it should be 50i), it hasn't the drag or jerking associated with other previous conversions.

Good to know, I've seen only the DVD till now, and yes, it looks so much better than the 2011 jerky Wembley rererelease.

[QUOTA]
Oh, and Doga. BD capacity is 50gb, not 100....
[/QUOTE]

Doga is right, there is a new BD format with 100 or 128 GB capacity (I think it's called BDXL or something like that) but I have never actually seen it in "real life", I just read about it

Nitroboy wrote:

tero! 48531 wrote:

popy wrote:

The 2013 edition of Freddie Mercury Tribute Concert:

Blu-Ray- one disc.
DVD- 3 discs.

The more important question is what's the bitrate on the blu-ray?
Does it actually have a better quality than the dvd?

Even if they used the same bitrate, the Blu-ray would look better because of the superior encoding used.

I don't know what exactly happened on the Blu-ray but there were shots when the audience looked like a painting , not a mass of living beings. It was only in some of the shots shot from the stage, but I don't remember seeing that weird "effect" on the VHS or the DVD before

pittrek wrote:
Doga is right, there is a new BD format with 100 or 128 GB capacity (I think it's called BDXL or something like that) but I have never actually seen it in "real life", I just read about it

Sure, there is a format for a 100 GB bluray out there.
Just like there are 870 MB (or 100 minute) cds.

They are nice for data storage if you happen to have a disc drive which supports them, but they can't really be used for commercial products because they don't work on most standalone players.