[Idea] A new release... "format"?

[spoRv]

Tl;dr: just jump to "From Idea to Concept"!

First of all, some previous threads that lead me to this idea:

• Laserdisc "Renaissance" in Blu-ray? - https://fanrestore.com/thread-2119.html
  
• Possible, alternative "container" for our releases - https://fanrestore.com/thread-1262.html
  
• Setting the standards: codecs and delivery formats - https://fanrestore.com/thread-112.html
  

Several years have passed since I wrote them, but there is still that "bug" in my brain...

We, movie collectors, still like to have movies to... collect! One thing is to have a title in a physical format, on an optical disc, with a printed cover and possibly a booklet; something to watch, to touch, to smell... instead of a bunch of files put on a soulless hard disk or memory...

It was rewarding when a member actually printed covers and discs of some ofmy projects and shared them here - I was so proud!

Still, times change; now the majors are almost becoming minors, with two companies that previously rented DVDs and sold books now producing first class series and movies with first class actors and directors; physical discs are sadly in decline... should we surrender to that, and release all our projects as a mere single file, without printed covers and discs?

YES! BUT NO! BUT YES! BUT NO...

(saying that with Vicky Pollard's voice helps a lot!)

YES! We should release a project on a single file - without menus, playlists, directories and subdirectories etc.: most of the users (including collectors) play their files "as is"; what's the point of spending days or weeks preparing a wonderful menu, carefully authoring a complete BD structure, when most of the watchers just grab the 00001.m2ts file and mux it on mkv or mp4 and discard the rest?!?
NO! Even releasing a single file, what prevents us to make great artworks for cover and disc? Again, most of the users can't care less, but for the few remaining pure collectors among us those artworks could be a treasure!

From Idea to Concept

So, the idea is simple: release a single audio/video(/subtitle) file that could be eventually recorded on a physical optical disc, along with artwork for cover and disc (and eventual booklet), and possibly be played directly by a BD/UHD-BD player - crazy? I don't think so!

FAQ

• Which physical optical disc?
  

I guess there is not a lot of options here: Bu-ray and DVD; CD can't be taken in account anymore - divx times are over, luckily!
I'd say: DVD for SD or short HD content; BD-25 or BD-50 for HD or short UHD content; BD-50 or BD-100 for UHD or long HD content.

• Which container?
  

MKV or MP4; these are the ones that are most popular; also, they should be played by most BD and UHD-BD players, apart all hardware and software media players. I lean towards MKV because it's free and seems to have less playing problems.

• Which video codec?
  

AVC for sure; I'd add also HEVC, as it's now mature enough; I was thinking also about AV1 but not so many players are compatible; for VVC it's too early, but it will be used later, we'll see when.

• Which audio codec?
  

FLAC for sure, as well as PCM; then DTS-HD MA, Dolby TrueHD along with DTS and Dolby Digital; thinking about AAC too.

• Which subtitles types?
  

SRT for sure; then the ones compatible with MKV and MP4 found on DVD/BD/UHD-BD.

• What kind of "format" this would be?
  

Something a bit like DTS Audio CD (that uses Compact Disc as disc format) or SACD (that uses DVD as disc format) or AVCHD (that can use DVD, BD, or other physical formats); Blu-ray and Ultra HD Blu-ray are file formats that use Blu-ray disc as disc format - but for example you can burn BD (or even UHD-BD) structure on a DVD-9 or even DVD-5 (albeit the former is no more BD compliant since 2011, and the latter never was) and some BD/UHD-BD players can play them.

• Why a new "format"? Aren't DVD/BD/UHD-BD enough?
  

Yes, they are; still there are some reasons to not use them:

• • they do not allow 44.1kHz - absolute must for LD and Cinema DTS untouched audio tracks
    
  • they do not allow 2K/4K - needed for DCI contents, even if they are (still?) quite rare
    
  • not all players can play burned discs - especially BD and UHD-BD
    
  • format structures and file format take space - at least around 7% for BD compared to MKV
    

So, if you want to preserve an untouched 44.1kHz audio track and/or get DCI 2K/4K video and/or burn a file that may be compatible with an hardware player, but will be surely compatible with ALL computers with proper player and/or want to put more data onto an optical disc, then you can't use DVD/BD/UHD-BD

• Then why not using an existing file format, like AVCHD or XAVC S or XAVC HS?
  

Because they have some limitations - mainly no 44.1kHz and DCI 4K; albeit XAVC (non S/HS) allows 4K, it does not allow HEVC, while XAVC HD allows HEVC but not 4K!

• So at the end it will be just an MKV or MP4 container eventually burned on optical disc?
  

Basically yes; but there will be some rules to follow; mainly size (to fit on disc), types of container/video codec/audio codec/video resolution/audio sample frequency/video encoding settings/audio encoding settings (to be compatible with the most BD/UHD-BD players); still, less constrained than DVD/BD/UHD-BD file formats!

• What's the main point of all of this?
  

To set a standard that project makers can follow to produce a file that is not only compatible with all software players, but also with the vast majority of hardware media players, and that when burned on disc, with the most possible BD and UHD-BD players; even if the file burned on disc would not be compatible with some players, it could always be retained as the original copy - BD-R could last several hundred years, if not thousand - at the contrary of any HDD that may last a decade or two, or SSD/USB and other memories that last only few years, as some of you could have experienced directly... the fact that optical disc could not be read anymore in hundred years is off topic here.

• Does this phantomatic format already have a name?
  

Of course - and it's memorable (IMHO!)... and not only that, but already a registered domain name, too! But for the moment, let's call it "fanres disc", OK?

[Mediahead]

Kunaki lets you manufacture 12" sleeves(for vinyl, but laserdisc size) with nothing inside, if that interests you.

[spoRv]

Kunaki lets you manufacture 12" sleeves(for vinyl, but laserdisc size) with nothing inside, if that interests you.

I'd love to use 12" sleeves for my projects - I also designed two covers for that; the only two things prevent me to do that is the unitary cost, and most important, the fact any optical disc recorded surface in contact with any material will lose data integrity before if inserted in proper cases - whichever one, CD/DVD/BD, not sleeves.

Still, if you have a link, I'll take a look!

[Mediahead]

Here's the link: https://kunaki.com/
if I'm not allowed to post that then just take it down
It's $3 a sleeve and you can just make one, only thing is that I think there's a shipping fee outside of U.S. right now, and they ship out of Nevada USA. ):
Hopefully this doesn't sound too much like an ad, i just found it useful.

[spoRv]

Only 3$ for a printed vinyl cover, front/back, full color, and I can buy even only one?

Too good to be true!

[Mediahead]

If you get one let me know how good it is for that price
I've been thinking of using it to make some sleeves for my records that don't have any (off-topic)
I've made CDs with it in the past and those are good, so hopefully this is the same

[alleycat]

I’ll be attempting this on one of my upcoming projects:

https://originaltrilogy.com/topic/GUIDE-...844/page/1

[spoRv]

I’ll be attempting this on one of my upcoming projects:

https://originaltrilogy.com/topic/GUIDE-...844/page/1

Wow, very nice indeed!

But I'm not patient enough to do that...