Quoting Rizor:

Quote:
Hello. I have a few Blu-ray titles in my collection that have longer alternate cuts presented in SD. This leads me to consider them as bonus features as they aren't presented in HD on an HD format. Likewise, I'd prefer it if the profile reflected the running time of the cut of the movie which is in HD. I feel this makes sense considering the audio, subtitle, and video format of the profile all reflect the cut in HD. I'm happy to keep the change local, but was wondering what others felt about this.

Currently the rules state:

"For branching titles, or those with multiple versions (e.g. Theatrical and Director's Cut) on the same disc, use the longest running time.  Exception: If the longer version is available only as part of an Easter Egg, use the shorter running time."

The two titles that come to mind for me are "Strangers on a Train" and "South Pacific". Both profiles list the running time as the longer versions, but both of these are in SD only.

In the case of "Strangers on a Train", both the HD "Final Release" version and the longer SD "Preview" version are on the same disc. So having the running time of the profile reflect the longer cut follows the rules.

But in the case of "South Pacific" the longer "Roadshow" version of the film is on Disc Two, which isn't covered by the rules. One can create a child profile for this cut, but since the movie is in SD only and is on a Blu-ray disc, that wouldn't make any sense.

In both cases, the profile's audio, subtitle, and video formats all reflect the shorter cuts in HD, so I feel it would make sense that the running time of the profile did as well. Any other opinions?

Well, is the SD version listed under special features menu? If so, then I'd agree but if it's an option between the two, then IMO the longer running time should be listed.

Back to technical terms: "branching titles" is the main aspect in the Contribution Rules. There exist two possibilities of "branching", there's "Seamless Branching" and "Integrated Branching". If you know the difference anyway, skip to my last sentence...

Seamless Branching exists on DVD only on a DVD-9 (two-layer disc), where the two layers contain parts of technically one single video file. The parts are scattered over the two layers and need to be exactly broken down over the two layers during authoring. This is a physical/mathematical process. When the two layers are correctly calculated, the last important hurdle is to align the two layers exactly during the replication process. When you play such a title, your DVD player will skip multiple times from one layer to the other – you could notice this if you have a slow player (no internal caching) that produces hickups on a layer change. Besides this old technical flaw you shouldn't notice anything. This process to align the two DVD layers exactly is complicated and therefore (still) very expensive. To my knowledge only the WAMO plant in Terre Haute in the US (now Cinram) is reliable to produce DVD using Seamless Branching. That's why only very few high-profile (blockbuster) releases use that technology. This technical "flaw" was eliminated with the Blu-ray specs, that include native support for branching A/V-streams.

The other cheap option for DVDs was Integrated Branching, where you can include different A/V-streams from any source. This basically works as any "Play All" Trailer-Show that will change (even on the same disc layer – a no-go for Seamless Branching on DVD) from one A/V-stream/file to another, no matter what Video format and Audio streams are included. Integrated Branching is basically just the possibility to re-order chapter-marks (and track-marks) as you wish [read: as your preferred media company has determined for you]. It's been quite often used on German "premium releases" of notorious trash lables. With 'Integrated Branching' you'll get even a prestine 60-minutes version of "Thai-Godzilla" in anamorphic widescreen, "extended" to 90-minutes with scenes from "Troma-Aquaman" in 4:3, filmed through your neighbors fishbowl... different sources, different qualities, different formats – and your player will always search for many seconds for the next A/V-stream it should play.

But back to your question: "branching" titles means the longest available version on one (IMO the main) disc. The German releases of "Independence Day" and the whole "Alien" quadrilogy use Seamless Branching, where you can choose between Director's Cut and Theatrical Cut. Use the running time of the longer version (no matter if DC or TC).

If it's Integrated Branching: I think you have also to use the RT of the longest version. Personally I wouldn't use that in my local DB, if the "longest" version uses crappy material from a second source. But for the Online DB, unfortunately... yes.

For material that's on a second, third, or any other additional disc: this is by definition not a branching title. Use the running time of the longest primary version (DC, TC, Producer's Cut, but not Workprints, Preliminary, or "Inclusive" versions, if not explicitly advertised as main version on the Front Cover) on the main disc.

The UK release of Dawn of the Dead is also affected, with only the US theatrical version in HD.

Quote:
A combo which includes HD media (HD-DVD, Blu-ray) as well as DVD should use the details from the HD media in the main profile.

I know this is from a different rule concerning different media types, not HD vs. SD on the same media type (it could have said SD media instead of DVD, that would have been nice) but I think the same reasoning should apply here. It is the HD media we are looking for first.