Blu-Ray Player Software Recommendations

[Donut417]

Just now, Zodiark1593 said:

Good grief, terrible DRM in action right there. The PS3 was probably the best blu ray player in hindsight, though the DRM should be getting slammed in courts for breaking compatibility with older players. Not sure how studios have gotten away with such a DRM scheme, let alone the requirements for 4k pc playback. 

 

As I don't have a hardware player myself (I buy few enough Blu Rays as it is), I just grab a new beta key for MakeMKV, then copy to my drive. I don't really have a way to play them outside that. Old Blu Rays can play directly in Kodi or VLC with the right files and key database installed, though is very hit and miss.

 

Will region B not work on PC?

Ive been considering picking up a player myself as I dont have one and I have a few blu rays. I gave my mom my PS3 for blu ray play back. But then I remember I have Kodi and certain add ons for it. If Hollywood wasn't a bunch of thunder cunts, I and many others would not choose to get their content from "Other Means". The fact is Id love to do blu rays thru my computer as I watch most of my content there and its near enough to my TV I could run an HDMI cable to it. But no, the software is very expensive or doenst work. So screw Hollywood, when content creators get their head out of their ass Id think about supporting them. 

[Zodiark1593]

8 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

Eh, Kodi's full menu support... Needs, er, some more time in the oven.   But they're def working on it.

A simpler solution may be to just burn region free BDRs of my legit Region B discs and then play them.  Ya know, in the off chance that I ever even want to use the menus in my a disc.

Can the discs be imaged without changing the region settings of your drive?

[AshleyAshes]

2 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Can the discs be imaged without changing the region settings of your drive?

Yeah, even MakeMKV's backups remove the region code.  THen it's just a matter of burning the backup to a BDR.

[Revan654]

On 2/19/2018 at 10:20 AM, IrwinAllen13 said:

If a PC is a must then you have to investigate AACS2.0 and BD+ encryption. Pretty much you will have to pay for a solution, or depending on where you live you might have other options that are LEGAL. Based on what your location states, you don't really have any options other than pay for a Blue Ray Decryption program (like POWERDVD) or buy a bluray player.

 

and Intel SGX and you must be running Skylake processor(Since SGX was added to Skylake). None of the E Processors support intel SGX. You also must have a board that supports SGX function, Which very few support it. There any entire list of what you need before you can even start watching any 4K movie.

 

Of course there are "legal" software that will strip out the encryption that blu-ray and 4K blu-ray uses. Which allows you to watch the movie on any media player you want like VLC(Which supports the menu system).

 

Nothing will play on a AMD system, due to the SGX system being needed.

 

 

[Stagea]

On 2/26/2018 at 1:07 AM, dalekphalm said:

Indeed. If his TV can’t display proper 24p content, that’s possible. 

 

Traditional 60Hz TVs are particularly bad. You need to go with something like a 120Hz or 240Hz LCD TV, or most (all?) Plasma TVs. Or I suppose OLED is probably good too, considering they’re supposed to be the pinnacle of modern home entertainment TV tech. 

You are correct in saying *most*. Panasonic and some other makers released Plasma TVs that cannot handle 24Hz natively (they had to perform 2:2 or 3:2 pulldowns); it stayed this way for a long time (especially for entry level models).

[dalekphalm]

7 hours ago, Stagea said:

You are correct in saying *most*. Panasonic and some other makers released Plasma TVs that cannot handle 24Hz natively (they had to perform 2:2 or 3:2 pulldowns); it stayed this way for a long time (especially for entry level models).

Performing a "2:2 pulldown" as you call it, is basically native support. All that means is they repeat frames twice. So, for example, a panel with a 48 Hz refresh rate.

Note: looking into 2:2 pulldown, it seems this is a specific interpolation method, which doesn't seem to be applicable to 24p playback (mostly deals with PAL conversions of 25 fps to 50 fps).

 

3:2 pulldown is for playing 24p content on 60 Hz displays.

 

In fact, this is the benefit of pretty much any TV that's 120 Hz or 240 Hz. Both can be evenly divided by 24 and 60. This is optimal, as you can have judder free playback on both 24p or 60p content. Whereas a 48 Hz display would sacrifice smooth 60p content to ensure smooth 24p content.

 

I've personally never seen a Plasma that didn't have a refresh rate that was a multiple of 24. Most were 48 Hz, 72 Hz, or 96 Hz.

 

I don't know of any display that can natively refresh at 1080p/4K 24 Hz, aside from ones that use Adaptive Refresh Rate technology (AdaptiveSync/FreeSync/G-Sync). Basically all TV's that I've ever heard of that can do proper 24p all use a multiplication method (playback at 120 Hz, for example).

[SpaceGhostC2C]

On 3/3/2018 at 9:37 PM, Revan654 said:

Nothing will play on a AMD system, due to the SGX system being needed.

 

I don't know if you meant some particular type of B-Ray there, but normal B-rays will play fine (at least on AM3+, but I doubt there's anything special that FX has and other AMD doesn't).

 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

On 2/25/2018 at 2:25 AM, kirashi said:

Piracy will go down when studios realize that people will buy more if you make content easier to acquire.

Sadly, judging from the VHS->DVD-BRay evolution, they seem to be aiming for more piracy rather than less  From PAL vs NTSC, to arbitrary DVD regions, to "just give up already, we didn't mean for you to buy our discs"...

[Revan654]

14 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

I don't know if you meant some particular type of B-Ray there, but normal B-rays will play fine (at least on AM3+, but I doubt there's anything special that FX has and other AMD doesn't).

 

 

I'm talking 4K Blu-ray discs which does have special encryption that only SGX can decode "Legally".

 

 

[kirashi]

3 hours ago, Revan654 said:

I'm talking 4K Blu-ray discs which does have special encryption that only SGX can decode "Legally".

While I understand that it may not be legal to circumvent DRM where you live, I'd circumvent it anyway. Why? Because in a court of law, I'd argue "yes, I did circumvent the DRM because the distributor has created a system that prevents me from consuming the content I legally own a license for. The distributor has actually stolen from me by accepting my money in return for a product that does not work as advertised because it's protected behind an artificially created hardware encryption system that only hurts legally paying consumers like myself, and not because my computer is incapable of technically playing back the unprotected video file." Full disclosure: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but it does portray the broken reality our society faces around legally licensed content.

[Revan654]

2 hours ago, kirashi said:

While I understand that it may not be legal to circumvent DRM where you live, I'd circumvent it anyway. Why? Because in a court of law, I'd argue "yes, I did circumvent the DRM because the distributor has created a system that prevents me from consuming the content I legally own a license for. The distributor has actually stolen from me by accepting my money in return for a product that does not work as advertised because it's protected behind an artificially created hardware encryption system that only hurts legally paying consumers like myself, and not because my computer is incapable of technically playing back the unprotected video file." Full disclosure: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but it does portray the broken reality our society faces around legally licensed content.

I hate to break it to you but Canada has one of the worst DRM Law in existence. Breaking the DRM in any form (even legal ones ) will allow lawsuits to be filed against you.

[kirashi]

2 hours ago, Revan654 said:

I hate to break it to you but Canada has one of the worst DRM Law in existence. Breaking the DRM in any form (even legal ones ) will allow lawsuits to be filed against you.

Bring 'em on. I welcome any chance to demonstrate just how broken our consumer protection laws are now that we're well into the world of digital media.

[AshleyAshes]

8 hours ago, Revan654 said:

I hate to break it to you but Canada has one of the worst DRM Law in existence. Breaking the DRM in any form (even legal ones ) will allow lawsuits to be filed against you.

 

6 hours ago, kirashi said:

Bring 'em on. I welcome any chance to demonstrate just how broken our consumer protection laws are now that we're well into the world of digital media.

Well, except that it's basically impossible to actually be sued.  Yes by Canadian copyright law, while 'Format Shifting' is legal, if you have to bypass encryption or DRM to do so, it still violates copyright law but it is also undectable.  For a torrent, your IP, unless hidden by a VPN, is publicly viewable.  If you use a streaming service, your access is logged by the ISP and by the streaming provider so if they get taken down those logs could be aquired.  If you're HOSTING material, if legal means are used to take down your hosting, they could access the logs.  Meanwhile, format shifting your own media at home is done ENTIRELY offline, it is effectively undectable.  Also, no one fucking cares.  While that may be the letter of the law, even if they COULD detect it somehow, with the maximum payout for an individual's copyright violation is only $5000, NO COPYRIGHT HOLDER is going to get themselves in the headlines with 'PERSON SUED FOR COPYING OWN LEGALLY OWNED, BOUGHT AND PURCHASED, BLURAY TO THEIR IPAD.'

[Revan654]

6 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

 

Well, except that it's basically impossible to actually be sued.  Yes by Canadian copyright law, while 'Format Shifting' is legal, if you have to bypass encryption or DRM to do so, it still violates copyright law but it is also undectable.  For a torrent, your IP, unless hidden by a VPN, is publicly viewable.  If you use a streaming service, your access is logged by the ISP and by the streaming provider so if they get taken down those logs could be aquired.  If you're HOSTING material, if legal means are used to take down your hosting, they could access the logs.  Meanwhile, format shifting your own media at home is done ENTIRELY offline, it is effectively undectable.  Also, no one fucking cares.  While that may be the letter of the law, even if they COULD detect it somehow, with the maximum payout for an individual's copyright violation is only $5000, NO COPYRIGHT HOLDER is going to get themselves in the headlines with 'PERSON SUED FOR COPYING OWN LEGALLY OWNED, BOUGHT AND PURCHASED, BLURAY TO THEIR IPAD.'

I'm just saying  it does open the door up if they really want to go after the person they can. I was talking about Bill C-11, I only know a few laws in Canada, Since I don't live in Canada there meaningless to me. I recall one law if the content could not be bought by legal means within the country it could be downloaded from the web and be considered legal. I know the US has this law in effect. Have no idea if Canada still has this law in effect anymore or not. In Canada it was mainly designed for TV since not everyone could get all the shows they wanted to watch. This was before streaming came into play.

 

For torrents, use a seedbox, Much more secure and hidden(Usually hosted in other countries). The better services have no logs and they use SSH or SFTP to access any content.

 

Most use DMCA to enforce copyright and report the person. Usually outside the US and maybe one or two countries DMCA is useless. Usually they go after high profile content like Movies, Games and Applications.

 

Getting way off topic now.

 

Back onto Topic, I did buy a 4K Player for PC just to see what can and not not be done with below 6th Gen CPU and SGX not enabled. I do have software that will allow me to view any of Blu-Ray disc on any player(Which is legal Software). It will be interesting to see if 4K movie will playback or not without the that software and with the software. I can't stand using PowerDVD 16, I prefer using VLC.

 

 

[AshleyAshes]

2 minutes ago, Revan654 said:

Usually outside the US and maybe one or two countries DMCA is useless.

The DMCA is useless outside of ALL countries other than the United States.  US laws have no affect in any other country because that's how sovereignty works.  

[Revan654]

Just now, AshleyAshes said:

The DMCA is useless outside of ALL countries other than the United States.  US laws have no affect in any other country because that's how sovereignty works.  

If the company is registered in the US DMCA does apply outside the US.

[AshleyAshes]

2 minutes ago, Revan654 said:

If the company is registered in the US DMCA does apply outside the US.

Which 'company' do you mean?  The copyright holder?  Because no, if I pirate something produced by an American company, the DMCA can't be used against me. (It COULD be used against any American based HOSTING I was using to pirate if I was) but they would have to use Canadian law to go after me.  This is how the Berne Convention works.  Any Berne Convention signatory (It's nearly EVERY country) has to respect every other county's copyrights but only the local laws themselves apply.

 

This is why Disney works made prior 1968 become Public Domain in Canada last year.  Because while Canada must respect Copyright on works from the United States, only the Canadian term of 50 years applies to those works within Canada.  In the case of works produced by corporations, it's the majority share holder or owner's death + 50 years that stands here... Walt Disney died in 1968 so everything made prior, now 50 years later, is Public Domain in Canada.

[Stagea]

On 3/6/2018 at 10:25 PM, dalekphalm said:

Performing a "2:2 pulldown" as you call it, is basically native support. All that means is they repeat frames twice. So, for example, a panel with a 48 Hz refresh rate.

Note: looking into 2:2 pulldown, it seems this is a specific interpolation method, which doesn't seem to be applicable to 24p playback (mostly deals with PAL conversions of 25 fps to 50 fps).

 

3:2 pulldown is for playing 24p content on 60 Hz displays.

 

In fact, this is the benefit of pretty much any TV that's 120 Hz or 240 Hz. Both can be evenly divided by 24 and 60. This is optimal, as you can have judder free playback on both 24p or 60p content. Whereas a 48 Hz display would sacrifice smooth 60p content to ensure smooth 24p content.

 

I've personally never seen a Plasma that didn't have a refresh rate that was a multiple of 24. Most were 48 Hz, 72 Hz, or 96 Hz.

 

I don't know of any display that can natively refresh at 1080p/4K 24 Hz, aside from ones that use Adaptive Refresh Rate technology (AdaptiveSync/FreeSync/G-Sync). Basically all TV's that I've ever heard of that can do proper 24p all use a multiplication method (playback at 120 Hz, for example).

2:2 pulldowns are done on 50, 75 and 100 Hz panels too (2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 pulldown to be precise; some people just call it 'Euro pulldown'). They still call it 2:2 pulldown to be concise, but it is converting 24 Hz to 25 Hz. Panasonic sold a lot of 100 Hz Plasmas (mostly to PAL countries). I actually own one (and it lets you choose if you want it to run at 50Hz or 100Hz). These TVs exhibit noticeable judder when displaying 24 Hz material.

[dalekphalm]

8 hours ago, Stagea said:

2:2 pulldowns are done on 50, 75 and 100 Hz panels too (2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 pulldown to be precise; some people just call it 'Euro pulldown'). They still call it 2:2 pulldown to be concise, but it is converting 24 Hz to 25 Hz. Panasonic sold a lot of 100 Hz Plasmas (mostly to PAL countries). I actually own one (and it lets you choose if you want it to run at 50Hz or 100Hz). These TVs exhibit noticeable judder when displaying 24 Hz material.

Fair enough, though PAL has always been somewhat of an issue, because 50 doesn't "nicely" divide into 24.

[Donut417]

On 3/7/2018 at 2:54 PM, Revan654 said:

If the company is registered in the US DMCA does apply outside the US.

I think your mistaking DMCA with international treaties. DMCA is clearly a US law. Its the treaties the US has with other nations that protects copy rights outside the US. Which is why certain content might be only available  in certain countries. But as @AshleyAshes stated, each country has its own copy right laws. If a company wants to distribute in that said country then they have to follow that countries laws. So in the example @AshleyAshes said, Disney would go to the Canadian government if its works were being illegally shared, or they would go to the courts and pursue legal action under what ever Canadian law dictates. 

[AshleyAshes]

3 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

I think your mistaking DMCA with international treaties. DMCA is clearly a US law. Its the treaties the US has with other nations that protects copy rights outside the US. Which is why certain content might be only available  in certain countries. But as @AshleyAshes stated, each country has its own copy right laws. If a company wants to distribute in that said country then they have to follow that countries laws. So in the example @AshleyAshes said, Disney would go to the Canadian government if its works were being illegally shared, or they would go to the courts and pursue legal action under what ever Canadian law dictates. 

Granted, you're unlikey to see any public domain Disney works distributed in Canada without license fees.  Disney doesn't actually hold copyright on those works but they have control over anything newer than 1967, so it goes like this 'Hi, we see you are distributing 101 Dalmations on your TV network.  ...So you can NEVER have access to ANY of our works made after 1967, including EVERYTHING STAR WARS.  Sound good?  No?  Let's give you directions on where to park your dump truck full of 'Sorry Money'."

[Donut417]

8 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

Granted, you're unlikey to see any public domain Disney works distributed in Canada without license fees.  Disney doesn't actually hold copyright on those works but they have control over anything newer than 1967, so it goes like this 'Hi, we see you are distributing 101 Dalmations on your TV network.  ...So you can NEVER have access to ANY of our works made after 1967, including EVERYTHING STAR WARS.  Sound good?  No?  Let's give you directions on where to park your dump truck full of 'Sorry Money'."

That sounds exactly right. Extortion its works.