Looks like this has been the happening thread lately. I've been missing out.
"Seamless branching is more complicated as it involves encoding and multiplexing the files in such a way that they 'ease in and out of each other' for want of a better term."
This makes sense. I've loaded the MPEG of the SW crawl into an editor to parse through it, and you can see the various languages jump in and out as well. Very bizarre.
"however if MGM's Robocop release is anything to go by it appears not just anyone can achieve it."
No. That simply shows that MGM chose not to do it. You keep harping on this one example as proof, and yet it is anything but.
"MGM's Robocop offers 'intergrated branching' no seamless branching, because, well it's not seamless! Guess they were too stingy to go to the correct authoring house!"
Exactly!
"The problem with most of these solutions is that the crawl is far too smooth. Adding an expression to dirty up the movement ever so slightly gives a more natural looking result - but it is really personal preference"
Agreed. I based mine on the crawl from the Empire of Dreams, and while it looks very similar (and good by itself), it just doesn't have the "jumpiness" of the film crawl. If I ever learn how to convert an MPEG straight to AVID, I would post it.
"DL discs can be ordered online for ~$5 per. The prices are always dropping."
Where might this price be found?!?
"P.S. I am actually waiting for either Pioneer or Lite-On DVD-'DL-R' drives before I do DL... DVD+R compatibility blows."
I would like that option as well.
"2.) Anyone know whether DVD-Lab Pro will let you set the point in the film you want the layer break?"
I use DVDLab Pro as well, but I haven't looked in to this yet, since I don't have a DL burner (yet). Here is some info I found on layer breaks. I don't know if you can force a break in DLP, but maybe it will help
http://www.mmbforums.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=6922&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15
I would like to share some of my experiences on DVD-9 with you.
DVD-9 simply means a single sided disc containing data anywhere from 4.7GB+ to 8.5GB. It has two layers. The tricky point is the layer break address. There are some checking rules for before selecting layer break address on the DVD volume. DVD volume is the final authored DVD Video_ts. You may create DVD volume in DVD Lab Pro since it supports DVD-9.
The general checking rules for layer break are following:
1. Keep the video bit rate as low as possible in few VOBU's right before layer break.
2. Audio frame(s) must be terminated before layer break address
3. The beginning VOBU on the upper layer must be lined up with ECC block boundary. ECC stands for Error Correction. One ECC block contains 16 sections. In other words, the correction check is across 16 sections.
4. It would be better if the upper layer starts from a new chapter (Cell).
5. If the upper layer starts from a new chapter, then the seamless play flag should be off, but the time code must continue.
Since we have DVD-9 ROM and DVD-9 +R9, there are some differences:
1. On DVD-9 ROM, bottom layer (L0) must be larger than upper layer (L1).
2. On DVD-9 +R9, data length on both layers must be equal
3. On DVD-9 ROM, L0 must start from a new CELL.
4. On DVD-9 +R9, it will NOT make any difference if the video bit rate remains same at the layer break address. Audio frame may not need to be terminated before layer break.
5. On DVD-9 ROM, it does not need to have even data length on both layers. However L0 is longer than or equal to L1.
6. On DVD-9 ROM, L0 can hold up to 4.7 GB data. L1 only can hold up to 3.8 GB data.
7. On DVD-9 +R9, both layers can hold up to 4.27 GB data. The total cannot exceed 8,547,991,552 bytes.
DVD Lab Pro burning routine supports DVD-9 +R9. I think it will automatically search for the best layer break address before burning.
Your crash may not be related to wrong layer break address. Since DVD+9R is very new, some players may not recognize the phyical property of +9R.
Here I also want to point out about the term of "Book Type". It is the offical term stated in DVD Book 1. Actually it is a parameter in the Control Data block. The Book type represents all cerified disc types by DVD Forum. Neither DVD+R, DVD+RW or DVD+R dual layer has been certified by DVD Forum. Therefore Book Type DOES NOT apply to +R camp. However Book Type is not the only way to find out the disc type. Again, DISC TYPE is not a DVD term. Actaully it is a disc format used in the Standard SFF (Mount Fuji). I believe a device looks for the disc format when a disc is first loaded to the device. The device will detect if the provided disc format being supported or not. For example HP 300 will not support DVD-R disc format.
The question is whether we can change the Book Type or not.
The answer is:
1. When device firmware allows, user can call SendDVDStruct packet command to change the physical page in the disc lead-in area.
2. When it is a DVD-R authoring format, user always can call SendDVDStruct packet command to alter the physical page in the lead-in area.
Can we change the Book Type on a DVD+RW so it can play like DVD-ROM?
The answer is 'not sure'. It is because the device looks for the other phyical parameters to determine the disc format. The "Control Data" block may not be reached before the device rejects the disc.
Now if the device recognizes the disc format, there is no need to change the book type.
For example, my old pioneer player was built in 2000. It plays DVD+R9 perfectly. I am sure the plalyer does not read the Book Type. In fact there is no 'Book Type' imbedded in the +R9 disc.
Your crash could be caused by some other reasons.
Moonman
I also have a procedure for creating Seamless Branching with Scenarist. I don't use the program myself, but if anyone is interested, I'll post it (it's a Word Doc with screen shots, so it'll take some formatting.) The experts can read up on it and check its efficacy.
"There is virtually no difference between 'Faces' and the DC, and the DC is more trouble to deal with. I'd work from 'Faces', too -- and I have both."
While the master for both may have been the same, the treatment is not. The Def Col has numerous known glitches, while the Faces set does not. The Faces set has also had less noise reduction applied to it and, to my eye, it has better contrast as well. 
