That’s odd. There are lots of 4:3 content out there and this is not an exotic requirement by any means. I’d expect developers dedicated to build a video streaming platform to already possess this...
Basically, the Disney Plus team had to reconfigure its content-delivery engine and build a brand-new feature to accommodate a concept it hadn’t previously anticipated: Giving viewers access to the same content but with different underlying video attributes
That’s odd. There are lots of 4:3 content out there and this is not an exotic requirement by any means. I’d expect developers dedicated to build a video streaming platform to already possess this very trivial and well know information.
It doesn't completely surprise me that they hadn't accounted for that in initial design of the overall Disney Plus system. Building a Netflix-scale streaming service isn't one of Disney's core...
It doesn't completely surprise me that they hadn't accounted for that in initial design of the overall Disney Plus system. Building a Netflix-scale streaming service isn't one of Disney's core competencies, so I think mistakes and technical debt are to be expected from a team that had to build such a service from scratch.
I imagine that, over time, if Disney Plus remains successful and grows, they'll become a powerhouse organization in the streaming world as they get better and Disney starts to see that particular team as more important.
IDK. Disney has vast resources and experience in serving video content. They’re pioneers of the home video market, and are well aware of the intricate needs of preserving aspect ratio. Mistakes...
IDK. Disney has vast resources and experience in serving video content. They’re pioneers of the home video market, and are well aware of the intricate needs of preserving aspect ratio. Mistakes are understandable, but I believe it’s also reasonable to hold Disney to a higher standard. Besides, Netflix was popularizing a fairly newer model, while Disney had several successful competitors to study.
Unless I'm reading it wrong, I think there's some misunderstanding of the problem here. It sounds like it wasn't a problem that 4:3 content exists to be streamed, but a problem of switching...
Exemplary
Unless I'm reading it wrong, I think there's some misunderstanding of the problem here. It sounds like it wasn't a problem that 4:3 content exists to be streamed, but a problem of switching seamlessly between 4:3 and 16:9.
(emphasis mine)
Disney Streaming Services uses the MovieLabs Digital Distribution Framework (MDDF) industry standard, which defines the methods for representing content assets and associated metadata. The issue was that the existing content model assumed only one video edit (while multiple audio or subtitle components could be associated with that video asset) for each Entertainment Identifier Registry (EIDR) ID tag.
So the DSS team revamped its content model to introduce the concept of multiple media “facets,” or multiple combinations of audio, video, and subtitle components. Now, components delivered under the same EIDR ID can be grouped in multiple combinations, laying the groundwork to support user-selected aspect ratio preference while maintaining existing content interaction features.
Audio and subtitles already were built around the idea of a user seamlessly switching between different versions (and off/on). This makes sense to consider, as the watching environment, content volume, etc. can change over the course of a particular viewing session and you want to make it as smooth as possible (i.e. no reloading the page, restarting the video, etc.).
Users wanting to change the viewing aspect ratio of a video, let alone while watching it, wasn't really considered (user's tv/monitor zoom capabilities aside). Most streaming video content doesn't have multiple variants offered these days (aspect ratio or otherwise). Additionally, the most common reason to want a different aspect ratio is to avoid black bars when switching to a different device, and switching devices is already a complete viewing disruption.
With that in mind, it's easy to see why the standard model only accounted for one video track with multiple audio and subtitle tracks. I don't think I would consider that a mistake or technical debt, and I'm not going to fault Disney for following an existing industry standard. Netflix doesn't let you change aspect ratio of a video either. Now Disney has a situation where they want to offer multiple video options along with multiple audio and subtitle options, with seamless switching between all combinations, which is not as trivial as changing videoId = 5 to videoId = [5, 6].
The issue was that Disney+ defaulted to zoom and crop their 4:3 videos, effectively removing visual portions of the frame. They created a problem for themselves. Unless there are unfixable...
Netflix doesn't let you change aspect ratio of a video either
The issue was that Disney+ defaulted to zoom and crop their 4:3 videos, effectively removing visual portions of the frame. They created a problem for themselves. Unless there are unfixable problems with the master copies, you do not stream large portions of your library missing essential content. That simple. The reason other platforms are okay without this complicated workaround is that they made the right decision in the first place.
This actually makes me think less of Disney+ as a whole, although better of their tech team specifically. If they'd lacked the ability to play 4:3 content it would have been a big oversight, but I...
This actually makes me think less of Disney+ as a whole, although better of their tech team specifically.
If they'd lacked the ability to play 4:3 content it would have been a big oversight, but I could still see it as an oversight. It's the kind of forehead-slapping "oh god how did we miss that?!" moment that happens from time to time on large projects with many different managers and moving parts. Still shouldn't happen, but it's an honest mistake.
As it turns out they did have the ability to play 4:3, but someone made the decision to destructively force it into a 16:9 frame instead. And then someone else made the further decision to do a whole tech build in order to retain those edits rather than just replacing them with the unaltered content. Both of these are active decisions, not mistakes; both of them are bad decisions.
Wouldn't it have been easier to just throw away the garbage "remastered" versions? They are inferior in every conceivable way. For the three people out there who prefer their 4:3 content ruined,...
Wouldn't it have been easier to just throw away the garbage "remastered" versions? They are inferior in every conceivable way. For the three people out there who prefer their 4:3 content ruined, give them a "zoom" button.
A lot of Disney's own content comes in varying screen ratios: the old cartoon shorts, for instance. How did they not anticipate this need for variable screen ratios? /rhetorical
A lot of Disney's own content comes in varying screen ratios: the old cartoon shorts, for instance. How did they not anticipate this need for variable screen ratios? /rhetorical
An addendum: Netflix usually provides 4:3 content in its original aspect ratio only. It works for them. I never heard of people demanding their old shows to be cropped. As far as I can tell this...
An addendum: Netflix usually provides 4:3 content in its original aspect ratio only. It works for them. I never heard of people demanding their old shows to be cropped. As far as I can tell this whole thing could have been easily avoided by simply following what I consider a best practice: present the content in the aspect ratio in which it was originally released. No need for complicated workarounds.
Why not just put them up as an entirely separate series? That would negate the need for this entirely. People who care could easily seek out the original aspect ratio (I'm guessing most people...
Why not just put them up as an entirely separate series? That would negate the need for this entirely. People who care could easily seek out the original aspect ratio (I'm guessing most people won't care).
That’s odd. There are lots of 4:3 content out there and this is not an exotic requirement by any means. I’d expect developers dedicated to build a video streaming platform to already possess this very trivial and well know information.
It doesn't completely surprise me that they hadn't accounted for that in initial design of the overall Disney Plus system. Building a Netflix-scale streaming service isn't one of Disney's core competencies, so I think mistakes and technical debt are to be expected from a team that had to build such a service from scratch.
I imagine that, over time, if Disney Plus remains successful and grows, they'll become a powerhouse organization in the streaming world as they get better and Disney starts to see that particular team as more important.
IDK. Disney has vast resources and experience in serving video content. They’re pioneers of the home video market, and are well aware of the intricate needs of preserving aspect ratio. Mistakes are understandable, but I believe it’s also reasonable to hold Disney to a higher standard. Besides, Netflix was popularizing a fairly newer model, while Disney had several successful competitors to study.
Unless I'm reading it wrong, I think there's some misunderstanding of the problem here. It sounds like it wasn't a problem that 4:3 content exists to be streamed, but a problem of switching seamlessly between 4:3 and 16:9.
(emphasis mine)
Audio and subtitles already were built around the idea of a user seamlessly switching between different versions (and off/on). This makes sense to consider, as the watching environment, content volume, etc. can change over the course of a particular viewing session and you want to make it as smooth as possible (i.e. no reloading the page, restarting the video, etc.).
Users wanting to change the viewing aspect ratio of a video, let alone while watching it, wasn't really considered (user's tv/monitor zoom capabilities aside). Most streaming video content doesn't have multiple variants offered these days (aspect ratio or otherwise). Additionally, the most common reason to want a different aspect ratio is to avoid black bars when switching to a different device, and switching devices is already a complete viewing disruption.
With that in mind, it's easy to see why the standard model only accounted for one video track with multiple audio and subtitle tracks. I don't think I would consider that a mistake or technical debt, and I'm not going to fault Disney for following an existing industry standard. Netflix doesn't let you change aspect ratio of a video either. Now Disney has a situation where they want to offer multiple video options along with multiple audio and subtitle options, with seamless switching between all combinations, which is not as trivial as changing
videoId = 5tovideoId = [5, 6].The issue was that Disney+ defaulted to zoom and crop their 4:3 videos, effectively removing visual portions of the frame. They created a problem for themselves. Unless there are unfixable problems with the master copies, you do not stream large portions of your library missing essential content. That simple. The reason other platforms are okay without this complicated workaround is that they made the right decision in the first place.
This actually makes me think less of Disney+ as a whole, although better of their tech team specifically.
If they'd lacked the ability to play 4:3 content it would have been a big oversight, but I could still see it as an oversight. It's the kind of forehead-slapping "oh god how did we miss that?!" moment that happens from time to time on large projects with many different managers and moving parts. Still shouldn't happen, but it's an honest mistake.
As it turns out they did have the ability to play 4:3, but someone made the decision to destructively force it into a 16:9 frame instead. And then someone else made the further decision to do a whole tech build in order to retain those edits rather than just replacing them with the unaltered content. Both of these are active decisions, not mistakes; both of them are bad decisions.
There's a Medium post by the VP at Disney Streaming Services that goes into detail about the technical aspects of this.
It looks like I cannot read without an account on mobile. I use Pocket but still: not cool, Medium.
How about this?
Thank you for the link. I know about outline.com, but I had already saved it to Pocket.
Wouldn't it have been easier to just throw away the garbage "remastered" versions? They are inferior in every conceivable way. For the three people out there who prefer their 4:3 content ruined, give them a "zoom" button.
A lot of Disney's own content comes in varying screen ratios: the old cartoon shorts, for instance. How did they not anticipate this need for variable screen ratios? /rhetorical
An addendum: Netflix usually provides 4:3 content in its original aspect ratio only. It works for them. I never heard of people demanding their old shows to be cropped. As far as I can tell this whole thing could have been easily avoided by simply following what I consider a best practice: present the content in the aspect ratio in which it was originally released. No need for complicated workarounds.
Why not just put them up as an entirely separate series? That would negate the need for this entirely. People who care could easily seek out the original aspect ratio (I'm guessing most people won't care).
But since it's here, let's hope that they use it to offer the original, unmodified versions of movies.