PDA

View Full Version : VIDEO_TS file too big for 4.38GB DVD


darkstar25
2010-02-24, 11:35 PM
I downloaded a live concert that included two VIDEO_TS folders, each labeled disc 1 and 2 respectively. This leads me to believe they can fit onto one DVD each. Yet the typical DVD size is 4.38 GB and one of these VIDEO_TS folders is over 5.5 GB. My 'burn' software for MAC tells me there was a problem authoring the DVD. I assume this has to do with the size. Is there a way to get the folder to fit on the DVD? Do I need to shrink the folder size?

Any help would be great. Thanks!

frank68
2010-02-24, 11:54 PM
I'm not too much of an expert though, but I think you've two options:

- burn it on a double layer DVD (8.5 GB space).

- compress the Video TS-file. I do that with the burnibg software "Toast" on my Mac.

hope, this was helpfull,

cheers!

AAR.oner
2010-02-25, 09:09 AM
its a 2 DVD set...burn each VIDEO_TS folder to a separate DVD

jameskg
2010-02-25, 09:45 AM
I downloaded a live concert that included two VIDEO_TS folders, each labeled disc 1 and 2 respectively. This leads me to believe they can fit onto one DVD each. Yet the typical DVD size is 4.38 GB and one of these VIDEO_TS folders is over 5.5 GB. My 'burn' software for MAC tells me there was a problem authoring the DVD. I assume this has to do with the size. Is there a way to get the folder to fit on the DVD? Do I need to shrink the folder size?

Any help would be great. Thanks!


since one of the VIDEO_TS folders is over the limit of a single layer DVD (DVD5), you'll need to burn it is a double layer disc (DVD9) to fit, just as someone said above.

It might help if you report the torrent and explain the issue briefly so the video mods can make a note on the torrent that it requires a dual-layer burner and media.


You can also shrink it, as was mentioned, but you'll lose quality... generally has all that nasty aliasing when you do that.

lordsmurf
2010-03-04, 12:37 AM
You can also shrink it, as was mentioned, but you'll lose quality... generally has all that nasty aliasing when you do that.
I don't think I've ever seen aliasing from a transcode ("shrink"). :wtf:
Artifacts, blocks, noise -- sure .... but aliasing?

Interesting.

jameskg
2010-03-04, 12:56 AM
You can also shrink it, as was mentioned, but you'll lose quality... generally has all that nasty aliasing when you do that.
I don't think I've ever seen aliasing from a transcode ("shrink"). :wtf:
Artifacts, blocks, noise -- sure .... but aliasing?

Interesting.


if it was sourced from VHS tape, or any other inherently interlaced video source, then yes, aliasing that would make Jennifer Garner blush - unless the DVD9 > recode we're talking about is played back on a progressive scan player... that helps a lot to eliminate the aliasing from the interlaced source video.

lordsmurf
2010-03-04, 02:02 AM
Do you have any examples of this to show?

Throwing out excess bitrate cannot affect a picture in this manner (aliasing). That's just technically not possible. I can see how visible macroblocking or mosquito artifacting could sometimes look like aliasing -- but even then, not really aliasing.

helps a lot to eliminate the aliasing from the interlaced source
Huh? That sounds like you're suggesting interlaced video be deinterlaced. Deinterlacing video definitely added aliasing artifacts, though the severity can vary from method to method. HDTV sets all scale and convert progressive.

Interlacing can be aliased in nature, but nothing can fix that (not even deinterlacing, which just makes it worse). Well, I guess you could blur it along an axis or two, but then you'd lose resolution and detail.

Again, would be interesting to see some samples of it. :)