Incompatible discs

[WTS1]

These days, a burning program that doesn't give you that level of control is rare, and who knows what else it might be missing. If you use such a program, I suggest looking for something more up-to-date.

I guess I would put this into the opinion, and not the "absolute fact" category. Setting the booktype to rom is nearly as old as there are recorders. Most burning applications did not support it directly back then. There are a lot that do support it now, but lacking that feature hardly puts the burning application into the dumper. Even the apps that do support it, don't always support the burner you have (even if the burner is able to do it). I think it's a bit of a leap to assume that lacking support of that feature means your burning application must be lacking in other 'unknown' and mysterious ways.

If you aren't burning (+) media, then look no further. If you do, then I would look for burners/and burning apps that do support it--it's worth it for the small bump in disc acceptability you'll get.

Jim

[THoff]

OK, let me explain why I wrote that.

Booktype support has been around for years, and any burning program that doesn't support it has either not been updated by the publisher or the user.

It's true that there are several flavors of booktype support (BenQ, HP, LG, LiteOn, NEC, Nu Tech, Plextor, Ricoh, possibly more), but support for at least some of these should be included in a burning program that is current, unless the publisher is intentionally not doing it. The same is also true for the various buffer underrun prevention technologies like BurnProof, BurnFree, JustLink and others -- there are multiple flavors that an up-to-date burning program should support in order to avoid spitting out coasters. Again you can probably do without, but again you are compromising.

It is also important to separate burning programs from authoring programs. I don't use the same software to burn the disk images as I do to create them, and I'm also not saying you should ditch your favorite authoring program just because it doesn't have booktype support.

[peterC]

Valuable thread. Thanks fellas.

[WTS1]

OK, let me explain why I wrote that.

Booktype support has been around for years, and any burning program that doesn't support it has either not been updated by the publisher or the user.

It's true that there are several flavors of booktype support (BenQ, HP, LG, LiteOn, NEC, Nu Tech, Plextor, Ricoh, possibly more), but support for at least some of these should be included in a burning program that is current, unless the publisher is intentionally not doing it. The same is also true for the various buffer underrun prevention technologies like BurnProof, BurnFree, JustLink and others -- there are multiple flavors that an up-to-date burning program should support in order to avoid spitting out coasters. Again you can probably do without, but again you are compromising.

It is also important to separate burning programs from authoring programs. I don't use the same software to burn the disk images as I do to create them, and I'm also not saying you should ditch your favorite authoring program just because it doesn't have booktype support.

If I said 'authoring' program, I apologize for misleading anyone, but I think I said burning program (at least that's what I used to reference the most).

The booktype setting for ROM is really not a 'supported' feature, it's a trick to get a very small percentage (mostly older) dvd players to accept recordable media that they might otherwise not play. It's only supported by some burners (and some that do so automatically for DL but don't for single layer--and you can't override it), and I would bet many here use burners that aren't on that list. My point about this is to clarify to those who might be spooked into running and changing their whole process (and buy new burners/burning applications/etc.) after reading all this is that not having that option isn't the end of the world. Many here still use burning apps without the latest update because their work flow is solid for them. That might include older versions of burning applications (and that doesn't mean centuries old) that didn't include booktype setting for rom. Whether it's Padus DiskJuggler, Gear, or older versions of Nero (RecordNow, Toast, etc.)--most did not have that option from the get go, and yet I think worries that because they didn't back then they must be lacking in other essential features are unfounded. I'll bet there are many here with older automated disc duplicators that don't have that feature enabled. In fact, a lot of the duplicators use drives that don't support it.

If you read the link you posted (about mid-section), there is a disclaimer about making that setting. Just food for thought--there is more than one view on whether it's a good idea or not. A lot of people here have had great success, while blissfully ignorant the 'feature' ever existed.

Jim

[Chris Barnard]

here is what I would do to fix an existing DVD with minimum effort

Anton,

Thanks for the replies. Read the whole thread through and I'm going to re-read it and make some notes and digest etc. Lots of food for thought. However, what I really wanted to start with was a step-by step plan (exactly as you did initially) of how to export a project from Edius, working through procedures up until finishing burning, rather than starting from the already burnt disc.

In anticipation,

Chris

[Chris Barnard]

Thanks for the help guys. To clarify my thought processes (sometimes a little stuttery and pixelated) I've broken down what seems to be the major steps.

I use TY discs (dunno if they are Japanese or not!), encode at 6000 CBR. Drive is a Pioneer DVR-108.

I know I'm asking a lot of eveyone's time, but I am nearly there and I beg your patience in answering my questions below:


1. Export my project in Edius. Do I first export the audio using a program like TMPEnc, and then export the video in Procoder Express? Is there a product that will export both audio and video at the same time whilst encoding the audio as AC3. Is there an AC3 plugin for procoder Express?

2. Presumably I create an MPEG2 Elementary Stream?

3. At this stage, should I examine the two streams for errors, overall integrity etc? If so, what programs should I use?

4. Combine the two streams in DVD Moviefactory? Any special parameters?

5. What burning parameters should I set?

6. After burning, what tests should I run on the disc.


At the moment I tend to encode the video at 6000kps, CBR. Scared of going higher.
HATE DVD Moviefactory. Have DVD WS, but will not work on this machine. What's a good mid level dvd authoring pgm?

[antonsvideo]

if you don't have ProCoder3, then you can use Tmpeg 4 Xpress

here is how to use in Pal (similar settings for NTSC)

1. export timeline to CanopusHQ (should take less than 10 min per hour of timeline)

2. www.videoproductions.com.au/html/tmpeg4.html

3. use a program like DVD_LAB Pro to author the DVD (dead simple)

4. burn like this

https://www.videoproductions.com.au/html/dvd-lab-pro3.html

if you do have Procoder3, than you can export from timeline direct to m2v+ac3 or direct to VIDEO_TS folder for burning a menuless DVD
settings:
closed GOP
ac3 at 256
video bitrate variable 1 pass or 2 pass with bitrate no more than 7700, 8000 max and 2000min
never use less than 2000 min as this is illegal DVD spec
same method https://www.videoproductions.com.au/...-lab-pro3.html

[THoff]

It's only supported by some burners (and some that do so automatically for DL but don't for single layer--and you can't override it), and I would bet many here use burners that aren't on that list.

There is a list of DVD burners on VideoHelp.com which can be searched for booktype/bitsetting support. The list contains 1026 burners, and 356 of them have this feature. I'd guess that most the ones that do not support it are older models. If you restrict the search to those that support dual-layer +R media (anything that doesn't is likely several years old), you get 526 drives, 224 or 42% of which support bitsetting.

If you read the link you posted (about mid-section), there is a disclaimer about making that setting.

Yes, there is that disclaimer, and the same disclaimer immediately points out that since all DVD players are required to read disks marked as "DVD-ROM", using bitsetting should not cause any problems.

[WTS1]

I think we both agree that if you can set it to ROM, you should do it. I point out the disclaimer (and this is not the only place where you'll find such a warning on this topic) because it's not a universally held position. Does it affect me, no. Is it an accepted part of the recordable standard for burning dvd video to disc, no--it's a work around to trick older players.

If you can't do it (set the booktype to ROM), don't lose sleep over it. Your link is a good one to look at (that site in has some good resources in general)--the majority of burners do not support it. This feature alone is not one I'd recommend buying all new equipment over. Assuming the only reason a burner doesn't support it is because it's old is erroneous. Type in "Pioneer" and do the same search. There are a lot of duplication towers built with Pioneer's. Almost all of my burners are Pioneer's. Now the good thing is that if you are burning (+)DL discs with them, they (Pioneer) will automatically set the booktype to ROM. You just can't do that for single layer media.

The irony in all of this is that while the trend is probably for more burners to support this feature, there is an ever dwindling pool of set top players you would really need it for. Because I couldn't set my booktype to ROM with any of my burners, I generally would burn (-) media. If I did put my projects on (+) media and had it fail to play on someones player, I'd give them a (-) copy. This was no big deal (especially since the number that wouldn't play was very small). DL media is a different bird. You should not output your project to (-) media, so you are limited to (+)DL as your only choice. Fortunately most of the burners automatically set it for you--regardless of what burning application you use, output direct from your authoring application, or what OS platform you used. (+)DL are (IMO) more tricky to get to work in the first place (and they cost more), so minimizing any and all potential glitches is worth it.

Jim