DVDRB output file size

[r3n4ud]

For some reason, when I tried backing up Wedding Crashers, the output file size was 3.9 gb and not 4.5 gb. Anyone have any idea why the file didn't output to fit an entire dvd? :confused:

I'm using CCE Basic, Full Backup and Steal Space from Extras (25%).

[casperse]

Have you done reauthoring....Editing on the movie before using DVDrebuilder?
If so try to run it without doing this

A quick fix... could be to just use the same settings and define a larger size as target in the ini file for this movie only..

CCETargetSectors= 2236400 sectors, almost always gives 4.32 + (0,55G)

Aprox:
CCETargetSectors= 2524300

And see if you get it closer to the full size DVD-r

[r3n4ud]

Thanks for the help. I appreciate it! I'll try changing the targetsector and see what that gives me.

BTW, I didn't mess around with the movie before shrinking. First time this has happened me me though without removing parts of a movie before hand.

[jdobbs]

Is this the NTSC version? I'm picking that up today and will give it a test run.

Also -- what version of DVD-RB are you using?

[jptheripper]

isnt odd that everytime there is a very undersized movie, its always 3.7gb-3.9? It seems like if it we a random error it would be more variable. It almost seems as files are systematically smaller for some reason.

[jdobbs]

There was a sizing issue at one time with MPEG audio... that's why I asked for the version... I also have to comment that you can't burn 4.5GB on a DVD-5... I assume you mean 4.35.

[Mr. Monte]

Was this a OPV (1 pass) or did you use multiple passes?

[jdobbs]

Well I picked up Wedding Crashers, NTSC/R1 and ran it through using CCE Basic last night.... it was 4.32GB which is exactly correct for my settings. I didn't use "steal space", though... which I will try next.

[r3n4ud]

Sorry for not replying earlier folks.

I'm using the NTSC version and the latest version of DVDRB Pro. I was trying to use 25% steal space and the output file was 3.9gb.

I inserted the CCEtagetsector in the .ini file and re-ran DVDRB with same settings and the output file is now fine, being 4.36 gb.

[apfraats]

I hope it's weel known now, but using 2.70.x.x versions can have undesized results.

Increasing CCETARGETSECTORS will help, but if you have a DVD that's falling into the CCE 2.70.X.X undersizing category, youre next DVD will be oversized.

Just look at THREAD 'UNDERSIZING USING CCE 2.70'.

[jdobbs]

There does appear to be something in CCE v2.70 that makes it's output less accurate than previous versions.... but it only happens every now-and-then and is quite unpredictable. I've haven't been able to make any correlation as to a specific source type yet.

But as I've said before, worrying about trying to fill a disc to the edge is one of those things people do that is given much more weight than it deserves. The best judgement of output is visual quality.

[o324712]

I have a few encodings (don't remember which ones now) that also came in at 3.9 GB. For myself I am using 2.70 and stealing space from extras (25 and 50%).

HTH,
Rich

[jdobbs]

Look at the bitrates and quantization levels you get. You'll find that sometimes when you use Movie-Only or high reductions on extras that CCE will max out. In other words, it will calculate the Q for the output, decide that it is "perfect" and refuse to add more bitrate to it.

Another possibility is the fact that DVD-RB, by default, will not allow output to exceed it's original bitrates. Doing so can cause problems when reintegrating the original audio streams. It comes down to a similar scenario as the first case... you can't make second generation stream better than its source.

But both of these are rare... most of the time you'll find a forgotten setting somewhere is the root of the cause.

[drvs]

Despite using this program for a while, it's my first post so I first have to thank JDobbs for his awesome program and dedication to his community.

But just wanted to add that I too have not had any problems until the last update. Then i copied Requiem for a Dream and the .iso came out 3.9 gig. This replicated over 5 different trials and 2 computers.

entire disc, cce 2.7, default matrices, but i did do some editing removing extras via rebuilder after stage 1. I did shrink the menus, but no other preprocessing. I've never had this problem until the most recent version.

I had to hack the .ini file as was suggested. I'll report if this keeps occuring with other titles, and of course I'm willing to do more tests to help isolate the problem, if it does indeed exist.
thanks

[jdobbs]

Coincidence. Nothing in the last release of DVD-RB was changed in terms of calculation of bitrates etc... you'll also find (as apfraats noted) that switching to earlier versions of CCE will result in more consistent sizing -- regardless of the DVD-RB version.

[jdobbs]

Ok... I've done Wedding Crashers with every possible setting. 0%, 10% , 25% extra reduction.... anyway -- it comes out to the exact predicted size every time (4.32GB).

I think a lot of these sizing errors are a result of forgotten settings. In the next version I'm going to add a "change all settings to defaults" selection.

[jptheripper]

i am thinking we need something like a verbose log file option.

such as after rebuild text in log would say:

vts1 - original video size 400mb - encoded 84% reduction, 5 pass cce2.7 - predicted size 370mb - encoded size 368mb
vts2 - blanked
vts3 - original video size 100mb - steal space 25% +84%reduction, 5 pass cce2.7 - predicted 63mb - encoded size 64mb

etc..

that way you can easily see if the undersizing is a result of a bad setting (user error) or a bad calculation (programming error)

what do you think?

[r3n4ud]

Since jdobbs did Wedding Crashers with 25% steal space and the output file was okay, it must be my fault that the output file I received was 3.9gb.

Just wondering what you mean by forgotten settings? I've been using the same settings for every movie and this is the first time I have this undersizing problem.

Also, I think jptheripper has a great idea for a verbose log file option. Just so we know what the compression is for the dvd.

[jdobbs]

Delete you REBUILDER.INI file and then redo the paths etc. in the setup screen. Try running it again after doing that.

[apfraats]

Reset to defaults ??????

I even don't remember what they were......:D

[blutach]

For info: There appears to be more than one version of Wedding Crashers around - one is straight CSS and another appears to have a quasi ARccOS protection (there may also be a 3rd version out there).

Anyone who has this latter version will need to use the method in How to backup ARccOS DVDs (http://forum.digital-digest.com/showthread.php?t=56831), in particular FixVTS (www.videohelp.com/~FixVTS) after your rip. This should get a properly compliant DVD for processing in DVD Rebuilder (http://dvd-rb.dvd2go.org/) and minimise chances for target sector errors.

Regards

[apfraats]

My first question when having problems with encoding/sizing is always:

1) Was the DVD protected in any way (not being standard CSS)
2) If yes --> Remove dirt with DVDREMAKE PRO

and dirt is: ALL CELL COMMANDS of specific PGC and all (starting) CELLS of PGC that contains dummy material due to read-error based protection.
These cells can really mess up everything, because they contain 'undefined' material.

A player SKIPS THIS PART, before using DVD-RB you have to delete this part.

The last VTS you can ignore most of the time if it's giving an IFO/BUP file patching error in DVD-DECRYPTER.

Of course youre method will probably do the same, and mine needs DVD-REMAKE PRO, but I see this tool as a must have one for everybody doing regelular backup tasks.

DVD-REMAKE has the advantage it lines up cells and related info, so structure is restored to standards as far as possible.

It's saying 'recovering cell information' when loading these DVD's.

[jptheripper]

apfraats - 1st im not accusing anything, just want to make sure

i just wanted to check you are using a legit copy of dvdremake, as the only cracked version i know of intentionally adds problems into the disk.

[apfraats]

Cracks ???

Nope, not for such value for money ratio.....

Just nicely registered and automatically informed of any updates.

Therefore I saw DVD-RB is using a look alike (I didn't say 'The same') way of protecting itself....

As long as a programm does pay for itself I just buy it.....

Like DVD-RB-PRO (that I even don't consider as a payment, but as a rounding error on my bank account :D ).

Like all critical and usefull software I use.

I don't consider all software critical and usefull however, especially not software that has a 'trial' status. :) That is just for trial or it wouldn't be named that way.

You never know when it stops performing.....

And when it does, you can always start considering buying it, which in some cases I defenitily won't.

Do not ask me difficult questions however, I'm simple minded :D :D on ocassion.

[jptheripper]

no problem, as i said no accusation, just wanted to rule it out