Transfering non copy protected DVDs' to a PC

[videobruce]

The only time I have transfered a DVD to a HDD is when I use CloneDVD2 (or DVDFab). To make a long story short, I have some 'home made' DVDs' that have playback issues and I wanted to transfer the DVD to a PC so another program can 'clean' up the files (so I am told).
Since there isn't any copy protection issue, I did a simple C&P from the disc to the HDD. The process took about as long as it would if I used a DVD ripping program. I assumed this would of been a 'simple' file transfer that wouldn't take that long (for the size).

When I did this C&P, was the O/S (XP Pro) doing a 'ripping' process instead of just transferring data as if the files were just data?

[filmboss80]

If the disc is scratched -- or if it's just a crappy brand of disc -- you may get bad sectors or file errors when you simply move the DVD contents over to the hard drive.

Although DVD Decrypter has not been updated in a few years, it is still a good ripping tool for handling certain errors -- even with non-copy-protected discs. For really troublesome discs, I have also used Isobuster.

But to answer your question; no the OS wasn't "ripping" per se, it was doing a data transfer process, but it may have gotten stuck on disc errors and had to slow down. (Such may happen with various ripping tools too. It just all depends on what you're dealing with, in terms of DVD media.)

[Baldrick]

The "ripping" part doesn't take that much extra time. What matters is mainly the dvd reader and media. Like home burned dvdrs may be read at a lower speed then commercial dvds.

[videobruce]

Disc was new and had no scratches.
Let me rephrase the question, what is the difference between just doing a C&P from a DVD vs using a DVD ripper program??

[MOVIEGEEK]

You need a DVD ripper program if the disc is copy-protected(eg store bought), if you want to copy a homemade disc then just C&P(I prefer drag and drop).If the disc has errors then your PC may choke on it, in that case use IsoBuster.
As Baldrick mentioned time to rip depends on how fast your writer is, most writers rip SL DVD's very fast while DL DVD's can be very slow. Some writers such as Pioneer or Plextor are set at the factory to read DVD's slow.

[videobruce]

You need a DVD ripper program if the disc is copy-protected(eg store bought)

As stated, it is not CP.

just C&P(I prefer drag and drop)

That's the same thing.

These are SL DVDs'.

[MOVIEGEEK]

C&P is not the same thing because some OS's have a limit on how much you can put in the clipboard.
Try this: copy a folder with say 500MB and paste it to another folder, then drag a 500MB folder to another folder....see which one is faster.
C&P is best used on images and text.

[videobruce]

The contents of a SL DVD fit.
I'm talking about from removable media to a HDD, not from one drive to another. Also, are you talking about copying from-to the same HDD or another HDD??

[midders]

C&P is not the same thing because some OS's have a limit on how much you can put in the clipboard.

When dealing with files, C&P doesn't use the clipboard for the contents of the file, only "pointers" to them; you can C&P the contents of a full 2Tb hard drive without problem on every modern OS that I know of. Any difference in speed between drag'n'drop and C&P will be due to other factors.

[MOVIEGEEK]

Also, are you talking about copying from-to the same HDD or another HDD??

I thought we were talking about ripping a DVD to your PC.

[videobruce]

When dealing with files, C&P doesn't use the clipboard for the contents of the file, only "pointers" to them

Thank you. As I said, C&P and D&D is the same thing, just different ways to do it.

I thought we were talking about ripping a DVD to your PC.

We were, but you suggested testing transfering files between folders.

[MOVIEGEEK]

Actually using C&P on Windows saves the file or folder to your RAM until you reboot or clear it, if you don't have enough RAM then it caches it in VM.
http://www.worldstart.com/tips/tips.php/869
"Move To" is the same thing as D&D but use whatever works for you.

[Gavino]

Actually using C&P on Windows saves the file or folder to your RAM until you reboot or clear it, if you don't have enough RAM then it caches it in VM.

Absolute rubbish.
As already stated, it only saves information about the files (roughly equivalent to a shortcut), not the file contents.

[MOVIEGEEK]

Absolute rubbish

You can say C&P cures cancer but unless anyone can provide a link proving otherwise I(and I'm sure others) would appreciate it.
BTW: this post on MS Technet(by the moderator) says what I've said all along(C&P=clipboard). http://social.technet.microsoft.com/...4-592452f56dd2

Fact:
D&D is faster than C&P
C&P uses your RAM and clipboard

[TJohns]

You can say C&P cures cancer but unless anyone can provide a link proving otherwise I(and I'm sure others) would appreciate it.
BTW: this post on MS Technet(by the moderator) says what I've said all along(C&P=clipboard). http://social.technet.microsoft.com/...4-592452f56dd2

C&P places the file *location* into the clipboard (like the full path name, but not in text format), not the file itself. The case you point out just indicates that when the clipboard isn't working, these locations can't be saved and so C&P stops working.

While the copy is in progress, *parts* of the file may be cached in RAM for performance reasons but this occurs when D&D as well!

[MOVIEGEEK]

Please provide links!
I've supplied two to prove my point.

[TJohns]

Actually using C&P on Windows saves the file or folder to your RAM until you reboot or clear it, if you don't have enough RAM then it caches it in VM.
http://www.worldstart.com/tips/tips.php/869
"Move To" is the same thing as D&D but use whatever works for you.

The example given is what happens when you use copy & paste on things like *pictures embedded in a Word file* ... sure, the image gets put into the clipboard so it can get pasted into another document, but copy & paste in Explorer is a completely different kettle of fish

[Gavino]

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...edroplist.aspx

shows that files copied to the clipboard are stored as a list of file names.
In fact the format is exactly the same as used for D&D operations.

[videobruce]

Talk about getting OT.
Ok, if I only have 1GB of RAM, how can I "copy" a 4GB file according to all of the above?

[MOVIEGEEK]

It gets cached in your VM, did you try my test on your HDD?
C&P was designed to easily transfer images and text into Word and Outlook, not huge files.
BTW: Gavino that post doesn't prove anything, it actually agrees with what I've been saying.

[Gavino]

BTW: Gavino that post doesn't prove anything, it actually agrees with what I've been saying.

Huh?

OK, I've just done an experiment which you can easily repeat.
I did a Ctrl-C on my C:\Windows folder, which is 1.6GB in size - it was instantaneous.
I then opened the ClipBoard Viewer (clipbrd.exe) and all it showed was the string "C:\Windows".
I saved the contents to a file test.clp, which produced a file of 1218 bytes.

Convinced now?

[videobruce]

Not to tear you guys away from your battle, but to re-ask the question;
"What is the difference between just doing a C&P from a DVD vs using a DVD ripper program (speed aside)??

[Gavino]

Sorry, videobruce!

I don't think there is any difference (assuming no copy protection), except that with a ripper program you have other options like making an iso image or only ripping certain tracks, etc.

[videobruce]

As far as the actual data is concerned, if I transfered the data without any DVD ripper program vs using one such program, the end result is the same? That brings the question, then what is a 'ripper' program actually doing other than if you use it's advanced features such as splitting the DVD or using additional compression so a DL disc fits on a SL disc? Other than the burn process itself afterwards.

[usually_quiet]

As far as the actual data is concerned, if I transfered the data without any DVD ripper program vs using one such program, the end result is the same? That brings the question, then what is a 'ripper' program actually doing other than if you use it's advanced features such as splitting the DVD or using additional compression so a DL disc fits on a SL disc? Other than the burn process itself afterwards.

Even if there were no copy protection, a ripper program would analyze the contents of disc anyway, looking for it. All other things being equal, that should take a little more time than a straight drag-and-drop/cut-and-paste, but maybe not enough to be able to make a noticeable difference when no copy protection is found.

[videobruce]

But, there is no processing of the files with a program during this transfer, correct? Then, if I manually copied the files off the DVD, used a program to 'burn' those files to a DVD, the result would be the same (assuming no copy protection or editing was used)?

[usually_quiet]

But, there is no processing of the files with a program during this transfer, correct? Then, if I manually copied the files off the DVD, used a program to 'burn' those files to a DVD, the result would be the same (assuming no copy protection or editing was used)?

Going back to your original question, some rippers are supposed to be able to find and correct certain kinds of authoring errors, because some forms of copy protection would involve something similar being introduced. So yes, there could be processing of a sort going on with some of the files being transferred, but the video and audio data would be left alone, unless you instructed the ripper to shrink the movie.

[olyteddy]

One advantage of 'ripping' -vs- 'copying' is that most rippers can re-try on errors and maybe even fill in the blanks. Most methods of copying fail on a bad sector or other reading problems. But if the copying is successful, the results are identical to a rip.

[videobruce]

Understood.
Sorry for the 'newbie' qustions, but the only experience with DVDs' I have had up to a couple of months ago were making back up copies of original movies in a PC. I never had a DVD stand alone recorder until now and I don't have a DV camcorder, so I never looked into editing/authoring software or anything like that.
I use to do video production back in the eighties and I remember the Amiga computer editing system being introduced as the latest and greatest (at the time). Analog had it's own problems, digital/optical has a new set of issues that I'm trying to wade through.