Why burn an image file?

[e1miran]

I've been lurking on this board trying to learn and I have a question. Why do some of you create image files (bin/cue/iso) to burn to cd and others just simply drop the mpeg file into your burning app. Is there an advantage of burning an image?

[Craig Tucker]

The image file can store the structure of the disc, ie VCD, SVCD. So you can create an image after authoring.

[Duchess]

An image file can't be used as it is since it is an image of a disc and not a strightforward video/audio/data file. To be able to access it you must either burn it, or load it into a disc emulator.

As to whether it is worth creating an image and then burning or just burning straight to disc is a contentious matter and is to a large extent a subjective matter. Some prefer to do it one way, others are just as happy to do it the other way. Neither is necessarily any better or any worse although it is subject to the vagaries of ones own equipment so it may be found that one method works when the other won't.

[mats.hogberg]

You either make an image first, then let the burning app burn this image, or you just feed the files to the burning app, and let it take care of creating the image too, which mostly is done "on the fly". As burning is such a tricky business, some (like me) like to make the burning as smooth as possible for the application. Making an image first often removes problems that seems to be caused by the burner application having problems with both building the image and writing it to disc at the same time.
It also goes with the ancient tradition of using a specific tool for a specific task: Creating an image and writing it to disc are two different tasks, so they should be carried out with 2 different tools. Others feel more comfortable pulling out their Swiss Army knife in every situation.

/Mats

[GodOfKnowledge]

Why people/release groups make images, is simple: Everyone that downloads the file doesn't have to wait for minutes for Nero to scan the file for compliancy. You just burn the image=simple!

Why wouldn't anyone want images?!

[e1miran]

Why wouldn't anyone want images?!

Not everyone shares their files or uploads them, so there's no need to be condescending, as if the answer was so obvious.

Thanks, everyone for your points. The fact that creating images = less demand on the burning app makes a lot of sense.

[GodOfKnowledge]

You're right about that sharing stuff... But still I think images is the best idea.

[e1miran]

You're right about that sharing stuff... But still I think images is the best idea.

Yeah, it seems to be, from what everyone has said. So once I'm done experimenting with bitrates and wasting cd's of short clips of my experiments, I'll start creating images then burning.

Thanks.

[jimmalenko]

...Neither is necessarily any better or any worse although it is subject to the vagaries of ones own equipment so it may be found that one method works when the other won't.

Excellent post - this just about sums it up. I have NEVER used images because I have never had to. As far as I am concerned, it is a useless, time-wasting step that is not required for my setup. Others here are stuffed without it. Go figure !

[GodOfKnowledge]

Alright this is my last post for this topic: No images are for people who never share their files to anyone=only burns it once or twice. Images are for people who share them to many people=burns it maybe a thousand times. Images are therefor just timesavers.

[jimmalenko]

There are many people here who use ISOs but don't share. That isn't really accurate GOD.

[eatin sammiches for lunch]

I know This is a little off the the subject but..... I often use image files files because I achieve up to a 14x ripping speed of a dvd compared to like 6x when I rip the files as is, using my artec 16x dvd-rom. when it comes to dvd , with my setup i find using an image file makes it faster and easier.