dvd shrink error out of memory???

[carlos28355]

so this is the first time i ran into this problem dvd shrink is almost finishing up ripping my movie to comp i have over 400gb of space and it gets towards the end and says out of memory not enough storage??

seems like i have plenty of space...any suggestions?

[guns1inger]

Welcome to 2009. DVD Shrink has not been updated in well over two years, and therefore does not handle current protection schemes. One of the symptoms is the "out of memory" error.

Use the free DVDFab HD Decrypter to rip your movies, then Shrink to reduce or reauthor if you so wish.

[carlos28355]

i see well thank you very much im still struggling with these same 2 dvds you have been helping me out with...sux lol can you make ifo and vob files with imgburn?

[handyguy]

You're supposed to use DVDfab.

Also, next time post what version of Shrink you are using & what film you want to backup so we can let you know what to use.

[neomaine]

Another Tuesday post...

First, out of memory is referring to ram, not hard drive space. Please learn the difference. And, before you ask, the box sitting next to you're monitor is not a hard drive. I'm not going to tell you what that box is...

If you want to learn how to rip your latest rental, at least learn how to use a search engine. If you don't know how, use the very capable search funtion on this site.

You'll notice that (very) similar questions are asked virtually every Tuesday...

[da_dj]

I have a relatively fast system I just purchased. Recently during a move I wanted to backup some movies in case the moving company destroyed one of the copies. So for the first time I cranked up DVD Shrink on this new i7 Intel Windows 7 64 bit system and I received the infamous message "DVD Shrink is out of memory". I tried all kinds of changes to compatibility mode, gave it admin authority and nothing seemed to help.

I was using a Raid 5 external disk array on USB 3.0 to write to when I received this message. I decided to try changing the output disk to my other drive, a slower and Internal to the system Raid 1 array, the error message disappeared. So if anyone is experiencing this error you might try writing to a slower drive, perhaps a USB stick, an old USB 2.0 drive enclosure or something slower to see if that fixes your problem too.

Good luck!

[kred]

I have the same problem from time to time (some discs) - in such a case I use AnyDVD in order to rip a DVD to HDD and then I open the ripped files with DVD Shrink and shrink them.

You can try to maximize buffer size in DVD shrink (if already not tried) - seometimes this can help.

[Hoser Rob]

I have a relatively fast system I just purchased. Recently during a move I wanted to backup some movies in case the moving company destroyed one of the copies. So for the first time I cranked up DVD Shrink on this new i7 Intel Windows 7 64 bit system and I received the infamous message "DVD Shrink is out of memory". I tried all kinds of changes to compatibility mode, gave it admin authority and nothing seemed to help.

I was using a Raid 5 external disk array on USB 3.0 to write to when I received this message. I decided to try changing the output disk to my other drive, a slower and Internal to the system Raid 1 array, the error message disappeared. So if anyone is experiencing this error you might try writing to a slower drive, perhaps a USB stick, an old USB 2.0 drive enclosure or something slower to see if that fixes your problem too.

Good luck!

If you're goinf to hijack a 5 year old thread you should at least READ it. All the answers are there.

[da_dj]

I love the modern notion that topics must be closed in a matter of weeks, everything is of the moment and nothing can be free of a quick and fast expiration date - move on, that's all over now, get on with it, be done.

In this case we are talking about backing up a movie and trying to figure out how to do that. With the relentless corporations and their lawyers gnawing at the heels of anyone who tries to provide a "fair use" method to back up their own purchased property, there are only a couple of software tools out there now to provide this task, only of which one is free and only of which that same one was dropped from development over a decade ago and which for some reason continues to work or not and only in certain situations. So I don't call bringing up another instance of finding a solution to make this "only tool for the job" work again when it begins to fail anew on a different hardware platform and when someone discovers a way to keep it from failing, to have the right to publish that.

From a philosophical perspective, I could say what if "love" was treated the same way ... as an ancient provider that has lost its importance because of its age and since it has obviously lost it's relevance, we should abandon all notions of it? But maybe you are making that argument, saying our society has changed to the point that love has lost it luster and all we can do is spit out critical bile while we condemn and ridicule those foolish enough to attempt to resurrect it.

[bendixG15]

Hey da_dj

It ain't that bad.

[ronmaz]

There is a workaround to this problem. It's quite simple really. DVD Shrink's buffer is only about 1600MB, so when the buffer is getting close to that amount, press the Pause button. Wait 20 seconds or so for the buffer to empty, then press pause again to continue. You may have to do this 2 or 3 times, but so what!! It works.

[nic2k4]

I was using a Raid 5 external disk array on USB 3.0 to write to when I received this message. I decided to try changing the output disk to my other drive, a slower and Internal to the system Raid 1 array, the error message disappeared. So if anyone is experiencing this error you might try writing to a slower drive, perhaps a USB stick, an old USB 2.0 drive enclosure or something slower to see if that fixes your problem too.

Ronmaz, you are quite correct with your answer. da_dj, first I guess that notion of "closing topics" could be seen as breaking the netiquette, but I believe in this instance it's actually the opposite since the 2009 answers never solved the issue and could even cause confusion for someone searching a solution to that problem.

The only issue with your post is that you got it backwards, the drive getting written to has to be at least as fast as the source drive. RAID 5 setups often have low write performance on account of the parity bit calculations being done in software by the onboard controller CPU instead of by an ASIC. OTOH, the internal RAID 1 drive will be as fast as the source drive and keep in mind that any USB drive will have a much higher latency than a SATA drive; it's a protocol thing (lots of handshaking/acknowledgement going on to ensure data integrity).

[da_dj]

One thing about conventional wisdom is that it often belongs back at the convention. Whether that wisdom comes from a round table of rich fat cats smoking stogies or a lounge full of hipsters with their focus on the hocus, these edicts often receive a lot more attention, credit and homage than they are worth. The idea that a post be locked after a few weeks does nothing but clutter an already unnavigable landscape with everything from small bumps to landmines of exploding ... trash. Just try to look up something on Broadband forum, it has one of the shortest windows of allowing the dreaded "resurrection of a thread" and assuming you ever find an answer to anything there, you have to navigate through a labyrinth of cut-off, misaligned, sectioned off and restarted ideas to the point that I usually skip over broadband.com, leaving them to last of my desperation list when I go searching for any technical answer.

Here as I interpret it, the answer of conventional wisdom was to "press pause" when you see the buffer get too big. Well I tried that and just like walking a gauntlet, the moment I neared the last 30 seconds I got the brunt of the swinging stone with "game over - try again". At this point I said are you effing kidding me, this can't be the answer of how to resolve this. So I did a little more research and found a way where the software could be used as designed, started and unattended while knowing I could always start an episode of Frogger or Donkey Kong when I wanted a similar but more fun challenge.

Now regarding the speed of Raid 5 vs 1, I know there are libraries of conventional wisdom on that and I will stand corrected that I have no idea if the speed of the drive is the issue or not with causing this software to all of a sudden start working again. All I know is that changing from one type of drive to another made the problem go away and I am happy.

Now I have another bit of conventional wisdom and that is from a good friend who says "no good deed goes unpunished". She was right, obviously, because my good deed to come here and suggest a spot of help with a discovery I have made that offers a way around the "pause" gauntlet apparently has landed in that category. So for those I have offended by posting to an old post here, I apologize. For those who wish that someone would go back and correct or expand on every single post of wrong and misleading information on every site across the entire Net and contrary to the boards of Netiquette and who with that, thank me for helping out in this one instance, I say you are welcome.

[da_dj]

Here is difference in the two drives. Not that the USB 3.0 running a hardware raid 5 array of four 2GB WD drives fails and the raid 1 array of two 2 SG 4GB drives on an Intel mother board showed that the USB 3.0 drive raid 5 failed and the internal raid 1 worked well.

HD Tune Pro: H/W RAID5 Benchmark

Test capacity: full

Read transfer rate
Transfer Rate Minimum : 138.9 MB/s
Transfer Rate Maximum : 154.2 MB/s
Transfer Rate Average : 147.2 MB/s
Access Time : 16.2 ms
Burst Rate : 151.8 MB/s
CPU Usage : 5.9%


HD Tune Pro: Intel Raid 1 Volume Benchmark

Test capacity: full

Read transfer rate
Transfer Rate Minimum : 72.0 MB/s
Transfer Rate Maximum : 168.0 MB/s
Transfer Rate Average : 131.9 MB/s
Access Time : 18.0 ms
Burst Rate : 810.2 MB/s
CPU Usage : 5.6%

[nic2k4]

It's interesting to see how limited the transfer rate is on a USB 3.0 bus compared to SATA (compare the burst rates). Could you add the results for the source drive as well?

A write benchmark would be more telling of what is going on with your setup and DVDshrink. If your version of HD Tune can't do it try HD Speed, it's free.

I know what you mean about getting to 99% done and getting the memory error (BTW, same thing happens with Nero Recode). I thought I'd recycle an old SATA WD 40GB as a temp drive for stuff like intermediate steps in processing video, bad idea. I found that if I hit pause every 33% and wait for the HD light to go out it would make it through. Shrinking DVD from that drive to a new SATA 3 drive never caused that problem.

[da_dj]

Yes, here is the source drive in an external hardware Raid 1 array (2 x 2GB) connected to the motherboard with eSata:

HD Tune Pro: ExternalDisk 0 Benchmark

Test capacity: full

Read transfer rate
Transfer Rate Minimum : 68.2 MB/s
Transfer Rate Maximum : 112.1 MB/s
Transfer Rate Average : 103.2 MB/s
Access Time : 14.5 ms
Burst Rate : 139.7 MB/s
CPU Usage : 5.4%

I just recently set this system up. I am a videographer and I recently lost 10 years worth of videos that I stored on a Raid 0, and the previous year I lost even more. In both instances I had tape backup but that still doesn't make up for the 4 weeks or more of capture labor I lost with the recent Hitachi Death Star Raid 0 crash. Before them, it was Toshiba, so no favors played - Raid 0 is just too risky. Anyway that was my official last Raid 0 setup. I am a little puzzled about the Raid 1 internal drives giving the external raid 5 such a run for its money but it's good to keep that in mind now when capturing in the future.

[da_dj]

HD Speed write test says it will destroy all the data on the drive. So I am taking it that this is not a good option to take.

[nic2k4]

The source drive is so much slower than the other two you'd think there wouldn't be a problem, but that's not knowing how they perform when writing. You definitely should not run a write test on a drive unless you don't care about losing the data. Still, the RAID 5 causes DVDshrink's buffer to overload and I wouldn't expect its write transfer rate to be much lower than the source's read rate.

It more likely boils down to USB latency; while non-data bits are being transmitted the buffer fills up and never has a chance to catch up.

You could also try a different shorter cable, a bad or overly long cable can cause errors. On the bright side USB controllers will keep resending the data until it's error free, but every time it does a retry the transfer rate gets slower.

On the subject of errors, don't forget to regularly run scrubs on your RAIDs (check the manuals for maintenance), even a RAID 5 can go bad. You'd think tape is dead, but it's still the more reliable backup media and it's still being developed.

It's just amazing what Intel can do with optimizing their drivers; there's no reason the source drive shouldn't perform like the internal RAID.