more than 120 minutes on 1 DVD

[icethekicker]

so i am lost here... this guy made an .iso file. when i burn it to a DVD it has a menu and it has 5 video clips, but the kicker is these video clips add up to more than 2 hours and it fits on a normal 4.7 gig DVD and it plays on a DVD player. how is he doing this? i can't seem to add more than 2 hours or if i do and combine all the videos to make 1 .iso it wont play on my DVD player... ideas?

[Cauptain]

so i am lost here... this guy made an .iso file. when i burn it to a DVD it has a menu and it has 5 video clips, but the kicker is these video clips add up to more than 2 hours and it fits on a normal 4.7 gig DVD and it plays on a DVD player. how is he doing this? i can't seem to add more than 2 hours or if i do and combine all the videos to make 1 .iso it wont play on my DVD player... ideas?

Use KVCD templates TMPEG.

Will record 5Hs in single DVD.




Claudio

[guns1inger]

Filesize = running time x bitrate. This is a universal law of digital video and audio. You want to fit more running time into the same space ? Use a lower bitrate.

Some tools, especially the rip-off chinese $19 - $29 internet only programs, hide the details and restrict how much control you have, so you may have to change the tools you use for encoding and authoring.

Reducing bitrate does reduce filesize, however it comes at a cost to quality. The lower the bitrate, the less data you have for the image, and the lower the quality you can display. There are various techniques that can be used to combat this to some degree, however again, each has a cost. Officially, the DVD spec allows for a variety of resolsutions, such as half-D1 and S-VCD/VCD, which will allow for lower bitrates and consequently up to 7 hours on a disc, however at these resolutions you are talking about sub-VHS quality. For non-import recordings this might be acceptable.

There are also non-spec attempts to work around the problem, including the aforementioned KVCD format. KVCD is basically a tweaking of the encoding parameters in an attempt to squeeze more quality at lower bitrates. It has two majow flaws. The first is that is puts the encoding outside the official DVD spec, and therefore is not guaranteed to play on standalone players. The second problems is the despite what it's adherents claim, it simply does not work, and produces results that are no better, and often worse, than simply using a good matrix and encoding to spec.

Depending on the source you can get get excellent quality up to around 90 minutes ped single layer disc, good quality to 120 - 130 minutes, and acceptable quality to around 150 minutes. Beyong this point every solution produces noticable quality reduction.

Discs are cheap. Don't be stingy. If you must put large amounts of data on a single disc, consider looking at Xvid/Divx encoding, which is supported by many stand alone players.

[manono]

ideas?

What ideas? Anyone can put as much as he wants on a single DVDR. With a low enough bitrate you could put 6, 8, as many hours as you want. Of course, it might not look so good. I just finished reencoding a 2 hour and 40 minute long movie for a DVDR. No problem.

If you can't do it, maybe it's time to switch to a real software program. DVD-Rebuilder is good for people that don't know very much. DVD Shrink is good for people that know even less.

[nharikrishna]

I put about 220 minutes of TV recorded video on a single-sided DVD. Used Half-D1 resolution, FAVC for encoding and authoring. Quality is good on CRT-based TV.

[AlanHK]

MPEG2 bitrate is not fixed, if your encoder doesn't give you any choice of rate try another. I use HCEnc.

You can use a lower bitrate and get, say, 10 hours on a DVD. It will look blurry and blocky, but perfectly within spec.

I routinely use a bitrate of about 2500 to fit 215 minutes of TV episodes on a DVD.
Looks fine on my TV screen; YMMV.

[jman98]

I put about 220 minutes of TV recorded video on a single-sided DVD. Used Half-D1 resolution, FAVC for encoding and authoring. Quality is good on CRT-based TV.

It's your decision, but I've put that much from TV recordings on a single layer DVD at D1 resolution and gotten great results. I have an exceptionally clean cable TV signal though and I use HCenc for encoding. Half-D1 may not be necessary unless your source is not very good.

[AlanHK]

I put about 220 minutes of TV recorded video on a single-sided DVD. Used Half-D1 resolution, FAVC for encoding and authoring. Quality is good on CRT-based TV.

It's your decision, but I've put that much from TV recordings on a single layer DVD at D1 resolution and gotten great results. I have an exceptionally clean cable TV signal though and I use HCenc for encoding. Half-D1 may not be necessary unless your source is not very good.

Yes, I always use D1 even for very low rates.

Using a smaller resolution gives me a noticeably jagged result on screen. Better to have a slightly softer image at normal resolution, in my opinion.

You have to decide what trade off to make when you are squeezing video down.

[lordsmurf]

I put about 220 minutes of TV recorded video on a single-sided DVD. Used Half-D1 resolution, FAVC for encoding and authoring. Quality is good on CRT-based TV.

I don't know about FAVC as an encoder, but using 352x480 Half D1 was a good choice. Another option would have been to simply burn onto DVD+R DL discs.

Use KVCD templates TMPEG.

KVCD / KDVD is worthless -- don't waste your time on that sloppy method. It's nothing more than settings put together by a narcissist known as "kwag" (Karl Wagner). The idea that it's a "format" is ridiculous. It doesn't get much more silly than somebody altering settings (in a bad way, no less), calling it a new "format," and then naming it after himself. It's nothing more than poor out-of-spec settings that makes non-compliant discs.