It's actually a good thing that DVD-A (and any authoring app worth it's salt) to force the user to make a compliant disc. The dvd specs must be rigidly adhered to if there is going to be any chance for the dvd technology itself to take off. The specs were written by the dvd consortium, and for a manufacturer to display the dvd logo, it must comply with making machines that will play back discs that are 'up to spec'. Some authoring applications allow for 'short cuts', which results in users being frustrated with the whole dvd creating process because they can't get their discs to play. One example are authoring applications that allow for mpeg1 layer2 audio only (via program stream)--which is a non-compliant audio format for NTSC based discs. It's no surprise when these discs fail to play on some players. Fortunately there are some players that will handle the out of spec audio, but there is no guarantee. Those frustrated users then started blaming everything under the sun as to why the disc won't play. Although the discs have come down in price, they are still expensive coasters. Getting a non-compliant CD to play can be a 'crap' shoot as well, but at least you aren't out much time or money if they don't work. I doubt you will ever see a main stream software company make an authoring application that will allow the user to circumvent the specs. Allowing such would only add to the confusion that already exists in making a dvd, more disc failures, and in the end, an ever diminishing user base because of bad feedback that would steer new customers to more reliable products. It's already very challenging to create an application that 'shields' the user from the complexity of the code required to author a dvd.

Jim

Jim, as an example, DVDit asks (I'm paraphrasing) "Do you want to accept only DVD player compatibe MPEG-2". When you go to burn a DVD it will remind you non-spec MPEG-2s are being used. Unfortunately DVDit is weak in many other respects, so I hate having to author in it. But they do leave many compatibility choices up to the user.

I've got MPEG-2s downloaded from the internet, old archived MPEG-2s I created before I knew what specs to follow. Sometimes I've got long files I want to use every trick possible to squeeze onto 1 disc... like lowering audio track size.

-Gord

Sometimes "shielding" the user is a bad thing. Anyone that's spent any time over at DVD VCD Help has probably seen all the tricks you can do to get more out of MPEG-1 and MPEG-2, like making a XVCD CD for example or using special non-standard templates for TEMPGnc, and so on.

Staying within the so-called "specs" is fine, necessary even if you're doing commercial work. If not and there is a huge market that isn't, then having an option to bend the rules a bit becomes a feature.

The real problem are consortiums that come up with standards that are way too rigid and miss what the market is really looking for. We've seen that with the stuffed shirts of W3C that royally messed up the so-called HTML XML "standards" that lead to browser wars. We've seen it in hardware like the specs for firewire, IDE, USB, etc..

You hit it on the head, "...Unfortunately DVDit is weak in many other respects, so I hate having to author in it." I used DVDit in the distant past, and stopped a long time ago for a number of reasons, including making discs that wouldn't play. I switched to ReelDVD (which is very stringent on file acceptance), and have never regretted it. If a disc doesn't play on a customer's set top, I know it doesn't have anything to do with my files being out of spec or the authoring engine used (ReelDVD uses the same engine as Scenarist--THE app for creating Hollywood dvd's)--it's going to be a media vs player issue. You can't have PAL and NTSC on the same disc, but if someone had an assortment of non-compliant files from different regions, an authoring app that didn't have restraints would allow people to make discs that have no chance of playing from the get go. You can easily lower your audio track size, so I'm not sure why that is a limitation. This forum already has a myriad of posts from those trying to get DVD-A to work for them. Imagine the volume of questions that would arise if Sonic Foundry let any kind of mpeg file to be used? And if they aren't going to open the flood gates to all mpeg files with varying aspect ratios, frame rates, mpeg type, region,etc.--which non-compliant files should they allow? Yours only? DVD authoring applications are for making DVD's, not for making multimedia projects that play everything. There are applications just for that. I am well aware of VCDhelp.com, and have used many of the tricks people have posted there to make any number of non-standard CD discs. I think this represents a small, slice of the DVD pie. It's a place where fairly proficient users can find tricks to go beyond the standard. Although there are a number of people who visit that site, they represent the minority of users. There are listings there of set top players that one could get to play their non-compliant discs. If I was Sonic Foundry(and I'm not), I wouldn't focus on the few that want to scour the web for players to accept their non-compliant discs. If you are doing this commercially, you only have to have a couple of bad experiences making non-compliant discs for your customers, and you'll never come back.

Just my 2 cents and a half.

;)

Jim

I side with Jim (JSWTS) and Sonic, in that, compliant all the way through is good-I want DVD-A to prevent me from messin' up. I see no reason for audio to be anything but AC3 (it plays everywhere and has excellent compression and 5.1 capability--my whole reason for wanting the product in the first place). If the product just addresses video players and not DVD ROM computer players, I am happy. The things I would like to see are features that would make the video DVD's look more professional:
(1) better control over navigation and end action
(2) multiple audio streams (e.g., language/commentary)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are only my own and these comments are in no way intended to negate the importance to others opinions or applications; they just express what is important to me.

"The real problem are consortiums that come up with standards that are way too rigid and miss what the market is really looking for."

I can't disagree more. What the market is looking for is a reliable way of allowing the masses to consistanly make discs that will play and share their cherished home videos and the like on any dvd player they put their disc in. We already know that even with standards, universal acceptance of recordable media has not yet been achieved. The only chance for this to occur is if standards are set that hardware manufacturers and the companies that write the software agree to comply with. DVD player, burner, authoring app, media, etc. sales have sky rocketed (in fact the speed at which dvd players have been accepted by the 'market' exceeds that of CD and VHS technologies) largely due to the fact that everyone agreed as to what the standards should be. Without that, the chances that one could create a disc that could be played consistantly would have been about nil, and the revolution we are seeing would never have occured. I really don't see where firewire/usb/etc experience has anything to do with this. The dvd technology as a whole has been wildly successful by any measure.

I've frequented VCDhelp.com quite a bit over the years. I disagree that people trying to squeeze a bit more low quality video on a CD via XVCD or tricking Nero to accept standard mpeg2 files and believe it's SVCD, represent 'the market'. I spent a great deal of time personally doing just these sorts of things, because dvd authoring wasn't a practical reality. Now that authoring apps/burners/media have come down so much in price, I'll never go back to spending time making low quality alternatives. Even though there are ways to circumvent the VCD/SVCD standards, there are limits as to what can be done and have it still work. VCDhelp.com is a site that helps one find out what they can get away with, and what specific player they will need to then watch it. Just who would determine what non-compliant mpeg files would be acceptable for any given authoring application to allow you to use? Certainly not every and any kind? Could you mix regions types, aspect ratios, frame rates, mpeg types, etc.? How many dvd coasters would one want to burn in the process? I admit they have come down significantly in price, but no where near to CD's which I can get for almost nothing with rebates at Best Buy. I would much rather have SF work on adding more features ALLOWED (like more end user actions) by the specs, than to spend time on adding 'features' that don't.

Jim

The point is there is NO agreement which is one reason there is DVD-R and DVD +R.

There should have been a SINGLE media format agreed on. Years ago. Again, instead, more pig headed arrogance, my "standard" is better than your standard meaning there is no real standard at all. Its the same mistake done in the past with other products all over again. The developers missed... again. Just like they severely unestimated the potential for the PC and how Mr. Joe Average would use it.

While overly broad as an example consider you can purchase a lamp or toaster or vacuum cleaner and plug it into any outlet. It works. Would the consumer sit still if that wasn't the case? Hell no, they would not, so why isn't the same with the latest crop of electronic devices? I know it varies from country to country because of how electricity is deliverd, AC in the states, DC other places. The point is with electronics it has always been hit or miss. You should have been able to create your own CD or DVD then pop in a CD and it works... in any player. Ditto for a DVD. That would have been a TRUE standard. No such thing. You can walk into any electronics store and see row after row of VCD's and DVD's players that have the label, right on the box that claims I'll play a CD-R and/or CD-RW. Fact is they don't. Not always. Shame on the industry.

It isn't that I'm calling for 'none standard' features, rather not trying to override what I as a user of the application may wish to do, which may be non standard or more correctly part of the standard but NOT SUPPORTED by the current version of DVD-A. which is where this thread started. Why does DVD-A refuse to allow what one may wish to put in the DVD structure? It shouldn't. Regardless if it is standard or non standard.

Again it really boils down to will DVD-A develop into other Net Nanny type of application that acts more like a road block to what some may have in mind or will it become a real "professional" grade application and at least not fiddle with what can be done and is supported by the "standards" much of which presently isn't supported by DVD-A.

That's the real issue.

I guess I will have to just agree to disagree. I don't even know where to begin. At one point you are 'shaming' the industry for having players not play discs, and then the next you want to be able to over ride standards. Perhaps the reason the discs don't play when they are posted as such on the 'box' is because the user has made a non-compliant disc--shame on the user. You say there is no agreement to the standard--you are wrong. The dvd specs and authoring really have nothing to do with the type of media a player will accept. Regardless of the '-' and '+' format wars, the defined specs for creating the vob and ifo files that our set top players 'read' are standardized and accepted--period. You are really comparing apples to oranges. There is universal acceptance of replicated/glass mastered media to play on set top's, recordable media is another thing all together. You aren't going to see Sonic let Scenarist ($20K +) support non-compliant files. I don't think you get anymore 'professional' than that.

As an aside, although there is great debate over which format (from a recordable standpoint) is superior, the official dvd consortium standard is DVD-R. They are the group that determines collectively what a number of manufacturers will support as a standard. To get the dvd logo displayed on your machine or media, it has to pass their standards. Sony likes to flog us with their own 'non-compliant' versions of video tape (Beta vs VHS), or portable digital media (memory stick vs compact flash). Without a 'standard', it doesn't take very long for the non-compliant stuff to go to the wayside. Beta has long since gone bye-bye, and one wonders how long memory sticks will hang in there. Learn how to make high quality compliant files, and you will much happier in the long run. High Definition is next--I don't think we're going backwards to more highly compressed, poorer quality formats. Scenarist will support HD type discs later this year, and sometime down the road it will trickle down to the rest of us. HD has it's own defined specs, so I would get prepared to learn how to make compliant files from the get go, and not how to circumvent the conspiracy of the industry to thwart our efforts to force our 'old' mpeg2 (standard dvd compliant files) into those applications.

Jim

What I was trying to get to is most DVD players have the "approved" DVD or VCD logo claiming that they meet some "standard" with the truth being they still can't play ALL CD-R or CD-RW discs created with some consumer grade CD and or DVD burner. Again, shame on them. See this site for what it really means:

http://www.dvdfllc.co.jp/dvdlogo.htm

How come consumer A using DVD set top "X" can play his creation while consumer B goes through the same exact steps, uses the same authoring/burning software, burns the same files and even uses the same brand of media and his DVD player also has the logo claiming it plays the media and all he gets for his effort is a coaster not becuase of anything the author did wrong, rather the DVD player can't read the disc.

The bigger picture I want to have CHOICES.

I used the non standard issue as an example.

The original poster that started this thread raised a valid point. How come DVD-A and to be fair other DVD authoring applications freak if you already have files that ARE part of the standard already set up in a perfectly valid file structure?

I support DVD-A making compliant files as I've said before in other threads. However, that said, if one wants to drift from the "specs" then one should be free to do so if one wants to. That has nothing to do with what the current application does, rather what you as the user have done or may do previously.

Further why did you try to drag in replicated/glass mastered media? That isn't close towhat we're talking about. That's beyond the scope of the discussion. Who's talking apples and oranges now? You are.

You should also realize "professional" isn't determined by price tag. I see the snob factor creeping it. If anyone is foolish enough to cough up $20K (snicker) for DVD burning software, personally I would suggest they have their head examined. QUICK!

In fact there are TWO competing DVD consortiums. See this somewhat dated article for some details.

http://news.com.com/2100-1040-229675.html?tag=mainstry

You continue to confuse the dvd specs and consortium with the competing recordable formats. They are obviously related in some ways, but they really have nothing to do with each other. There are defined code standards that the authoring applications must follow so that the players can actually read and playback the discs as designed. Those specs are agreed upon, and don't have anything to do with whether you put those files on a hard drive, a CD, DVD-R, DVD+R, and so forth. The authoring app writes the code that tells your dvd player what color your menu highlights should be, and where it should navigate to when a button is selected, etc. It doesn't care what you ultimately put it on. The specs were written before the masses were able to burn onto recordable media. That's where people have had troubles--getting some types of media to play on any given player, and with authoring applications that don't create file structures that are entirely within the dvd specs. The first players didn't have recordable media to worry about, so it's no surprise when recordable media hit the market that some of the early players couldn't play these discs. Most of todays players can handle 'official' media, and many of the troubles that users have are because of straying from the specs and not burning the discs appropriately. I have used ReelDVD for 2+years, and in the last year haven't had a single disc returned because it wouldn't play. The reason I bring up replicated media, is that you keep bringing up the DVD logo and that it's mere presense should ensure all dvd type media should play. It only means that it will play official DVD media--replicated discs. If it displays DVD-R, DVD+R, then it's supposed to play those media as well, but one needs to read their user manual to see exactly what types of media will be accepted. The one given is that if the DVD logo is on the machine, then you can be assured that replicated media will play.

The dvd logo is copyrighted to only one consortium/forum(http://www.dvdforum.org/forum.shtml). The DVD+R can not legally display the the DVD logo, and hence there is nothing to compel a manufacturer to support that format. It is a popular format, so from a pure financial standpoint it would make sense to support it, but they don't have to if they don't want to.

You might think that Scenarist and anyone who uses it should have their heads examined, but I'm not quite sure why you would think that. It's the defacto standard for Hollywood disc creation. The vast majority of these discs are authored with Scenarist. I'm certain the $20k price tag is paid for and then some for those authoring houses.

The original poster wanted the option to allow for ANY mpeg format and mpeg audio and aberrant ac3 files. The dvd players are really simple machines, with limited ability to interpret the data presented to them. As I asked before, just how on earth could one create a player that could handle every and any mpeg file presented to it? The closest we can get is a computer, and even then you have to have the appropriate codec to play the file back. Mpeg audio at the same bitrate is no smaller than ac3, and ac3 is a compliant file type. I don't know of any reason to want to use mpeg audio unless you don't want to pay for an ac3 encoder, particularily since it's(mpeg audio) not an official audio format for NTSC.

Jim Taylor's DVD Demystified and Ralph LaBarge's books are excellent resources for clarifying all of this. Anyone serious about dvd authoring would find these books helpful.

Jim

I'll let you have the last word, you seem to want it, but you're still confusing what I'm saying. I can see why you're confused if you getting your information only from books.

>>It's actually a good thing that DVD-A (and any authoring app worth it's salt) to force the user to make a compliant disc. The dvd specs must be rigidly adhered to if there is going to be any chance for the dvd technology itself to take off.<<

I rather think the technology has already taken off. It is a good idea to inform the user that a specific format is non-compliant. It is insulting to one's intelligence to refuse to allow the end-user to make a concious decision to ignore it.

>> The specs were written by the dvd consortium, and for a manufacturer to display the dvd logo, it must comply with making machines that will play back discs that are 'up to spec'. <<

Unfortunately it is not always an out-of-spec condition that is not allowed. 1/2 D resolution for example (352/576 25fps 352/480 29.97fps) is perfectly within the DVD spec. It just happens not to be supported by this rev of DVD Architect and you are forced to endure a recode. That is a major pain and waste of space.

>>... One example are authoring applications that allow for mpeg1 layer2 audio only (via program stream)--which is a non-compliant audio format for NTSC based discs. <<

To expand, Mpeg1 layer 2 audio is not non-compliant for NTSC. It is non-compliant if it is the ONLY audio stream on the disk. An NTSC disc must have at least one AC3 or PCM track and may also contain one or more others such as MP2 and DTS.

However, most DVD players will have no trouble playing such a format. If I know I have a player which does, then I should be allowed to build a DVD in whatever format I choose.

Further, it is a perfectly allowable PAL format.

The authoring app should warn me, but still let me build it.

It's commonly referred to as 'freedom of choice' ;-)

regards,

jr

>>The original poster wanted the option to allow for ANY mpeg format and mpeg audio and aberrant ac3 files.<<

Actually the original poster wanted the software to warn one if a particular format was non-compliant but allow production anyway. A subtle difference but quite important.

>> The dvd players are really simple machines, with limited ability to interpret the data presented to them. As I asked before, just how on earth could one create a player that could handle every and any mpeg file presented to it?<<

Totally missing the point though. One doesn't expect a player to understand any format, but 90% of them will handle 1/2 D, 480/576 480/480 and 1D quite happily thanks. That is all I ever encode with. The MainConcept encoder that comes with Vegas doesn't stop me encoding at these resolutions and neither does TMPGEnc. Why should DVD Architect now stop me building a disk with those resolutions. Preposterous.

>> The closest we can get is a computer, and even then you have to have the appropriate codec to play the file back. <<

And I may well just be wanting to create a DVD to play on my computer. Why shouldn't I be allowed that choice ?

>>Mpeg audio at the same bitrate is no smaller than ac3, and ac3 is a compliant file type. I don't know of any reason to want to use mpeg audio unless you don't want to pay for an ac3 encoder, particularily since it's(mpeg audio) not an official audio format for NTSC. <<

Well AC3 encoders are not cheap and seeing as most players will play MP2 audio just fine, many home users may not see the need to pay for something they shouldn't need. Neither is everyone in the world really interested in an NTSC disk. Other parts of the world exist actually that use PAL. Not everyone interested in DVDs lives in the USA.

regards,

jr

"Actually the original poster wanted the software to warn one if a particular format was non-compliant but allow production anyway. A subtle difference but quite important.
"

This is the actual quote: "-Allow MPG video of any format." Sorry if I misinterpreted that.

"Totally missing the point though. One doesn't expect a player to understand any format, but 90% of them will handle 1/2 D, 480/576 480/480 and 1D quite happily thanks. That is all I ever encode with."

1/2 D1 and Full D1 are a part of the dvd specs and should be supported. SVCD is not, and doesn't have to be supported. The key here is the 'CD' part of SVCD--they are CD formats not dvd. I don't expect a dvd authoring application to do non-dvd work. There are plenty that do that. I don't know where you got your statistics on the 90%, but I doubt it. It's hard to find that high of compatibility with just standard, full D1 on recordable media. At any rate, it started out with a request for all (again pardon my misinterpretation) mpeg video types. I didn't see any of the aspect ratios you quoted, but at least you narrowed the possibilities. I wonder if they cover everyone's desires?

"And I may well just be wanting to create a DVD to play on my computer. Why shouldn't I be allowed that choice ?"

No one says you can't--there are plenty of other apps that allow you to do this. I don't use Photoshop to do NLE, nor do I use a dvd authoring application to do non-dvd work.

"Well AC3 encoders are not cheap and seeing as most players will play MP2 audio just fine, many home users may not see the need to pay for something they shouldn't need. Neither is everyone in the world really interested in an NTSC disk. Other parts of the world exist actually that use PAL. Not everyone interested in DVDs lives in the USA.
"

I agree that ac3 encoders aren't cheap, but I thought the first poster was using DVD-A, so that shouldn't be the issue. You are absolutely correct that the whole world doesn't use just ac3. Mpeg1 layer2 audio is an accepted format in PAL-land, it's just not a part of the dvd specs for NTSC. Ac3 audio however, is an accepted format world-wide. ReelDVD won't allow you to create a disc for NTSC unless at least one audio stream has a compliant file (wave or ac3). That's why it is rare to have a disc authored by ReelDVD fail to play--it just won't allow you to make non-compliant discs. I wasn't aware that DVD-A won't allow you to use mpeg audio at all. If that's the case, it should with PAL video assets.

jim

Yes,

It is a sad thing, but true--I do from time to time learn the old fashioned way.

Jim

"It is insulting to one's intelligence to refuse to allow the end-user to make a concious decision to ignore it."--and to make a disc that doesn't play and blame the software creator.

"Unfortunately it is not always an out-of-spec condition that is not allowed. 1/2 D resolution for example (352/576 25fps 352/480 29.97fps) is perfectly within the DVD spec. It just happens not to be supported by this rev of DVD Architect and you are forced to endure a recode. That is a major pain and waste of space.
"

This is a completely different issue. We (at least I thought we were) were talking about non-compliant files. Half D1 and broadcast D1 are perfectly acceptable formats, and I think they should be supported.

"To expand, Mpeg1 layer 2 audio is not non-compliant for NTSC. It is non-compliant if it is the ONLY audio stream on the disk. An NTSC disc must have at least one AC3 or PCM track and may also contain one or more others such as MP2 and DTS.
"

No argument here. I saw this post after I answered yours above, and you are absolutely correct regarding mpeg audio as above, and on PAL discs.

I think DVD-A is struggling to find it's niche. It's price point is low enough that a wide array of users are making discs with it. Higher end applications for the most part are being used by professionals trying to make discs that are as widely compatible as possible, because their business depends on it. If you are doing this for your own personal use, and you know your dvd player can handle mpeg audio, then there really is no reason not to use it if you so desire. If you are creating discs that have the greatest potential for set top compatibility, then it's best to stick with the most widely accepted formats. If you have DVD-A, you've got a great ac3 audio encoder--why not use it? Audio conversion really doesn't take that long. I agree the re-encoding video is a pain, but generally not audio.

Jim

Actually this is the full quote: -

>>Every time DVD-A sees that an audio or video stream is not meeting DVD specs, instead of forcing a recompress, GIVE THE USER AN OPTION TO BYPASS.
---
-Allow MPG video of any format.
-Allow MPG audio, don't force it to AC-3.
-If AC-3 of strange data rate, sample rate is submitted don't force an audio recompress.
-If I dump autorun.inf files and the like into the DVD root folder before a burn, don't abort telling me there's files there. Ask me if I'd like to proceed anyway.
<<

You selectively pick one part of the request without giving the complete context and thereby mislead as to the salient point that is being made. Give the end user the choice to recode or not is the request.

You prefer the application to not allow a dumb user to stuff up. Fine. I prefer an application to warn an intelligent user they could stuff up, and let them choose to do so if they wish.

Anyway, each to their own and good burning to you all.

regards,

jr

There wasn't anything intentionally manipulative about my quoting part of his post--just as I didn't post every last word on yours. Anyone can go and read the entire first post on their own if they want. I understand that the poster wanted the option to import ANY mpg file WITHOUT having to recompress. I thought it was implicit in my discussion, but I guess not. Whether you give the end user the choice to recode or not, it doesn't change the fact that a request for mpg video of ANY format be allowed. Perhaps DVD-A could allow any mpeg video type without recoding, and just give the user a warning message they are about to burn a coaster, proceed at your own risk.

DVD-A already is significantly limited in allowing the user access to the full dvd specs. I think we underestimate just how hard it is to make an application like DVD-A, even with the limted feature set it (currently) offers. I personally would rather see the company spend the time and money developing the product to allow us a more robust dvd authoring application, rather than making it a 'swiss army knife' of mpeg content creators. Many users have only a basic understanding of compliant file types. That doesn't make them dumb, they're just trying to wade through all the complexities and pitfalls of dvd authoring like the rest of us. I'm personally glad these apps kept dummies like me from goofing up. It made me smarter about the whole process. It made me search out why my files were do-do, and in the process I learned more about GOP's, sequence headers, aspect ratios, I frames, D1, half D1--things I had no clue about when I first started. Maybe you are aware of another dvd authoring application that isn't as limited as DVD-A on asset acceptance and would allow mpg use of any format without recoding? It would help the more intelligent users find what they are looking for.

I agree, to each his own and good burning to all.

Jim

DD 1.0, 1.1, 3.0, 3.1, 4.0, 4.1, and 5.0 are also DVD compliant. Where is the support for those?

Vern

I'm all for DVD-A supporting as much of the dvd specs as possible, including all acceptable video and audio formats.

Jim

>>Maybe you are aware of another dvd authoring application that isn't as limited as DVD-A on asset acceptance and would allow mpg use of any format without recoding? It would help the more intelligent users find what they are looking for.<<

DVDLab. http://www.mediachance.com/dvdlab/

Problem is, it is still in it's infancy, and PAL support is not 100% yet, so for me, not ready. Whilst it is promoted as version 1.1, I'd still call it a beta. NTSC support is apparently pretty good now.

I bought SFs product instead, primarily because I wanted the AC3 encoder as well as a general penchant for SF products. When DVDLab is ready I will probably buy it too, as I find it's authoring capabilities superior (in method) to DVDA.

Still, DVDA may evolve quickly enough to negate that need, which would be great !

regards,

jr

Thanks jr I'll investigate DVDLab as another option for burning non-spec discs. Hadn't heard of it before. -g