Thanks for your response BillyBoy. But the point I'm making is that DVDA estimates the completed project at more than 3GB more than the actual total when the rendering was complete. I am using DVDA 1.0c so yes I do have the latest version. There is obviously a bug in the file size estimates that DVDA uses.

I burn DVDs quite often so my expectations are pretty realistic. I wouldn't expect to try to jam 8GB onto a DVD with compression, that is why I am so surprised by the size estimates provided by DVDA, because I knew how unrealistic they were as soon as I saw them. So for now I will continue to let DVDA render my projects without optimization, and then use DVDShrink to compress them a small amount to fit to one DVD.

Cheers

TVeith

Just wondering...

Could it be you have MPEG-2 files with both audio/video and also seperate AC3 files with the same file name, but different extension?

While I know DVD-A doesn't report true file sizes (its different than what Windows Explorer reports for example) I haven't seen the doubling others have reported. What I mean is I usually end up having a bunch of small projects as seperate thumbnails which I drag and drop to the work area noting the increasing value shown in the lower right bottom corner as far as total. project size is concerned. While not extact (if I have say 4.6 GB it may be a little off) I don't recall seeing a huge difference between what DVD-A reports and what it actually is.

Hi BillyBoy

My project consists of the intro, 6 videos (all were originally MPEG-1 - VCD format). Also 2 menus with 3 motion buttons per menu. No mp3 music on any menus (they are all silent menus).

TVeith

If I was doing that kind of project I would have first rendered to MPEG-2 in Vegas, then drop each rendered file in as a thumbnail. I would set up my menu structure, add some audio to the menu page, maybe animated the thumbnails and then just let DVD-A finish it.

Is there really any benefit to rendering the files with Vegas first rather than letting DVDA do it on the fly? I did have animated thumbnails in the project btw. And as for audio on the menu page, I had reasons for keeping it silent. Thanks again for your responses.

Not really. I just got in the habit of doing it that way. Both Vegas and DVD-A share the same encoder so it really doesn't make a difference if you render in one or the other. What you want to avoid if you can is having to render a MPEG-2 twice.

Yep I find it also annoying
The estimate for my current project is around 8 to 9 GB and the final is around 3 GB
Input is 4 avi files and 5 menus with background audio.
(I also noticed it doesn't matter if you use mp3 or ac3 audio files - menus that were 1.2 MB become 245.8 MB after you add aftre you add either the 3MB mp3 or the 265kb ac3.

I also find encoding in DVDA quicker that Vegas - ?

Mark

BB

I thought that somewhere on this forum it was said to render in Vegas, then let DVDA just do the authoring part, because Vegas would render faster than DVDA ????

I've now taken to using the bitrate calculator to set the bitrate to encode out of VV ar. Also use VV to encode the ac3 with line out set to none, dial norm at -27 or -31dB.

Now that I've set default disk size to 4.7GB all goes very smoothly.
If you're using Optimize to check final size even things that have no audio set the audio to ac3. Dumb thing is always going to mux audio in and muxing in silent ac3 takes up less space than pcm.

Got question to TVeith-how did you make working dvdshrink to shring produced by dvda files.I all ways get error message.
The secong question to sony.
The dvdshrink program does what promise and it is free.It does shrink large dvd produced files to fit 4.7dvd.Mybe you should employ the guy whu wrote this program and learn how to optimize dvd?.Does that program have better compression?.I did not saw any quality issue.

dvdshrink to shring produced by dvda files.I all ways get error message

The new version of DVD Shrink (3.0 beta) won't work with DVDA. You need to use the older version 2.3. The author of this program is aware of this problem (I actually corresponded directly with his rep), and hopefully will fix it shortly.

Johnmeyer is correct - I have both versions of DVDShrink, Beta 5 and version 2.3.

Ver. 2.3 works fine to shrink the DVDs with DVDA, but Beta 5 produces an error. For now use ver. 2.3 and you won't have any problems.

@BB,
"Expecing to get 8, 9 10 GB or more on a disc is foolish" are you sure?
This is where CCE(Cinema Craft Encoder) comes in.WHY?
Example is my backup DVD of LOTR The Two Towers done with CCE,or Matrix,or.... At low bitrates CCE is THE BEST ENCODER.
Anyway,BORIS RED is the best thing ever integrated with Vegas,love it.

AudioIvan

The point I was making if you want DVD QUALITY then compressing to the extent you can get 10 GB's worth on a disc defeats the purpose of making a DVD IF you going for quality. The whole idea behind DVD was to have HIGH quality video, not just to see how much you can compress to get a ridiculous amount of data on a single disc.

I swear... if ten years into the future its possible to get 50 GB worth on a single disc, someone of course will want to put 100 GB worth on.

Translation: Some people are NEVER satisified.

You DONT GET IT DO YOU?
DVD Quality depends first on the source quality,then compression ratio,encoding methods,encoder.....Min. bitrate 1000 Mbps,Max.4300 Mbps does the job for me,this is video about 190~200 mins.Excellent DVD quality, no macroblocks,no artifacts, looks perfect on my plasma.HIGH QUALITY DVD VIDEO doesn't have to mean HIGH BITRATE.
Translation:USE CCE & EXPERIENCE THE ENCODING QUALITY

Boloney! YOU don't get it. 1,000 MPBS isn't DVD quality by any yardstick I know of. Further Plasma TV doesn't generate that good a quality picture for someone to say oh, look at the quality. So maybe you're just not seeing what you would see if viewed on a big LCD screen or better still a big CRT that still delivers the best quality. or maybe you just like a softer look.

I don't get YOUR hosility. If you think getting 200 minutes on a DVD results in "excellent quality", fine, think it, just you're going to have a hard time selling it to those that know better.

1.Some of my DVD backups(LOTR The Two Towers.....etc.) are done in this way.Meaning movies(read video) 2~2:30 hrs I do them with software that uses CCE & automaticaly calculates the MIN,AVG,MAX bitrate for CCE.The backups look excellent either on my TV or my friends TV's.
2.If a backup can be done in this way to me means that I can do my projects in a similar way(using CCE).
3.90% of the people that know how to do PROPPER DVD backup,or encode video projects are using CCE.
4.We "all" know the DVD-Video specs.
5.What you are saying is that the people that put 2~2:30 hrs video or DVD backup on a single 4.7GB disk can't see properly & have a hard time selling it to those that know "better".
6.I do know that you are kind of a person that likes to chat about different things,but sometimes seems to me that you are too confident with your knowledge.That is a BIG problem,because if you don't consider others people opinions & experiences you will never expand your knowledge.
7.I've seen a lots of your replys to some people in this forum.Some of them help a lot,but some of them are very rude & off topic.I believe that forums are to exchange opinions & help each other.

AudioIvan

Its always nice to feel appreciated. <wink>

I always like to hear what others think. Just sometimes some people say the darnest things like #4. AFAIK the "official" and complete DVD specs (red book I think) aren't out there for anyone to see. In fact I've heard they cost about $15,000 if you want to whole ball of wax.

We "all" don't have that. I sure don't. Do you?

Now you know I'm "funning" with ya, don't ya?

I'd have to agree with BB to some extent on this one, dropping the bitrate that low no matter how good the encoder means something has to suffer. If you're encoding at 24p with ac3 though for that length of video you should be able to get the bitrate a bit higher than that.