WestAussie,

I can't answer all your questions except for the one about recoding as AC-3. You WILL lose some quality by going from PCM to AC-3 because AC-3 is what they call a 'lossy' codec. However, you will be able to save a significant amount of space by doing so. Also, while there is some quality loss (and some people say AC-3 makes the volume too low -- see other posts on this forum), I really don't think you will be able to notice the difference between the original PCM and the AC-3 encoding. Maybe an audiophile would be able to tell and there may be some way of measuring the differences on a scope or something but generally there is NO perceptible audible loss in quality.

After all, commercial movie-makers use AC-3 encoding all the time.

As for using a template, my understanding is you should use the DVD-A template in Vegas for the best results. However, since your video is so close to the size limit already, you should probably 1) reedit it to make it shorter or 2) use a lower bitrate setting for the MPEG encoding or 3) do both.

Finally, I would recommend using a rewritable DVD (-RW or +RW) so you won't have a coaster when you are done (if something doesn't go right during the process).

I hope some of this helps.

Jake

Ah yes, the ol' advertising thing. When is 4.7 gig not really 4.7 gig? When 4.2 gig does not sound as good on the box!!! Have you ever installed a new hard drive? It is pretty disappointing to install your new 200 gig drive and find it really only has about 180 gig in it! But how is this possible? False advertising? Well somewhere in the fine print, with hard drives anyway, will be the clause, "We use 1024 bytes to represent 1 kilobyte" But what does it mean?! It means for every 1000 bytes, they add that extra 24 bytes, resulting in a much bigger number.

The k, MB, Gig extra are all terms based on the binary number system, you know, the ones and zeros that computers use. So those names are supposed to represent numbers that are powers of 2. Us non computer nerds expect a "k" to be about 1000 bytes, so 10k should be 10,000 right? Well the nerds know a k is actually 1024 bytes, so 10k is actually 10240 bytes, an extra 240 bytes.

So when advertisers refer to the capacity of something, we all expect 100 MBs to be 100 million bytes right? (wrong!). But if it is really 102,400,000 bytes, isn't it 102.4 MB? Doesn't 102.4 make you want to buy it more then just 100?

The problem is this non-computer way of refering to capacity using the base 10 system we all know, rather then the base 2 system it is, and knowing which one to use and when. The problem was created by Windows when MS decided to have it refer to size using base 10. But the real size is actually bigger. Xp now shows you both the common base 10 representation of the size of a file, and the actual base 2, which is the real file size. So your 200 gig drive does indeed have 200 gig, but Windows shows it as 1000 bytes per k, which makes it look smaller.

So a DVD really does have 4.7 gig of space, but Window tells you 4.7 gig of data is a file size of about 4.2 gig, very confusing.

So when you use Windows to tell you the size of the files you are going to burn to the DVD, it is understating the true size. If you have XP, right click on the file or folder and choose properties, look at the "size on disk" number, not the "size". This is the actual number of bytes in the file. It is much bigger then the number Windows usually reports as the size.

This is why so many people are having trouble with getting their projects to fit on a 4.7 gig DVD. Windows is reporting the size using the common base 10 method, which understates the true size. So 4.2 gig of data, using base 10, is the max that will fit on a DVD, because 4.2 in base 10 is equal to 4.7 in base 2.

Confused yet? Just think of it this way, the comon and Windows way to refer to a file size understates its true size. When advertisements or spec sheets refer to size, they are going to state the true size (usually). So always remember your files are bigger then what Windows is telling you they are.

Go into DVDA and use optimize to see what is really going on. But if you use avi files in DVDA, or if DVDA is rerendering your mpegs, keep in mind that the media size stated under optimize is just an estimate, the true size will not be known until after the render, so it could end up rendering into a longer file then estimated.

So the best thing to do is:

Always use the "Size on disk" as the true size in Windows

Always go to Optimize to check the estimated size.

Always allow yourself extra space, especially when rerendering needs to be done.

Shoot for media size of less then 4.2 gig to go onto a 4.7 gig DVD.

Now some of you may say, I put 4.7 gig on a DVD and it worked. How long did it take DVDA to render it? Remember that if you go over the limit, and DVDA will be rerendering something, it will automatically lower the bitrate to make it fit.

Lets say you have a 4.5 gig DVDA template mpeg and a .2 gig avi, should fit right? Well keep in mind that the menus, as well as the file structure that gets burned to the DVD also take up some of that space. Since DVDA will be rendering the avi but not the mpeg, it will crank up the compression on the avi to make it all fit. This could really degrade the avi since all the needed compression will be applied to that one file. I learned that the hardway.

Hope this all helps!