BD, DVD disk selection
Richard Crowley
it here in the newsgroup.
>>> Aren't formats fun? We should have more of them.
>>
>> "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many
>> of them to choose from. " - Andrew S. Tannenbaum
>
> Almost as much fun as figuring out what media to use. You have
> mentioned in the past that you use Taiyo Yuden disks from the
> super media store.
>
> However, they have a lot of options at their store. Could you let
> me know specifically which disk you recommend (-R, +R, white
> printable, water shield white printable, 8X, 16X, etc, etc) for
> maximum compatibility. Or it is time I should consider moving
> on to Blu-Ray, IOW, would that be better for the footage I am
> shooting from my Canon HV30?
As for -R vs. +R, www.videohelp.com says (from 1st hand user
reports) that 4634 players of 4935 tested (93.9%) will play DVD-R
vs. 4096 of 4495 tested (91.1%) will play DVD+R.
http://www.videohelp.com/dvdplayers
I don't think this shows a significant advantage of one or the other.
I have probably distributed >700 DVD+R since I switched to T-Y
and I can't remember that any of them have come back with any
problem. The quality of the disk (T-Y vs. others) appears to be a
much more significant issue than -R vs. +R. At least IMHO.
As for speed, I am using 8x but my computers seem to burn at
about half that speed (using www.imgburn.com). There is no
advantage (and probably a significant disadvantage in image
quality) by using faster disks unless you are actually burning
them at that speed.
As for printing surface, that is a cosmetic issue (and maybe a
compatibility issue depending on printer?) that you will have to
decide for yourself based on your circumstances. I have not
yet tried the water shield discs, mostly because I'm too cheap.
As for BD vs DVD, that is a matter of what your program is
and who your audience is. If you want to distribute wide-
screen HD with maximum screen resolution, then BD is certainly
superior. But your audience may have a very low percentage
of BD playing capability? Only you can make that decision. Of
course BD players will play DVD and lots of content doesn't
warrant wide-screen or HD.
David Ruether
"Richard Crowley" <rcro...@xp7rt.net> wrote in message news:7okap5F...@mid.individual.net...
> As for -R vs. +R, www.videohelp.com says (from 1st hand user reports) that 4634 players of 4935 tested (93.9%) will play DVD-R vs.
> 4096 of 4495 tested (91.1%) will play DVD+R. http://www.videohelp.com/dvdplayers
>
> I don't think this shows a significant advantage of one or the other. I have probably distributed >700 DVD+R since I switched to
> T-Y and I can't remember that any of them have come back with any problem. The quality of the disk (T-Y vs. others) appears to be
> a much more significant issue than -R vs. +R. At least IMHO.
>
> As for speed, I am using 8x but my computers seem to burn at about half that speed (using www.imgburn.com). There is no advantage
> (and probably a significant disadvantage in image quality) by using faster disks unless you are actually burning them at that
> speed.
>
> As for printing surface, that is a cosmetic issue (and maybe a compatibility issue depending on printer?) that you will have to
> decide for yourself based on your circumstances. I have not yet tried the water shield discs, mostly because I'm too cheap.
>
> As for BD vs DVD, that is a matter of what your program is
> and who your audience is. If you want to distribute wide-
> screen HD with maximum screen resolution, then BD is certainly superior. But your audience may have a very low percentage of BD
> playing capability? Only you can make that decision. Of course BD players will play DVD and lots of content doesn't warrant
> wide-screen or HD.
Just to add a bit...
Depending on the Blu-ray player used and editing software used, it is
possible to use either CBR 17 Mbps AVCHD camcorder files or HDV
transcoded to this format, and to record these files (or even to author
them) to standard red-laser blanks - and to write the disks using standard
red-laser writers, and to play the resulting disks in 1080x1920 HD in
very high quality. The only real "hitches" are that standard disks will not
hold a full hour of material, and if transcoded, the HDV will take a long
time to do this, and (depending on the codec quality used for transcoding),
there may be visual losses ranging from VERY subtle to "egregious".
--DR
Unknown
I'm not an HD video cam user, but this product
http://www.smlabs.net/tsmuxer_en.html
has been cited as being able to handle AVCHD clips.
If so: it is free; it will append clips; it will handle limited
subtitle formats; and it allows for the entry of chapter start times.
It will demux or produce TS or M2TS files, or Blu-Ray or AVCHD discs
from any of the following supported input file types (from the pull
down list in the open menu):
ac3/e-ac3; aac; avc/h.264; dts; mpeg elementary; ts; m2ts; mpeg
program stream; matroska a/v; mp4 a/v; quick time; mpls; sup and srt
subtitles; wave; and lpcm.
This is a viewerless mux/demux product that does not re-encode video.