Ok, I'm no stranger to forums so I know the rules. I first read over the forum the best I could. I would like to say lots of my question are already answered. But I love to ask question, it's the only way to learn.
I am totally new to dvd making, but no stranger to the technical field. the first question i would like the ask is why do avi's convert to over 22 gig files. In most cases a mpg-1 ripped off a cd at lets say 9 gig, from a dual layer cd, I would THINK is 9 gig or so on a harddrive. then converting to avi, you could get it to 700 ish, depending on methods. Which again I would think is possible to get the 9 gig mpg-1 back , and then burn to a dvd. Now i could be wrong but thats my guess. I have a few avi's that are around 700 meg. and when i covert to mpg1 or mpg2(vbr, cbr) its converts a files size of around 9 - 27 gig. 9 being the lowest bitrate, and pour quality. now how in the heck are you or any one going to get 27 gig on a dvd? I do understand we only have a 4.7 gig dvd to work with. but dydshrink does a great job! my copy looks like, well you know. here is what i have:
image 720 x 340
audio 18:37:15, bitrate (128kbs) lame mp3
data rate 129kbps
sample size 24 bit
video compression divixmpg4 v3.
and onther at
image 640 x 272
audio 2:58:32, bitrate (128kbs) lame mp3
data rate 147kbps
sample size 16 bit
video compression divix codec
i like using tmpgenc to compress/convert
I was just under the impression a 700 meg avi, would fit on a 4.7 gig dvd. with the correct method. Maybe i'm wrong?
Yes I found the same problem. Never did find out why, but for me I found a solution.
Any movie that reported an excedance of a 4.7 gig DVD I resolved by using the initial editng screen in TMpeg following the identification of the file screen.
I would preveiw the movie for a few frames and then set the start movie tag. Then I go to the end of the movie and rewind a few frames and then set the end marker. When I then go to the last screen or template before file save and encode I find that it now reports a much smaller file.
I assumed this meant that something was wrong with the reported "header" flags, but it was not important to find out what since the fix worked, at least for me.