Approximate DVD time from Arabesk 4.4

[Rte80west]

Hi all. In the past I had always gotten about 82 minutes max on a DVD using the 'high' quality setting when burning DVDs (on my Kron, not sure of Arabesk version). Since upgrading to S4000 PRO with Arabesk 4.4, I recently tried to burn a disc about that length and received an error message that media was insufficient to burn data file of that size. I have always used DVD-R discs. Do I need dual layer discs now? Did something change w/ this version of Arabesk that the data that can dit on a DVD is less? It's still SD footage, so I'm not sure what's up. It takes a long time to render film before I can burn so I wanted to see if anyone knows of the approximate time rather than continually doing trial & error until I get it to fit. Thoughts are appreciated.

[TimKennelly]

The S4P uses the processor to number crunch the downconvert from DV to MPEG2 for DVD authoring where as the gen2 machines (outside of the Claro) had a built in hardware chip (C Cube) to do this which was inherently and obviously faster.

Unfortunately, the C Cube is a third part manufactured product and is long discontinued now.

So, yes, the S4P takes longer to convert (Add Film) than the older machines.

DVD capacity related to quality level set will vary with the specific content involved.

If the content has lots of motion or high detail it will negatively impact capacity.

Other than that I am unaware of any difference in DVD capacity relative to the quality levels, but it's possible MSDE has set the bit rate slightly higher per quality level on the S4P than on the gen2 machines which would change the general capacity per level.

[Rte80west]

Thanks for the feedback, Tim. Would using a dual layer capacity DVD result in the ability for additional content?

[Rte80west]

And Tim, after re-reading your intial response, I now assume using a dual layer DVD, while in theory has the ability to hold more data, may not be worth the "bang for the buck" if I am using a "HIGH" quality setting and the unit already indicates it is almost at its max. Is that a safe assumption? I would drop down to a "NORMAL' quality setting but have noticed glitches in the past (though this was quite awhile ago- maybe it's not an issue now?) Any other info you could provide (or anyone else) would be appreciated. Thanks again.

[TimKennelly]

I agree the High setting gives a better result than Normal.

It depends on the footage on how noticeable the artifacting is though.

Yes, dual layer would double your capacity.

However, it also costs more than two single layer DVDs and some players have issues with the dual layer DVDs of stopping and needing manual input or not working at all at the crossover point.

I personally would either pare down the footage a tad to fit at High on a single layer DVD or categorize the footage so you can put it on two single layer DVDs and make it look like a designed (which it would be) two DVD creation.

With larger projects this is what I do.

For instance, with a Catholic wedding, DVD One is the edited ceremony and DVD Two is all else, usually with some highly edited snippets from the DVD One ceremony and I use a double DVD jacket for the presentation case.

[LouBruno]

Set the rendering to INTENSIVE to eliminate the possibility of glitches.

And Tim, after re-reading your intial response, I now assume using a dual layer DVD, while in theory has the ability to hold more data, may not be worth the "bang for the buck" if I am using a "HIGH" quality setting and the unit already indicates it is almost at its max. Is that a safe assumption? I would drop down to a "NORMAL' quality setting but have noticed glitches in the past (though this was quite awhile ago- maybe it's not an issue now?) Any other info you could provide (or anyone else) would be appreciated. Thanks again.

[Jeanton]

Make sure you set the rendering to intensive it takes a lot longer to render but the quality of the footage is in my view allot better.
I had some problems with the quality of my footage.

O Lou just beat me to it.

[Rte80west]

Too funny- I am doing a burn now and figured I'd try Intensive... then I just checked the site and see 2 reccomends to do the same. Nice. Guess I'm on the right track. Thanks all for taking the time for input, really appreciate it. Now... the big question is this: can I get away with "NORMAL" quality setting if I use Intensive rendering? Right now, I am trying a burn with Intensive rendering, High quality and it's about 65 minutes. What I don't understand is I was always under the impression that the Arabesk indicates whether or not the footage can be fit onto media (via the % indicator before adding a film). Now it appears this isn't the case. When I previously attempted to burn, it indicated I had 3% remaining space (film was about 82 minutes) and it did not work. My objective is to determine the greatest capacity while preserving good quality. And I understand from what Tim previously posted that the degree of complexity of footage affects this capacity, but I still have to believe there is a way to get a ballpark idea.

[TimKennelly]

The three percent was the ballpark.LOL

That tells you that you are extremely close to maxing out and if the data is overall complex you might be over.

On the other hand I have gone as much as five percent over and had it fit.

[Jeanton]

If it just not fits I compress the audio to make it fit. I can't hear much of a difference in the sound when I do that and it is better than spreading it out over 2 DVD's or changing it to a normal setting. After all we capture video and the picture quality is very important in my view.