DVD 2 disc vs. DVD 1 disc? Confused

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Wootikus, Sep 25, 2003.

  1. Wootikus

    Wootikus Guest

    I have newbie questions maybe some of you DVD experts can answer. A
    while back when DVD just came out, there were a lot of movies that
    couldn't fit in one DVD. Goodfellas and Seven were both in 2 discs
    format. Nowadays, I don't think there are any 2-disc movies out there
    anymore unless it's one of those where they packed it with a bunch of
    special features.

    How could they get these movies to fit in one disc nowadays rather
    than 2 discs like in the early DVD years? Did you find a better way
    to compress? Wouldn't that sacrifice quality?
     
    Wootikus, Sep 25, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On 25 Sep 2003 09:16:46 -0700, (Wootikus) wrote:

    >I have newbie questions maybe some of you DVD experts can answer. A
    >while back when DVD just came out, there were a lot of movies that
    >couldn't fit in one DVD. Goodfellas and Seven were both in 2 discs
    >format. Nowadays, I don't think there are any 2-disc movies out there
    >anymore unless it's one of those where they packed it with a bunch of
    >special features.
    >
    >How could they get these movies to fit in one disc nowadays rather
    >than 2 discs like in the early DVD years? Did you find a better way
    >to compress? Wouldn't that sacrifice quality?


    Early discs were "flippers" sometimes, one layer each side; When
    DVD's were first on the market they didn't use dual layer pressings,
    where after playing one layer the laser refocuses and plays the other
    layer. This was always part of the spec but the technolgy wasn't
    quite in place (still isn't in some cases of failure, with the disc
    failing at the layer change.. <g>)

    . Steve .
     
    Steve(JazzHunter), Sep 25, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Wootikus

    Impmon Guest

    On 25 Sep 2003 09:16:46 -0700, (Wootikus) typed:

    >How could they get these movies to fit in one disc nowadays rather
    >than 2 discs like in the early DVD years? Did you find a better way
    >to compress? Wouldn't that sacrifice quality?


    Early DVD were single layered and either had a choice of dual sided
    "flippy" or spanned across multiple discs. Up until a few years ago,
    the art of making dual layered DVD has been perfected and it can hold
    about 4 hours of standard DVD quality movie.
    ----
    space for rent.
     
    Impmon, Sep 25, 2003
    #3
  4. Wootikus

    lugnut Guest

    On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:35:16 GMT, Impmon <> wrote:

    >On 25 Sep 2003 09:16:46 -0700, (Wootikus) typed:
    >
    >>How could they get these movies to fit in one disc nowadays rather
    >>than 2 discs like in the early DVD years? Did you find a better way
    >>to compress? Wouldn't that sacrifice quality?

    >
    >Early DVD were single layered and either had a choice of dual sided
    >"flippy" or spanned across multiple discs. Up until a few years ago,
    >the art of making dual layered DVD has been perfected and it can hold
    >about 4 hours of standard DVD quality movie.
    >----
    >space for rent.


    Speaking of which, this has probably been discussed in the past but I
    never knew about it until I bought the movie last night - why the heck
    is "Gangs of New York" spread out across two discs? I know there's a
    lot of extras on here, but geez, couldn't they have fit all the extras
    on the second disc?

    -lugnut
     
    lugnut, Sep 25, 2003
    #4
  5. Wootikus

    Joshua Zyber Guest

    "lugnut" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Speaking of which, this has probably been discussed in the past but I
    > never knew about it until I bought the movie last night - why the heck
    > is "Gangs of New York" spread out across two discs? I know there's a
    > lot of extras on here, but geez, couldn't they have fit all the extras
    > on the second disc?


    The DTS track eats up a lot of the available bit space.
     
    Joshua Zyber, Sep 26, 2003
    #5
  6. Wootikus

    John Doe Guest

    On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:31:52 -0400, "Steve(JazzHunter)"
    <> said:

    >Early discs were "flippers" sometimes, one layer each side; When
    >DVD's were first on the market they didn't use dual layer pressings,
    >where after playing one layer the laser refocuses and plays the other
    >layer. This was always part of the spec but the technolgy wasn't
    >quite in place (still isn't in some cases of failure, with the disc
    >failing at the layer change.. <g>)


    Hmm... from what I remember, it wasn't the players that couldn't handle it...
    nearly all players back then could play dual layer discs no prob. I thought
    it was more a cost issue... the technology to create dual layer discs existed
    but it was cheaper to make a "flipper". When it became feasible to cheaply
    make dual layer discs (or even the dual layer/dual side, like "The Stand"),
    that's when they started doing it that way instead.

    I do remember some reports of certain players having problems with the layer
    change on some discs... I chalk that up to some players perhaps not
    implementing the standard correctly, or maybe some discs... they all seem to
    have their act together now though. But I remember buying my Sony 7700 based
    on the fact that it handled layer changes quite well including even the most
    problematic discs. :)
     
    John Doe, Sep 26, 2003
    #6
  7. Wootikus

    Wootikus Guest

    Thanks for all the response. I'm still a bit confused.

    How many gigs can a single layer hold?
    How many gigs can a double layer hold?
    Is double layer the same as DVD-9?
     
    Wootikus, Sep 26, 2003
    #7
  8. Wootikus

    luminos Guest

    www.dvdrhelp.com

    "Wootikus" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Thanks for all the response. I'm still a bit confused.
    >
    > How many gigs can a single layer hold?
    > How many gigs can a double layer hold?
    > Is double layer the same as DVD-9?
     
    luminos, Sep 26, 2003
    #8
  9. On 25 Sep 2003 22:18:29 -0700, (Wootikus) wrote:

    >Thanks for all the response. I'm still a bit confused.
    >
    >How many gigs can a single layer hold?
    >How many gigs can a double layer hold?
    >Is double layer the same as DVD-9?


    http://www.thedigitalbits.com/officialfaq.html#3.3
     
    H E Pennypacker, Sep 26, 2003
    #9
  10. On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:57:25 -0700, John Doe <>
    wrote:

    >On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:31:52 -0400, "Steve(JazzHunter)"
    ><> said:
    >
    >>Early discs were "flippers" sometimes, one layer each side; When
    >>DVD's were first on the market they didn't use dual layer pressings,
    >>where after playing one layer the laser refocuses and plays the other
    >>layer. This was always part of the spec but the technolgy wasn't
    >>quite in place (still isn't in some cases of failure, with the disc
    >>failing at the layer change.. <g>)

    >
    >Hmm... from what I remember, it wasn't the players that couldn't handle it...
    >nearly all players back then could play dual layer discs no prob. I thought
    >it was more a cost issue... the technology to create dual layer discs existed
    >but it was cheaper to make a "flipper". When it became feasible to cheaply
    >make dual layer discs (or even the dual layer/dual side, like "The Stand"),
    >that's when they started doing it that way instead.


    I don't know why you bing up the players..I said that the technology
    wasn't fully in place to press dual layer discs, and I made a joke
    about the fact that dual layer pressings do still fail. Nowhere did I
    discuss the players at all, nor their ability to play dual Layers,
    they HAD to to meet the format license.

    . Steve .
    >
    >I do remember some reports of certain players having problems with the layer
    >change on some discs... I chalk that up to some players perhaps not
    >implementing the standard correctly, or maybe some discs... they all seem to
    >have their act together now though. But I remember buying my Sony 7700 based
    >on the fact that it handled layer changes quite well including even the most
    >problematic discs. :)
     
    Steve(JazzHunter), Sep 26, 2003
    #10
  11. Wootikus

    jayembee Guest

    (Wootikus) wrote:

    > Thanks for all the response. I'm still a bit confused.
    >
    > How many gigs can a single layer hold?
    > How many gigs can a double layer hold?
    > Is double layer the same as DVD-9?


    There are 4 basic "formats" for DVDs:

    (1) DVD-5, which holds around 5 gigs, and is single-sided
    and single-layered.

    (2) DVD-9, which holds around 9 gigs, and is single-sided
    and double-layered.

    (3) DVD-10, which holds around 10 gigs, and is double-sided
    and single-layered.

    (4) DVD-18, which holds around 18 gigs, and is double sided
    and double-layered. Quality control in manufacturing is still
    problematic with these, which is why you don't see them very
    often.

    -- jayembee
     
    jayembee, Sep 26, 2003
    #11
  12. >> Speaking of which, this has probably been discussed in the past but I
    >> never knew about it until I bought the movie last night - why the heck
    >> is "Gangs of New York" spread out across two discs? I know there's a
    >> lot of extras on here, but geez, couldn't they have fit all the extras
    >> on the second disc?

    >
    >The DTS track eats up a lot of the available bit space.
    >


    Each disc contains some extras, so they probably could have put the movie on
    one disc and the extras on the other without splitting the film.

    Remove "moc" to reply.


    Whoever says "Nothing is impossible" has never tried to slam a
    revolving door.
    - Willy Walker
     
    Sydney Assbasket, Sep 27, 2003
    #12
  13. Wootikus

    Wootikus Guest

    > There are 4 basic "formats" for DVDs:
    >
    > (1) DVD-5, which holds around 5 gigs, and is single-sided
    > and single-layered.
    >
    > (2) DVD-9, which holds around 9 gigs, and is single-sided
    > and double-layered.


    Thanks for the reply. This helps a lot. Why is it that the older
    version of Seven is on 2 DVDs? Its running time is just 2 hours and 7
    minutes. Shouldn't this fit nicely on just one side?

    Another question I have is, there's a couple of movies I saw in the
    store that are 3 hours long and yet they got it fit in just one DVD.
    Did they just compressed it to the point where quality would suffer?
    How do I check up on this? Someone suggested to me to play the DVD
    using PowerDVD and look at the Mbps.
     
    Wootikus, Sep 27, 2003
    #13
  14. Wootikus

    Dan P. Guest

    Back when DVD was first introduced, they advertised that a single-layer DVD
    could hold 130 minutes of video/audio. So a dual-layer DVD could easily
    hold 3 hours.

    But when you up the Mbps (video quality) or add a DTS soundtrack, or add
    multiple DD5.1 soundtracks, or just add a bunch of special features, it
    might not fit.

    On my DVD player, you can view the Mbps, so maybe your player can do the
    same thing. Check the manual.


    Dan
     
    Dan P., Sep 27, 2003
    #14
  15. Wootikus <> wrote:

    > Why is it that the older version of Seven is on 2 DVDs?


    Two (single-layered) sides of the same DVD, actually.


    > Its running time is just 2 hours and 7 minutes. Shouldn't this fit nicely
    > on just one side?


    It depends on the movie: not every 127-minute film will compress to the
    same extent. The compressionist may have had to use higher-than-usual
    bit-rates to produce an acceptable image (perhaps because _Se7en_ is so
    dark? I'm not sure).

    _The Godfather Part II_ was split over two discs for what I believe
    were similar reasons.

    doug

    --

    ---------------Douglas Bailey ()---------------
    I can't see the lines I used to think I could read between...
    --Eno
     
    Douglas Bailey, Sep 27, 2003
    #15
  16. Wootikus

    Erik Harris Guest

    On 26 Sep 2003 18:00:56 -0700, (Wootikus) wrote:

    >> There are 4 basic "formats" for DVDs:
    >>
    >> (1) DVD-5, which holds around 5 gigs, and is single-sided
    >> and single-layered.
    >>
    >> (2) DVD-9, which holds around 9 gigs, and is single-sided
    >> and double-layered.

    >
    >Thanks for the reply. This helps a lot. Why is it that the older
    >version of Seven is on 2 DVDs? Its running time is just 2 hours and 7
    >minutes. Shouldn't this fit nicely on just one side?


    Even if it was encoded at a bitrate very near the DVD standard's maximum
    (9.8Mbps or there-about), 2:07 should fit on a single dual layer disc. And
    IMHO, there's no excuse for releasing a movie on two single layer discs,
    unless it was released before dual layer technology was available (though
    wasn't it available right from the start?).

    >Another question I have is, there's a couple of movies I saw in the
    >store that are 3 hours long and yet they got it fit in just one DVD.
    >Did they just compressed it to the point where quality would suffer?


    That's hard to answer. What is "the point where quality would suffer"? That
    depends on the content of the film and how well it was encoded. A 3 hour
    movie should fit onto a dual layer disc at very good quality if it's encoded
    well. There wouldn't be room for much else, though.

    >How do I check up on this? Someone suggested to me to play the DVD
    >using PowerDVD and look at the Mbps.


    I believe PowerDVD only lists the maximum bitrate - since most discs are
    encoded at a variable bitrate, that maximum will always be 9.8Mbps, even if
    it's never reached. You'd need a DVD player with a realtime bitrate monitor
    (many of them have it). But even that won't tell you if it's compressed "to
    the point where quality would suffer." To judge that, you need a good
    monitor and a good pair of eyes (and a brain that knows how to use those good
    eyes to look for compression artifacts).

    A trained eye will find _some_ compression artifacts even on very well
    encoded DVDs, making it even harder to answet a question about "the point
    where quality would suffer." Technically, that point is _always_ reached
    with DVDs, because MPEG-2 is a lossy compression format even at its highest
    quality levels (for one thing, the version of the MPEG-2 standard used on
    DVDs requires chroma subsampling. If you have any DVD's with hard edges that
    are in red, look at those edges. They will look like crap, because reds
    generally suffer most noticeably from chroma subsampling - one example is the
    extras in the new Alias box set. Most of the titles were done red on black,
    which is a very poor choice when DVD is the intended medium).

    --
    Erik Harris n$wsr$ader@$harrishom$.com
    AIM: KngFuJoe http://www.eharrishome.com
    Chinese-Indonesian MA Club http://www.eharrishome.com/cimac/

    The above email address is obfuscated to try to prevent SPAM.
    Replace each dollar sign with an "e" for the correct address.
     
    Erik Harris, Sep 28, 2003
    #16
  17. On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 00:17:56 -0400, Erik Harris
    <n$wsr$ader@$harrishom$.com> wrote:

    >On 26 Sep 2003 18:00:56 -0700, (Wootikus) wrote:
    >
    >>> There are 4 basic "formats" for DVDs:
    >>>
    >>> (1) DVD-5, which holds around 5 gigs, and is single-sided
    >>> and single-layered.
    >>>
    >>> (2) DVD-9, which holds around 9 gigs, and is single-sided
    >>> and double-layered.

    >>
    >>Thanks for the reply. This helps a lot. Why is it that the older
    >>version of Seven is on 2 DVDs? Its running time is just 2 hours and 7
    >>minutes. Shouldn't this fit nicely on just one side?

    >
    >Even if it was encoded at a bitrate very near the DVD standard's maximum
    >(9.8Mbps or there-about), 2:07 should fit on a single dual layer disc. And
    >IMHO, there's no excuse for releasing a movie on two single layer discs,
    >unless it was released before dual layer technology was available (though
    >wasn't it available right from the start?).
    >
    >>Another question I have is, there's a couple of movies I saw in the
    >>store that are 3 hours long and yet they got it fit in just one DVD.
    >>Did they just compressed it to the point where quality would suffer?

    >
    >That's hard to answer. What is "the point where quality would suffer"? That
    >depends on the content of the film and how well it was encoded. A 3 hour
    >movie should fit onto a dual layer disc at very good quality if it's encoded
    >well. There wouldn't be room for much else, though.
    >
    >>How do I check up on this? Someone suggested to me to play the DVD
    >>using PowerDVD and look at the Mbps.

    >
    >I believe PowerDVD only lists the maximum bitrate - since most discs are
    >encoded at a variable bitrate, that maximum will always be 9.8Mbps,


    Nope, PowerDVD shows the current average bitrate, just like the
    hardware players with bitrate indicators. It's a good indicator of
    the amount of compression,

    . Steve .
    > even if
    >it's never reached. You'd need a DVD player with a realtime bitrate monitor
    >(many of them have it). But even that won't tell you if it's compressed "to
    >the point where quality would suffer." To judge that, you need a good
    >monitor and a good pair of eyes (and a brain that knows how to use those good
    >eyes to look for compression artifacts).
    >
    >A trained eye will find _some_ compression artifacts even on very well
    >encoded DVDs, making it even harder to answet a question about "the point
    >where quality would suffer." Technically, that point is _always_ reached
    >with DVDs, because MPEG-2 is a lossy compression format even at its highest
    >quality levels (for one thing, the version of the MPEG-2 standard used on
    >DVDs requires chroma subsampling. If you have any DVD's with hard edges that
    >are in red, look at those edges. They will look like crap, because reds
    >generally suffer most noticeably from chroma subsampling - one example is the
    >extras in the new Alias box set. Most of the titles were done red on black,
    >which is a very poor choice when DVD is the intended medium).
     
    Steve(JazzHunter), Sep 28, 2003
    #17
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Allan
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,137
    Allan
    Jul 11, 2005
  2. (PeteCresswell)

    "Disc Cannot Be Played... Please Check The Disc"?

    (PeteCresswell), Jan 11, 2007, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    958
    (PeteCresswell)
    Jan 13, 2007
  3. Don
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    974
  4. =?Utf-8?B?UGF1bCB0aGUgVmljZQ==?=

    Message "No disc in drive please insert disc"

    =?Utf-8?B?UGF1bCB0aGUgVmljZQ==?=, Feb 21, 2007, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    891
    John Barnes
    Feb 21, 2007
  5. Mr Undeniably Sluttish

    Doh! How do ya write a floppy disc image onto a floppy disc?

    Mr Undeniably Sluttish, Dec 28, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    584
    Mr Undeniably Sluttish
    Dec 29, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page