View Single Post
Old 22nd April 2017, 14:33   #25856  |  Link
jdobbs
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 20,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lathe View Post
Yeah, that is pretty much what most of mine come out to also. Generally if I choose the BD-25 output size, no matter whether I'm using 'Fast' 2 Pass or 'High' 2 Pass, invariably the resulting encodes will be 22.1-22.5, sometimes 22.9. If I am really trying to squeeze an encode where it BARELY will fit, I usually select a custom size of about 23,700. But, even with that, most times the size is still 1 or 1 1.5 Gigs less than a full disc. If it's REALLY pushing it, I will try to go a bit more, but one time I tried 23,800 and it came out just a tad too big.

Of course, I've never been accused of playing with a full disc anyway...
22.1 to 22.5 would be within the range of correct sizing. As I've said before, that's purposeful because the outer edges of the disc are much more prone to failure/error. By keeping the disc in a smaller size range you are less likely to experience problems. It also keeps me from having to respond to people who think the failed burn is BD-RB's fault. But the 20.9 (as reported) would be outside what should be expected.

Just my opinion/advice, but a disc written to capacity will hold about 23.3GB and that last 1GB (about 4%) or so isn't going to get you a noticeable improvement in quality, especially considering the risk. Of course, as always, I've added the ability to change the target size for anyone who disagrees.
__________________
Help with development of new apps: Donations.
Website: www.jdobbs.net
jdobbs is offline   Reply With Quote