Stas Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Hi, Yesterday I was playing with a new version of ImgBurn, and found that when I create a DVD Video disc/image, the program modifies .IFO and .BUF files of the original VIDEO_TS folder. Could someone please explain the reason for this and is there a way (maybe some setting in the menu) to prevent this behaviour. The DVD image I was creating had only one layer, so I assume 'layer break' has nothing to do with this. I was comparing files in the original VIDEO_TS folder and that in the DVD image mounted as a virtual drive using some binary comparison software. Currently I use Roxio Easy Media Creator 9 for burning (the main program of the suite called 'Home' which is essentially RecordNow). And the two main reasons I prefer it to Nero and others are: 1) It supports unicode files and folders for data discs. (it doesn't support it in other parts of the same program though) 2) It does not modify files when burning VIDEO_TS folders. Not a single byte. Even when burning dual layer discs. And yet discs play perfectly in DVD players. To me, modification of files by burning program does not look good at all. It is basically re-authoring. Also, I cannot use a burned disc as a backup of original VIDEO_TS folder and thus delete the original. It is not even clear how to back it up using such programs at all. But definetely we need some alternative to both Nero and Roxio. They bundle their burning programs with all kinds of crap possible and their installation software will soon exceed 1GB of size. So this small and nice program ImgBurn looks as a promising alternative. I was very happy to see that the latest version supports unicode. If not this issue with VIDEO_TS folders, I would probably start using it. Also, ImgBurn has so many options in the menu, and it doesn't even has a help file which explains them. Not even tooltips. It would be nice to fix this too. Regards, Stas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontasciime Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 They only thing i can think of is the padding option under build. In a previous time another program I would have said that the IFO and BUP files must not be correct in the first place if they were being altered by that program. Maybe ImgBurn also notices they are not quite right and fixes them for you, or it simply is the IFO/BUP 32k Padding option. Wait for someone with more knowledge of the structure and function of IFO/BUP and Imgburn to clarify why it happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volvofl10 Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Welcome to the forum stas my thoughts are the padding option as well. what is ACTUALLY differant between your original VIDEO_TS folder and the disc you created , anything visible on playback ? as for a help section in ImgBurn , thats what this dedicated forum is for To me, modification of files by burning program does not look good at all. It is basically re-authoring. Also, I cannot use a burned disc as a backup of original VIDEO_TS folder and thus delete the original. It is not even clear how to back it up using such programs at all. im baffled as to why you think you cant use a burned disc as a back up of an original VIDEO_TS folder though . if its already in a VIDEO_TS , then you will get a replica disc that will still play the same as the VID_TS folder, especially if its DV5 size Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stas Posted February 15, 2007 Author Share Posted February 15, 2007 Thanks for your replies, but I tried to un-check "IFO/BUP 32K Padding" with no luck. I was playing with other settings as well, but could not find one which prevents altering .ISO/.BUP files. Files are not much different, just a few bytes are altered. I did not even try to play the resulting DVD. I do not think it would be noticeable when playing, but I still do not like the fact the files are changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 It does not modify the original files on your hdd, only the ones on the disc (or in the ISO) as part of the 'Build' process. It has to correct the VTS sectors for when they're burnt to disc. It's normal and nothing to worry about. If they were right in the first place, it wouldn't have to change anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stas Posted February 15, 2007 Author Share Posted February 15, 2007 Hi LIGHTNING UK!! I'm very glad to talk to a living legend! > It does not modify the original files on your hdd, only the ones on the disc (or in the ISO) as part of the 'Build' process. This is what I meant. If it was also modifying original files on HDD it would be much worse, but on the other hand in this case I would not notice that something was modified . > It has to correct the VTS sectors for when they're burnt to disc. It's normal and nothing to worry about. So there is no option in the menu to tell the program not to do this? If so, can you add one in the next version? PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!! Lets take from Roxio this advantage point over your program! Let it be the responsibility of authoring program (one which created the original VIDEO_TS folder) for any playback issues. Also, how do you decide that the image/disc is going to be a DVD Video disc? Just if VIDEO_TS folder is present? What if it is filled with some garbage? In other words, is there any way to tell ImgBurn to treat VIDEO_TS folder just as data folder, not DVD video folder, even if this results in discs not playable in DVD palyers? When I look at DVD video discs using IsoBuster, it shows additional section in the list of file systems, called "IFO/VOB" or something like that. IsoBuster calls it pseudo-file system. It would be interesting to know, does recording program have to take some special actions for that to appear or not? What I'm trying to understand is when RecordNow creates a disc, does it treat VIDEO_TS folders differently or it does not care and writes them as normal data? The thing is, for discs burned with RecordNow (which does not change files) this "IFO/VOB" section still appears, but for some files file sizes are different from UDF section. Yet they are both playable in DVD players and files are same when I compare them with originals byte by byte. On the other hand, recently I tried to write a VIDEO_TS folder with Microsoft burning software shipped with Vista. I was using 'Mastering Mode', not 'File System Mode', and still the resulting disc was not playable in DVD players, though it was playable on a computer. And when I looked at it using IsoBuster, "IFO/VOB" section was there, but only three files were there. So I came to a conclusion that something special has to be done to make DVD video discs, and RecordNow probably takea this into account. Can you please clarify all this a bit. Thank you very much in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Sorry, the fixing of 'VTS sectors' stays. Quit worrying about it and just let ImgBurn do it's job. Yes it's a DVD Video disc if the VIDEO_TS folder is present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blutach Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 If you posted a couple of IFO files that you say are different, we could compare them. If it it just VTS Sectors, then if your authoring prog had done it right, there would be no change. It is not, after all, the most complex calc in the world. PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!! Lets take from Roxio this advantage point over your program! I seriously doubt Roxio has ANY advantage over ImgBurn. That is funny, indeed. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stas Posted February 16, 2007 Author Share Posted February 16, 2007 (edited) Hi Everyone, I have spent last several hours doing some experiments with my VIDEO_TS folder. I created two DVD images using ImgBurn and RecordNow. Then I mounted them as virtual drives and analysed images and .IFO files with IsoBuster and IfoEdit correspondingly. And I think I can now answer questions I was asking you and myself yesterday. I know why ImgBurn changes .IFO files, how RecordNow manages not to change them while discs created with it are still playable with standalone DVD players, and why discs created by Microsoft burning software included in Vista are not. ImgBurn places files on disc one after another without gaps between them, so it has to change some information in .IFO files to reflect positions of files on disc. Some other programs (CloneDVD, for example) also seem to do the same thing. RecordNow uses different strategy: it FOLLOWS the information it reads from .IFO files when it decides positions of files on disc. So it does not have to change .IFO files. But this can be dangerous if .IFO files have wrong numbers in them, so some files might overlap on disc. This is actually what happened with my test VIDEO_TS folder, and one of the files - VTS_02_0.IFO was in the same place as VTS_01_0.BUP. RecordNow does not seem to check for overlaps. But normally, if the authoring program did it right, everything should be OK. Microsoft's burning software included in Vista does not do either thing. It is completely dumb. It ignores .IFO files, and positions of files on disc do not match the information from .IFO files. So DVD players do not play such discs. Now when I understand that RecordNow and ImgBurn both do right things when burning VIDEO_TS folders, the question is: which strategy is better? Probably I would still prefer what RecordNow does, as it does not change files and places them where the authoring program wanted them to be. But it is just a matter of one's taste. I attached IsoBuster screenshots for images created by both ImgBurn and RecordNow. Below is the extract of my test .IFO files. If you look at the pictures and below numbers, and apply some math, you will see that everything makes sense now. The only thing I still do not understand is why IsoBuster shows different file size for some .VOB files in IFO section. (see RecordNow_IFO.png, for example) Most of you probably know all this anyway, but maybe someone will be interested in what I wrote here. VIDEO_TS.IFO Original: [00000010] Title_1: Title set starting sector 4096 [00001000] [0000001c] Title_2: Title set starting sector 1072092 [00105bdc] ImgBurn Modified: [00000010] Title_1: Title set starting sector 51 [00000033] [0000001c] Title_2: Title set starting sector 1067831 [00104b37] VTS_01_0.IFO Original: [0000000c] Last Sector of VTS 1068015 [00104bef] [000000c4] Start sector of VTSTT_VOBS 256 [00000100] ImgBurn Modified: [0000000c] Last Sector of VTS 1067779 [00104b03] [000000c4] Start sector of VTSTT_VOBS 20 [00000014] VTS_02_0.IFO Original: [0000000c] Last Sector of VTS 1065794 [00104342] [000000c4] Start sector of VTSTT_VOBS 256 [00000100] ImgBurn Modified: [0000000c] Last Sector of VTS 1065558 [00104256] [000000c4] Start sector of VTSTT_VOBS 20 [00000014] Edited February 16, 2007 by Stas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 The 'IFO' section in IsoBuster is showing the LBA/Sizes as a player that strictly follows the IFO pointers would see it. It's not anything to do with the filesystem. All being well, the LBA in UDF and the LBA in IFO should match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stas Posted March 8, 2007 Author Share Posted March 8, 2007 Dear LIGHTNING UK!, How hard is it to add an option to ImgBurn so that when it is enabled it places VIDEO_TS files on image or disc according to the rules specified in .IFO files instead of fixing VTS sectors in them? I would really be happy to see such an option in the next release. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfcrule1972 Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Hi - excuse my ignorance but I cannot for the life of me see why you are so in need of this ? To my mind and looking at the posts above, ImgBurn is fixing errors created by the authoring program and should always do this..... Why would you want to maintain files that are not correct ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts