20 replies to this topic

[Shooter]

I started a burn last night, and now more than 12 hours later, it has 30% of the project encoded.  This is my first DVD burner, and the first project I've tried to burn with it, so I'm sure there are all kinds of things I could have screwed up.  I knew that I should expect it to be much slower than my CDR, but I'm thinking 36 hours is a little longer than it should take.

Here's the details:

-Burning 5 23-27 minute TV episodes recorded by TiVo and converted using DirectDump
-The title screen has a picture that glides in, and then 5 links to the movies, which are set to play the next succesively (I couldn't get a Play All button to work, but that's a challenge for another day)
-Intel Core2 4300 @ 1.80 GHz
-2 GB RAM
-WinXP Pro
-The processor usage percentage is running between 55-70%
-RAM being used is just over 1GB

Any suggestion here would be greatly appriciated.

Thanks!

[gi7omy]

OK - first of all, don't confuse rendering with burning - they're two different processes.

Your problem is the rendering - if you selected to burn the file, it will render first and then burn (you can select burn to hard drive and then open the .iso file with disc copier afterwards but that's just splitting it in two separate jobs)

Check that you have NOTHING running in the background - no messengers, no browsing, etc. In fact, run a spyware sweep first to clear out any malware that may be lurking

Defrag the disk before starting (otherwise the heads skip all round the place picking up scattered bits of the file)

Rendering is dependant on the video duration and not its size on the hard drive - basically one hour video = 1 standard DVD. What size avi (or whatever) are you trying to render? More importantly, what time duration are the files?

On my last machine (Athlon 3200) it took roughly an hour to render an hour long clip so basically it will take real time duration plus a bit longer

Did you update your video drivers and install the latest DirectX from MS? Rendering utilises the graphics and the drivers are importane

[grandpabruce]

I started a burn last night, and now more than 12 hours later, it has 30% of the project encoded.  This is my first DVD burner, and the first project I've tried to burn with it, so I'm sure there are all kinds of things I could have screwed up.  I knew that I should expect it to be much slower than my CDR, but I'm thinking 36 hours is a little longer than it should take.

Here's the details:

-Burning 5 23-27 minute TV episodes recorded by TiVo and converted using DirectDump
-The title screen has a picture that glides in, and then 5 links to the movies, which are set to play the next succesively (I couldn't get a Play All button to work, but that's a challenge for another day)
-Intel Core2 4300 @ 1.80 GHz
-2 GB RAM
-WinXP Pro
-The processor usage percentage is running between 55-70%
-RAM being used is just over 1GB

Any suggestion here would be greatly appriciated.

Thanks!

If you are going to burn that production to your hard drive, burn to a Folder Set, as an .ISO file will cut off anything over 2 hours.

[Shooter]

It is still very S L O W L Y 'encoding', which I assuming is the rendering process.

I have 5 TV shows with commercials clipped that are around 25 minutes each.  15 hours in now, and its only halfway done with the second movie.  I should expect these to take half an hour, give or take, right?  Not 10 hours...

I've used the task manager to shut down any process that didn't seem critical.

I didn't specificaly check drivers, but Windows update was run last week with the non-critical goodies also installed.

I don't know if this will have much effect, but the hard drive is 160 GB, in 2 equal partitions.  The C: drive has around 40GB free, and is where the program is installed and where the project file is saved.  The movies are on the D: drive, which only has 1 GB free.  The computer is a month old, and has not been defragmented, but I doubt there's much fragmentation becasue of the age and those movies were the first files written there.  How much free disk space does it need?

Also, I've been reading on-board graphics adapters may cause issues, which, of course, is what I'm using.  It's an Intel GMA 3000 with the Intel 946GZ Express Chipset Family and 256 MB.  Are there any known issues with this?

If you are going to burn that production to your hard drive, burn to a Folder Set, as an .ISO file will cut off anything over 2 hours.

Thanks for the hint  

Edited by Shooter, 27 August 2007 - 11:03 AM.

[grandpabruce]

It is still very S L O W L Y 'encoding', which I assuming is the rendering process.

I have 5 TV shows with commercials clipped that are around 25 minutes each.  15 hours in now, and its only halfway done with the second movie.  I should expect these to take half an hour, give or take, right?  Not 10 hours...

I've used the task manager to shut down any process that didn't seem critical.

I didn't specificaly check drivers, but Windows update was run last week with the non-critical goodies also installed.

I don't know if this will have much effect, but the hard drive is 160 GB, in 2 equal partitions.  The C: drive has around 40GB free, and is where the program is installed and where the project file is saved.  The movies are on the D: drive, which only has 1 GB free.  The computer is a month old, and has not been defragmented, but I doubt there's much fragmentation becasue of the age and those movies were the first files written there.  How much free disk space does it need?

Also, I've been reading on-board graphics adapters may cause issues, which, of course, is what I'm using.  It's an Intel GMA 3000 with the Intel 946GZ Express Chipset Family and 256 MB.  Are there any known issues with this?
Thanks for the hint  

Defrag your hard drive, and get rid of any malware/spyware you have on your computer.  It isn't necessarly the amount of space, it is the contiguous space that works.

[Shooter]

Defrag your hard drive, and get rid of any malware/spyware you have on your computer.  It isn't necessarly the amount of space, it is the contiguous space that works.

I'll give it a shot.  Thanks for the help.

[gi7omy]

You could have graphics problems. If that Intel one is onboard (not a dedicated card) it will be slow.

Updating drivers - go straight to intel and get the drivers from their website. Also, DirectX is not a MS 'update' - you have to go get it by hand

[Shooter]

Funny thing - I do networking IT work for a living, and so I should really know to just shut up and listen to people who are really good at this, especially the first time out.  All the 'network down' issues that I've 'solved' by convincing people to go check, just for fun, if the switch they insist on keeping on someone's desk is still plugged in...

OK.  Direct X updated.  New graphics driver less than a month old downloaded.  No malware detected.  And a defrag in process.  I'll update tomorrow after I retry the rendering and burning process.

The graphics chipset is onboard, and though I have the full 256MB allocated to it, I know it's not the best option.  By 'slow', do you mean while most people can render in relative realtime, it will take me an extra 10 minutes, or should I expect an hour movie to take 2 hours or more?  I know what I had before with an hour taking 20 hours to render wasn't right, but do you have a ballpark idea of what I can expect?

Thanks for all your help here.  And, <humbly> patience.

Edited by Shooter, 27 August 2007 - 06:17 PM.

[barryware]

Here's the details:

-Intel Core2 4300 @ 1.80 GHz
-2 GB RAM
-WinXP Pro
-The processor usage percentage is running between 55-70%
-RAM being used is just over 1GB

Any suggestion here would be greatly appriciated.

Thanks!

Slow processor! It will take a while. Be patient.

[Shooter]

SUCCESS!! (presumably)  For some reason the defrag last night had a problem putting just the video files back together and had to be run 3 times. But, this morning, using all the suggestions, I started a Folder Set, and 90 minutes in it has successfully rendered over 60 minutes of video.  So, not super-speedy, but better than I was hoping for, and more than I got out of 16 hours from the first try.

BTW, since this seems to be a standard drill for burning movies, are there any recomendations out there for defrag utilities other than the windows flavor?

Thanks all!  

[grandpabruce]

SUCCESS!! (presumably)  For some reason the defrag last night had a problem putting just the video files back together and had to be run 3 times. But, this morning, using all the suggestions, I started a Folder Set, and 90 minutes in it has successfully rendered over 60 minutes of video.  So, not super-speedy, but better than I was hoping for, and more than I got out of 16 hours from the first try.

BTW, since this seems to be a standard drill for burning movies, are there any recomendations out there for defrag utilities other than the windows flavor?

Thanks all!  

I use Diskeeper 10, but version 11 is out now.

[Shooter]

  Ahhhhhhh!  So, I've succesfully rendered the 2 1/2 hours of video in just under 4 hours with my on-board graphics chipset.  Not too shabby from what I've read.  But I made a folder set, and I can't figure out how to get it from my hard drive to the DVD.  What I'm reading is I need to use Copy function, but it appears to only want .gi, .iso, .udi, .cue, or .c2d extesions.  I can succesfully play the folder set I made, so I know it came out right.  There's got to be an easy way to do something this simple... I think I've just been staring at it too long the last couple days...

[malatekid]

On Disc Copier, under CD&DVD COPY, the dropdown should have Browse for image or folder set as a selection. Then point to the folder set. The program sould recognize it is a Video folder set and you should be able to burn it to DVD disc.

Edited by malatekid, 28 August 2007 - 12:12 PM.

[grandpabruce]

  Ahhhhhhh!  So, I've succesfully rendered the 2 1/2 hours of video in just under 4 hours with my on-board graphics chipset.  Not too shabby from what I've read.  But I made a folder set, and I can't figure out how to get it from my hard drive to the DVD.  What I'm reading is I need to use Copy function, but it appears to only want .gi, .iso, .udi, .cue, or .c2d extesions.  I can succesfully play the folder set I made, so I know it came out right.  There's got to be an easy way to do something this simple... I think I've just been staring at it too long the last couple days...

Use Disc Copir, click on the Source dropdown box, the browse for your files, click on them, and they should be added to your burn project.

[Shooter]

That did it!  A fully functioning DVD.  Sweet.

I kept trying to copy from the Creator home page rather than open the seperate program.

Thanks all!

[gi7omy]

Glad you got it sorted - for defrag I use Ashampoo WinOptimizer (does everything that Norton SystemWorks does except for anti-virus and, imho, does it better)

And it doesn't make your copy of EMC into a trial version either

[Shooter]

One more question, if anyone is still following this thread.  The DVD works fine in my newer portable player, but in my main, older player, it gets a 'Disc Dirty' message.  The older player is a 5-disc Sony which is between 5 & 7 years old.  Is this just an age/technology compatability issue, or is there a solution?

[barryware]

One more question, if anyone is still following this thread.  The DVD works fine in my newer portable player, but in my main, older player, it gets a 'Disc Dirty' message.  The older player is a 5-disc Sony which is between 5 & 7 years old.  Is this just an age/technology compatability issue, or is there a solution?

The age of your player certainly has something to do with it.

It has been my experience that -R's are much more compatible with set top players especially the older ones.

Did you use a +R or a -R DVD disk?

[Shooter]

Did you use a +R or a -R DVD disk?

It's a +R

Edited by Shooter, 29 August 2007 - 05:07 AM.

[gi7omy]

Try -R and maybe a different brand. I've a cheap and nasty player made by A.Non of Taiwan that plays anything I feed it, but my sister-in-law's high end Sony is fussy about what it will and won't play - go figger THAT one