 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4  Previous Next
|
|
Dual-layer Blu-ray discs vs. actual data pressed |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 2,337 |
| | Posted: | | | | A BIG greenie to Mark! |
| | Registered: May 8, 2007 |  Posts: 823 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Mark Harrison: Quote:
Since this conversation is starting to turn nasty, this should be my last comment on the topic. Everything that follows this is MY OPINION.
I have a problem using a filed called Dual-Layer for any purposes besides telling me how many layers the disc contains. The field should NOT be re-appropriated to store any other data besides the number of layers the disc has. And since we're only tracking the number of layers (it's not measured in GB), it works out to be very simple.
I'm hearing that other people don't like this; I guess they must use that information for other purposes. And I'm fine with that. But get a new field for whatever it is you're wanting to track. This one already has a pretty clear definition, the number of layers on the disc. If you want to use that number to infer some other attribute of the disc, that's fine. If you want to put something other than the correct number of layers there because it's causing you to infer things incorrectly, get a new field and leave this one alone! We DO have a feature request forum.
Finally, if you see no reason for doing things the way we are, too bad. Unless you're Ken, you're understanding isn't a requirement. Just because *YOU* see no value in it doesn't mean others agree with you or that your limited understanding is correct. Nor should your lack of understanding prevent those who do get it from discussing the topic. Don't like the discussion? Don't read it. You have failed to understand Blu-Ray standards and specifications. It isn't like DVD layer breaks. And it IS measured in size. 0 - 12,219,392 sectors = single layer 12,219,393 - 24,438,784 sectors = dual layer To specify that a disc with less than 12,219,393 sectors is "dual layer" because the BD-ROM has an unused layer, the "disc" in terms of what the player or computer sees is STILL only single layer. To specify otherwise is inaccurate and undermines the integrity and usefulness of the database. As someone said to me, "your oversimplification does not invalidate." And as you yourself say, "Nor should your lack of understanding prevent those who do get it from discussing the topic." By the way, please pray tell how you are determining if a disc has a second unused layer? (My gosh... four pages of this nastiness. Can we please get a ruling to put this issue to rest?) | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
| | Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 823 |
| | Posted: | | | | I didn't even think to check the rules. (Why would I need to until this thread?) Quote: Quote:
Dual-Layered: Discs with two layers of data presented on the selected side. (i.e. RSDL) So a ruling is not needed. The "ruling" is in the rules. That should put the issue to rest. Further discussion should go in the rules forum as a proposition for a rule change. | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." | | | | Last edited: by Grendell |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 13,201 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Mark Harrison: Quote:
Since this conversation is starting to turn nasty, this should be my last comment on the topic. Everything that follows this is MY OPINION.
I have a problem using a filed called Dual-Layer for any purposes besides telling me how many layers the disc contains. The field should NOT be re-appropriated to store any other data besides the number of layers the disc has. And since we're only tracking the number of layers (it's not measured in GB), it works out to be very simple. Using a field for something other than what the field is called, is, unfortunately, a common problem in Profiler. The purpose of a field is determined by the rule, not the field name. In this case, according to the way the rules are written, the purpose of the field is to record the number of layers that contain data. I know, based on reading the thread, that some people don't agree with that, but I honestly don't see how you can read the rule any other way. Just so we are clear, I see zero value in this field, so have no dog in this fight. My only objective here is to point out that what a field is called doesn't always match what we enter...production year anyone? | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,456 |
| | Posted: | | | | An observation that using ambiguous terminology, as often happens, results in confusing discussions and artificial conflict. Based on the last few posts, it is still clear to me that most everybody is overlooking the fundamental basis of the question of this thread: Disc capacity: the maximum amount of data that can be put on the disc. Disc data size: the amount of data that is actually on a disc. The Standards define SL, DL, etc in terms of Capacity of the Disc. The Invelos Rules define SL, DL in terms of the actual Amount of Data on the disc. The rule is a poorly worded statement made for DVD. I couldn't find any statement for Blu-Ray. Most of the unnecessarily contentious debates in this thread are either a direct result of blurring this distinction, in other words, due to comparing "Apples with Oranges.", or of differing interpretations of a poorly worded and incomplete rule. Conclusion: Invelos just needs to clarify and complete the Rules statement, then we can all operate accordingly. And BTW, that's all the OP was asking for in the first place, IMHO. Another point: As I mentioned before, the standard for " layers" is based on capacity. There is a one-to-one correlation. 2 layers have twice the capacity of 1 layer, etc. The confusion arises when you conflate the notion of "amount of data on the disc" with layers. That is the only way you get into the riddle of what to do when the data is only on the second physical layer? Answer based on capacity: Two layers = dual layer. Answer based on amount of data: depends on how much data. It's as simple as that. No need for nastiness, just clear thinking. | | | Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog. | | | | Last edited: by mediadogg |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 3,197 |
| | Posted: | | | | If it was simple (I don't think it is simple, and I'm a tech geek) there would be no need for discussion. But since very few seem to actually care about the data why not enter it as DVD Profiler reports it and leave it at that. If people can't agree what the purpose it then it's better to remove the feature completely, or make it local only. | | | | First registered: February 15, 2002 |
| | Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,456 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting iPatsa: Quote:
If it was simple (I don't think it is simple, and I'm a tech geek) there would be no need for discussion. But since very few seem to actually care about the data why not enter it as DVD Profiler reports it and leave it at that. If people can't agree what the purpose it then it's better to remove the feature completely, or make it local only. I didn't mean that the technology was simple - just that the issue was, once it is framed correctly. E = mc squared is simple to explain in general, but it takes reams of equations and billions of dollars to back it up!  | | | Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog. | | | | Last edited: by mediadogg |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |