"Disc Information" vs. "File System Information"

[Pelvis Popcan]

Some Blu-Ray discs in ImgBurn show a much bigger Disc Information than File System Information. For example,

Disc Information:
Status: Complete
State of Last Session: Complete
Erasable: No
Sessions: 1
Sectors: 24,176,128
Size: 49,512,710,144 bytes
Time: 5372:30:28 (MM:SS:FF)

File System Information:
Sectors: 12,442,464
Size: 25,482,166,272 bytes
Time: 2765:01:39 (MM:SS:FF)

Is there any point to this? Is there any way to copy *only* the file system and not the disc information, since it seems to be pretty much 25 gigs of useless "blank" data?

 

[Peer]

Some Blu-Ray discs in ImgBurn show a much bigger Disc Information than File System Information. For example,



Is there any point to this? Is there any way to copy *only* the file system and not the disc information, since it seems to be pretty much 25 gigs of useless "blank" data?

What are "some discs"? Titles?

 

[YaniD]

Some Blu-Ray discs in ImgBurn show a much bigger Disc Information than File System Information. For example,

Is there any point to this? Is there any way to copy *only* the file system and not the disc information, since it seems to be pretty much 25 gigs of useless "blank" data?

The point to this is to make copying more troublesome, for the studios benefit.

However, you can copy the folders/files to HDD first and then use ImgBurn to "create image file from files/folders" to get around this problem.

The blank data is only in the Disc Information, not in the actual file system files.

 

[Peer]

The point to this is to make copying more troublesome, for the studios benefit.

Is this anything more than pure speculation?
I find it verydoubtful.

 

[Pelvis Popcan]

The point to this is to make copying more troublesome, for the studios benefit.

However, you can copy the folders/files to HDD first and then use ImgBurn to "create image file from files/folders" to get around this problem.

The blank data is only in the Disc Information, not in the actual file system files.

I thought about trying that, but I wasn't sure if it would work or not!

 

[Adbear]

I thought about trying that, but I wasn't sure if it would work or not!

As long as it's not a protected ISO then it works fine. (I've never tested it with a protected ISO)

 

[Peer]

I thought about trying that, but I wasn't sure if it would work or not!

so...again: please give us an example of a title (or more) that displays this behavior.
I inserted a random choice of 4 discs and couldn't find anything like it.

 

[Pelvis Popcan]

Here's a log from the disc I mentioned in the first post. It's from a copy of Sherlock Holmes I bought from an online discounter. It turned out to be the crappy stripped down "rental" version. I guess I got what I paid for.

 

[YaniD]

I thought about trying that, but I wasn't sure if it would work or not!

It works, if you can remove the protection from the source: "Rising Sun" goes from 50GB down to 25GB.

Of course my comments on why the studios do this on occasion are pure speculation, but it does make life more complicated for the consumer: a straight disc copy can use up to 25GB more storage space, or an extra file copy and image creation step is required. Similar principle to each new DRM: it gets cracked eventually so is only a temporary annoyance, yet the studios seem to get some mileage from having a couple of weeks where the new release doesn't get copied.

 

[Pelvis Popcan]

I don't have a title in mind but I do remember seeing some titles where for example it's 35 gigs for File System Information, and 38 gigs for Disc Information, so that doesn't seem to be anything related to copy protection. I still wonder what's in that 3 gigs.

Many discs also have the exact same size for Disc Information and File System Information.

It's not that big a deal to me, I'm just interested in knowing more about what's going on with this.

 

[Adbear]

It's just blank space, You can either make an ISO and keep the blank space or rip to folder and then remake the ISO which will be smaller.