HELP!?! What am I doing wrong now?

[starz]

I meant useless with respect to what 68dodgeramman needs. It is possible that someone may have some reason for wanting to build an .iso, but I can't really think of a good one in terms of dvd playback because dvd player software does not natively understand .isos. You have to convert the .iso back to dvd files (or mount the .iso in a virtual drive). So what's the point?



I fail to see any functional difference with respect to dvd-video playback on a computer. But you may have some reason that I'm not privy to.

All a ISO is, is A DVD Partition in a file on a HDD if I'm not right then please enlighten me on what the heck it even is....

EDIT:the point might have something to do with making it look like a real disk to a program...cause from my understanding....when created to this specification....
the ISO is Just a Virtual Disc...inside u have your UDF Partition formated to a DVD-ROM discs Partition standards....same with HD Media you Create an ISO to UDF 2.5
When You Make AN ISO from Clone DVD and Burn The ISO with another program that burns ISO files to disc the layout partition etc is transfered automatically to that program...As if Clone DVD Actually did the burning it's self....worked fine with Nero....ImgBurn is rather well not as easy to work with.


Starz

 

[Webslinger]

All a ISO is, is A DVD Partition in a file on a HDD if I'm not right then please enlighten me on what the heck it even is....

Starz

Probably the simplest way to think of an .iso is as a wrapper containing a bunch of files. It's an archive file based on the International Organization for Standardization (.iso). And the .iso wrapper contains the files in an uncompressed format too (so it's not as though anyone is saving tons of disc space by using it).

In terms of troubleshooting, I absolutely hate .isos because just by using one people are creating the potential for problems. I have troubleshoot virtual drives. I have to troubleshoot how the .iso was created. It's just a bunch of extra variables that I have to consider.

 

[DrinkLyeAndDie]

I fail to see any functional difference with respect to dvd-video playback on a computer. But you may have some reason that I'm not privy to.

Because you are handling only 1 file. You are only moving around 1 file. You just have that single ISO containing the whole disc and whatever else.

It's His Laptop That he takes with him.....thats like the first line of the OP Original Message.....Just thought I'd point that out..

I did see what they wrote, starz, and I am not interested in a debate on semantics. No offense intended. I know people quite a few people who have laptops for work and if you talk to them they refer to it as "my laptop" when it actually isn't owned by them. The statement is not necessarily a definitive declaration of ownership.

Nonetheless, the OP has been given their options. Now it is up to them to decide which is better for them.

 

[starz]

Because you are handling only 1 file. You are only moving around 1 file. You just have that single ISO containing the whole disc and whatever else.



I did see what they wrote, starz, and I am not interested in a debate on semantics. No offense intended. I know people quite a few people who have laptops for work and if you talk to them they refer to it as "my laptop" when it actually isn't owned by them. The statement is not necessarily a definitive declaration of ownership.

Nonetheless, the OP has been given their options. Now it is up to them to decide which is better for them.

fair enough
Starz

 

[starz]

Probably the simplest way to think of an .iso is as a wrapper containing a bunch of files. It's an archive file based on the International Organization for Standardization (.iso). And the .iso wrapper contains the files in an uncompressed format too (so it's not as though anyone is saving tons of disc space by using it).

In terms of troubleshooting, I absolutely hate .isos because just by using one people are creating the potential for problems. I have troubleshoot virtual drives. I have to troubleshoot how the .iso was created. It's just a bunch of extra variables that I have to consider.

right but is my understand of it internally correct at all or am I just being blindsided into a false IDEA of what I was or am Even Doing?

Starz

 

[Webslinger]

Because you are handling only 1 file. You are only moving around 1 file. You just have that single ISO containing the whole disc and whatever else.

Yeah, but I'm talking solely about video playback. You still have to convert that .iso, and with Clonedvd you're not getting anything other that the actual video content, as you know. With Clonecd . . .

Ah, it's not really worth my time discussing.

Anyway, whatever people want, as long as it works, is fine with me.

 

[Webslinger]

right but is my understand of it internally correct at all or am I just being blindsided into a false IDEA of what I was or am Even Doing?

Starz

I dunno. What do you think you're doing?

You know what happens when you rip a dvd to "dvd files", right, using Clonedvd?

You get a video_ts folder with a bunch of .vob files, a video_ts.ifo file, .ifo files, .bup files, etc.

An .iso just wraps that all up into one big file (Clonedvd does that automatically for you, but Clonedvd is, itself, taking an extra step). A dvd software player cannot play the .iso. Powerdvd, for example, won't recognize an .iso

So you mount the .iso in a virtual drive precisely because (most) dvd player software can't play .isos. Suddenly, after mounting the .iso, you have a (new, virtual) drive letter containing the video_ts folder with all those same files inside I mentioned earlier.

My point is if I need the dvd-video files in order to play a movie on dvd playback software, then why would I bother creating an .iso? I'm just creating extra work for no reason.

 

[starz]

Yeah, but I'm talking solely about video playback. You still have to convert that .iso, and with Clonedvd you're not getting anything other that the actual video content, as you know. With Clonecd . . .

Ah, it's not really worth my time discussing.

Anyway, whatever people want, as long as it works, is fine with me.

if you read my Edit: on Post #21 and if you knew how to answer it...you may very well help us understand what a ISO is in the end perhaps that will help us understand it as you do....if my understanding were wrong then I'd definitely would not be using it....though I tend not to any more do to it adding up to 20 mins to my rip....I do agree it's nicer having one file over as many as 500 in a folder to move around etc. but I'd still would like to understand it more in terms of technical...if I am Even explaining my question right.

Sorry
Starz

 

[Webslinger]

if you read my Edit: on Post #21 and if you knew how to answer it...

I already did answer it.

Pay attention to whom I'm responding to, please. You're quoting something I wrote to Drinklyeanddie.

 

[starz]

I dunno. What do you think you're doing?

You know what happens when you rip a dvd to "dvd files", right, using Clonedvd?

You get a video_ts folder with a bunch of .vob files, a video_ts.ifo file, .ifo files, .bup files, etc.

An .iso just wraps that all up into one big file (Clonedvd does that automatically for you, but Clonedvd is, itself, taking an extra step). A dvd software player cannot play the .iso. Powerdvd, for example, won't recognize an .iso

So you mount the .iso in a virtual drive precisely because the dvd player software can't play .isos. Suddenly, after mounting the .iso, you have a (new, virtual) drive letter containing the video_ts folder with all those same files inside I mentioned earlier.

My point is if I need the dvd-video files in order to play a movie on dvd playback software, then why would I bother creating an .iso? I'm just creating extra work for no reason.

want me to be honest...I just do not know....I'm that lost in it now I just don't know.:bang:

I understand you though.

Starz

 

[starz]

I already did answer it.

Pay attention to whom I'm responding to, please. You're quoting something I wrote to Drinklyeanddie.

so I can't ask a question or make a point then ask if its right because you quoting someone else?

Starz

 

[Webslinger]

want me to be honest...I just do not know....I'm that lost in it now I just don't know.:bang:

I understand you though.

Starz

Some people prefer just having one big file to play with instead of file folders and lots of files. So if you find using .isos with virtual drives is easier, then that's fine. But you should also realize that you're creating extra steps. A dvd software player requires dvd-video files--not .isos. So I think it's fair to ask yourself, "Why am I creating an .iso if my sole intent is dvd-video playback?" The reason one uses a virtual drive with .isos, in this case, is to get the dvd-video files back again so that the dvd player software can play the movie.

 

[starz]

Some people prefer just having one big file to play with instead of file folders and lots of files. So if you find using .isos with virtual drives is easier, then that's fine. But you should also realize that you're creating extra steps. A dvd player software player requires dvd-video files--not .isos. So I think it's fair to ask yourself, "Why am I creating an .iso?". The reason one uses a virtual drive with .isos is to get the dvd-video files back again.

right....but was my Edit: On post #21 by me a correct understanding of what a ISO is thats all I want to know.....but for me I burn everything back and will be using DVD files again anyways....for some reason I didn't think DVDs could be played much like BD Rips without ISO files....as I learned back in the Zohlon thread thats not nesscarry....and not so....so thats that....for me no more iso files for dvds

Starz

 

[DrinkLyeAndDie]

Think of it as a ZIP file but without any compression. It contains all the files copied from the original disc and it also contains the UDF fo the original disc.

Most software cannot just play the ISO as it is. A few can but that's not a discussion worth having right now. You need to mount the ISO using virtual drive software. This software allows you to mount the image so that the OS and subsequently all software running on the system can access the image transparently as if it were a disc in a real DVD drive. To the OS and software there is no difference between the virtual disc and an original disc in your DVD drive.

 

[Webslinger]

the ISO is Just a Virtual Disc

No. It's a file. It's not a virtual disc until you mount it.

inside u have your UDF Partition formated to a DVD-ROM discs Partition standards

No. Inside the .iso, in this case, you just have a bunch of dvd-video files.

 

[Webslinger]

.for some reason I didn't think DVDs could be played much like BD Rips without ISO files.

You could . . . until Cyberlink removed the capacity to play Blu-ray movies from folders. They didn't remove that capacity for dvd-video.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread.

 

[starz]

Think of it as a ZIP file but without any compression. It contains all the files copied from the original disc and it also contains the UDF fo the original disc.
To the OS and software there is no difference between the virtual disc and an original disc in your DVD drive.

I Always thought that was the point the plus the reason to do it or one of...
aside from my misunderstanding of PowerDVD and what it can and cant play from folders..

Starz

 

[starz]

You could . . . until Cyberlink removed the capacity to play Blu-ray movies from folders. They didn't remove that capacity for dvd-video.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread.

Fair enough Webslinger
thanks for your time.

 

[DrinkLyeAndDie]

aside from my misunderstanding of PowerDVD and what it can and cant play from folders..

Starz

PowerDVD7 Ultra could play SD DVDs, HD-DVDs, and BDs from folders up to version 7.3.3319a. CyberLink was likely pressured into removing playback of HD-DVD and BDs via this method. All later releases of PowerDVD7 Ultra and every release of PowerDVD8 Ultra do not allow any playback of HD/BD discs from folders, period. SD DVD playback from folders has not been changed at all.