DVD format choices

[TonyBeeeee]

Can someone please explain why people use the different types of DVD format, +, -, +/- etc.
Or maybe its a case of what technologies came out and when?
Is there any major difference in the purchase prices of writers and/or media?
Any info very welcome.

[vehelpfulguy]

There are two main formats + (plus) and (-) minus.

They were developed by two different companies, and although they are similar, they are not exactly the same.

There is not a +/- as you show, that is only used to show a device supports both plus and minus.

Most hardware sold nowadays will support plus AND minus, so to be honest there is not a lot of reason for choosing one over the other.

Minus probably has slightly more support, and I think minus disks are cheaper.

Having said that, some devices do support only one or the other (plus OR minus) so make sure any disks you buy are supported by your DVD devices.

Also if you plan to give DVDs you have made to other people make sure their devices can play the disks you choose.

[vehelpfulguy]

Note that as well as plus or minus there is another thing to consider on a DVD disk.

Some disks are R and others are RW.

"R" disks can only be recorded to once. You cannot delete the data off an R disk and use it again.

"RW" disks can be used over and over again.

So both plus AND minus disks are available in both R and RW format, so the four types of disk are:

DVD - R (minus R)

DVD - RW (minus RW)

DVD + R (plus R)

DVD + RW (plus RW)

Generally R disks are cheaper than RW disks.

Confusing eh !

[fo3nix]

The official DVD consortium developed what became DVD-R and DVD-RW (for write-once and write-many media).

Some other companies did very similar stuff, ended up with DVD+R and DVD+RW.

Most players, as the above says, do both, showing DVD�RW.

Due to the official nature of DVD-R, most original DVD players (under your TV kind), do better with DVD-R.

DVD+R tends to be better for storing raw data (i.e., backup, just for use computer to computer, not playing back video).

DVD�R is always better than DVD�RW for playing back video on a standalone player (like under your TV), just due to the way re-writeable media (�RW) works.

[fo3nix]

Regardless of + or - type, there is another variable.

DVD5 is a standard disc. It has a nice picture of what's on the disc on one side, and the actual DVD clever stuff on the other side. There is only one layer of material to record information on.

DVD9 is similar to DVD5, except it's like taking two regular discs (DVD5), and sandwiching them together so the two picture sides touch. That way, you get two shiny sides to each disc, and once at the end of side A, you have to take the disc out and swap it for side B. Still just one layer of information stored on each side of the disc.

However, there exist two other types of disc. These types are produced by sandwiching two information layers together. These are called DVD10 and DVD18 respectively (just the previous numbers x2!).

DVD10 is like taking two regular (DVD5) discs, and sandwiching them together but so that picture side of one touches the shiny special side of the other. So you still have a shiny side and a picture side to the disc, but inside there are two information layers -- meaning that you can store twice as much stuff.

This is what most films do that you buy commerically -- the feature film plus extra features are too big to fit on a standard DVD5 disc. Because the laser in the machine has to jump from one level to the other, you often get a slight pause in the action when watching your film.

Finally, DVD18 is the result of taking two of these DVD10 discs (picture side, shiny side with two layers of information), and sandwiching them together such that you can only see the shiny sides. So it's just like a DVD9 as described earlier, but with two layers of information on each side of the disc.

Why is all this important?

Often you will see advertised (for more money) dual layer discs -- with two layers of information -- DVD9. There have been recordable devices for PCs that can use these

[fo3nix]

Prices differences will result from the quality of the media.

Regular discs will be far cheaper than the more expensive stuff that's made for archival purposes.

[TonyBeeeee]

I should have qualified first I understood about R and RW, I have been using CD-R/CD-RW, so apologies for not following up on that, but thanks anyway.

OK, to summarise from my reading of all the fo3nix stuff here...

If I get a DVD+/-RW dual layer it will be essentially all I could need.

DVD-R (or -RW) will be OK for saving shorter movies that I can play in a standard (older?) under-TV DVD player.
DVD+R (or +RW) is a better option for saving data (back ups etc)
Dual layer would allow me to play and record longer movies on my pc.
DVD18 is dual layer but you have to flip the disk over manually at the end of the first side.

Is that how it is? Any corrections most welcome!

Also, if I was writing a long movie to a DVD18 , do the normal writing software packages allow it, and tell you when to flip the disk" (or insert a new DVD9 disk?), rather than just saying "its too big for the media"?
If this is not possible, no big deal, I don't intend to try to start copying feature film DVD's (I know there will be copyright protection issues anyway).

[fo3nix]

You're mostly right.

DVD�R will be fine for backups, or any random data files of any kind. But if you go to places like cdfreaks.com, you'll see long geeky discussions on this topic, and usually +R wins.

-R tends to be better for films, simply because most DVD players accept them more. But these days, most players can support �R, so it's not really an issue.

I've not paid that much attention to the DVD media market. I know you can get DVD+R DL media (i.e., DVD9), since they sell dual layer writers.

However, I'm not sure if anyone does DVD18 media. If they do, the software may not know about it, and may just recognise it as DVD9 media. In which case, the software may very well offer to split the film into two (or you do it yourself with video software), and then manually change disc and tell it to burn the other part.

[TonyBeeeee]

OK fo3nix, thanks for all the help.

Will do a little scouting around on prices for writers and media, your info is all I need to know to make an informed choice.

[ACtheTROLL]

mainly spot on fo3 (certainly the background) ... as I understand it the useage is wrong way round in parts.

+ r is optimised for burned video (the under your telly type) ... the cdfs and error correction is optimised for a few big files (designed by manufacturers to get the best from their machines).

- r has now been added to the list of most under telly recorders ....

-r was originally developed to be compatible with the comercially "stamped" media. and is sort of based on the -r format used on CDs
the CDFS is really a general purpose format and so is more efficient with lots of smaller files

if recording for another recorder ... use +r for the widest compatibility (esp older models)

otherwise use -r

[fo3nix]

Hmm, I disagree on that one.

I still think that the -R technologies were the original ones, designed for video.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_Forum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD%2BRW_Alliance

http://www.osta.org/technology/dvdqa/dvdqa2.ht m

[ACtheTROLL]

didn't make it clear .... you are right -r... was first and based on cd-r and was the first (about �500 if I remember - in real terms more expensive that blu-ray) and was used for commercial video (stamped) - in players .... and intended for all PC applications.

DVD recorders --- (under the telly types) - used almost exclusively +r for recording (certainly the ones I've seen) - but of course would play (stamped) as well - but not always burned discs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_optica l_storage_media

it's an error correction thing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD%2BR

+r was more tolerant with crappy cheap recorders so manufacturers could use cheaper rigs

;-)

[fo3nix]

Ah yea, I agree with you there.