|
|
I tried searching but could not find anything - which prog (or does it matter or are they really the same prog) produces a better ing/iso.
Shrink
ing tool classic/mkisofs
By definition, an image file is just that, a bit-for-bit copy of 100% of the information. Therefore, there should be no quot;betterquot; or quot;worsequot; image...
(of course, if you're actually referring to quot;goodquot; placement of a layer break in a DL image, that has nothing to do with the image file itself - rather it has to do with the software used to determine the layer break)
As neither of those two programs read anything direct to an ISO, I assume battscrew isn't talking about bit-for-bit copying but rather which one builds the most compatible ISO - i.e. follows the specs more closely.
In which case, both do the job just fine. I would have a hard time pick one over the other.
With so many structures / descriptors to fill out and position correctly, it's easy to go wrong with these things and so there is every possibility one is better than the other. (same goes for all image building software)
So far as creating a 'better' DL ISO image, I would advise avoiding both of those program. Neither one can build a decent one.
It's very important that the image building util looks at the IFO files and correctly positions the files (padding if necessary) so that the chosen layer break cell lands on an LBA that's divisible by 16.
That makes it everything to do with the image file itself. Once the image has been built, you cannot magically shift the files around without some fairly major rebuilding work (and then why not just do it properly in the first place?!)
So to sum up....
If you're burning to SL media, DVD Shrink and ingTool Classic are fine. You may aswell opt for DVDShrink as it's 1 less step.
If you're burning to DL media, use PgcEdit.
Thank you very much this iis the info i was looking for. |
|
Post at 2011-4-15 14:27
| This Author's Posts Only
