Do the sizes of blank BD-R's vary?

[LEFT]I couldn’t find a more appropriate forum to post this so…I just bought a LG WH10LS30k from Newegg along with some 25GB Optical Quantum 4X BD-R’s, specifically Logo Top Blu-ray Disc Model OQBDR04LT-10. When I put the disc in the drive Nero 10 says that the maximum space a BD-R can have is 23,866 MB but that the Optical Quantums only have 23,098 MB available. Does anyone know of specifically what other discs do have the full amount of space? Is there another burning program that would give me the maximum space with these discs? According to Opti Drive Control 1.50 the Manufacture ID is: PHILIPR04 (000).
[/LEFT]

The space you can user for user data is limited by the media, the drive and the used Filesystem, lastpoint is the folder and file overhead generated by the filesystem…

So, under Windows filesystem (NTFS) has anyone found a BD-R SL (with any burner) that has more than 23,098 MB available space?

Using an LG GGW-H20L, Win7 64bit, and a blank Verbatim BD-R SL disk, this is what I see in Optidrive Control:

This is what you see in ImgBurn:

HL-DT-ST BD-RE GGW-H20L YL05 (RAID)
Current Profile: BD-R

Disc Information:
Status: Empty
State of Last Session: Empty
Erasable: No
Free Sectors: 12,219,392
Free Space: 25,025,314,816 bytes
Free Time: 2715:27:17 (MM:SS:FF)
Next Writable Address: 0
Supported Write Speeds: 2x, 4x, 6x

BD Disc Information:
Disc ID: VERBAT-IMc-00
Disc Type: BD-R

You should expect to burn no more than 23.31GiB of data on a single layer blu ray.


Thanks Kerry56. I just knew Verbatims would be full size. Anyone have Disc info (size specs) for Memorex 25GB 4X BD-Rs?

[QUOTE=ilnot1;2561298]So, under Windows filesystem (NTFS) has anyone found a BD-R SL (with any burner) that has more than 23,098 MB available space?[/QUOTE]

Tell me, what has NTFS to do with the blank media??

Well chef, you used the word filesystem twice in your first post. I thought you might have been referencing the difference between GiB and GB. The only file system difference that I know of for blank optical media is burning an ISO or UDF disc. Both allow the same amount of space on the BD-R’s that I’m using, which was the subject of my original post. Since, I’m using Windows XP and Nero 10 (as I previously stated) what file-systems were you referencing that might be the limiting factor?

Any that you use, usually you would only use UDF in different variations on a BD, right?!

chef I don’t think I’ve understood any one of your responses yet. I burn the BD-R’s with the default setting of Nero Express which file system, I believe, is ISO + joliet.

[QUOTE=ilnot1;2561578]chef I don’t think I’ve understood any one of your responses yet. I burn the BD-R’s with the default setting of Nero Express which file system, I believe, is ISO + joliet.[/QUOTE]

Really? UDF is for BD.

Some form of the UDF file system goes back to '97, using CD’s as floppy discs, it was called Mount Rainer technology. The newest version of UDF 2.6, which came out 3 or 4 years ago is for Bluray movies. When I burn I haven’t been copying Bluray movies, just been burning data. And the default filesystem in Nero is ‘ISO 9660 + joliet’.

Many of us who burn to blu ray disks use ImgBurn instead of Nero. Normally, we would use ISO 9660 + UDF (1.02) for data in ImgBurn or UDF 2.5 for blu ray video.

The only time I use ISO 9660 + Joliet is when burning xvid or divx avi files to dvds. And then, only because ImgBurn prompts me to do so.

I see, what are the benefits of ISO + UDF compared to ISO + joliet?

[B]Joliet is just an extension of ISO9660![/B]

Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joliet_(file_system)

First off chef that didn’t answer my question. Second, I know Joliet is an extension of ISO 9660 but I wanted to be clear because there are options in Nero to have ‘only ISO 9660’ and ‘ISO 9660: 1999’. ISO + Joliet is how it is phrased in NERO, so again I wanted to be as clear as possible.

Advantages of UDF:

[I] * UDF is an open standard.
* The design and evolution of UDF keeps compatibility in mind.
* UDF natively supports many modern file systems features:
o Large partition size (maximum 2TB with 512B block size, or 8TB with 2KB block size)
o 64-bit file size
o Extended attributes (e.g., named streams, or forks) without size limitation
o Long file names (maximum 254 bytes, any character can appear in the name)
o Unicode encoding of file names
o Sparse file
o Hard links
o Symbolic links
o Metadata checksum
o Metadata redundancy (optional in UDF 2.50 or later in metadata partition)
o Defect management (for media that does not manage defect internally, such as CD-RW, DVD-RW, and DVD+RW)
* UDF defines how different platforms interact with each other. For example, it defines how to store Mac Finder Info and Resource Fork, NTFS ACL, UNIX ACL, OS/2 EA, etc. It also requires platforms to preserve the information that they don’t understand.
* UDF is a truly universal file system. It can be used on all kinds of optical media, including read only (CD-ROM, DVD-ROM, BD-ROM (Blu-ray Disc Read-Only)), write once (CD-R, DVD-R, DVD+R, BD-R), rewritable (CD-RW, DVD-RW, DVD+RW, DVD-RAM, CD-MRW, DVD+MRW, BD-RE), and of course block device (hard drives). Even write-once media appears as a big overwritable floppy under UDF. [/I]

Taken from here: http://homepage.mac.com/wenguangwang/myhome/udf.html

For your purposes, writing data to write-once BD-R disks, 9660 + UDF 1.02 may not have many advantages over Joliet other than file lengths/characters, and directory depth. I believe UDF is better for multi-session, but I don’t recommend multi-session burns on dvds, much less BD-R.

If you cannot read the info and make your conclusion from it, sorry.