dvd-rebuilder forum

For RB/CCE on 2 pass it seems slow, but if you're happy with it go. If you have enough RAM and space on the HD, then it should be faster than that, or seems so to me. You're saying my 2.8GHz processor is about 2 to 3 times faster than a 1.6GHz machine. I know it's faster, but I didn't think by that much. That's a lot better than the time with the Procoder. As UncasMS said, your problem must have been with the Procoder for such a time difference.

 

I did a seperate test with ProCoder 2 using a 30min. VOB file for processing to elementary M2v. It took almost 10 hours as compared to just 2hrs. when optimized for speed. In any event, DVD Shrink never takes more than an hour, to encode a typical 2hr. movie.

 

@ brobear

i recently did some speed comparisons

a title with ~3hrs playing time took ~120 min using cce
adding 1/4 to it it may take 2.5hrs to convert a 4hrs title on my machine

i'm using an athlon64 @ 3500+

so this may be 4x faster than the 1.6ghz cpu which could well be, as we cannot simply compare mghz numbers but also have to take into consideration that memory access is much faster and spreading the conversion across harddrives will also increase speed

 

They always did say that apps will run a little better with a 64 chip.
High performance 200+gb drives can also make a difference. I've just added a 1 gig memory to my system. I was only curious about the effects rebuilder would have on movies that were below 60% compression. Perhaps with ProCoder2 combined with a high end system,a difference can be noticed,but with what I got now, it just doesn't seem to be worth the trouble...or the encoding times for that matter.

 

percentage numbers are of no importance, bitrate matters

cf. here:

http://forum.digital-digest.com/showthread.php?t=51536&page=1

 

That statement leads me to wonder if you realize what Rebuilder actually is. The program doesn't encode by itself. CCE, HC, Procoder and the others do the encoding. RB is a tool that utilizes encoders and transcoders to compress DVD files to DVD5 size. Granted, it is involved in the task, but the encoders with their properties are involved heavily. RB just makes it easier to use a program like CCE without having to go through the heavy learning process normally associated with the use of such an encoder. Depending on the encoder chosen with Rebuilder, quality can vary as well as encode times.

Speaking of Shrink, unless you're not using "Quality Settings", I don't see how it can be that much faster than RB with CCE. I've done comparisons and using "Quality Settings" I end up with times similar to those when using RB/CCE at 2 passes (all Basic will do). Without those "Quality Settings" in use the video output is no where near RB/CCE or the RB/HC in quality. Sounds like you're running the Shrink in its fast mode. Otherwise something is strange about what's happening with your processor speeds.

 

UncasMS
No need to explain about a 2.8GHz system not being twice as fast as a 1.4GHz one, just because the numbers are doubled. I have a vague idea about CPU, mobo, chipsets, bus speeds, RAM, HDDs, and the things that whirr inside the case that make the magic of computing. I've even heard about things like latency and overclocking. I've even been known to compare a benchmark or 2 on occasion. Heck, I think I may have even run one at one time or another.

With Nictoe the info given has been limited; CPU speed and finally he added RAM. My curiosity lead me more toward wondering if his "housekeeping" had been kept up to par; defragging on occasion, keeping ample freespace, turning off processes and programs not directly needed to the encoding process, clearing memory before starting encodes, doing the occasional system cleanup, and on occasion doing a reg clean. Also, not trying to multitask while encoding, especially on a system with such limited resources. Just wondering if all the little things that lead to good operation were being kept up. As they say, letting it be all that it can be.

 

my reply wasnt really meant to adress you

i know you knew ^_~

 

Guess it was just the order in which the posts fell.

I thought it might be an idea to post about "housekeeping" anyway. Just in case Nictoe might have forgotten. Even knowing computers as well as I do, I still forget to do things sometimes, if I don't have them scheduled.

Have a good one.

 

The best 'housekeeping' has to be when you reformat your hardrive and start from scratch. You'd be amazed how some apps can fly after that. Anyways, it took about 6 hrs for DVD Shrink with deep analysis and max smooth to compress that 4hr. movie. I hardly noticed any difference, as I hardly noticed any difference with CCE encoding. I still get confused as to exactly what encoding options rebuilder is using: QuEnc, CCE, HC, or ALL of them ??? On QuEnc, the settings were high quality mode, and 2 pass VBR. On HC it was normal default, but like I said, I dont know which process rebuilder was using. Heaven knows,what I'd have to fool around for the AVS options, although I would have loved to seen a script for MP2 audio substitution.

 

the logfile will tell you which encoder was used

 

As brobear has stated...I do not see better quality from shrink when comparing it to RB/CCE Basic or HC HAnks. I do like the Recode 2, but again Rebuilder with CCE or HC Hanks is one of the best at Rebuilding a DVD movie from Dvd 9 to Dvd 5 and keep the quality that is typically associated with none compression backups. I have ahard time distinguishing between the original and my backup after running it through RB with CCE Basic. I know CCE Basic is $60.00 but I believe it is, like AnyDvd, money well spent for a lifetime of quality backups. I will still use HC once in a while and actually feel it gets close to CCE, but on my 55 inch 16X9 I can see the quality difference on certain scenes between the two. Not every scene but in certain scenes where red is used. It probably has more to do with my Denon 2200 rather than encoder.
MoieDud

 

Maybe thats why I can't see the difference. Guess on a 20" everything looks the same.

 

LOL Probably... Now if we all went over to BigO's place. He just recently devoted an entire room to a projection system to watch movies and games on. Like going to the movies. Just think of the flaws you see on screens that size. He said the background suffered so bad from some transcoders and encoders that he's having to redo his backups for use with the projector. His setup of choice is the RB/CCE.

 

@NicToe, yes, everything looks good on a 20" set. Not knocking your choice of size, but that has always been the problem when expanding to the big screens, even Projection...and that is how can we get the picture to look as sharp as it would on a 20 in but expanding it to 5 ft. or 10 ft. Progressive scan helped tremendously (With High Quality progressive chips...siliconimage and furouji (sp?)) then there is HD (1080I, 720 P, and now 1080P)...Quality is essential to creating that filmlike quality. I had a 20 inch then went to 31 inch, 35 inch and now with the Mit. 55 inch HDTV the quality is awe-some, yet I'm looking forward to going a full throttle with HD DVD or Blu-Ray or both. I made the investment to High Quality Cables and also investing into a Monster Power Reference Power conditioner, which I could see the immediate results. Have a great day!
movieDud

 

.....ME TOO !!!