:: DVD rebuilder & return of the king... dissapointing results...

ok... so i had ROTK to backup and needing 40% compression i really wanted to try rebvuilder as i had heard such good things... after following the guide to the letter (apart from using 2.67 not basic CCE encoder ) and about 4 hours of transcoding the quality seems rubbish - like a 40%JPEG... ok so thats thru the powerdvd on my poot rather than my big TV but i really expected more... i have just got the new dvd shrink with the quality settings and am giving that a try on shapr (default) to compare but so far i just feel like i wasted a day... humph

anyone got any comments on getting the best quality backup - i could dual layer it but i resent paying all that cash for a backup disk!

 

I used DVD Decrypter then Shrink and burned with Nero. I have been playing with ripping files with DVD Decrypter and then using Nero to re arthur and burn and not using Shrink. I have backed up LOTR Return of the King and The Fellowship of the Ring and no problems. I did have 3 coasters after 45 burns but that was operator error (me)





PC clone 512k, AMD 1500, WD 120gb, NTFS, Forced ASPI, Pioneer A7 w/1.18 flashed firmware, BTC 16x DVD ROM, DVD Decrypter, Shrink, Smartripper, Nero 6.3, Ritek GO4 -R's branded

 

babelfish, on this particular title I'd suggest you use the "Smooth" setting instead.

http://www.dvdshrink.info/temp/beta/comparative_tests_smooth.html

 

thx m8 - i was looking at your webby - but im at work so cant really sit looking thru all your mini clips

 

No worries. Keep us informed.

 

will do bro keep up the good work....

 

must have been blumin' power dvd - you would really think that an ATI 9700 GPU would be able to handle DVDs at least as well as a DVD player wouldnt you!

well... i tried both versions burned to DVD then on my sony system... and to be honest both look pretty damn good to me!

the CCE version looked a little bit sharper but seems lower quality when paused... most confusing...

and for the massive difference in encode/transcode times i can say i wont bother using DVDRebuilder again!

once again - dvd shrink wins the day - what an awesome piece of software...

system: sony 32" widescreen 100Hz Tv (i can never remember the model) and sony home theatre system. although my TV has an interpolation facility so maybe that helps on heavily compressed movies?

 

Thanks for the detailed info, babelfish.

Would you mind doing another test?
Could you play the original DVD and see how it compares to the CCE and DVD Shrink backup in terms of sharpness?

 

A big apology to all who have downloaded the "Smooth" comparison tests mentionned above.
The links were actually pointing to the v3.2 beta 3 test files.

This error has now been rectified.
A "Maximum Sharpness" comparison page has also been added.

 

the DVDShrink one i did was just using the default sharpness setting.. (i left it encoding whilst i went back to work....)

problem is to keep testing i need to keep burning disks.. and i cant be bothered..

i can borrow fellowship and 2 towers extended and see how they look on the new system... i did them ages ago as 2 diskers as the quality required 50% - i will try to see how cce and shrink with AEC handle them and report back...

 

Thanks, babelfish, that'd be appreciated.

 

bablefish ... as I'm a RB-CCE user, I was drawn in by the title of your post. Do I understand your final assessment to be that the quality problem was really the player software (?), and that your disappointment now is with the amount of time involved with CCE encoding?

I typically got 2-1/2 hrs with Shrink with deep analysis and enhanced features ... compared to 3-1/2 hrs with RB-CCE. I would say that the better CCE quality is worth the wait, but RB also has a batch feature, and with this I load 2 to 4 movies at a time, and go to work or bed. They are finished when I get back to them, and so time isn't much of a factor or consideration with this approach.

 

Clips from the unprocessed title are now available for download.

http://www.dvdshrink.info/temp/beta/comparative_tests_smooth.html

 

yeah doc - the problem was testing playback using powerdvd on my poot (doh!) ... im actually very pleased with both versions... but shrink wins hands down on ease of use and time... - and the ability to remove extra features (90% of the time they are just useless - unless there is a good making of (like dead end film or transporter etc, as im a budding film maker/writer) and do a reauthor... i think i just expected more if you know what i mean.. i think the new shrink is on par with CCE - glad i didnt pay 2500 for the cce sp version!

i see what you are saying about the batches tho... but to be honest i usually just rip the main movie - this usually takes like 7-9 mins with shrink - and i can leave it to burn using nero engine too! so 30 mins i got a nice backup

 

Thanks for the positive feedback, babelfish.

 

babelfish ... as a budding film maker, you should know that Cinema Craft is said to have the finest encoder engine available. Also, there is no difference between the encoding engine of SP and Basic. The SP price difference reflects professional capabilities that we don't need for the task of video compression, so it would be foolish to consider gettting that version anyway.

You do make a good point about editing, and I use DVD Remake Pro and Shrink to get down to movie only. (Shrink does have some nice editing functions.). I've yet to experience any significant compression where Shrink was on par with CCE, though. I would agree that at the lower compressions it is difficult to tell the two apart without doing some magnification of individual frames ... and this isn't a good test. What counts is that you are happy with the level of quality that Shrink provides.

 

Sorry, Doc, but probably due to my small involvement in DVD Shrink development, I find it very hard not to respond to such statements.

Have you looked at the LOTR-ROTK comparison tests?
I have now included the clips from the unprocessed title, so one can see CCE is not sharper, but simply introduces noise.




_X_X_X_X_X_[small]

For DVD Shrink and related softwares guides and information, please visit http://www.dvdshrink.info[/small]

 

babelf

I can't add much to what Doc’s already stated in so far as my opinion’s concerned. To me it no longer really matters what someone else likes or dislikes, and it probably shouldn’t matter to them as to what I like or dislike, they won't change my mind and I won’t change theirs. Always remember that in a debate; everyone’s right in their own minds until it becomes an argument and then no ones right.

Real change can only happen when one stops knowing what they believe in and starts believing in what they know. Let them judge by their personal observations that to them are proven, empirical, and not sublimated to the ineffable subjectivity of individual private agendas. Do what makes you happy.

I’ve grown tired of trying to prove my choices to everyone and anyone, now its time for me to just enjoy them. If someone wants to come to me and ask me how I backup a DVD, then I’ll tell them and it will be RB/CCE until I buy into dual layer burner and then it will be irrelevant.

I wish you good luck in your search for the truth.

http://people.freenet.de/mb1svcd/

 

Am I paranoid, or "here we go again"?

Does this mean you will not contribute some comparison test?

 

P.S: the test you posted a link to is based on interlaced material, which dvdshrink has admitted DVD Shrink is not at its best with.
How many of these do you backup regularly?

I believe my comparison tests to be as relevant as this one.
Granted, I do not use any fancy software to measure bitrate, frames-types compression, etc etc
What I tried and provide are clips that people can watch and compare, from a movie that has more chances of being owned and appreciated by many.
Not numbers, graphs, and a couple of still-images from an obscure interlaced documentary.


_X_X_X_X_X_[small]

For DVD Shrink and related softwares guides and information, please visit http://www.dvdshrink.info[/small]