DVD2One vs. DVDShrink

What's up all.. My solution to this is:

1) Open DVD Decrypter
2) select Mode > ISO > Read
3) Select the filename and location you wish to use.
4) BURN BABY BURN!
5) open Alcohol or Daemon Tools and mount the ISO you created in step 3
6) open DVDShrink and select your virtual drive (the Drive Letter that you mounted your movie on)
7) remove all extra languages/sub pictures
8) compress the menus with maximum compression
9) compress the extras with maximum compression and remove any extras you do not wish with a still pictures
10) Main Movie should now be 100% compression (BEST QUALITY)
11) SHRINK!
12) depending how you have it set up, I burn with DVD Decrypter on Ritek G04 Discs using Lite-on SOHW-812S.

When playing the movie, the menu's aren't that great in apprearance but the movie looks like it's original.

Hope This Helps..
------------------------------------------
AMD XP 2500+ (oc'd to 3200)
2 Gig Ram
(2) 250 Gig Maxtor Hard Drives
Lite-on SOHW-812S DVD Burner (12X Firmware Hack)
------------------------------------------

 

xpsycho
Appreciate your desire to be helpful, but a guide was not requested. A number of people here are very familiar with the 3.2 version. The use of the emulator is not needed unless one just wants to take that route. Shrink can use ISO files without an emulator. Also, there are better methods of dealing with unwanted files. In Full Disc a person can now create a movie only with menu function, which wasn't possible previously. AD now has a Shrink section in which you can research the program more fully. 3.2 has enough differences that one needs to learn them to properly use the app, even if familiar with the older versions. 3.2 DVD Shrink was a major improvement to Shrink. Much more in the line of differences and it would have been another program.

 

HEy, hey brobear -

It made me tired just reading it - we can do it without all that work 90% of the time. Just by using our normal editing we wind up with our work at about 100%.

Go figure, huh ?


(Edited because brain wasn't in gear )
_X_X_X_X_X_[small]
The “old man” Pete (ö¿ô)
Compaq 8000, Pent IV CPU 2.84GHz, 1024MB RAM, 520GB HD.
Pioneer 107, 8X R/W , Nec R/W ND-1300A, JLMS DVD ROM.
128MB GeForce4 TI 4200, O/S XP[/small]

 

Know what you're saying Pete, using Decrypter to rip for Shrink in any manner is most often a waste of time. They say to use Decrypter when Shrink isn't able to do the rip, however I've yet to need it for that. Creating ISO files and using emulators is sometimes useful; just not in the case of DVDShrink. It's sometimes a study in where best not to use a program.

 

(Huuummm, wasn't thinking that -)

Actually, I've had to use it upon a few occasions BUT when I do, I rip it in an ISO image mode, forget about the emulators and pick it up with DVD Shrink straight away -

NOTE: The times it truly comes in handy is when DVD Shrink gives me a bit "O" trouble with episodel type DVD's. Ripping in the ISO mode assures that I get everything in its proper order. I've had times when using just DVD Shrink to rip and encode has resulted in just a single episode being burned to disc instead of 4.

But as you say, those times are rare and for the most part, our "hero" DVD Shrink can do it all - a good proggy that no one can argue -

Cheers Buddy,

"P"

_X_X_X_X_X_[small]
The “old man” Pete (ö¿ô)
Compaq 8000, Pent IV CPU 2.84GHz, 1024MB RAM, 520GB HD.
Pioneer 107, 8X R/W , Nec R/W ND-1300A, JLMS DVD ROM.
128MB GeForce4 TI 4200, O/S XP[/small]

 

I find that in most cases when DVD shrink can't handle a DVD there really is something wrong with the DVD and DECRYPTER will find the problem sometime during the ripping process.

 

That's so true. It may be only a single file BUT it can be found and eliminated. Some pple are just super lucky and never have a DVD with a problem, God bless, and those pple don't ever have to use Decrypter to rip with. Me, with not a bird in sight, if I think of washing my car, some time within the first 20 minutes I'll have "Bird crap" somewhere on my car, Go Figure ?

When a day like that happens, I DO NOT go to the gambling casinos.

I'm not lucky BUT I'm not stupid either (Lol).

Cheers,

Pete

 

Hi everyone;

Cool to at last find a community of people burning dvds on mac.
It took me a while to find a winning combination to be able to copy dvd.
But somehow I feel i might not have the best recipe as yet.
I use Mac the ripper + dvd2one + toast 6.
This "recipe" doesn't allow me to choose from the DVD menu which ingredient i want to get ride of (to minimize to 4,7Go).
Any better recipe ?
tHxs
Dave

 

Ok I have been Backing up DVD's For Over just over 2 years now. I started on the DVD decrypter, IFOedit & VOBedit, & Nero Scene, and have moved onto DVD Decrypter, DVD2ONE, & Nero 6 Technique. I have used LOTS of media types and get about a 95% perfect Copy (Even on Ritek G04 Media). However some of my movies they skip, stop, pixelate ect. When I was using the old IFOedit Technique This NEVER happend even with cheap media. I have not changed any hardware so I feel it must be due to DVD2ONE... I love DVD2one, Picture quality has never been an issue for me just overall disk quality, going back to the old technique is not an option... Any Thoughts?

FYI:
AMD Athlon 3200 Barton Core
1 Gig Pc333 DDR
Dual Western Digital 120-GIG HD's WD1200JB
Asus DVD-E616P <-Ripper
Asus DVD-RW DRW-0402P <-Burner

P.S. After Dawn Kicks Ass! Everything I know About DVD's I learned here.

 

Hi projecTOE, Welcome to aD,

What you're describing sounds like a media issue. What brand of media are you using ?

BTW, I'm using DVD2One and agree, it's a super proggy However to date, I haven't experienced any problems with it, much less the problems you are having.

Pete

 

Listen up, the Herbsman isn't just blowing smoke. LOL I just couldn't resist that one.

 

Most of the discussions I read here boil down to the same two questions "what is the best ripper" and "what is the best transcoder".

[bold]Best Ripper[/bold]
This is actually a very easy one. I've been ripping for more than 1,5 years now, and in most of the cases (98%), DVDShrink does the job. If not, I use DVD Decrypter & AnyDVD. The combo of those three has never let me down to far.

[bold]Best Transcoder[/bold]

First of all, somewhere in this thread there is mention of the dvd.box.sk test, which is actually completely fake. I tried to do some tests myself, and I was wondering how the author could actually get the exact same frame for every movie he encoded, because I couldn't - and I don't think this is technically possible. Despite numerous reminders about the used methodology, I never got an answer back (if anyone knows how to do this same test, please let me know!). On top of this, my practical experience showed other results.

To know how these tools work, one should know a little bit about the MPEG hierarchy:

Video sequence (frame size, aspect ratio, bitrate, matrix VBV)
|-----Group OF Pictures (GOP)
|------Picture (I, P or B-Frame) and motion vector
|------- Slice horizontal strips in the height of a macro block
|--------Macro block (16x16 pixel), motion info, adress within slices, quantization factor
|--------Block (8x8 pixel), the main DCT block (discrete cosine transformation) of the actual picture

A "normal" transcoder (TMPGEnc, CCE, MainConcept) first decodes all the pictures, then re-encodes them again to reduce bitrate.
The idea behind the quick shrinking the DVD is that the most consuming time of encoding is to calculate motion estimation vectors.
This is actually not a new idea, because it is used for example in broadcasting or wireless video delivery to reduce the bitrate in realtime. Such transoder is called Compressed Domain Transcoder (DCT-Domain Transcoder)

Tools like DVDShrink, DVD2One et al unpack the mpeg up to macro block (see hierarchy above), then recompress the macro blocks and simply reuse the original motion estimation vectors and quantisation matrix. They calculate the shrinkage on the fly to know how many and how often macroblocks need to be recompressed to fit to desired size.
The result will be a mix of pictures with original unchanged macroblocks and the new ones recompressed. They also don't really seem to judge the actual picture so they happily reduce even the macroblocks that are part of already low bitrate picture. The result is that suddenly the picture may get blocky in dark scenes where a normal transcoder will not touch them or the picture will get soft in parts where a normal full transcoder will do much better job. Some of these tools use some form of "blurring" the image on top of this, but artifacts remain.

InstantCopy (Pinnacle) goes much further, it requantisizes the DCT, it judges the quality of each macroblock and also adjusts the motion vectors if the image changes. It takes longer (and the result is less predictable in size) but it is better than the above applications.

The bottom line:
There is no magic transcoder. The quality goes down with the increased speed.
If you watch your DVD's on an old normal size TV tube, then the fast transcoders can do a reasonable job for you, but watching it on hdtv, projector or a better larger TV reveal the tradeof in quality. From the bunch only the InstantCopy delivers somehow more serious quality but it takes twice as long.

For any larger shrinking the best advice is to use a real transcoder such as TMPGEnc, CCE or Mainconcept. The quality will be much better.

My practical advice:
I personally use DVDShrink with Deep Analysis on everything which is reduced between 90-100%. If reduction goes below 90%, I use Pinnacle 8. What you actually see when pushing Pinnacle 8 to the limit is a 'noisier' image, instead of a more 'blockified' one. On a normal TV screen, the quality starts degrading seriously with Pinnacle 8 once you go below 60%

 

zoef

The DVDbox test is old and forgotten and of no use in a discussion on quality.


I mostly agree with you since I use Shrink for some rips and DVD Decrypter for the others (I use it more often than shrink). All transcoders don't work exactly the same and I seem to recall that shrink focuses largely on compressing B frames and it reduces the bit rate to 7500 kbs for action scenes. I like your encoder choices although I use CCE for all my backups and on a very rare occassion DVD Shrink. Yes I've done numerous comparisons and CCE is for me an overall better choice. Thanks for the read.
_X_X_X_X_X_[small]Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."[/small]

 

zoef,

As has been said, the DVDbox test is valueless. When doing tests with DVD Shrink the use of video clips were used to help determine quality. Of special note were clips involving smoke, fire and fog - these seemed to more readily depict artifacts and the absence of same when Deep Analysis and Quality Enhancements were used.

Nice post in all

Pete

 

There appears to be a fly in the soup. DVDCopy2 from InterVideo happens to be one of the fastest and best transcoder apps on the market. Some people do appear to have pixelation problems with the program, but I am not one of the people who have suffered the problem so far. RB with CCE, until recently, couldn't transcode movies with angles unless the angles were edited. Star Wars, Return of the Jedi is a good example to use; a high GB disk needing lots of compression. DVDCopy2 not only did the transcoding quickly, but the quality rivals that of RB/CCE. That includes being viewed on my 60 inch screen TV.

Don't get me wrong; overall, I use RB/CCE for most of my large projects. But, it is nice having the DVDCopy2. Due to contrast and imperfections being more visible, I don't use the Copy2 for older movies.

 

good one, testing.......

 

If you're testing, I hope you're testing DVD Copy 3 instead of DVD Copy 2. The 3 is superior and those claiming pixelation with the Copy 2 say they aren't getting it with the DVD Copy 3. And by all means test RB/CCE. They're both excellent apps.

I still find DVD2One better for attaching DVD files. Since it's a DVD2One vs Shrink thread, figured they deserved mention.

Or were you doing another kind of testing?

 

Well i thought id add my 2 cents and say DVD Shrink rocks i just backd up my LOTR 2 and 3, compression was @ like 63% i think and was thinkin that they would turn out gayness and there is hardly any pixelation through out both of them

 

To be honest i find them both bloody good programes and get good use out of them both.I tend to use one2one a little more so i favour this programe.Thats mainly because i have tested it to its limits which i have not done with shrink yet.Still i'm sure when i get to this stage with shrink i will be equally as happy with shrink.