Experiencing Difficulty Using DVD RB and CCE? If So, Then Ask Your Questions Here.

I can't tell you how many times a simple defrag has resolved an RB/CCE issue.

 

Sophocles...good call, especially with the stuttering. I found that macroblocking is also a problem with fragmented drives.

Block134...The tech data on page files is lacking, but I have one set up on both HDD's because I'm using Win2K, and it goes into a reboot cycle if it detects a D drive without one. I don't know what XP does. I also use large drives, and a page file on each isn't a problem. I usually rip to the C, and export Remake files to and encode on D. I find that if I do it this way, when all the ripped files are removed, I can defrag C in a minute or two. The same goes with D. When I mix these on a single drive, it seems to spread out my system files, and then defragging takes a lot longer. If you use Remake, it also saves time by going from one drive to the other.

 

I defrag often too. When you consider that if you rip three movies and they average 6 gigs each and then you do a batch process which adds about another 9 gigs each you talking 45 gigs total. Then when you're done you delete them and your on your way to a fragmented hard disk. Same with the paging file. The default settings might be fine and even excessive for most normal operations, but when you're dumping multi gig files and then deleting them on a regular basis it may not be enough.

that's why I approached it with this line.

I can't tell you how many times that recommendation resulted a flamer.

 

Doc409

XP can handle a swap file on one or multiple drives without a problem. Sadly, a end-user still needs to defrag there hard drive with the swap files on it. No problem with rebooting. However, I must agree that anyone that rips and transcodes movies on a normal basis must defrag there hard drive or be ready for odd qwirks.

 

Soph...it's often more like this...
6 (Decrypt/Shrink) + 6 (Remake File) + 9 (RB-CCE) x 3 movies = 63 GB's.

And ... I would agree that regardless of how low-key you approach the suggestion that someone should check their HDD for fragging, it seems to strike a nerve with some.

 

How many people are not aware that a swap/paging file can also be become fragmented? Every now and then I disable my paging file completely and then reboot into safe mode and defragment my hard disk. It takes a longer time but the contiguous files are much more tightly packed. Don't try this if you don't have a lot of physcial memory, but if fyou do give it a whirl
_X_X_X_X_X_[small]Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."[/small]

 

Sophocles

Hmmm.... never attempted that one. I would just set the MAX and MIN size of the page file the same and defrag as normal. It would be nice to run a machine without a swap file, but I don't happen to have 2GB of RAM on my mother board.

 

When you do a normal defrag your swapt/Paging file is protected and it doesn't get defragged. You don't need a lot of memory to do this in Safe mode because everything that uses memory is disabled and by disabling your swap or paging file it's no longer protected and it too gets defragged.

 

Sophocles,

I think I will try it tonight. Oh, just thought of something. You could recreate the swap file by setting it to none. Reboot. Defrag and recreate the swap file again. The file should be created in on a non-fragmented HD of cource. Hmmm... Yours seems less work still. You also need less memory then my option.

 

Gnomex

I've tried it that way but it takes longer and it could lockup. To defrag windows has to compact and move files around and it uses the paging file to do that. When you remove the paging file, everything has to be stored in your physical memory and it may not be able to keep up with your hard disk's transfer needs. In safe mode your memory is virtually free.

 

I have just had my first less than perfect result from RB/CCE Basic, namely trying a backup of the Goodies DVD. The original material is obviously not high quality, though the indoor shots are better than the outside camera-work. What do you guys recommend? Perhaps Shrink with some sharpening? Thanks.

 

Sophocles,

Both our methods of dealing with a fragmented swap file will work. However, to solve this problem we just need a little more RAM (2GB) and that little thing called money. 2GB of high speed RAM could be an expensive fix.

 

I've used the saftey mode method with only 512 megs of memory.

 

Schaf, that's a toughie, it's hard to improve upon the source. Backup apps are designed to reproduce while using compression. The aim is to make a copy as close to the original as possible, not to improve upon the original.

My question is this, did the copy look as good as the original from RB/CCE?

 

BigO
No thats just the problem, the copy is not as good as the original. Normally the copy looks as good as the original when I use RB/CCE with a modern DVD, but this DVD is a BBC transfer of the original TV series (1971 or so) The visual quality of resulting DVD's aren't as good as modern movies. Rather like comparing an old 78 record with a modern CD. I seem to recall Vurbal talking about filters to improve things in this case. Thats why I thought Shrink with its new sharp/smooth options might be easier.

 

Schaf1945...as much as I like CCE, Shrink is a good program and may be worth a try. Or, if you have DVD2One 1.5, I have found it is very good with older, high contrast moview. Either of these may also serve to track down what is happening with CCE. If the "Goodies DVD" is in a standard format, it should have been re-encoded into a similar quality due to the way CCE works. The filters you mention, from my understanding, only offer minor enhancements. Your post sounds like you are talking about something major.

 

Here's the thread vurbal mentioned:
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/7/102128#577977

 

Schaf, I agree with doc and vurbal, sometimes a few apps, like RB/CCE and Intervideo's DVDCopy 2 do such a good job that errors are magnified making the resulting copy actually worse than the orginal. That's why I wanted you to clarify your question whether you were trying to improve on the original or if the copy was actually worse than the original.

I also think shrink might be a soution to your problem. Make sure you use the 3.2 version, which has the quality enhancements you seek. Let us know how it turns out. :>)

 

Hello,

I tried to look for an answer in this thread, thought I got it...but no.

I'm trying to use DVD-RB 0.62 with CCE-SP 2.67 (not trial)
and all I get of the main movie is a blank screen with red lines at the bottom (see image)



What I do is use DVD-Decrypter to copy the DVD files to the HD, and then run DVD-RB on it.

Here's an example INI I recently used:
Options]
BackColor=-2147483633
ReduceOpt=3
OneClick=0
CCE=1
Completed=1
[CCEOptions]
VBR_bias=25
Quality_prec=16
eclPasses=2
[Paths]
CCENEW=C:\Program Files\Cinema Craft Encoder SP v2.67.00.27\cctsp.exe
MPEG2DEC=C:\Program Files\DVD Rebuilder\MPEG2Dec3dg.dll
Source=E:\DVD\VAN_HELSING\VIDEO_TS\
Working=E:\DVD\TEMP\
[Setup]
Languages=0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
sLanguages=0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

I recently removed the auto-select of the audio/sub, it didn't change anything
BTW, I keep everything (will use DVD-Shrink if I want to remove stuff)

Any help will be greatly appreciated!