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

Im doing a rebuild so Ill do it with 2.69 so Ill try again tomorow and post if you are interested.

Ozzy

 

The "CCE Works" version is pirated software -- so I really wouldn't feel right about giving advice as to how to make it work.

 

Nevermind. ;-)

 

Quality Prec is set to 24 for the SP 2.70 trial. 2.70 Trial can be run with the CCE SP selected or SP Trial selected. With SP the Quality Prec has to be reset to 24 and Quality Prec is preset with the Trial selected. I learned this because I ran the trial prior to jdobbs updating the RB for the 2.70. This trial sets up just like a retail version with no need for eclCCE. Just like setting up Basic except one selects the SP. This has made the trial easy to set up now. This trial still has the big logo marking the video (water mark). It's a free way to see how the program works, but to have a functional app with an unmarked video, a person still needs to purchase CCE Basic. I used the latest versions of DGdecode and Avisynth and there don't appear to be any problems. The program works the same as the previous setup. I wasn't having any problems before and I didn't have a problem with the 2.70 trial. I used RB in both the one step and 3 step mode and it worked well either way. 2.70 SP Trial worked just like Basic except for the option of the additional passes and of course the big trial logo.

 

jdobbs,

Pirated? but its just a trial version, I downloaded it off Emule. I was having trouble downloading from CCE site so I downloaded from Emule. Does this mean it has been hacked or something? Forgive my ignorence but whats the point of hacking a trial version, whats to hack?

I simply wished to see if the quality was better with the new version. Ill have a go at downloading from CCE again.

Ozzy

 

Ozzy
Hope you aren't that naive. What's to hack on a trial? For starters, if the logo water mark recorded to the video is removed from the SP Trial programming, then a functional program has essentially been stolen. Boils down to grand theft when you consider the theft is of a $2000 program.

 

I mentioned only the doom9.org forum because (1) jdobbs and rockas regularly participate and (2) reading it helped me solve my problem. I did not mention the dvdrebuilder.com forum, or any of the other fora I've found, because they were not helpful. In particular, the dvdrebuilder.com does yet not have much content.

 

If the watermark is removed then so is the entire area that it covered because there's nothing underneath it to recover.

 

I purchased the CCE basic, have no reason to use hacked or stolen software, simply downloaded a trial version that did not work. Have since downloaded the trial from links on CCe site, with no problems, although I still had problems as before from 3 links from CCE.

PS: the 2.50 version I got first to try the programs out had no water mark, just as the 2.70 trial downloaded.

Since my basic upgrade only alows 2.69 at the moment I was simply interested in any quality improvements in 2.70. Maybe I should have simply asked for a review.

PPS: Im sure that the trials do not have and can not be changed to the full fuctionality of the SP programs, hence whats the point and whats to hack. Nieve NO practical YES!

PPPS: Grand theft is an american demestic law' and has no relivence in International-internet-copyright-property-law.

Ozzy

 

@ozzy666

I don't judge anyone. But I personally don't advocate piracy. All I was saying was that I didn't feel right about helping.

BTW: The "Works" version has all the functionality of the retail version. But in use with DVD-RB there really isn't any noticable difference in quality between SP and Basic. The impact of the extra passes has been debated for a long time -- and most generally agree that the improvement is marginal.

Most of the bells and whistles of CCE SP are only useful to video professionals.

 

jdobbs

I was responding to BroBear. I took no offence to you not helping once I knew it was a pirated version.

I use your software because I can no longer afford to replace the library of movies I have collected for myself and my kids,(So much for the indistructable media touted years ago).

BTW: Well then maybe I am naive, I would have thought that the trials would not contain the full functions of the retail, to be hacked.

Ozzy

 

It's interesting. In all previous Trials it was hamstrung by not being able to read or write ECL files. So that combined with the watermark kept it reasonably "Trial" -- but this latest trial version was made more breakable. It makes you wonder if someone "forgot" to do something before release.

I know the feeling. Two of the best reasons I've seen for backup software is peanut butter (kids) and the Jack Russell Terrier (hey, look at the shiny chewtoy).

 

ozzy666

Yes it means that it's been cracked. Do a backup and see if it has a watermark.

 

I cant do a full back up with it because of the error, but the AVI files have not got a watermark. In anycase I have deleted the copy and got the original from one of the working links at CCE site.

As I said the original 2.50 SP I got from Emule did not have a watermark either, and was not inclusive of a patch etc. I would asume it was a hack too.

It maters not, I was simply interested in any quality difference, which question has been answered.

Tks
Ozzy

 

ozzy666

I didn't mean to insult you, and if I did then I'm sorry. All I was doing was answering a question, and pointing out what identified a trial version from a Pirated version.

 

Ozzy666,

Now thatt you have a valid trial of CCE_SP. You can see howwell this solution works. DVD-RB ~ CCE can handle just about anything you give it. A trial by fire is the best seller for this solution.

Find a nice sized DVD-9 and go for it. Tell the group what you think.

 

Sophocles

I was not insulted, maybe my translation to english some times may seem abrupt, I dont mean it to appear so, Not many pleases and thank yous in Spanish conversations.

My point about the other trial I downloaded originaly (2.50) was just to ilustrate that it seems much of the software on Emule is already hacked. as none had the water mark, and simply said Trial.

I will try to write a little less abrupt, and maybe I can improve my english as well as learn more about these programes at the same time.

Ozzy

 

double post

 

double double post

 

Ozzy

Why you wanted to respond to my post and not the others may just be a matter of semantics. I only pointed to what jdobbs and the others were referring to. Trials without watermarks and time limits are not trials. People selling software programs don't give for free what they're trying to sell. As far as the "why" in stealing a full function app from a trial, that is obvious; as the other forum members have pointed out.

I don't know if you understood my phrasing or not. I said I hoped you were not naive enough to miss why hackers would steal the apps. The implication was that you would only be naive if you didn't understand what there was to steal from a trial. The other members appear to have made you aware of what there is to hack and that hacking is constantly going on.

Hopefully you've come to see that statement isn't correct. Even the dongle protected SP programs have been hacked. Trials of most popular programs have been hacked. Most savvy internet users are aware of this. Also, they are aware of the fact that they can get their PC badly infected from hacked programs and viruses from the sites that deal in them. Also, there are severe penalties for software theft in many countries.

Grand theft may be an American term, but the reality exists in most courts, they differentiate between petty theft and that of valuable items. This would be applicable in most international civil courts where a company could sue an individual for damages or where a prosecutor is prosecuting a felon in criminal court. I don't need a lesson in international law. Most civilized countries have similar laws, they're just not worded the same. And of course they don't have all the same little laws.

I'm sure the Spanish courts would deal differently with a juvenile who stole an apple in the market than with a bank robber who stole thousands of dollars.

As far as the Millenium Copyright Act, there is something of an international agreement with the EU on copyright infringement. Those particualar laws don't get into value of the theft, only that a protected item was tampered with. According to the wording, it is just as criminal to alter a cheap app as an expensive one. The programs you had without the watermarks that started as trials were hacked programs. Now that you understand those trials without watermarks weren't legal, I noticed you deleted them. Glad to see you did the honest thing.

Sophocles
I didn't quite understand your earlier statement. I thought you realized that programers rewrite trials so the water mark won't be recorded. I wasn't referring to removing it once it was recorded.