hcenc 0.17 released!!

The .exe file in the HC Folder. They each have a different name. I named the .17 what the .15 was, so that the path was unchanged.

 

you mean you copied the hc 0.17 into the directory of hc 0.15 then renamed it and moved hc0.15 to another location under another name??

kinda like an encoder(witness) protection plan

I simply browed for the directory (under the quenc path) and opened the file name box at the bottom of the browse box and selected hc0.17!

seems easier but different strokes for different...

*edited due to fat fingers*

 

yeah, 6 of one half dozen the other.........I figured this way the Quenc is still intact.

Later.

 

Hmm, I don't understand all the redoing/renaming. I just put hcenc 0.17 in my encoder folder along with hcenc 0.16 and the path to hc is now v0.17 automatically. If it works like you have it thats cool but sounds like you're complicating things. If you get rb pro it should come with hcenc 0.17 packed in. You probably will want to delete the free vs of rb before installing the pro vs anyway.

 

mort, Yeah I am really thinking I will spring for the pro. The Free version does not have the option to browse the source path for hc. I simply downloaded the .17 and placed it into the hc folder. Since RB was looking for the .15 exe. file, I just named the latest version exe. what the prior was. I then renamed the .15 so that it would not have the name that the RB was looking for. I didn't throw it out, just in case I had a problem and had to revert back to the older version. Once, I upgrade to the pro there is a path for the HC. I have seen it on some screen shots that are in a few guides.

Shawn

 

I see what you mean now it's actually pretty clever

I guess it's been a while since I was a free user!

hope you get that pro version it's truely a great deal better!

I wonder if we can get an updated skin for rb free since the best free encoder is not properly supported?!?

 

The verdict is in. On this one particular large folder (7.71 gb) CCE SP at 3 passes wins video quality wise. Amazingly hc v0.17 ws not far behind it with CCE Basic bringing up the rear. I only wish hc was faster. I would use it more often. Here are the times to encode for the three:

CCE SP: 397 min
CCE Basic: 238 min
HCenc: 430 min

This was a very large folder and normally basic will suffice on folders less than 7 gb. I can't justify the additional time required for hc or see a difference in video quality on folders less than 7 gb. This of course is just my personal opinion.

Forgot to mention, my cpu does not have hyperthreading technology and only has a FSB of 533. I was also multi-tasking during all three encodes.

 

I think it's fair to mention that hc is limited to 2pass like cce basic but now has a opv mode (only rebuilder pro allows this option)
to increase speeds

I only ran hc in opv mode once but didn't see a lack of quality but only doing one comparison I will not consider this "proof"!

 

Are those normal times for HCenc? I just did Into the Blue last night and after using menu shrink, the folder was 7.52 gb...but HCenc on "best" setting finished in 256 min, however, I wasn't multitasking at all. Does multitasking really have that large an effect on encoding time? I suppose it really depends on what tasks you are performing at the same time. I was just wondering because our computers seem fairly equal as far as processing and memory.

 

ebega,

That venice core is going to most likely tear me up every time on encoding times. My cpu is a prescott core. Wish I would have gotten a northwood core. Your FSB is probably 800 mhz or 1 ghz isn't it. Soph has a venice core and his encode times are faster than most.

I'm not sure why that particular folder took so long. I did a couple others with rb/cce sp at 2 passes and they took about 2/1/2 hrs each. My normal encode times with cce basic is right around 2 hrs which is about average. SP set at 2 passes actually does 1 more pass than basic does at 2 passes so these last two folders I did were about par on encode times for my setup.

As far as multi-tasking goes, I don't think surfing the web or chatting on here will affect your encode times that much but I've got rebuilder set at low priority and was running some other programs that are pretty cpu demanding so they will definately cut into my encode times.

 

Thanks for clearing that up Mort, and your right, I have the 939 pin Venice core which has 1 Ghz FSB. It's been a good processor, but I think I'm gonna go for a dual core 939 pin processor.

 

There is DGDecode.dll files. Is the DGDecode12.dll newer than this one ( http://www.doom9.org/Soft21/Decoders/dgdecodedll.zip ) and, if it is, can I use it with DVD-RB ?

Thx

 

Do you see a big difference between the NORMAL and the BEST modes with high bitrates (+/- 4.000 Kbs) ?
I don't want to spend time to encode the same movie twice so thx if you can tell me.

 

it's alway's good to keep up to date w/ your decoder as authoring methods change/evolve the old ones will not do the job eventually.

however it's also wise to save the older ones if the newer ones have not been properly tested they may have bugs.

as for normal best settings I personally don't see a difference because I only use the best settings ;-}