Speeding up the ripping/encoding/burning process

Hello, and thanks to all that make this a great site. I've read many of the guides and such for dvdfab decrypter/dvd shrink/dvd menu shrink/FixVTS/ImgBurn and the like. My question isn't about the process itself, as I'm currently adding DVDfab into my process and that seems to be solving many problems of DVD backups. My question is related to the time it takes to do this entire process, and if there is anything I can do to shorten it.

The ripping (I would think) is just based on the DVD drive itself. The drive in question is a 4x burner on my laptop, but it's still taking 30+ minutes to just rip a DVD to the HD. Then you shrink it, and that's always taken forever, then burn.

Any tips that might lower the total time down a bit?

Thanks.

 

Sounds like time for a new fast dual core or quad core computer ( if speed is what you want)

 

Do dual and quad cores really improve encoding and ripping times?

I have a 2.66 GHz Core 2 Duo right now, and didn't go quad as I didn't think the extra cores would help. I thought it was all about processor speed.

 

You are really fast currently. Quad will not add that much. BTW how fast is your fsb?

 

Depending on you drive, if available, you could fash it with a firmware that removes the riplock. This could cut your ripping time in half.

 

Can you explain what exactly "rip-lock" is? I've not heard of this.

I actually have 2 computers, one over the hill Dell laptop, and one very new home made desktop. I actually don't have the hard drive space currently on the notebook to do the dvdfab as well as the dvdshrink steps, as one DVD will take about 15GB. I need to take some stuff off of it first before doing this.....

The desktop still takes some time to do all the steps. To answer the question above, I have an E2140 set with a 333 fsb (1333 quad-pumped) with 2GB 800 mhz ram. This is the same as a mch higher priced C2D chip, just with less cache.

 

Yeah, well my dual core was around $75, when the cheapest quad was around $300. I'll sit through the extra few minutes and wait and keep the cash in my pocket.

I mean, I thought I had a very, very fast computer with an OC'ed C2D at 2.67 Ghz, 2 gigs of fast RAM, a 640 GB RAID 0 array, and a very recent Samsung SATA DVD burner. I know it's not the best gamer, but that's due to the video card, not any of the above mentioned stuff. If I can completely install Vista home premium in around 15 minutes, why does it take it 30 minutes to rip a DVD?!?!

 

I was giving the specs of my desktop that I just built. I think the only thing I should be ripping with the notebook is CDs for iTunes!! At least until I get a new one later this year on the new Intel standard.

The above specs are my desktop, which I would think would be more than fast enough to get the entire process done in around an hour per disc, oh well.

Another question, what are your thoughts on lightscribe drives/media? There is a great burner with this feature on sale at the egg right now, but the media seems to be more expensive than media without that feature. I used to put sticky labels on all my backups, I guess that wasn't the right thing to do....

 

Well, what I used to do was make a very high resolution scan of the original DVD, save it, and print that on the burned DVD with my printers maximum resolution. I liked for the finished product to look as close to the original and as professional as possible. This ended up with many discs not working properly on certain players....

I have used the sharpie approach on CDs, but it doesn't look nearly as good, and my handwriting is horrible. I thought that lightscribe would be the best of both worlds. It's not a label, but it can still be made to look professional and all.

The discs seem to be a bit more expensive, though, and I don't know if they are as reliable as their non-lightscribe siblings.

 

As Creaky said, I also find Lightscribe pointless. Unless one stores the backed-up DVDs hanging like Christmas decorations, the only times they see the day light is when they are transported from the storage case to the player- that's it! Sharpie or fancy lightscribing, makes no difference. All I care is to have a good quality burn. It all comes down to taste, but to me is like paying $1000 for underware- no one gives a damn, unless you run around on the streets semi naked on broad daylight!

As for the 2,4,8 core...I have a machine with a 1/2 core:~), but it takes less than 30 minutes to rip a DVD9. Rip-lock removed, of course
As for the other processes, I would guess that even a 12 core turbo charged machine will not make a big difference if the software you use does not use multi core. It will allow multitasking, alright, but if the program uses only one core, the extra ones will really not help improving the speed. The extra core(s) makes a difference during transcoding/encoding, burning or ripping doesn't require much CPU power, as much as it requires RAM.

Your machine sounds like fast enough. If you want to make use of its capabilities, I would actually use the right software. For example, I do not know if DVD Shrink uses multi core. I know latest versions of Nero 7 do( and of course, 8). So, if you do have Nero, you might want to use Nero Recode instead.That would cut down on the transcoding time. The rip-lock removed-that will lessen the ripping time.
It doesn't matter how fast your CPU/RAM is, or how new your burner is-the rip-lock will not allow fast ripping.Look for new firmware.As for burning- nothing you can do. You burn at the proper speed, or mess the whole thing up.
If you really want to do it right, I would not use the burner for ripping. I would get a DVD-ROM. IMO, they are better rippers, and will buy more life time for your burner. But that's my choice.

 

A few great points, but it also added a few questions......

I do have an old IDE DVD-ROM, but with only 1 IDE input on the MOBO, I need to kick out an old hard drive so I can use it for the DVD-ROM. I'll do that this weekend I hope. I'll also check for the latest firmware for it, but do you need to find special "rip-lock" firmware, or just the most up-to-date from the manufacturer?

Also, are you saying to use Nero recode instead of Shrink all together? I do have a copy of Nero recode I think that came with my Samsung burner. Does it do any better or worse job than shrink (quality wise)? I assume you can also use it to shrink 7-9GB of a DVD rip down to a single layer DVD size?

 

From my limited knowledge, I think only modified firmware will remove the rip-lock. I could be wrong though.
As for Nero Recode- I see it as an updated DVD Shink. It does the transcoding to shrink a DVD9 to DVD5,trim a movie, compile one DVD from multiple titles, and it also burns to disc. It can aslo convert different formats to mpeg4(Nero Digital).

I still use DVD Shrink, but only when backing up older titles that DVD Shrink is able to decrypt/rip, this way I do the whole thing in one step. Otherwise, I use Recode.
Since you already have Nero(don't know what version you have, I would update to the latest)give Recode a try se if it will go any faster using both cores.

 

Yeah, I'll give that a shot and see how it does! Another simple stupid beginner question. I have an answer to it, just making sure it's right.....

DVD-R or DVD+R?

The +R might give you a better final copy, but the -R is more compatible with players? Is that right?

 

Hmmm...that's another dangerous subject to start a debate on!
I personally only use DVD+R booktyped to DVD-ROM. I have 2 players that do not play DVD-R or DVD+R( with no booktype change), will only play DVD+R with booktype changed to DVD-ROM.
If the burner supports booktyping, I'd go with DVD+R with the booktype changed to DVD-ROM.

http://www.k-probe.com/bitsetting-booktype-faq.php