Wow! Cool site!

[JeepSiteGuy]

Hello all! First of all I'd like to say you have a very informative site here! I'm a total noob at dvd ripping, editing and such. I'm finding all kinds of stuff to read up on it!

I already have some cool software for dvd's - like:
dvd decryptor
dvd shrink
Ulead dvd Movie Factory
DivX converter
Xvid
and Win AVI.

I'm still learning how to use all the various functions and I'm glad I found a place with some answers! I'm sure I'll hollar when I got questions!!

Anyways.....Hi!

[Die*wrek*show]

Virtual Dub, and it's variants are probably the easiest to use for noobs(don't worry I'm a noob too no worries). I use the mpeg2 version which lets you work directly with .vob files that you have ripped to your hard drive. Super easy, and fun to work with.

What I have seen with regards to Ulead, seems to be positive.

see you around, and welcome!

[LoRd_MuldeR]

If you like VirtualDub, then you should definitely check out Avidemux (http://fixounet.free.fr/avidemux/) :D

The user-interface looks pretty much like VirtualDub, but it supports many more input/output formats!
Furthermore it has MPEG-2, XviD (MPEG-4) and x264 (H.264) encoders built-in!

[sillKotscha]

call me a complete moron but I don't understand avidemux... it looks like a perfect one-click-tool to me but it always had it's "hick-ups" when I put my fingers on it...

sill and avidemux seems to be a no-go :D

[LoRd_MuldeR]

call me a complete moron but I don't understand avidemux... it looks like a perfect one-click-tool to me but it always had it's "hick-ups" when I put my fingers on it...

sill and avidemux seems to be a no-go :D

I don't know what problems you had with Avidemux, you didn't tell us any details ;)
But for me it's an "every day use" tool and I hope Avidemux will have a great future.
If you need a "one click tool", then you'll love Avidemux!

VirtualDub was great in the past, but it's limitation to VfW Codecs and AVI container is a big problem today.
Since Avidemux is still under development, it's not as stable as VirtualDub yet. But it has many advantages!

Avidemux 2.3+ should be pretty stable now:
http://prdownload.berlios.de/avidemux/avidemux_2.3.0_plus_win32.zip

Latest 2.4 build can be found here, it's worth a try:
http://fixounet.free.fr/avidemux/win32/2.4_r2796_win32.zip

[Adub]

I second the Avidemux opinions. Personally, I just couldn't get everything to work as I wanted it to, with different hidden settings scattered throughout the GUI, and so on.
I think that I will stick with Avisynth, MeGUI, and virtualdub.


Edit: Welcome to the site JeepSiteGuy! If I were you, I would check out some of Doom9's guides on his main page, plus some of the others scattered about the forums, and the MeGUI wiki in my sig.

Welcome and have fun!

[foxyshadis]

Totally agreed that AVIDemux needs a complete GUI overhaul someday, but it's pretty indispensible as a part of one's toolbox if you do any work with mp4. There just isn't anything else that's as versatile.

btw, it's a little more tolerable if you replace the ugly default gnome theme with the win32 theme, by replacing the gtkrc file. I just found that out yesterday.

[KoD]

If you import a matroska file with vfr video in avidemux you'll find out it has no idea how to properly interpret the timecodes. Move the button on the seekbar around and see. Probably because support for matroska is not what the creator of the tool was looking for (it can't export to mkv, either). However vfr in mp4 files is allowed so it's something that should work in the future.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

btw, it's a little more tolerable if you replace the ugly default gnome theme with the win32 theme, by replacing the gtkrc file. I just found that out yesterday.

Don't want to start an Avidemux discussion here, but I don't understand what everybody is complaining about.

There are very few differences between VirtaulDub's UI and Avidemux's GTK+ UI, we even have two Video panels now!
Furthermore Avidemux uses native WinXP look by default in all builds I have tested so far...

http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/2452/admve1.th.png (http://img380.imageshack.us/my.php?image=admve1.png)


// EDIT

Maybe you guys will find the QT4 interface more appealing ;)

http://img460.imageshack.us/img460/407/admqtbp7.th.png (http://img460.imageshack.us/my.php?image=admqtbp7.png)

[foxyshadis]

It's not the look so much, which is pretty decent in win32 mode. It's the fact that it seems to do the opposite of what I expect it to do in some places, or it's missing some things you'd think were critical (like stripping audio); but mean knows about them and just doesn't have time to do gui work while the core is getting changed, which I can totally understand.

[sillKotscha]

I don't know what problems you had with Avidemux, you didn't tell us any details ;)

It's not the look so much, which is pretty decent in win32 mode. It's the fact that it seems to do the opposite of what I expect it to do in some places...

exactly my point :)

[Doom9]

we're getting really OT here but the main problem with any GUI toolkit that doesn't make use of native widgets is that it just doesn't conform to the UI guidelines of a platform. Buttons and menus look a certain way in Windows.. and even Java doesn't quite get there, GTK is far worse. It may not bother people who like skins but the vast majority of users out there are used to the standard look and feel and will spot immediately if something is off. As a few examples, the dropdown size is off, the slider isn't the standard slider, and there are no reasonably sized dividers (though admittedly the last one is mostly up to the developer). Both Windows and Apple, and I suspect even KDE and Gnome have rigid UI guidelines.. any user of one of those window manager will feel uncomfortable with apps that don't conform to what you're used to. This is very much like when you drive a car in another country.. while you might recognize the signs, they will be somewhat different from what you're used to, so you'll always feel a bit put off seeing them.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

Well, the "problems" Doom9 describes effect all cross-platform applications. I think the idea of cross-platform applications is really great! If I decide tomorrow to switch from Windows to Linux or MacOS, I still can use my favorite tools like Avidemux or MPlayer. Nevertheless I doubt there's a better way to create a cross-platform GUI application than using one of the mentioned GUI Toolkits (with all the "unwanted" behavior). One other solution would be the MPlayer way: Make a simple CLI application and built different OS-specific front-ends on top of it. In case of Avidemux, the UI and the core application are currently being decoupled. So in the upcoming 2.4 version, the users will be able to choose at least between a GTK+ and QT4 style interface. In theory it should even be possible to implement a Windows specific UI, only using native Win32 controls. However I highly doubt this will ever happen... Me personally is pretty happy with the GTK+ interface, although it took a few days to get used to it. Nevertheless I'm looking forward to the new QT4 interface, which looks promising atm!