New Decrypting Method [Archive]

setarip_old

15th September 2007, 22:22

@bourtzovlakas

Hi!

Although it's not specifically stated, my interpretation is that the described methodology should be capable of circumventing the type of protection used on the German releases of "Das Parfum" and very few others - that had, among other things (If I understand correctly) multiple .IFOs with the same name.

Thusfar, to my knowledge, that is still the ONLY protection scheme that RipIt4Me cannot conquer.

If, on the other hand, "PathPlayer" likewise cannot handle the "Das Parfum" protection, then you are very likely correct in that it would be nothing more than "Step 3B" and then FixVTS in RipIt4Me...

BTW - Is it possible that this "PathPlayer" is intended for HD DVDs, rather than standard DVDs?

linx05

16th September 2007, 03:33

@setarip_old, it is indeed made for standard DVDs. AnyDVD should have their AI Scanner out soon which I cannot wait for.

blutach

16th September 2007, 03:50

Yes, it sounds like Fengtao has adopted RipIt4Me's methodology (and perhaps AI scanner is based on the same premise). Interesting to see it re-surface.

@setarip_old - the issues with the German DVDs were related to reading the DVD in the first place (corrupted filesystem), not decrypting it. DVD Fab Decrypter has, to my knowledge, conquered that issue.

Regards

linx05

16th September 2007, 08:51

I remember a while back people were asking DVD copy program developers to add this sort of feature. Does anybody remember what their reply was? It was never added (besides in RipIt4Me in a way) so there had to be a reason.

What I am interested in is how companies are going to combat this solution. More power to us honest people.

blutach

16th September 2007, 11:10

Quite frankly, it is probably not able to be combated successfully. So long as the program can read the IFOs, menu buttons and BOVs, it can determine which PGCs are played and which are not. It can then totally ignore (or better still make into dummies) the useless PGCs (which usually contain the advanced protection). As well, PGCs which are not referenced in any way can be eliminated.

However, this analysis of "pushing every button" comes at the expense of the time it takes to do. If there are many levels of menus, each having lots of buttons, with no PUOps, it may take some time to go thru the lot. For practicality's sake, a maximum depth will need to be adopted.

Schemes which can successfully "fool" the program into performing a bad navigation (or just flood it with data) will perhaps work. We saw this notably with DVD games and RipIt4Me. Other schemes whch can prevent the proper reading of the IFOs and buttons (already tried and failing in Germany) should also be successful.

But in the decrypting program's war on encryption, this "player emulation" is about as advanced as you can get - which is why RipIt4Me was - and is - so successful.

(Please note that this post is for comment only and in no way is it meant to encourage or assist people to rip DVD-Videos. People should, at all times, respect the rights of copyright holders).

Regards

Wombler

16th September 2007, 16:19

However, this analysis of "pushing every button" comes at the expense of the time it takes to do. If there are many levels of menus, each having lots of buttons, with no PUOps, it may take some time to go thru the lot. For practicality's sake, a maximum depth will need to be adopted.

According to Fengtao the time taken to do this analysis shouldn't take any more than about 30 seconds for current discs so the overhead mightn't be as bad as you'd think.

Wombler

HyperHacker

16th September 2007, 21:49

Well if the disc, for example, contained a menu loop (button A on menu 1 opens menu 2, and button B on menu 2 opens menu 1), or (if possible) buttons leading to some invalid data or something that are placed such that they could never be activated by a human, the program might follow them blindly and get stuck. It shouldn't be too hard to prevent this, though.

Another possible option is to actually display the menus and have the user navigate them as normal, selecting what they want to copy.

Wombler

16th September 2007, 22:17

Another possible option is to actually display the menus and have the user navigate them as normal, selecting what they want to copy.

That method would be laborious and wouldn't work in all circumstances.

For example hidden "Easter eggs".

Automatic analysis is the only satisfactory and comprehensive way to go.

Wombler

setarip_old

16th September 2007, 23:05

@blutach

Hi!(Please note that this post is for comment only and in no way is it meant to encourage or assist people to rip DVD-Videos. People should, at all times, respect the rights of copyright holders).This appears to contradict the entire purpose and reasoning of the "Decrypting" sub-forum with regard to purchased DVDs...

jinjin_jp

17th September 2007, 01:09

It's called PathPlayer and is able to determine which content on the disc is accessible by a stand alone DVD player.

I have thoght provious versions search whether unplayed or played, too.
Because Fab asks to ignore read-error or not when reading DVD which I scrathed intentionally, but seems to ignore without ask when reading DVD contains RipGuard protection.

The difference is serching partly only when read-error or seaching all at first ?

Regards.

blutach

17th September 2007, 01:43

@setarip_old

Au contraire! Rule 6 strongly shows that we respect the rights of copyright holders.

Please do not make meaningless posts - observe rule 3.

Regards

blutach

17th September 2007, 01:45

According to Fengtao the time taken to do this analysis shouldn't take any more than about 30 seconds for current discs so the overhead mightn't be as bad as you'd think.On most DVDs that would be true, but DVDs which have many paths to trace may take longer. Anyway, I am not a time junkie.

Regards

setarip_old

17th September 2007, 04:19

With full recognition of the fact that you are a moderator here, I disagree with your statements:

1) Rule #6 does not pertain to making backup copies of (as I specifically stated in my previous post) purchased media

2) The fact that I take exception to something you've posted does not make my post meaningless. I'm seeking clarification from you regarding your footnote (as a moderator), which appears to indicate that there is suddenly a reason to no longer make postings regarding making backup copies of purchased media:Please note that this post is for comment only and in no way is it meant to encourage or assist people to rip DVD-Videos. The "Decrypting" sub-forum and several other sub-forums here are specifically indicated to be for the purpose of discussing "ripping"/"copying"/"creating backups" of (purchased) DVDs. These are the captions of some of the sub-forums:Decrypting
How do I get the files on my (HD)DVD / Blu-Ray disc to my harddisk?Newbies
If you're new to DVD ripping please post your questions here.One click DVD backup solutions
Everything about DVD2One, DVD95Copy, DVD Shrink and Instant Copy.DoitFast4U, BatchCCEWS, ScenAid & NuMenu4u
tools for doing full DVD backup the way it's supposed to bePlease be good enough to clarify...

blutach

17th September 2007, 11:35

No - and stop taking this off topic.

Strike issued.

Regards

Wombler

17th September 2007, 12:50

I have thoght provious versions search whether unplayed or played, too.
Because Fab asks to ignore read-error or not when reading DVD which I scrathed intentionally, but seems to ignore without ask when reading DVD contains RipGuard protection.

The difference is serching partly only when read-error or seaching all at first ?

Regards.

The new version analyses the full disc and determines all playable paths first.

Wombler

Wombler

17th September 2007, 12:57

On most DVDs that would be true, but DVDs which have many paths to trace may take longer. Anyway, I am not a time junkie.

Regards

True. Even on extreme discs a short time extra won't really be much of a problem.

Wombler

jinjin_jp

17th September 2007, 14:35

@Wombler
The new version analyses the full disc and determines all playable paths first.
I understand. :thanks:

RickA

17th September 2007, 14:49

Yes, I think the search time scanning for what can be actually played may increase somewhat is well spent. That should all even out versus the time wasted trying to rip unwanted protection data from the disc and cleaning it up afterwards. Such as cycling trays, slower rip speeds, inserting dummy sectors, cleaning VOB's and the like. 'Six of one, half a dozen of another?' as the saying goes.

Cheers

SamuriHL

17th September 2007, 18:11

If it means not having to wait for an update to deal with a new copy protection, it can take an hour for all I care. :D I think this functionality has been badly needed by all the great rippers. And I think this is slightly different from what R4M does if I'm not mistaken. R4M scans the disc for errors and creates a PSL file to tell DVD Decrypter to skip those sections of the disc, does it not? It's not actually parsing the IFO to find all the readable sections of the disc...it's in fact taking the opposite approach and finding all the non-readable sections and then using FixVTS to validate each VTS and removing invalid ones. At least, that's my understanding of how it works. Perhaps I'm wrong on this point. In any case, I for one applaud this new functionality and can't wait to see Slysoft implement their on the fly version in AnyDVD.

setarip_old

17th September 2007, 19:35

@SamuriHL

Hi!

I believe that "Step 3B" of RipIt4Me, performed after the applicationof the PSL (and before the use of FixVTS) performs an analysis similar to what's being described for this new version of DVDFab Decrypter HD...

SamuriHL

17th September 2007, 19:42

Interesting. I was not aware of that. Thanks for the info! In that case, R4M does far more than I thought. This would explain its almost legendary status of one of the best ripping packages out there. It's nice to see the other rippers finally implement similar technology. Only time will tell if they are as successful at it as R4M.

setarip_old

19th September 2007, 04:16

As a point of information, it's been noted in another thread here today, that this new "PathPlayer" process is apparently not capable of processing the R1 version of "Blade - House of Chthon".

Among other possible protections, the DVD contains outrageously apparent huge .IFOs and .BUPs, differing filesizes between .IFOs and their respective .BUPs, and apparent (file references only) triplicated .VOBs, resulting in an apparent DVD with a combined filesize of 11Gb.

It looks like FengTao will have to "go back to the drawing board"...

blutach

19th September 2007, 04:38

This sounds just like the German DVDs (which I thought DVDFD could read). Interesting to see the encryption technology migrate to the US.

I would think it is a matter of being able to read the IFOs.

Regards

setarip_old

19th September 2007, 05:30

This sounds just like the German DVDs (which I thought DVDFD could read).Actually, the most recent threads regarding "Das Parfum" (in May) indicated that DVD Fab Decrypter was "still having problems" with it...

SamuriHL

19th September 2007, 14:20

This is indeed a variation of the ProtectVideo ugliness as seen in Germany. As of yet, none of the rippers can handle it as far as I know. It's only a matter of time, however.

setarip_old

19th September 2007, 18:23

As of yet, none of the rippers can handle it as far as I know.However, it totally surprised me when I discovered that the ANCIENT SmartRipper was easily (In less than 10minutes) able to rip a "movie only" copy of the aforementioned the R1 version of "Blade - House of Chthon"!

SamuriHL

19th September 2007, 18:52

However, it totally surprised me when I discovered that the ANCIENT SmartRipper was easily (In less than 10minutes) able to rip a "movie only" copy of the aforementioned the R1 version of "Blade - House of Chthon"!

You have no idea how hard I laughed when I first read your post about that. :) I find it absolutely ironic that a 5 year old abandoned ripper can easily make a movie only copy. :D

Wombler

19th September 2007, 21:54

However, it totally surprised me when I discovered that the ANCIENT SmartRipper was easily (In less than 10minutes) able to rip a "movie only" copy of the aforementioned the R1 version of "Blade - House of Chthon"!

That's bizarre. I think you might just have been lucky with that one.

Wombler

buckster67

19th September 2007, 22:07

hm am i the only one that cant get this 1 to go i have tried 6 times an can only get the previews not the movie itself

setarip_old

19th September 2007, 23:16

@Wombler

Hi!

"Luck" has nothing to do with the ability of a specific ripper to (in this case) rip a "movie only" backup.

It seems that whereas DVD Decrypter (either directly, or from within RipIt4Me) automatically (at least based on its default settings) attempts to first interpret all .IFOs and, therefore "gags" on that part of this protection, SmartRipper (in "movie only" mode) apparently doesn't do this and seems to follow the PGC through the actual .VOBs.

If, however, this DVD contained "ARccOS" copy protection as well as its present demonic protection, I'm fairly certain that SmartRipper would not be able to render a good "movie only" copy.

(Note that SmartRipper also fails at the attempt to perform a full disc backup)

mc2man

21st September 2007, 03:53

i've had the whole disk on my hdd to fool around though unfortunately I don't know nearly enough to make any clear technical points or make a full backup. Got very close but either the movie wouldn't start from the main menu or it would start 1.29 sec. in. I am at least able to see some of what's going on and the effects on popular progs. This is some really inspired work compared to "ripguard", it's variants and arccos. One thing that jumps out is it's designed to "fool" alot of progs. into removing stuff that's critical to playback or in some cases smooth playback. Several progs. want to blank what is actually part of the movie. While the movie seems to be Vob id 2 it seems to be switching to Vob id 0 back and forth. Another thing that comes into play is most of the ifo/vob editors "see" the movie beginning about 1:29 in . For instance p..edit says for the 1st vob/cell id in title 2 - entry vobu 34891 (this sector also has invalid nav pack) ab. sec. 35006 - which is 1:29 in.
Now the movie only backup I did plays fine on standalones and does show 15 cells at vob0 followed by 18 at vob2, 1 at vob3
What's really interesting is to take the movie only and open it up in dvd shrink in reauthor mode It "sees" all the cells corresponding to vob0 as chapter1 (1500 or so mb.) and the real beginning of the movie at chap.2. If you reauthor from 2 on and burn the disk it plays fine (starting at the true beginning) and then around chap.6 starts missing a few seconds here and there for the rest of the movie

jeanl

21st September 2007, 06:50

Man! What a mess!
Jeanl

SamuriHL

21st September 2007, 13:25

Man! What a mess!
Jeanl

Yea, it really is...What a "great" protection they've got themselves.

Wombler

21st September 2007, 19:09

It seems that whereas DVD Decrypter (either directly, or from within RipIt4Me) automatically (at least based on its default settings) attempts to first interpret all .IFOs and, therefore "gags" on that part of this protection, SmartRipper (in "movie only" mode) apparently doesn't do this and seems to follow the PGC through the actual .VOBs.

That's interesting.

I'll bear that in mind if I ever have any difficulties with other DVDs.

Wombler

blutach

22nd September 2007, 00:36

If it follows a PGC, the it somehow looks at the IFOs. The PGCs are in the IFOs, not the VOBs. Chances are that in movie only mode, it picked the correct VOB (out of 3 identically named ones).

Regards

setarip_old

22nd September 2007, 01:09

it picked the correct VOB (out of 3 identically named ones).I believe two of them exist ONLY as directory entries, not as actual .VOBs...

blutach

22nd September 2007, 01:51

Indeed. So, how can it "follow a PGC" (which is in the IFOs)?

A PGC is a logical collection of cells, not a physical one (and so is in the IFOs).

Unless it is blind luck, it must determine which VOB is actually the right one somehow. This is not that tough as VIDEO_TS.IFO contains the correct start sectors.

Anyways, it is interesting to see that it works. Presumably, the full disk backer-uppers, can either wait for one of the more advanced rippers to come along and break the scheme, or use a combo of Smart Ripper (movie only) and some other ripper (to rip the non-protected bits), together with some editing software to pull it all together.

Regards

setarip_old

22nd September 2007, 02:04

Anyways, it is interesting to see that it works.Perhaps that's why there was all the "whispering" in March/April 1 about the possible replacement of DVD Decrypter by SmartRipper in then-future RipIt4Me releases, starting with the never released v.1.73...

mc2man

22nd September 2007, 02:29

even though there's no practical use for this (probably never get off hdd) I now have a complete full disk backup on the hdd. It plays the movie perfectly from the main menu with only a 3 sec glitch getting to the true start. Whats interesting is how the control panel for powerdvd shows title 2 but the chapter keeps switching from the ch. it's on to 1 and back . ie. ch.4, ch.1, ch 4, ch. 1 ch. 6 cn. 1 ch. 6 ch. 1 ect.
The short of it is I took the full disk rip, removed anything to do with vts12, readjusted the ifo to reflect this(probably not needed) and pasted in the vts_02_0.ifo from the movie only. I figured it couldn't hurt to butcher it more

setarip_old

22nd September 2007, 03:32

@mc2man

What you've not said in this thread is how you managed to initially copy the entire original, commercial DVD to your harddrive.

Please share this information with us ;>}

mc2man

22nd September 2007, 03:51

there are some things flying under the radar and should stay that way. I will gladly share privately mainly because while I can "see" possible solutions I have no where near the knowledge to proceed or properly repair (if possible)
I also can see that the smartripper solution will be short lived, I believe it fails on ...03_.0.BUP which shows up 8000 kb with "invalid parameters". It's actually only 12 kb. same goes a couple of others further along, put one before the main title and ....

edit: after a little thought smartripper could still be very useful, it seems to be unaffected by errors in the .vobs,(as used it this case) if you can feed it corrected ifos and bups I think it will go merrily on it's way

setarip_old

22nd September 2007, 04:45

there are some things flying under the radar and should stay that way.To each his own, I guess (whether Linux or Windows is involved)...

mc2man

22nd September 2007, 19:06

As a side note on smartripper if anyone wants to fool around with it on the full disk just run it in linux under wine. You'll be able to parse all the ifos ect. While it will fast skip the errors in 02_01.vob in file and disk mode you can see the disk as it really is

SamuriHL

22nd September 2007, 19:09

Fascinating. What a wonderful protection they've got there.

wildchild77

22nd September 2007, 23:04

mc2man

23rd September 2007, 02:59

for the hell of it just tried smartripper in wine to rip the whole disk. Backup mode gets you everything but 02_1.vob. (02_5 looks ok since the block errors are after the video) In movie mode you can pickup the full 02_1.vob to paste in.
Vlc player is good for unlocking but very unreliable for playback of the orig., rip, or any changes. Better to rip or send to a partition you can access from win.

SamuriHL

23rd September 2007, 03:01

I got a full backup working using nothing but DVD Decrypter and IFOEdit. Works great, no more protection. :)

mc2man

23rd September 2007, 04:23

@SamuriHL
your 100% right
i learned 2 really good things here - how to use ifoedit and patience - All my attempts with ifoedit failed because i thought it was hanging after correcting the vobu's - just have to wait it out.
Same goes for dvdd -you have to wait awhile for it to get thru that
_12 ifo
I don't know how long dvdd took to rip smartripper in wine takes about 15 min.

SamuriHL

23rd September 2007, 05:01

I don't have access to a linux box with a DVD drive at home so that wasn't an option for me. (I'm assuming linux in a VM running under Windows is not exactly what they had in mind on this one. :) )

It wasn't overly difficult to deal with this one though. Basically I just used DVDD's File mode, ripped all the IFOs and VOBs for all VTS' except for 2 and 12. 12 is bogus and is why DVDD takes forever to scan the disc and 2 is the main movie. Once I had all the VTS' except the movie ripped, I used DVDD in IFO processing mode to rip just the main movie VTS into the same directory. This will give you a backup that plays fine except for the very beginning of the movie. Since that's not overly acceptable, you just need to use IFOEdit to fix VTS2 and you're then good to go. Sounds complicated but in reality it's very easy and completely defeats this protection. For those that are having problems playing it on their player, give this a try and it should fix it up for you.

blutach

23rd September 2007, 05:33

I dunno what all the hoo-hah is about this. People are reporting all over the place that it can be ripped. And the scheme is hardly new. See http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=99761

Regards

SamuriHL

23rd September 2007, 05:36

Well, you read the post on CDFREAKS that irritated me. :) I realize this protection is nothing special, but, I wasn't about to wait for Slysoft or FengTao to update their software before tackling it. I never do. And yes, I think you're correct about where this protection originally came from. Real nice. I'm sure we'll see updates soon enough once they get their discs to play with. In the meantime, I've got a working backup that plays anywhere so I'm good to go.

blutach

23rd September 2007, 07:59

HyperHacker

23rd September 2007, 08:03

setarip_old

23rd September 2007, 08:57

@blutachPeople are reporting all over the place that it can be ripped.If you mean other than here at Doom9's Forum, would you please be good enough to provide links to these reports?

mc2man

23rd September 2007, 09:59

while this " protection " has/can be defeated in several ways in terms of getting a full working copy on your hdd, I think almost all of the mis structure is still very much in play. As worthless as the endeavor would be (in terms of this title) if you can't run it thru your favorite prog.(s) and fit it on a dvd5, then it's still an effective method. I'm watching rb try to process it now and I somewhat doubt the output is going to be any good. Maybe I made a mistake "fixing" the rip, I don't know other than it plays perfectly on pc.
It looks like rb is going to create at least 3000 segments
I'll check back on it in the morning

blutach

23rd September 2007, 10:16

DVD Rebuilder (http://dvd-rb.dvd2go.org/) will create 1 segment per cell. If there are hundreds or thousands of tiny cells, remove them with PgcEdit or the like.

Regards

SamuriHL

23rd September 2007, 14:44

No need to let trolls irritate you SamuriHL.

But given this disk had difficulties playing, I suspect the scheme will go back to the drawing board. DMCA or no, I do believe consumers have a right to be able to play their DVDs!

Regards

You got that right!! This protection is quite ridiculous in how far it goes to corrupt the DVD standard. My guess is that if they tried this on a more popular title in region 1, they'd get a LOT of complaints about it not playing.

SamuriHL

23rd September 2007, 14:46

mc2man

24th September 2007, 08:30

I thought I'd make a couple of final comments even though I might be wrong. I made and burned a movie only (based on setarip_old's method) that works fine in standalones . I also made and burned a full disk on a dl that plays on standalones as good or in 1 case better than the orig. The only changes were to make pgc's 2 and 3 in vts2... into dummies and remove last vts
That being said I still think the protection is not overcome in terms of passing a rip on for processing (shrink, rb ,ect)
If you exclude pgcs 2 and 3 (from main title) from the rip I can't see your getting the full movie that"ll play right from start to finish.
If you remove unreferenced material from the main title same thing.
I would actually venture to guess quite the opposite - you"ll need to reference it somehow instead

Wombler

30th September 2007, 16:57

SamuriHL

30th September 2007, 17:03

I see Slysoft has adopted an approach similar to 'PathPlayer' with the introduction of it's 'AI Scanner' in the latest AnyDVD beta.

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=228665

That's obviously been the reason for the lengthy delay between updates and it's great to have another option open with regard to the latest discs.

Wombler

While this is true, it should be noted that the current beta was intended to be a closed beta and as such has quite a few bugs that need to be fixed. Slysoft never intended it to be released to the public at this stage. That being said, the testing I've done with it has been quite good. There are definitely some issues that need to be fixed, and they are in the process of doing so, but, when this is released and finalized, it's going to be incredibly powerful.

Wombler

30th September 2007, 18:06

While this is true, it should be noted that the current beta was intended to be a closed beta and as such has quite a few bugs that need to be fixed.

That's why I linked to the full thread so that people would be aware of this.

I probably should have mentioned it as well though.

Slysoft never intended it to be released to the public at this stage. That being said, the testing I've done with it has been quite good. There are definitely some issues that need to be fixed, and they are in the process of doing so, but, when this is released and finalized, it's going to be incredibly powerful.

Yep, it's great to see the tide turning in our favour for a once.:)

Wombler

SamuriHL

30th September 2007, 18:08

Wombler

30th September 2007, 21:51

Yes indeed. Once it's done there's a good chance it'll simply work for whatever nasty perversion of the DVD standard they come up with. It's quite impressive. The beta testers are madly testing every disc we can get our hands on so hopefully when it's released there won't be any unforeseen bugs. :)

Well I wouldn't like to preclude the chance of any new protections coming along but I think that it will certainly decrease the frequency of updates required and that definitely has to be a good thing.

Wombler

SamuriHL

1st October 2007, 14:04

Well I wouldn't like to preclude the chance of any new protections coming along but I think that it will certainly decrease the frequency of updates required and that definitely has to be a good thing.

Wombler

One would hope so. I can't wait to see what Slysoft has cooked up next. I don't know when a new version will be out. I'm sure people will love it.

Wombler

1st October 2007, 21:03

One would hope so. I can't wait to see what Slysoft has cooked up next. I don't know when a new version will be out. I'm sure people will love it.

Well if they're that far down the beta testing route I'd expect it to be fairly soon.

I'm interested myself to see how good it is and how well it copes over the next few months.

My bet is that it will far superior to anything they've produced before and that's saying something.

Wombler

SamuriHL

1st October 2007, 21:06

Well if they're that far down the beta testing route I'd expect it to be fairly soon.

I'm interested myself to see how good it is and how well it copes over the next few months.

My bet is that it will far superior to anything they've produced before and that's saying something.

Wombler

Yea, I'm not really sure where they are with the beta testing. I've heard rumors about what they're working on and it sounds really promising. I played with the beta and found a bunch of issues so one can only hope they're working on fixing those. You really got to hand it to them...they work hard to keep their customers happy. I can't wait til they release a public beta or final release of this one!

Wombler

1st October 2007, 21:09

Yea, I'm not really sure where they are with the beta testing. I've heard rumors about what they're working on and it sounds really promising. I played with the beta and found a bunch of issues so one can only hope they're working on fixing those. You really got to hand it to them...they work hard to keep their customers happy. I can't wait til they release a public beta or final release of this one!

When you say 'issues' were they fairly serious things or just minor bugs?

Wombler

SamuriHL

1st October 2007, 21:12

When you say 'issues' were they fairly serious things or just minor bugs?

Wombler

I ran the leaked beta against a bunch of discs I have just to see how good it is and found that there are definitely problems with the beta. IOW, it was DEFINITELY not ready to be released to the public. I'm told they're working on fixing those issues now so I have no idea when a public beta or final release will be out, but, it'll definitely be worth the wait. But there was a lot of regression problems in the leaked beta...things that used to work fine with old versions could no longer be ripped with the beta. So, it's a work in progress and they know about all the issues. It's a shame it was leaked before it was ready but it shows what they have in mind...and it's quite impressive.

Wombler

1st October 2007, 21:25

I ran the leaked beta against a bunch of discs I have just to see how good it is and found that there are definitely problems with the beta. IOW, it was DEFINITELY not ready to be released to the public. I'm told they're working on fixing those issues now so I have no idea when a public beta or final release will be out, but, it'll definitely be worth the wait. But there was a lot of regression problems in the leaked beta...things that used to work fine with old versions could no longer be ripped with the beta. So, it's a work in progress and they know about all the issues. It's a shame it was leaked before it was ready but it shows what they have in mind...and it's quite impressive.

Ahh right so maybe there's a bit more work to be done than I thought.

It'll be worth the wait though.:)

I think the leaked beta will actually work in their favour as it's generated a lot of discussion about their product and created a good deal of eager anticipation that wouldn't necessarily have been there.

Added to that they've probably got a lot more feedback from unintended beta testers than they'd have got from a smaller group and it begins to look like a shrewd move.

Maybe Slysoft will think about doing it this way in the future, I don't know.

It's good PR for their product though and it's definitely got me hooked.:)

Wombler

SamuriHL

1st October 2007, 21:33

Ahh right so maybe there's a bit more work to be done than I thought.

It'll be worth the wait though.:)

I think the leaked beta will actually work in their favour as it's generated a lot of discussion about their product and created a good deal of eager anticipation that wouldn't necessarily have been there.

Added to that they've probably got a lot more feedback from unintended beta testers than they'd have got from a smaller group and it begins to look like a shrewd move.

Maybe Slysoft will think about doing it this way in the future, I don't know.

It's good PR for their product though and it's definitely got me hooked.:)

Wombler

You could be right, but, I know for a fact they were not happy about the leak. However, one of the private beta testers simply made a mistake in posting it. And it does seem like the "damage" has been largely non-existent. People now know that the reason Slysoft was silent on titles like Blade HoC and others was that they were working on the AI Scanner function that will hopefully deal with all copy protections. And yes, since it was leaked, a lot of us have been playing around with it giving them some feedback. The problem is that some people expected assistance with the beta when things didn't work which is a bit much to ask for...especially when the beta wasn't intended for release. So that part is probably frustrating. Nonetheless, most of the things I've read from people have been positive. Since I'm a developer I *understand* the concept of what BETA means and so I had no qualms at all about trying it out. Others expecting this leaked beta to be as polished as other "public" betas will be disappointed. The problems I encountered were rather severe in terms of discs failing. And those are discs that shouldn't have failed. Blade HoC...no problem except with an issue found by someone where the video gets jumpy when the disc is opened by DVD Shrink directly. But, good Lord...*YOU CAN OPEN THE DISC DIRECTLY WITH SHRINK!!!* That in and of itself is amazing. When the bugs are worked out, think about being able to handle ARccOS, RipGuard, ProtectDVD Video, etc on the fly so that even Shrink can open the disc directly without problems. AMAZING!!!

setarip_old

1st October 2007, 22:06

SamuriHL

1st October 2007, 22:07

Forgive me for noting this, but during the last dozen or more posts, you've hijacked this thread and turned it into speculation and "cheerleading" back and forth between yourselves, for a thusfar non-existent program.

Was not my intention. I'll drop any discussion of AnyDVD from this thread.

blutach

2nd October 2007, 02:57

SamuriHL

2nd October 2007, 03:02

Thanks, blutach. The reason I brought up AnyDVD was because it was implementing a new decryption method. However, if people feel I'm hijacking the thread, I will refrain from commenting further.

blutach

2nd October 2007, 03:10

I don't think that at all. Please continue.

Regards

SamuriHL

2nd October 2007, 03:13

Ok, thanks. Nothing new until we get a public beta or final release I think.

Wombler

2nd October 2007, 09:48

@setarip_old

I find the discussion very on topic about new decrypting methods (and by corollary how software comanies are responding to them).

Even more to the point, it is Wombler's thread and no forum rule has been broken. To admonish him (and SamuriHL) for discussing items of interest to him in that thread is illogical.

Regards

Thanks for that Blutach.

I'm a relatively new user here but I appreciate and abide by any guidance recieved from the mods. on any of the forums I frequent.

I'd hate to think I'm annoying other users or breaking forum rules and your proactive response is reassuring as I've only just read setarip_old's post.

If I ever inadvertantly stray over the line though please let me know as that is most definitely not my intention.
:thanks:

Regards,

Wombler

Wombler

2nd October 2007, 11:25

@Wombler and SamuriHL

I'm sure interested members are already aware that a new version of AnyDVD will eventually be released, at which time we'll all know its actual capabilities, however:

Forgive me for noting this, but during the last dozen or more posts, you've hijacked this thread and turned it into speculation and "cheerleading" back and forth between yourselves, for a thusfar non-existent program.

Just a friendly suggestion from a fellow poster, with no ill will intended: Perhaps such conversations are better suited for PMs?

This thread is not restricted to discussion of AnyDVD and was originally started in relation to the similar methods employed by DVDFab. It just happens to be the case that recent comments have been in this direction.

I must admit I'm a bit bemused at being accused of hijacking my own thread but I was merely replying to whomever made a response to my thread.

The fact that recently Samuri_HL chose to participate and others did not is in my mind somewhat irrelevant as the thread is open to anyone for reply.

You are more than free to add comments you feel are relevant to this thread and indeed I would welcome this from anyone as this is inherently why it exists.

Users should not be made to feel reluctant to post when they haven't flaunted any forum rules and I'm surprised and disappointed that you've chosen to criticise unjustly.

Ultimately this is a matter for yourself however I do respect your right to your own opinion.

I'm very grateful to Doom9 and for providing this forum where people can collectively discuss such issues and I feel it would detract from the forum if on topic stuff has to start going to PM.

Regards,

Wombler

setarip_old

2nd October 2007, 17:13

As I said - and I don't know that I could have made it any clearer:Just a friendly suggestion from a fellow poster, with no ill will intended... I made no implication of "authority", as I'm obviously not a moderator at the Doom9 Forums - just an expression of my interpretation/opinion of the then-most-recent dozen or so consecutive posts. The fact that moderator "blutach" doesn't share my opinion is not surprising.

(Just as a point of information, the fact that one person starts a thread doesn't preclude the possibility that the very same person can participate in "hijacking" it by altering the topic of discussion)

BTW - I guess we'll soon hear whether any new protection schemes have reared their ugly heads on this day of new releases (Which include a Disney release) ;>}

Wombler

2nd October 2007, 19:59

As I said - and I don't know that I could have made it any clearer:I made no implication of "authority", as I'm obviously not a moderator at the Doom9 Forums - just an expression of my interpretation/opinion of the then-most-recent dozen or so consecutive posts. The fact that moderator "blutach" doesn't share my opinion is not surprising.

(Just as a point of information, the fact that one person starts a thread doesn't preclude the possibility that the very same person can participate in "hijacking" it by altering the topic of discussion)

BTW - I guess we'll soon hear whether any new protection schemes have reared their ugly heads on this day of new releases (Which include a Disney release) ;>}

I read your post in its entirety, not just your disclaimer. :)

But I've no wish to turn this in to an argument and in fact it's the exact opposite.

No harm done and I'm happy to get back to discussing the topic in question.

Having said that though I think we've reached a temporary hiatus anyway and as Samuri_HL has said there won't be much to report until the next AnyDVD beta.

Who knows what will happen with other programs though in the meantime.

Wombler

Harn7Race

2nd October 2007, 23:01

@setarip_old

Au contraire! Rule 6 strongly shows that we respect the rights of copyright holders.

Please do not make meaningless posts - observe rule 3.

Regards

Gday Blu

You've mentioned specific rule numbers.
Could you please give me the links to where these numbered rules are ?

Tah

ojdidit

2nd October 2007, 23:12

Harn:

Take a look at the forum subjects screen (back click once) at the top of the page click FORUM RULES

Harn7Race

2nd October 2007, 23:16

:thanks:

Ps. I'd hate to get on old Blu's bad side.

:)

blutach

3rd October 2007, 01:34

A link to forum rules is at the top of every post and forum.

Now, this very interesting thread IS starting to meander OT. No-one's on my bad side, except the forces of evil.

Regards

SamuriHL

3rd October 2007, 01:45

Let's get this discussion back on track even though there's nothing really new to post.

First, we have RipIt4Me which as we all know is no longer supported. That being said, the scanning technology it employs is so powerful that until recently it could handle ALL known protections. It's only been stopped by ProtectDVD Video's massive corruption of the UDF file system. This makes it so RipIt4Me can't scan the disc properly. Nonetheless, this should be considered the grandfather of scanner based copying programs.

Next up we have PathPlayer that's built into DVDFab. Recently it has been changed so that if the "use when necessary" option is selected, it will attempt to do the disc without it. If an error is encountered, it enables the PathPlayer engine and restarts the copy. This should speed things up when PathPlayer isn't necessary. However, when it IS necessary it should be a pretty powerful copying solution. I believe this technology also scans the titlesets and only tries to copy valid PGCs thereby bypassing any copy protection found. I BELIEVE I saw recently in the changelogs that it's no longer relying on the windows file system to read the UDF file system on the disc. This should allow it to handle ProtectDVD Video a lot better in theory one would imagine. All in all, this seems like a very powerful technology.

Finally we have a near rewrite of AnyDVD to use the AI Scanner technology as they're calling it. Since we only know a little bit from the leaked beta, there's not much to really say here. When it's enabled it scans the disc for all playable titlesets and makes only the playable titlesets available to any program that's accessing the disc. This should allow things like DVD Shrink to access discs directly that couldn't be done before. That's REALLY sweet IMO. We will need to wait for a public beta or finalized release before we can really see what this technology is capable of. No one knows when that'll be, but, the little demonstration we've seen from this current beta is HIGHLY impressive.

Those are the programs I know about. There are others out there such as DVD95Copy but I don't know anything about them. If anyone else has knowledge of other programs that are using a scanner like technology for backups, I'd be quite interested to hear about them.

blutach

3rd October 2007, 02:09

@SamuriHL

Without wishing to advise Fab or Slysoft, scanning the disk beforehand can get you only so far. Yes, you might get a clue from seeing PGCs with all those uncalled cell commands that the disk has advanced protection and decide to turn the scanner on (there are other upfront tests that can be made, to be sure).

However, just focussing on pathplaying/AI for the minute, an upfront scan alone of menu buttons (found in the navpacks of menu VOBs) and PGCs (found in the IFOs) is bound to fail where menus are authored into the titles domain (which is not at all unusual, espeically for special features). Then, the program is required to scan all the VOBs first to find BOVs and so build a picture of the full disk. This can only be done after the VOBs have been ripped.

Otherwise, if I am a developer of protection systems, all I'd do is pop the menus in titles. The (upfront) scanner would come along and find no titles referenced. Therefore, scanning needs to be post rip (as Fab has now discovered in its latest beta).

Another thing that scanners can find issues with is LOTS (and I mean thousands) of buttons as seen in game DVDs and multi button sets (where the buttons change over time the PGC is played back). The followers in RipIt4Me's footsteps are also going to need to overcome this hurdle as the scan could end up taking longer than the rip, even on very powerful PCs.

Regards

SamuriHL

3rd October 2007, 02:17

Interesting information. Thank God I'm not developing any of those technologies. :D I'm not entirely sure how the AI Scanner code FULLY works as I have no relation with Slysoft at all. I'm sure there's probably more to it than my simple explanation. But you do point out some interesting problems that need to be overcome. It'll be very very interesting to see how Slysoft deals with this. I don't expect either of these technologies to be flawless their first time out. :) That is apparent with both the first incarnation of both PathPlayer and the leaked AnyDVD beta. However, I suspect that over time both technologies will continue to improve as they are challenged by new protections. This is just a new escalation. Although, R4M has done QUITE well up until recently, so, it CAN be done. :)

setarip_old

3rd October 2007, 02:32

It seems to me, that based on the recent successful updates of some rippers that are now apparently able to deal with the overall concept of "ProtectDVD Video", it will be quite some time before yet another new concept protection scheme shows up for DVDs.

1) Bad/Protected sectoring has been addressed.

2) Fake .IFOs, .BUPs, and .VOBs have been addressed.

3) False directory entries have been addressed.

4) DVD-only players don't have the "intelligence" (keys) built-in as do HD or BluRay players.

I'm certainly not an expert in the field of encrypting DVDs but, based on the above, it may just be that we've seen the last of the DVD protection concepts.

Therefore, at least for the near term, I can't see any direct or immediate additional benefit arising from the creation of either "PathPlayer" or "AI Scanner". The programs incorporating these methods may just prove to be alternatives to already-existing solutions.

Perhaps we'll all smile if, based on the most recent change regarding "PathPlayer" (Will not be activated unless "normal" ripping fails), it never has to be activated ;>}

SamuriHL

3rd October 2007, 02:39

I think the theory is that neither want to have to update their respective programs every time a new version of a protection is released. All programs had to be updated for Blade HoC even though they all had dealt with ProtectDVD Video before. It was a new variation. The PathPlayer and AI Scanner options *THEORETICALLY* could handle the new variant of the protection without having to wait for the companies to update it. That's how I see it anyway.

setarip_old

3rd October 2007, 02:47

even though they all had dealt with ProtectDVD Video beforeI don't believe that's correct (based on the posts at this forum)...

SamuriHL

3rd October 2007, 03:03

I don't believe that's correct (based on the posts at this forum)...

No? I thought all the major rippers dealt with the German version of this insipid protection, but, I could certainly be wrong. I know AnyDVD did at the very least.

setarip_old

3rd October 2007, 03:50

Based on a quick search that I just performed, it appears that you are correct...

SamuriHL

3rd October 2007, 03:52

Based on a quick search that I just performed, it appears that you are correct...

Thanks for checking on that. I wasn't positive but I thought they had all dealt with it before. What this means is that variations will need updated programs unless PathPlayer and/or AI Scanner technologies can be perfected to deal with them automatically. It's a lofty goal, as Blu pointed out, but, it'll get better over time.

setarip_old

3rd October 2007, 04:16

Actually, great encouragement should be taken from the fact that not only did DVD95Copy properly handle "Blade - House of Chthon", it also properly handled "Full of It", which contained a different variation of the "protection we love to hate".

I say it's different because "Full of It" gagged RipIt4Me completely, whereas "Blade - House of Chthon" "only" generated a ton of "Unable to copy .IFO VTS_xx_xx" messages...

The fact that DVD95Copy can process a variation that didn't exist when the program was last updated indicates to me that DVD95Copy's present methodology is perhaps thorough enough to address the entire capability of this type of protection

SamuriHL

3rd October 2007, 04:19

Wishful thinking, perhaps, but, we can hope. I really hope they just stop all this nonsense and let us back up our DVDs without hassle, but, that's REALLY wishful thinking. :) Then again, placing hope as I do on PathPlayer and AI Scanner technologies to end this nonsense is also wishful thinking on my part, most likely.

Wombler

3rd October 2007, 20:05

However, just focussing on pathplaying/AI for the minute, an upfront scan alone of menu buttons (found in the navpacks of menu VOBs) and PGCs (found in the IFOs) is bound to fail where menus are authored into the titles domain (which is not at all unusual, espeically for special features). Then, the program is required to scan all the VOBs first to find BOVs and so build a picture of the full disk. This can only be done after the VOBs have been ripped.

Ahh that explains something I'd wondered about.

When you rip certain discs with PathPlayer then load them up in PgcEdit, PgcEdit still finds loads of uncalled PGCs that can be safely removed but only takes seconds to find them.

I'd wondered why if they were that easy to find that PathPlayer hadn't removed them already.

Wombler

Wombler

3rd October 2007, 20:14

Based on a quick search that I just performed, it appears that you are correct...

Yeah I think it first appeared quite a while ago on 'Das Parfum' or something like that.

I don't speak German so I didn't bother buying this disc despite the technical interest.

It's only the most recent variant of ProtectDVD that has prompted and possibly necessitated new techniques.

Wombler

Wombler

3rd October 2007, 20:44

It seems to me, that based on the recent successful updates of some rippers that are now apparently able to deal with the overall concept of "ProtectDVD Video", it will be quite some time before yet another new concept protection scheme shows up for DVDs.

That's always hard to tell as every time decrypting software is updated then that revised software becomes the specific target that they seek to circumvent.

The fact that there have been so many updates required over the last year or so by all the companies with decrypting products is in some way testament to that.

I'm certainly not an expert in the field of encrypting DVDs but, based on the above, it may just be that we've seen the last of the DVD protection concepts.

That certainly is possible but with the goal posts being such a moving target I'm certainly glad that they've developed (what I feel will ultimately be) a better technique to fall back on.

Therefore, at least for the near term, I can't see any direct or immediate additional benefit arising from the creation of either "PathPlayer" or "AI Scanner". The programs incorporating these methods may just prove to be alternatives to already-existing solutions.

Perhaps we'll all smile if, based on the most recent change regarding "PathPlayer" (Will not be activated unless "normal" ripping fails), it never has to be activated ;>}

Ironically PathPlayer et al might make this a self fulfilling prophesy as they might not bother introducing new protections that can be circumvented with software using now existing AI techniques.

What they're really after are methods that block all types of decryption software but this is in my mind a fruitless and at best temporary solution.

I must admit I do find the battle of wits interesting though. :)

Wombler

blutach

4th October 2007, 04:25

@wombler - having uncalled PGCs does not always mean there are BOVs that call them. In fact, for some reason, most commercial DVDs are authored "inefficiently".

Regards

SamuriHL

4th October 2007, 04:28

@wombler - having uncalled PGCs does not always mean there are BOVs that call them. In fact, for some reason, most commercial DVDs are authored "inefficiently".

Regards

That's absolutely true. There are several DVDs out there that have PGCs that have no BOVs at all. Some are intentional.

HyperHacker

4th October 2007, 05:38

What they're really after are methods that block all types of decryption software but this is in my mind a fruitless and at best temporary solution.Problem is, players are decryption software. :p

Wombler

5th October 2007, 10:00

@wombler - having uncalled PGCs does not always mean there are BOVs that call them. In fact, for some reason, most commercial DVDs are authored "inefficiently".

Regards

Cheers Blutach but I wasn't actually thinking of it that way. I was looking at it the opposite way around and I'm sure you'll keep me right on this.

I was assuming that uncalled PGCs were those that are not called via BOVs or other methods.

It just seemed strange to me that if the AI scan is purportedly following all the playable paths that some uncalled (never played) stuff makes it through.

Am I over simplifying things here or have I missed something obvious?

Wombler

blutach

5th October 2007, 13:28

Wombler

5th October 2007, 20:05

No. An uncalled PGC is one that is not referenced by another PGC or a button (menu/BOV/remote).

Almost every commercial DVD has uncalled PGCs - sometimes 100s of them - even 1000s on ARccOS DVDs.

Regards

Got it! :)

Thanks for that.

Yeah I've got into the habit now of scanning all rips with PgcEdit before I do anything else.

As you say it's amazing the amount of stuff it can eliminate on certain discs.

Wombler

SamuriHL

9th October 2007, 01:07

For those that are interested, it seems Slysoft has released their new version. Enjoy!

setarip_old

9th October 2007, 03:01

And now the countdown begins - to see if or when the new technology of both AnyDVD and DVFab HD Decrypter will actually HAVE to be called into play due to the creation of yet another new copy protection concept...

SamuriHL

9th October 2007, 03:03

We shall see. From what I can see, this new beta version seems quite impressive. Very powerful.

setarip_old

9th October 2007, 03:20

jeanl

9th October 2007, 03:52

They're effective, once they come up with updates!!! :D :D
But look at the change history, every release there's a fix for a "new protection scheme"! Presumably, they need a more future-proof solution, like the one in ripit4me!
Jeanl

setarip_old

9th October 2007, 04:16

Wombler

9th October 2007, 09:39

@jeanl

My point is, how can anyone state that these "new technologies" are any more effective than the present versions of decrypters, when the present decrypters are, as of today, capable of handling ALL presently existing protection schemes?

These technologies, which appear to be suggesting that they use A.I. and would, therefore, automatically adapt to new protection schemes, would first have to be able to overcome a copy protection scheme that foils the present decrypters, as proof that they, in fact, provide new and additional capabilities via this concept of tracing.

If, without "fixes", they prove to provide just a different way to decrypt the same DVDs, then in my estimation, they will have been proven to be a failed concept.

I think the point is that AI techniques inherently overcome schemes that foil present decrypters (including variants of current protections yet to emerge).

In other words they've moved the goal posts substantially and simultaneously reduced the potential need for updates as pointed out by Jeanl.

As a concept I can't see anything wrong with this.

Whether it ultimately fails in practice is a different matter but I think that's extremely unlikely given the dedication and determination of the various programmers.

Slysoft and Fengtao/Ting are extremely expert in this field and if both independently come up with a similar solution then you can be certain at least that it's a valid concept.

Wombler

setarip_old

9th October 2007, 09:44

In other words they've moved the goal posts substantially and simultaneously reduced the potential need for updatesAs I've already stated, there is absolutely no evidence of this at the present time.Whether it ultimately fails in practice is a different matterNo, it's ALL that matters. What value is a new decrypter concept if it "ultimately doesn't work?

Wombler

9th October 2007, 09:52

As I've already stated, there is absolutely no evidence of this at the present time...

There isn't any evidence that it won't work either.

Time will tell.

Wombler

setarip_old

9th October 2007, 10:14

The following is a quote from earlier in this thread, regarding AnyDVD with "AI Scanner:From what I can see, this new beta version seems quite impressive. Very powerful.The inference from such a statement would be that it has been proven capable of doing things that earlier versions (of AnyDVD and/or other decrypters) couldn't.
I raised my question in response to that statement -and I still would ask:

How can anyone state that these "new technologies" are any more effective than the present versions of decrypters, when the present decrypters are, as of today, capable of handling ALL presently existing protection schemes?

These new concepts can only be evaluated when a new protection scheme arises, that cannot be dealt with by today's versions of existing decrypters.

linx05

9th October 2007, 10:47

setarip_old, copy-protection schemes can be validated when using only the AI Scanner or PathPlayer. If the present copy-protection can be broken with either versions, then it may hold a good chance at defeating new ones.

blutach

9th October 2007, 12:34

bourtzovlakas

9th October 2007, 15:58

SamuriHL

9th October 2007, 16:08

I'm at a loss to understand the following:

If, as of today, ALL known copy protection schemes have been successfully dealt with by the likes of DVD95Copy, DVDFab HD Decrypter without using "PathPlayer" and, presumably, AnyDVD without "AI Scanner" - how has anybody determined the effectiveness of either "PathPlayer" or "AI Scanner"?

Because AnyDVD was not updated to handle the latest protections as found on Blade HoC, Full of It, and a few others. The Scanner was used instead.

SamuriHL

9th October 2007, 16:11

The following is a quote from earlier in this thread, regarding AnyDVD with "AI Scanner:The inference from such a statement would be that it has been proven capable of doing things that earlier versions (of AnyDVD and/or other decrypters) couldn't.
I raised my question in response to that statement -and I still would ask:

How can anyone state that these "new technologies" are any more effective than the present versions of decrypters, when the present decrypters are, as of today, capable of handling ALL presently existing protection schemes?

These new concepts can only be evaluated when a new protection scheme arises, that cannot be dealt with by today's versions of existing decrypters.

Once again, AnyDVD was *NOT* updated to handle protections released in the last few weeks. instead they rely on the Scanner to deal with them. And it works.

setarip_old

9th October 2007, 16:36

The first time statement that the "AI Scanner" technology properly processed the likes of "Blade - House of Chthon" is encouraging.

As stated by "Wombler":Time will tell.And, as I said:And now the countdown begins - to see if or when the new technology of both AnyDVD and DVFab HD Decrypter will actually HAVE to be called into play due to the creation of yet another new copy protection concept...

SamuriHL

9th October 2007, 16:49

That is certainly possible. Slysoft said in the release notes that this new version of AnyDVD was basically a large rewrite. It seems that they don't want to deal with updating the old heuristics scanner any more and feel that the AI Scanner will be the future of ripping for them. I agree with the time will tell statement as no one can know for sure what kinds of copy protection junk they'll dream up next. I'm sure the game of cat and mouse will probably continue. But who knows...maybe we won't need as many updates. Look at R4M...that hasn't been updated in months and is still going strong minus one protection scheme. That's a pretty good record IMO.

setarip_old

9th October 2007, 16:57

Look at R4M...that hasn't been updated in months and is still going strong minus one protection scheme. That's a pretty good record IMO.Absolutely!

SamuriHL

9th October 2007, 17:01

Wombler

9th October 2007, 18:46

The scanner technology is what formed the backbone of RipIt4Me, which worked spectacularly well at getting round schemes because it acted like a real DVD player. Usually RipIt4Me got round new protections within hours of them emerging and in many instances, RipIt4Me needed no updates to handle new protection schemes. I credit the scanner technology for this.

SlySoft and Fengtao are now adopting this idea, so I can only see it helping.

Regards

I've nothing but admiration for RipIt4Me and all those associated with it.

It's a testament to how good this program was that it's still coping admirably with almost all titles.

A superb piece of programming in my mind.

Wombler

SamuriHL

9th October 2007, 18:51

I have to agree. It's a brilliant piece of programming that has stood the test of time. No other piece of software to date can say that.

Wombler

9th October 2007, 19:41

Better compatibility with existing transcoding programs(even on-the-fly) might also be a benefit from the new approach....

For example, AnyDVD handles almost every new protection scheme, by using the ripper function...
...but, on-the-fly function still lacks compatibility with DVD Shrink....

Also, Fengtao said somewhere that the new approach produces a "cleaner" output overall...

Very good points.

Additional functionality and features such as these make the new versions winners irrespective of eagerly anticipated ripping improvements.

Wombler

SamuriHL

9th October 2007, 19:48

The AI Scanner has increased OTF functionality with DVD Shrink. It's still not perfect, but, a lot of ARccOS protected titles that Shrink had issues with can now be opened directly. That's definitely a good thing. There are some titles that still have issues. For instance, Blade House of Chthon can be opened directly with Shrink, but, the output is screwed up. So, it's not perfect, but, it's improving.

Wombler

9th October 2007, 19:52

One thing I just want to clarify as I don't think it's obvious. In DVDFab, the PathPlayer technology, by default, is only used when it runs into a disc it can't rip. By default in AnyDVD, the AI Scanner is used on all copy protected discs. Even on "older" discs that the heuristics engine already dealt with. You can, of course, turn the AI Scanner off and use the old heuristics engine, but, by default the new version of AnyDVD is *ALWAYS* using the AI Scanner.

I'd like to see PathPlayer reach the stage where it's reliable, effective and quick enough to be the default ripping method.

Slysofts approach is impressive though and I like the idea of the ripping on the fly approach.

Out of curiosity when ripping to hard disk with the latest beta of AnyDVD is the overall ripping time any longer with AI Scanner turned on compared to when it's turned off?

Or in other words is there an overhead associated with using AI Scanner?

Wombler

SamuriHL

9th October 2007, 19:59

No, it's incredibly fast. And it has a caching mechanism so that when you put a disc in, it's scanned, and the results are cache so the next time you put the disc in it doesn't have to rescan it. Once the disc is scanned(and I've not seen any take more than 10 seconds personally, but, there probably are some out there that take longer), ripping is no faster or slower than it was before.

As for pathplayer, i hope it keeps evolving, as well. The more options out there that don't need to be constantly updated the better off everyone is.

Wombler

9th October 2007, 20:47

No, it's incredibly fast. And it has a caching mechanism so that when you put a disc in, it's scanned, and the results are cache so the next time you put the disc in it doesn't have to rescan it. Once the disc is scanned(and I've not seen any take more than 10 seconds personally, but, there probably are some out there that take longer), ripping is no faster or slower than it was before.

Wow... I didn't realise it was just quite as fast as that! :eek:

There must be something very clever going on there given the time it takes other software to do this.

Doesn't seem possible but obviously it must be. :confused:

Did that 10 second maximum include difficult titles such as Blade HoC?

Wombler

SamuriHL

9th October 2007, 23:15

Wow... I didn't realise it was just quite as fast as that! :eek:

There must be something very clever going on there given the time it takes other software to do this.

Doesn't seem possible but obviously it must be. :confused:

Did that 10 second maximum include difficult titles such as Blade HoC?

Wombler

Yup, I scanned Blade HoC with it, no problems at all. There are titles that are going to DEFINITELY take longer, as I said. But, the discs I've thrown at it have all been pretty darn quick and I don't have an uber fast machine. There are several levels of AI Scanner, the default being "very fast". This should handle every disc out there.

linx05

9th October 2007, 23:30

I didn't know AnyDVD had a caching mechanism. That's pretty handy. I've set mine to Deep Scan. It only takes a few seconds.

SamuriHL

9th October 2007, 23:33

I didn't know AnyDVD had a caching mechanism. That's pretty handy. I've set mine to Deep Scan. It only takes a few seconds.

The cache creates very small files...say about 3-4k per disc. This allows AnyDVD to skip rescanning those tougher titles when you've already done so. Seems to work pretty well from what I can tell. As for Deep Scan, that shouldn't be necessary. When I asked Slysoft about it, they said that if Very Fast doesn't do it, it's probably a bug. :) Nonetheless, I'm glad those options are there. Who knows what protections we might run into that could require it.

Wombler

10th October 2007, 22:05

The cache creates very small files...say about 3-4k per disc. This allows AnyDVD to skip rescanning those tougher titles when you've already done so. Seems to work pretty well from what I can tell. As for Deep Scan, that shouldn't be necessary. When I asked Slysoft about it, they said that if Very Fast doesn't do it, it's probably a bug. :) Nonetheless, I'm glad those options are there. Who knows what protections we might run into that could require it.

That seems like a very positive sign to me.

It sounds to me as if they've already factored in the potential for as yet unrealised protections that could potentially circumvent the basic AI Scanner model.

It's been a long time since we've seen proactive rather than reactive updates and both SlySoft and Fengtao/Ting seem to have turned the tide.

Wombler

SamuriHL

10th October 2007, 22:47

Yea, we shall see. Let's wait and see what new protections they cook up. I don't expect we'll see anything made to defeat PathPlayer or AI Scanner for quite a few months as they'll have to analyze it and then come up with a way to defeat it. That's not instantaneous. So, for a while, at least, we can relax I think. :)

blutach

10th October 2007, 23:26

DrinkLyeAndDie

11th October 2007, 05:12

How does creating a cache of a specific disk that has already been ripped make it proactive for other DVDs? Confused.

I think you need to separate the two points. The method which is being employed to handle the protections is pro-active. The caching, IMHO, is only useful for when you may pop the disc in sometime down the road to view said disc again. Since it's already been scanned before why run a full scan on the disc yet again? In the case of a HTPC this could be considered a very useful feature for on-the-fly viewing from the original disc. Remember there is more to AnyDVD than just ripping your legally purchased and owned discs. :)

Wombler

11th October 2007, 09:35

How does creating a cache of a specific disk that has already been ripped make it proactive for other DVDs? Confused.

Now, if it created an external database of these cache files and called home when a DVD was inserted, tnat would be another matter.

Regards

Sorry for the confusion.

It was me that used the term proactive which was prompted by SlySoft's inclusion of the as yet unnecessary (according to SlySoft) deep scan options.

I was referring though to the approach adopted by both companies in developing similar systems which are intended to defeat future unknown protections.

I'm normally fairly lucid with my posts but perhaps I could have been a bit clearer.:)

Wombler

blutach

11th October 2007, 11:15

Thanks guys for the clarifications.

Regards

SamuriHL

12th October 2007, 02:35

Wombler

12th October 2007, 09:20

If anyone's interested, the final version of AnyDVD is out. 6.1.8.4. It contains a nifty new info collection function where it zips up the IFOs, AnyDVD status window, and an extensive AnyDVD log file that includes filter driver information plus information about the titlesets on the disc. The zip file can be emailed to Slysoft support when problems are encountered. Gotta love that!

DVDFab has had this IFO zip feature as well for a few weeks now. It was included in response to certain recent discs with apparent multigigabyte IFOs that were too large to email.

I don't know if the SlySoft version is more comprehensive though.

Wombler

SamuriHL

12th October 2007, 13:36

DVDFab has had this IFO zip feature as well for a few weeks now. It was included in response to certain recent discs with apparent multigigabyte IFOs that were too large to email.

I don't know if the SlySoft version is more comprehensive though.

Wombler

From what I can see it does more than simply zip the IFOs. It gives the status window text, the AnyDVD log that now contains filter drivers that are installed plus information about the disc, and a few other diagnostic things that could potentially help them troubleshoot. It's a welcome addition I think. According to the Slysoft forum, it does look as though a regression bug has been found with Win2k. Currently Win2k owners will get a bunch of error messages when starting AnyDVD. They are looking into it.

jinjin_jp

13th October 2007, 17:47

Hi, I have interest and tried to use DVDFabHDDDecrypter(3.2.1.0) and AnyDVD(6.1.8.4).
Both seems to be changed excluding new scanner function.
Protected cells remain in VTS overview with replaced, The last version which I tested i.e; DVDFabHDDDecrypter(3.1.2.0b) and AnyDVD(6.1.4.3) removed protected cells in VTS overview.
Does it have any purpose?

About "Path player" I felt strange.
It is not for BadSector but for UnplayanleCells?
Even if set Disable, it shows "potential bad sector protections are removed!".
When Enable, it addly shows "Unplayable cell is removed!".
Even if it Disable, several DVDs of ARccOS or RipGuard can be ripped without problem, and BadSectors's cell are replaced.
But "Attack Force" can't if Disable, and it can if Enable. I felt EnableWhenNeed is little inconvinient, it must restart from first so have loss of time.
Ver.3.1.2.0b which doesn't have "Path player" could rip this DVD without problem.
The reason of this failure to remove Bad Sectors when Disable is mis-recognize?
It shows that potential bad sector protections are 5. But AnyDVD shows 6, and RipIt4Me 7.
Oppositely "Path player" mis-recognize playable cells as unplauable in "8 BELOW". Ripped file doesn't involve extras (unopened scene).

More differences (perhaps small) are between DVDFab and AnyDVD and RipIt4Me. But not examined yet.

Regards.

Wombler

13th October 2007, 20:17

About "Path player" I felt strange.
It is not for BadSector but for UnplayanleCells?
Even if set Disable, it shows "potential bad sector protections are removed!".

The program is designed to remove protections. The way it does it can be altered but it will always remove the protection no matter which choice you select.

When Enable, it addly shows "Unplayable cell is removed!".
Even if it Disable, several DVDs of ARccOS or RipGuard can be ripped without problem, and BadSectors's cell are replaced.
But "Attack Force" can't if Disable, and it can if Enable. I felt EnableWhenNeed is little inconvinient, it must restart from first so have loss of time.

Unfortunately you lose some time at the moment and that is a disadvantage. I believe Fengtao/Ting will develop PathPlayer to the stage where it's fast enough and reliable enough that it will always be used.

AnyDVD is very fast already so we know this is possible.

Ver.3.1.2.0b which doesn't have "Path player" could rip this DVD without problem.
The reason of this failure to remove Bad Sectors when Disable is mis-recognize?

That is probably an unexpected result of the way the program has been altered.

It shows that potential bad sector protections are 5. But AnyDVD shows 6, and RipIt4Me 7.
Oppositely "Path player" mis-recognize playable cells as unplauable in "8 BELOW". Ripped file doesn't involve extras (unopened scene).

Just because it identifies cells that may be protected doesn't mean that they actually are. Different methods of detection give different results but as long as the software eventually confirms those that are really protected then it doesn't matter how many potentially protected cells are identified at the start.

More differences (perhaps small) are between DVDFab and AnyDVD and RipIt4Me. But not examined yet.

They are both great programs but with slightly different features.

Depending on your needs you may find one program suits you better than the other.

Wombler

Wombler

13th October 2007, 20:55

From what I can see it does more than simply zip the IFOs. It gives the status window text, the AnyDVD log that now contains filter drivers that are installed plus information about the disc, and a few other diagnostic things that could potentially help them troubleshoot. It's a welcome addition I think.

I've suggested to Fengtao that they add something similar to the save IFO option in DVDFab HD Decrypter.
He thinks it's a good idea and it's now going to be added into the next version!

Wombler

SamuriHL

13th October 2007, 21:40

I've suggested to Fengtao that they add something similar to the save IFO option in DVDFab HD Decrypter.
He thinks it's a good idea and it's now going to be added into the next version!

Wombler

Awesome. It's a very good thing to have.

jinjin_jp

14th October 2007, 00:50

@Wombler
Thanks for explanation. DVDFab seems not to be stable.

About AnyDVD,
when simply copy-paste or combined DVDDecrypter, some sectors and V/C-ID are jumped. Is it legal ?
For example, if Cell_2 has BadSector,
Cell_1 V/C-ID=1/1 sector= 0 to 9 => not changed
Cell_2 V/C-ID=1/2 sector=10 to 19 => replaced to V/C-ID=1/1
Cell_3 V/C-ID=1/3 sector=20 to 29 => not changed
So in ripped files, V/C-ID jumps tp 1/3 from 1/1 and sector=10 to 19 doesn't exist.
When used AnuDVD Ripper, it seems to be obviously legal.
Cell_1 V/C-ID=1/1 sector= 0 to 9 => not changed
Cell_2 V/C-ID=1/2 sector=10 to 19 => replaced to V/C-ID=1/1
Cell_3 V/C-ID=1/3 sector=20 to 29 => altered to V/C-ID=1/2 sector=10 to 19 (moved)

Regards.

blutach

14th October 2007, 03:32

@jinjin_jp

Jumping sectors and VCIDs is legal. Of course, there will be STC discontinuities and non-seamless cells at the cell 2 boundary. Now, if the result has sectors 10-19 in it and they have not been fixed to make them readable (eg by replacing them with stuffing packs), then you would reach cell 3 and have playback problems.

More elegant is to remove all tiny cells from the PGC.

Regards

jinjin_jp

14th October 2007, 03:55

@blutach
Thanks for the explanation. I understand.

I remember RipGuard has similar feature, it has sectors which has no V/C-ID before V/C-ID=1/1.

Regards.

setarip_old

14th October 2007, 04:04

"SamuriHL" stated:Because AnyDVD was not updated to handle the latest protections as found on Blade HoC, Full of It, and a few others.

"jinjin_p"stated:I have interest and tried to use DVDFabHDDDecrypter(3.2.1.0) and AnyDVD(6.1.8.4).
Both seems to be changed excluding new scanner function.
Protected cells remain in VTS overview with replaced, The last version which I tested i.e; DVDFabHDDDecrypter(3.1.2.0b) and AnyDVD(6.1.4.3) removed protected cells in VTS overview.

If I understand both statements correctly, it would appear that they can't both be correct...

(I added red color and bold type in the quotes)

SamuriHL

14th October 2007, 04:16

"jinjin_p"stated:

Both seems to be changed excluding new scanner function.

If I understand both statements correctly, it would appear that they can't both be correct...

(I added red color and bold type in the quotes)

I'm not sure I fully understand what he's saying there, but, the updates were all in the AI Scanner code. If you disable the AI Scanner, it will fail on Blade HoC quite spectacularly. The old heuristics code has NOT been updated since 6.1.7.4 afaik.

jinjin_jp

14th October 2007, 06:11

What I want to say is like below figure.
(difference remove(older version) and replace(newest version))
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/4965/29322426ni4.th.jpg (http://img187.imageshack.us/my.php?image=29322426ni4.jpg)
***about DVDFabHDDDecrypter, independent on whether PathPlayer is enable or disable.

@SamuriHL
If you disable the AI Scanner,
Where is the setting for choosing disable or enable?
I can't find any setting about AI scanner.

Regards.

jinjin_jp

14th October 2007, 13:00

About "Path player" I felt strange.
It is not for BadSector but for UnplayanleCells?
Even if set Disable, it shows "potential bad sector protections are removed!".
When Enable, it addly shows "Unplayable cell is removed!".

I misunderstood. "Path player" seems to be related with BadSector.
For example "Attach Foece",
when disable (failure to decrypt), it shows
1 fake vts protections are removed!
5 potential bad sector protections are removed!
when enable (succeed to decrypt), it shows
5 fake vts protections are removed!
2 potential bad sector protections are removed!
"Enable" seems to be more complete.
But I feel it strange till that "disable" is inferior than old versions.

Regards.

Wombler

14th October 2007, 14:53

DVDFab seems not to be stable.

DVDFab is very stable as it has been developed and improved over a long period.

There have been no reports of stability issues on any of the support forums.

If you are having difficulties then there must be a problem somewhere else on your system.

Wombler

Wombler

14th October 2007, 14:56

Where is the setting for choosing disable or enable?
I can't find any setting about AI scanner.

Regards.

Click on the settings icon (a small star shaped symbol at the upper right of the window).

There's a separate section for PathPlayer settings and you can change them as you wish from here.

Wombler

SamuriHL

14th October 2007, 15:27

@SamuriHL

Where is the setting for choosing disable or enable?
I can't find any setting about AI scanner.

Regards.

If you go to AnyDVD settings, Video DVD, settings, at the bottom is a drop down for the AI Scanner settings. By default it is set to Very Fast.

jinjin_jp

14th October 2007, 15:36

DVDFab is very stable ...
... there must be a problem somewhere else on your system.
I didn't want to say "not stable" related with system or like.
Its decrypted files doesn't have extras because mis-recognize as unplayable cells. I think it problematic at least now. Perhaps it will be fixed.

Click on the settings icon (a small star shaped symbol at the upper right of the window).
Thanks.
Yes, it is about setting of DVDFabHDDecrypter. I know it.
What I can't find is about AI Scanner of AnyDVD.

Regards.

SamuriHL

14th October 2007, 15:38

What I can't find is about AI Scanner of AnyDVD.

Regards.

See my answer above.

Wombler

14th October 2007, 15:43

IThanks.
Yes, it is about setting of DVDFabHDDecrypter. I know it.
What I can't find is about AI Scanner of AnyDVD.

Regards.

Oops sorry about that.

I mustn't have had my brain in gear. :)

Wombler

jinjin_jp

14th October 2007, 15:47

@SamuriHL
Thanks for the answer. I'll compare them.
(I noticed your answer after my previous post. I need to spend much time for post in English.)

Regards.

SamuriHL

14th October 2007, 16:59

No problem. Good luck. For the record, it's best to leave that setting on default unless you're just testing something. The Very Fast setting works with all known discs so far.

jinjin_jp

14th October 2007, 18:06

I compared enable(very fast) and disable AI Scanner.
When disable, the number of potential bad sector protections is reduced, but there seems to be no problem.
And it is interesting that output is similar to old vesion. (like 6.1.4.3 in figure of post #158)
But I found the bug, it remove(replace) playable cells when enable. There is no problem when disable.

AI Scanner and PathPlayer seem to mis-recognize playable cells as unplayable and remove(replace) sometimes.
Presently AI Scanner is much better than PathPlayer about frequency of mis-recognize.

Regards.

setarip_old

14th October 2007, 18:36

@jinjin_jp

Hi!AI Scanner and PathPlayer seem to mis-recognize playable cells as unplayable and remove(replace) sometimes.Would you please be good enough to state the Region and Title of one or more of the DVDs you've tested, that have yielded these problematic results?

jinjin_jp

15th October 2007, 00:53

＠setarip_old
DVD title : 8 BELOW, Region-2(Japan)
Mis-recognized titles :
(1)VTS_05(title 6,7,8,9,10,11) : extras (unopened scenes), replayed from menu' button.
(2)VTS_07(title 13) : end roll, replayed after main movie when selested Japanese as audio.
(3)VTS_08(title 14) : end roll, replayed after main movie when selested Japanese as audio.
---(2) is replayed when sprm(14)=3072, (3) is replayed when sprm(14) is others.

AI Scaner : remove(replace) (2)
PathPlayer : remove(replace) (1),(2),(3)

When not used AI Scaner and PathPlayer, all remains.

Regards.

blutach

15th October 2007, 01:23

@jinjin_jp

It might be that your excluded titles in DVD Fab are due to missed BOVs. Have you tried in to mess around with the settings. 300/30 seems too fast to pick up BOVs. 300/6 seems better.

Also, and I am not sure if the scanners test this, but they should also always test the first and last navpacks of a cell for BOVs (irrespective of the scan variables) to maximise the chances of BOVs being picked up.

Regards

setarip_old

15th October 2007, 01:32

@jinjin_jp

Thanks for providing details ;>}

Interesting that both would improperly deal with (If your R2 DVD has the same copy protection as R1) the simple "RipGuard" copy protection of this mid-2006 release...

jinjin_jp

15th October 2007, 01:53

It might be that your excluded titles in DVD Fab are due to missed BOVs. Have you tried in to mess around with the settings. 300/30 seems too fast to pick up BOVs. 300/6 seems better.

I tryed 10/1, but the result seems to be same.

Regards.

blutach

15th October 2007, 07:36

10/1 would be bad. It would mean a cell of length 10 seconds or less! Every other would be ignored.

To make for a deeper scan for BOVs, maybe set it to 500/1 (although 6 should catch them, especially if first and last navpacks are scanned).

Regards

Wombler

15th October 2007, 09:45

blutach

15th October 2007, 10:05

More than likely, he is tracing in PgcEdit or DVDRMP or playing and watching registers in Ifoedit (or just playing in a software player).

IIRC, there was at least one DVD that was authored very badly - Freedomland R1 - that when you selected the aspect ratio (it wasn't loaded directly by reading SPRM(14)), the DVD did not let you reselect it and you had to eject and reload. Also on that DVD, IIRC, was some poor authoring of the extras (they were circular, IIRC).

However, to select an audio stream and have certain cells replayed seems totally illogical (and we know that DVDs are not authored this way). A cell command has probably gotten screwed up.

Path Player is new to DVD Fab and AI is new to AnyDVD, so you can expect some teething problems. jinjin should email the developers with his specific concerns.

Regards

jinjin_jp

15th October 2007, 15:42

@blutach

I re-tryed 300/6 and 500/1, but result was same.

@Wombler
Can I ask in what way you are detecting these differences?
Is there software that does this or are you viewing each title manually?
At first confirming what cells are recognized as unplayable cells by DVDFab. DVDFab shows most numbers, and I can know its VTS/PGC/CELL.
Next, comparing original and output of each decrypting software, and confirming each cell is removed(replaced) or remains.
Next, assuming each removed-cell is playable or not by watching replayed movie, and what kind of (extra, roll end, extra).
Next, confirming playable cells which I assumed are actually so by PgcEdit TraceMode as blutach say. But this needs try-and-error.
(PgcEdit is very useful. It can set sprm(14) by Virtual Player Setup, and show gprm and sprm, and replay each cell.)

Regards.

Wombler

15th October 2007, 22:42

Path Player is new to DVD Fab and AI is new to AnyDVD, so you can expect some teething problems. jinjin should email the developers with his specific concerns.

Regards

Funny enough I was thinking that myself. The developers of both DVDFab & AnyDVD would be most interested in his findings.

Wombler

Wombler

15th October 2007, 22:57

@Wombler

At first confirming what cells are recognized as unplayable cells by DVDFab. DVDFab shows most numbers, and I can know its VTS/PGC/CELL.
Next, comparing original and output of each decrypting software, and confirming each cell is removed(replaced) or remains.
Next, assuming each removed-cell is playable or not by watching replayed movie, and what kind of (extra, roll end, extra).
Next, confirming playable cells which I assumed are actually so by PgcEdit TraceMode as blutach say. But this needs try-and-error.
(PgcEdit is very useful. It can set sprm(14) by Virtual Player Setup, and show gprm and sprm, and replay each cell.)

Regards.

Hmmm I was hoping that you had found some easier way of doing it. That sounds rather time consuming.

As Blutach has suggested it would be great if you would contact Fengtao & Ting and Slysoft regarding your results as I'm sure they'll find them very useful.

Slysoft have their own AnyDVD forum (http://forum.slysoft.com/forumdisplay.php?f=18)and Fengtao & Ting are most easily contacted via CDFreaks DVDFab forum (http://club.cdfreaks.com/forumdisplay.php?f=116).

You would be doing us all a favour by reporting these problems.

Wombler

jinjin_jp

16th October 2007, 01:09

I posted this info to each Forum.

Regards.

Wombler

16th October 2007, 09:25

I posted this info to each Forum.

Regards.

Thanks for taking the time to do that.:thanks:

I'm sure the guys here appreciate your efforts.

I'll be interested to see what reponses you get as both SlySoft and Fengtao/Ting are normally exceptionally quick at tackling problems.

Wombler

SamuriHL

16th October 2007, 13:35

Slysoft will probably be a little delayed in getting to this. I've heard they're hard at work on the BD+ and MBKV4 stuff right now. Plus there appears to be a bug in the latest AnyDVD that is not related to the AI Scanner that needs to be fixed. Nonetheless it's very much appreciated that you posted that information and I'm sure they'll take a look at it as soon as they can.

fengtao

17th October 2007, 04:45

Hi jinjin_jp,

Thank you very much for the bug report.

I'll check it out asap.

Best Regards,
Fengtao

Ajax_Undone

17th October 2007, 06:46

Hey Fengtao why dont you make your software work on Ubuntu...

Figured Id ask..

fengtao

17th October 2007, 09:29

cweb

17th October 2007, 11:47

Hi Ajax,

In fact, the core is completely written by c/c++, which should can be compiled on linux with gcc. But the UI is hard to transfer, since it's written by mfc, only on windows.

Best Regards,
Fengtao
Hi, I found this in case it may be of help...

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-mfc/

mc2man

18th October 2007, 00:13

The latest free ver. (3210) does work correctly in wine-fully tested
Platinum ver. also works unless your using plextor drive

wildchild77

19th October 2007, 08:23

The latest free ver. (3210) does work correctly in wine-fully tested
Platinum ver. also works unless your using plextor drive

That may explain my problems getting DVD Fab running on Wine as I am still using my trusty old PX-712

wildchild77

19th October 2007, 11:57

Running Ubuntu Edgy 6.10 and Wine 0.9.30 I was able to get DVDFab to run in full movie and movie only to rip and open in DVD Shrink

What does not work

Can not change anything under the settings tab and when opening DVDFab while analysing the disk my desktop goes blank in the upper taskbar. This also happened with DVD shrink and was fixed by changing a setting which I can not remember at the moment.

Anyways this is very good news!

@mc2man maybe you could start another thread on how you got DVDFab working and any issues you have had.

mc2man

19th October 2007, 23:11

@wildchild77 just tried platinum with different drive - all the functions from main gui are working, rips are good
As far as the preference menu not great yet - info is displayed, all the buttons work but mouse is nonfunctional on tree in left box. (just noticed keyboard can access the additional settings so there's hope there)
As far as plextor if you can disable read ahead (in dvdfab settings, not hdparm) that may help (too bad it's not a default setting)
will post what I've found to work later in linux thread

got the preferences working - arrow buttons on keyboard till gui goes nuts - then mouse works

@mc2man maybe you could start another thread on how you got DVDFab working and any issues you have had.
doesn't need a thread - couldn't be simpler - wine ver.'s ....46,.47 work ootb, set to nt4.0, no added and or override dlls
You should make a copy of existing sys.32 in case the upgrade/install creates a new one and if so paste it in. Won't hurt anything and keeps all your other progs. going. (if you've replaced riched20 you need the wine ver.(2.5kb) for vobblanker

laguna_b

24th October 2007, 22:39

Hi Fengtao,

I posted this elsewhere so forgive the repetition:

Using DVDfabHD for HD-DVDs I get widely varied results as far as rip speed. It starts off really fast at about 10-30mb/sec. Then it starts dropping down as low as .5Mb/sec.

Processors are just idling and memory is barely used. The DVD drive is an HP (got the same results with the XBOX HD drive) on USB 2.0.

I can xfer the files onto the hard drive very fast but then I can't choose the hard drive as a source. (would be a nice feature)

Any ideas here?

Thanks,

Barry

Wombler

24th October 2007, 23:04

It's been a while coming (relatively speaking) but there are new betas of DVDFab HD Decrypter & AnyDVD out today.

DVDFab HD Decrypter has had a major update with completely rewritten DVD structure cleaning module and a spruced up interface.

AnyDVD seems to have had some compatibility and bug fix updates.

For those that are interested full details of the DVDFab HD Decrypter beta here (http://club.cdfreaks.com/f116/dvdfab-4-0-0-0-beta-230526/) and likewise for AnyDVD here (http://club.cdfreaks.com/f88/discussion-thread-anydvd-6-1-8-6-beta-230536/).

@jinjin_jp

Have they fixed any of the problems you had discovered?

Wombler

laguna_b

24th October 2007, 23:26

I just checked the website and Version 3.2.1.0 released Oct 10 (two weeks ago) seems to be the latest. That is the version I have been using.

Is there one I am not aware of?

Thx,

Barry

OOOOPS Hold the presses! I clicked on your link and there is version 4. Let me try it and get back with the results...thanks again!

laguna_b

25th October 2007, 00:03

I have to wait to fully test DVDFABHD V4 but I wasn't able to get it to recognize sourcing of HD encrypted files from my HD. Was that changed to add as a feature this release or still not a feature?

I am still slowly ripping an HD now so I have to wait for it to complete on that PC to do the upgrade.

laguna_b

25th October 2007, 00:53

Well the results seem similar. The movie is Casablanca. After finishing it on the version 3.2.1.0 and having it get as low as .39m/sec I installed and restarted Version 4. As before it started out strong around 5mb/sec. After 15 minutes it is down to 1.13mb/sec and dropping. So I will abort and move on to the next disc. any ideas?

blutach

25th October 2007, 01:11

Possibly a disk reading error. More to do with the disk itself, I expect.

Regards

laguna_b

25th October 2007, 02:20

The second disc I put in has been going for almost an hour and a half at .25mb/sec. It started at 1.5mb/sec and dropped. If it were a disc read error it is unlikely that it would be repeating the problem and at different reading rates over multiple DVDs AND two different HD-DVD players.

SamuriHL

25th October 2007, 02:23

Um, has anyone asked you to check your DMA settings? If not, please do so.

laguna_b

25th October 2007, 02:56

I checked DMA settings and they are all "DMA is available" under the IDE ATA/ATAPI in Manager. This is true for the two primary and secondary IDE controllers. There were "standard dual IDE Controllers" listed but they did not have the settings for DMA.

The setup will move HD DVD files very fast between DVD and Hard Drive so i suspected the channel was running fast enough. I show 1G memory of the 2G available in use so only about half the memory is used. The processors are running 2-5%.

That is why I am baffled.

BTW I am able to PLAY HD movies thorough this setup.

SamuriHL

25th October 2007, 02:59

Ok, just checking. I'm not sure what could be causing it then.

laguna_b

25th October 2007, 03:19

The source is USB 2.0 HP 100 DVD-ROM. I had a problem getting the ROM to recognize the UDF 2.5 files so I installed the Toshiba UDF driver. I am wondering if they are the problem. Does anyone have alternative drivers? The only SW that came with the drive is the Cyberlink DVD player. I have that installed but i wouldn't think it would switch back and forth between drivers but I may just check that.

laguna_b

25th October 2007, 03:35

Interesting:

I started wondering if there were drivers associated with the Cyber DVD SW that came with the drive. I started up Cyber DVD while DVDFABHD was ripping then after it was stable i killed it again and the BW jumped way up.

jinjin_jp

25th October 2007, 04:00

It's been a while coming (relatively speaking) but there are new betas of DVDFab HD Decrypter & AnyDVD out today.
@jinjin_jp
Have they fixed any of the problems you had discovered?

I tried to confirm.
But both was not fixed.

DADFab seems to have some change, it is strange.
(1)VTS_05(title 6,7,8,9,10,11) : extras (unopened scenes), replayed from menu' button.
(2)VTS_07(title 13) : end roll, replayed after main movie when selested Japanese as audio.
(3)VTS_08(title 14) : end roll, replayed after main movie when selested Japanese as audio.
---(2) is replayed when sprm(14)=3072, (3) is replayed when sprm(14) is others.

AI Scaner : remove(replace) (2)
PathPlayer : remove(replace) (1),(2),(3)
About (2) and (3), it seems to misrecognize as unplayed only first cell of each VTS in shown Info, but actually output file is deleted both VTS itself.

I'll post to each Forum.

Regards.

Wombler

25th October 2007, 09:08

Wombler

25th October 2007, 09:28

DVDFab seems to have some change, it is strange.

Thanks for the quick response.

A bit disappointing but then it's only the first v4 beta for DVDFab HD Decrypter so hopefully there are more improvements to come.

About (2) and (3), it seems to misrecognize as unplayed only first cell of each VTS in shown Info, but actually output file is deleted both VTS itself.

So if I read you correctly it misrecognises the first cell but deletes the entire VTS. Is that correct?

Wombler

jinjin_jp

25th October 2007, 16:00

So if I read you correctly it misrecognises the first cell but deletes the entire VTS. Is that correct?
Yes, I feel strange.
The similar thing is fixed in ver.4.0.0.0beta.

VTS_01 PGC_3 has 2 cells,
and info of ver.3.2.1.0 is ;
Unplayable cell (vts:1 title pgc:3 cell:1) is removed!
but output has only 1 cell and cell_2 was removed, though the new feature seems to be that cell is not removed but replaced.

Info of ver.4.0.0.0 is ;
Unplayable cell (vts:1 title pgc:3 cell:1) is removed!
Unplayable cell (vts:1 title pgc:3 cell:2) is removed!
and output has 2 cells which seems to be replaced.
It seems to match with the new feature.

Regards.

laguna_b

25th October 2007, 16:36

Quote:
Originally Posted by laguna_b View Post
The second disc I put in has been going for almost an hour and a half at .25mb/sec. It started at 1.5mb/sec and dropped. If it were a disc read error it is unlikely that it would be repeating the problem and at different reading rates over multiple DVDs AND two different HD-DVD players.
Try clearing out your Windows temporary folder (as well as the ones under the user profiles in local settings).

Sounds strange but i will try it.

Turns out my joy may have been premature. Aftera while, during the same copy, it slowed way down again. By repeating the same procedure I was able to get similar results that lasted shorter and shorter intervals. I will try you suggestion today. I will also uninstall the UDF driver from Toshiba to see if it is causing the problem.

laguna_b

25th October 2007, 19:25

I deleted the temp files under windows and under my profile in D&S. The ripper rips out of the gate at like 50Mb/sec and starts to drop. After 5 minutes it is in single digits mb/sec headed for fractionals. It is almost like there was a buffer filling up and not being managed properly. I still have to try deleting the Toshiba UDF file reader and try that.

blutach

25th October 2007, 21:53

laguna_b

25th October 2007, 23:59

Where does DVDFABHD Get its UDF reader? I have been centering my investigation of the problem of slow ripping on the UDF reader as a probable cause of the problems I have been having with the speed of ripping.
Originally I installed CYBERlink Power DVD as my player. It seems to have its own UDF reader.
I later installed the Toshiba UDF reader so the system could "see" the UDF files in Windows Explorer.
Then I installed DVDFAB HD and it appears to use the Toshiba reader since when I disabled the Toshiba reader it could no longer see HD DVDs to rip.

So, what are others using for a driver/UDF reader with DVDFABHD?

I think this is the source of my problem.

SamuriHL

26th October 2007, 00:31

So, what are others using for a driver/UDF reader with DVDFABHD?

I think this is the source of my problem.

Vista. :) Seriously, though, I haven't heard of anyone else having problems like that with the Toshiba driver. If you're truly set on trying to figure this out, I can recommend one possible course of action for you. Remove the Toshiba driver(for now), install a trial copy of AnyDVD HD from Slysoft's site, and use the Rip Video DVD To Harddisk... option to rip the HD DVD to your hard drive and see how that does for you. AnyDVD HD has its own UDF driver built in so it doesn't require one to be installed. That way you can at least compare the results and see if that's indeed where the issue lies.

davinleeds

26th October 2007, 00:37

So, what are others using for a driver/UDF reader with DVDFABHD?

I'm using what came with cyberlink. Other than Iwo Jima, Fab has worked great, and updated before cyberlink. It is sensitive to dirty disks.

laguna_b

26th October 2007, 00:56

I'm using what came with cyberlink. Other than Iwo Jima, Fab has worked great, and updated before cyberlink. It is sensitive to dirty disks.

Interesting that you say that. I assume you are like me using XP SP2 rather than Vista (which has its own UDF I understand).

I tried all sorts of combinations of PowerDVD started then killed or kept running and the FABDVDHD did not seem to "pick up" on the fact that there was a disc in the drive. Do yo also have the ability to see the HD Disc in Windows Explorer?

I am downloading a trial copy of Nero 8 as INCD is supposed to have its own UDF reader.

I guess I will have to follow with AnyDVD trial next.

laguna_b

26th October 2007, 07:14

My feeling is that I have a problem getting the UDF reader to "connect" with DVDFAB or for that matter, Windows Explorer.

I come back again to the question, how does DVDFAB "find" the UDF reader? I downloaded the latest Nero 8 and it has INCD which has a 2.5 reader. I verified that INCD was running. But I could not "see" the file contents of the HD DVD with either DVDFAB or Windows Explorer like I could with the Toshiba drivers which are suspect as causing the problems of slow transfer rates.

If someone installs DVDFAB HD on a virgin machine where will it get the UDF 2.5 reader and how will it build the association?

Update:
I uninstalled the Toshiba drivers completely. If I insert an HD-DVD into the drawer, it will be recognized now in Windows Explorer (possibly due to the INCD I installed) and you can browse to it in the DVDFABHD browse window and be identified correctly. But when I select it, it is not accepted and recognized as media. It should be instantly scaned by DVDFAB. Regular DVDs put in the same drive operate as normal with DVDFABHD.

wildchild77

26th October 2007, 13:07

For those that are interested full details of the DVDFab HD Decrypter beta here and likewise for AnyDVD here.

DVDFab seems to have one advantage it will run on Linux, it still needs some work but seems to be getting better. Here are some screen shots of the latest 4.0 beta running on Ubuntu Gutsy 7.10.

DVDFab analyzing
http://my.afterdawn.com/wolfmanz/show_image.cfm/15076/full

DVDFab complete
http://my.afterdawn.com/wolfmanz/show_image.cfm/15078/full

I am still early in the testing and there are still many bugs to be worked out. I will be starting a thread in the Linux section to see if we can get some more people working on this.

SamuriHL

26th October 2007, 14:42

DVDFab seems to have one advantage it will run on Linux, it still needs some work but seems to be getting better. Here are some screen shots of the latest 4.0 beta running on Ubuntu Gutsy 7.10.

DVDFab analyzing
http://my.afterdawn.com/wolfmanz/show_image.cfm/15076/full

DVDFab complete
http://my.afterdawn.com/wolfmanz/show_image.cfm/15078/full

I am still early in the testing and there are still many bugs to be worked out. I will be starting a thread in the Linux section to see if we can get some more people working on this.

That's quite impressive! I might have to try that out. I use Ubuntu as my main OS at work and I have a machine at home that's got it installed, as well. It's my file server machine but I was going to add a DVD reader to it soon. I'm quite impressed with those screen shots. I assume you're using the latest version of Wine?

jinjin_jp

26th October 2007, 15:16

@jinjin_jp

If a cell is unplayable, but the PGC is referenced (eg for precommands or playing other cells), then it need to be either (a) removed from the cell table and (possibly also) the chapter table, (b) skipped via cell commands, or (c) replaced with a dummy cell. If the PGC is unreferenced, it can be deleted, along with its cells.

I presume this is what the new versions do.

Regards

Thanks for the explanation.

2 Cells of VTS_03 PGC_3 seems to be unplayed by precommand.
(1.Pre Command (JumpVTS_TT) Jump to Title: 1)

May I have question?
*(a)(b)(c) all are sayed about output of Fab? (b) is about original not output ?
*"referensed" means shown in VTS overview of IfoEdit ?
*"chapter table " means PTT_SRPTI of IfoEdit ?

By the way I foud strange thing about PGC_3 of original.
------------------------------------------------------
VTS overview
PGC_3 (program chain): [Title(TTN): 3] [00:00:01.04 / 30 fps] (Programs: 2) (Cells: 2) (uses VOB-IDs: 1)
[Ch 01] [Pg 01] [Cell 01] [V/C Id: 1/ 1] _______: time: 00:00:00.17 / 30 fps
______________[Cell 02] [V/C Id: 1/ 1] Layer Br.: time: 00:00:00.17 / 30 fps
VTS_PGCITI
PGC Program Map:
Program_1: Entry cell number 1
Program_2: Entry cell number 0
-------------------------------------------------------
Program_2 and cell number 0 don't exist.

Regards.

laserfan

26th October 2007, 16:31

...problems I have been having with the speed of ripping...So, what are others using for a driver/UDF reader with DVDFABHD?Hey laguna_b I read this thread today start-to-finish and came across your woes re: ripping. I have a similar (almost identical?) story to yours i.e. HD100, Cyberlink, Toshiba UDF reader (think it was advertised for the Xbox), DVDFabHD, etc. etc. and recent attempts at rips have ground to a halt such that I've aborted them.

I *was* successful a couple months ago with a single test rip I tried; since then I have a new video card, updated PowerDVD, and of course DVDFab has changed. But I hadn't tried any more rips til recently and they've failed in the manner you describe. :(

laguna_b

26th October 2007, 17:12

Hey laguna_b I read this thread today start-to-finish and came across your woes re: ripping. I have a similar (almost identical?) story to yours i.e. HD100, Cyberlink, Toshiba UDF reader (think it was advertised for the Xbox), DVDFabHD, etc. etc. and recent attempts at rips have ground to a halt such that I've aborted them.

I *was* successful a couple months ago with a single test rip I tried; since then I have a new video card, updated PowerDVD, and of course DVDFab has changed. But I hadn't tried any more rips til recently and they've failed in the manner you describe. :(

That is reassuring and sad at the same time. However, it saves me from going and ripping out everything installed since I built the system a week ago and installing fresh. I was able to uninstall the Toshiba driver completely using the uninstall "script" I found in the registry, so there should be no way it is interfering. I uninstalled and reinstalled BOTH DVDFAB programs. Still no change. Hopefully someone will bail us out here.

laserfan

27th October 2007, 00:57

Hopefully someone will bail us out here.Honestly I think this is way OT for this thread--maybe you want to start a new one?

davinleeds

27th October 2007, 01:58

Interesting that you say that. I assume you are like me using XP SP2 rather than Vista (which has its own UDF I understand).

I tried all sorts of combinations of PowerDVD started then killed or kept running and the FABDVDHD did not seem to "pick up" on the fact that there was a disc in the drive. Do yo also have the ability to see the HD Disc in Windows Explorer?

I am downloading a trial copy of Nero 8 as INCD is supposed to have its own UDF reader.

I guess I will have to follow with AnyDVD trial next.

XP/2 and I find that UDF reader is at 5.0. I'm using An OEM Cyberlink that is updated to 7.3.3319. Just saved my Heros Season 1 disk and it starts slowly then maxes out around 9 kbs at mid point and slows to end. About 50 minutes. Tried my new transformers and does not recognize it. Under my computer it shows as a dvd drive, right click on properties, and it's shown as a hddvd drive.

laserfan

27th October 2007, 05:32

I just tried again w/DVDFab 3.1.5.0 and it worked, though at 2% and again at 80% it slowed to a crawl, saying it was gonna take 5 hours to rip. Actually took almost 1.5 hours. Maybe I just wasn't patient enough the last time I tried it?

Dunno why it slows (to about 1Mbps vs. typical 9Mbps) cuz there's little/no CPU activity as well. Maybe a question for the DVDFab folks at CD Freaks.

jinjin_jp

27th October 2007, 06:20

AnyDVD is up to 6.1.8.9 and 6.1.9.0.
But the issue of 8 BELOW which replace playable cells seems not to be fixed.

AnyDVD seems to change the feature. It retuen to remove cells of BadSecter from replacing. It is little different from before.
http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/2978/80450856eq6.th.png (http://img155.imageshack.us/my.php?image=80450856eq6.png)

Regards.

laguna_b

27th October 2007, 06:30

Well, there would be so much to repeat..besides I am making progress(?).

I took an old XP installation on another disk. It never had the Toshiba drivers. I installed Nero and got virtually the same results. (DVDFAB would not see the DVD) On examination I determined that INCD was not loading. With out going into a lot of detail, the prior test must have used INCD 4x not 5x. Incd 5x needs a separate download from Nero. After I downloaded it and installed it, the problem was still the same.

As it turns out I had an HD DVD I needed to rip. So I figured I would reinstall the Toshiba driver which worked albeit slow.

To my surprise it started up and has been increasing in xfer rate the longer it runs! It is not a firehorse but it started at 1.5 and up to 8.5mb/sec at about the 80% ripped level. What a kick!

Tomorrow I will try installing the INCD to my regular Windows Media XP system and see what we get.

Updated after adding InCD to XP Media Center:
WOW...so close to a solution....but the InCD prevents DVDFABHD from seeing the disc in the case of an HD disc :(

blutach

27th October 2007, 06:53

@jinjin_jp

Clearly, IF PGC3 is played, it will have a conflict between the cell table and the VCID. From what you say, it isn't played anyway and possibly can be removed. But I'd change it to cell 1.

A PGC is unreferenced if it can not be entered at all - even via the remote (PUOps will generally play a part in this). Sometimes, PgcEdit sees a PGC as called, but it is really unreferenced since it can only be called by itself (eg by a LinkTail PGC cell command) or by something else which is unreferenced. In this manner, PgcEdit is a bit conservative. Video which is in unreferenced PGCs, if it does not appear elsewhere, is "unreferenced material". Technically, this is how DVD Shrink works:

DVD Shrink checks the VMG_V_ADMAP and so knows exactly how many vobus are in the VOBS file, and where each one begins.

Then it checks the C_POSIT table for each cell in each title. The C_POSIT table contains a list of all the cell and vob_id's that are used by that title.

Then it checks the C_ADT and for each cell and vob_id creates a list of every vobu that is used by that title.

Then it checks the V_ADMAP again, and if there are more vobus in the V_ADMAP than accounted for by all titles, the unaccounted vobus go into "Unreferenced Material" folder.

As far as your question about (a), (b) and (c), all 3 methods are valid for the original to ensure good navigation and playback. But typically, in advanced schemes, (b) is most seen.

The chapter table is VTS_PTT_SRPT not VMG (which is a summary of total chapters).

Hope this helps.

Regards

jinjin_jp

27th October 2007, 09:36

@jinjin_jp

Clearly, IF PGC3 is played, it will have a conflict between the cell table and the VCID. From what you say, it isn't played anyway and possibly can be removed. But I'd change it to cell 1.
Yes. PGC3 isn't obviously played because jumps to other title before played by precommand. (as I posted in #217 of this thread.)
What I wanted to say is that though all 2 cells are unplayable, Fab 3.2.1.0 recongnize only cell_1 as unplayable, now Fab 4.0.0.0b is fixed and recongnize all 2 cells as unplayable.

Technically, this is how DVD Shrink works:
Thanks for explanation.
I can understand more clear.
C_POSIT table seems to be reflected VTS overview if edited.
VMG_V_ADMAP means VTS_V_ADMAP ?

As far as your question about (a), (b) and (c), all 3 methods are valid for the original to ensure good navigation and playback. But typically, in advanced schemes, (b) is most seen.
My question was understandable.
(a)removed from the cell table ;
used in original DVD(for example unreferenced material), and used in AnyDVD and DVDFAb for unplayable cell.
(b)skipped via cell commands
used in original DVD(for example RipGuard, ARccOS)
(c)replaced with a dummy cell
used in AnyDVD and DVDFAb for unplayable cell.

Regards.

blutach

27th October 2007, 10:19

VMG_V_ADMAP means VTS_V_ADMAP ?
I guess he meant for the address map tables in both VMGM and VTS.

Regards

jinjin_jp

27th October 2007, 11:42

@blutach
I understand. Thanks.

Regards.

Wombler

28th October 2007, 18:51

As far as your question about (a), (b) and (c), all 3 methods are valid for the original to ensure good navigation and playback. But typically, in advanced schemes, (b) is most seen.

So in the context of jinjin_jp's results where does this leave us?

Are there still problems that need to be rectified or were the different programs merely dealing with the protection in different but equally valid ways?

Wombler

jinjin_jp

2nd December 2007, 11:59

The problem of DVDFabDecrypter and AnyDVD which removes playable cells has not been fixed at all for about a month though many update.
It seems to be very difficult to fix.

Regards.

DrinkLyeAndDie

2nd December 2007, 13:38

The problem of DVDFabDecrypter and AnyDVD which removes playable cells has not been fixed at all for about a month though many update.
It seems to be very difficult to fix.

Regards.

Read the thread you started on the Slysoft forum.

jinjin_jp

2nd December 2007, 15:15

@DrinkLyeAndDie

Thanks for the info. I've not noticed and posted though confirmed every versions.
I posted to it now.

Regards.

fengtao

3rd December 2007, 03:03

Hi jinjin_jp,

I think I find a way to fix the problem, and I'll find some time to do this job :)

Best Regards,
Fengtao

DrinkLyeAndDie

3rd December 2007, 05:13

@DrinkLyeAndDie

Thanks for the info. I've not noticed and posted though confirmed every versions.
I posted to it now.

Regards.

From the response to your post I think the next release will fix this.

wildchild77

3rd December 2007, 06:38

Hi jinjin_jp,

I think I find a way to fix the problem, and I'll find some time to do this job :)

Best Regards,
Fengtao

That sounds like good news! keep up the great work!

I was able to back up Hairspray R1 with DVDFab 4.0.1.4 on my Ubuntu set-up running Wine 0.9.46 with no problems. Testing has gone very well so far.

Wombler

3rd December 2007, 22:00

Hi jinjin_jp,

I think I find a way to fix the problem, and I'll find some time to do this job :)

Best Regards,
Fengtao

Great news Fengtao. :cool:

Kudos to jinjin_jp for spotting this problem in the first place and taking considerable time to analyse/report all the results. :cool:

Thanks also to Blutach for his invaluable technical expertise (I've increased my knowledge quite considerably as a result of your responses to this thread).:thanks:

Wombler

Wombler

3rd December 2007, 22:04

That sounds like good news! keep up the great work!

I was able to back up Hairspray R1 with DVDFab 4.0.1.4 on my Ubuntu set-up running Wine 0.9.46 with no problems. Testing has gone very well so far.

Version 4.0.1.6 has been available for a couple of days now.

In case you want to test the latest version.

Wombler

jinjin_jp

3rd December 2007, 23:47

I think I find a way to fix the problem, and I'll find some time to do this job

Thanks very much. Please ask me if you need any info.
At least there was some difference between output of ver.3.2.1.0 and 4.0.0.0beta. I didn't noticed any others.

Regards.

poisson

4th December 2007, 01:54

@bourtzovlakas

Hi!

Although it's not specifically stated, my interpretation is that the described methodology should be capable of circumventing the type of protection used on the German releases of "Das Parfum" and very few others - that had, among other things (If I understand correctly) multiple .IFOs with the same name.

Thusfar, to my knowledge, that is still the [COLOR="DarkRed"]ONLY protection scheme that RipIt4Me cannot conquer . . . .

Maybe this explains why I'm having so much trouble, including trying Ripit4me, "getting on top of", "The Lives Of Others", a German film . . .

setarip_old

4th December 2007, 02:06

@poisson

Hi!

Nope - It's a SONY (typically "ARccOS" copy protection - and not the protection spoken of here) release.

I had no trouble successfully copying the R1 version of "The Lives of Others", using RipIt4me v.1.6.4.

Try cleaning the DVD...

Reboot and then use RipIt4Me before trying anuy other ripping program (Or, hold down the "Shift" key while loading the DVD)

poisson

4th December 2007, 02:22

[Color=Blue] . . . I had no trouble successfully copying the R1 version . . . .

Um . . . excuse the ignorance . . . what's "R1"?

SamuriHL

4th December 2007, 02:23

Um . . . excuse the ignorance . . . what's "R1"?

Region 1.

poisson

4th December 2007, 02:26

[Color=Blue] . . . I had no trouble successfully copying "The Lives of Others", using RipIt4me v.1.6.4. . . . .

I must admit, I thought I was on a winner for sure when I ran Ripit4me. (V 1.7.1.0 with Decrypter V 3.5.4.0) I was curious to see it uses DVDDecrypter which I'd tried repeatedly without success . . .??

I've cleaned the DVD a FEW times. I even got a 2nd disk (R4) that was cleaned "professionally" in one of those groovy machines.

I haven't tried your other suggestions of rebooting and/or rebooting holding down the shift key.

I'm just about driven to obsession in winning this one so I appreciate and am willing to try any suggestions!!

Thanx guys!!

setarip_old

4th December 2007, 03:21

I even got a 2nd disk (R4) that was cleaned "professionally" in one of those groovy machines.You didn't, I hope, have this brand new purchased DVD polished BEFORE you tried copying it, did you?

poisson

4th December 2007, 05:48

You didn't, I hope, have this brand new purchased DVD polished BEFORE you tried copying it, did you?

Er . . . . I did actually . . . ? Bad Move?

I tried all your other suggestions. It seems to copy it (to hard disk) OK then reckons there's either dust or scratches here and there . . . of which I'm pretty sute there isn't . . . THEN attempts to re-rip quite a few of the main VOB files and that's where the "fun" starts and all comes to a grinding halt pretty much . . .!?

So . . . um POLISHING . . . what do I need to know?