Encoding time - is it worth it?

[itayab]

Hello.

I've got an old computer.. intel pentium 4 1.80GHz, 256 MB RAM.

The time for encoding a 6.7GB movie in Dvd rebuilder + CCE basic is about 4-5 hours.

My question - is it worth it?? dvd shrink with deep analysis is almost half the time.

And no, I don't have 40/60/80 inch HDTV.. just a regular 32" LOWE tv.

I don't think I'll notice any difference in the quality (i'm backing up some full movies)..

what is your opinion? also when I run the rebuilder, my entire computer is 'shutdown'.. as I can't do anything because it's using my entire CPU&memory.

And please, save me your "4 years old comp?? get a new one!" cause I can't afford it right now.. and I know this issue has been disccused here several times, but still I have some thoughts on using the rebuilder..

thank's!

[winny]

Yes, it's worth it in my opinion, only you can decide for yourself.

[jdobbs]

I guess the basic argument would be: If quality isn't important... why even use a DVD? Why not VHS? I'm very picky about quality when I watch a film. Before DVD Rebuilder I was still using CCE --> and taking an incredibly long time (many hours). Now on my computer (which is only a mid range Athlon XP 3200) I can backup a DVD in roughly the same amount of time as copying a VHS tape (a couple of hours).

Another argument is --> how many times do you encode a film compared to the number of times it is watched over its life (including you, your family, your friends, and everyone who might borrow it). MPEG is actually designed around that principal. It is asymmetric in terms of processing -- lots of processing is required to encode and very little to decode.

Also -- trying to say there is "little difference" is just inaccurate. The difference between transcoding and encoding is intuitively obvious to even the casual observer. I'm sorry to say the most of the time those who say they "can't tell" are simply showing the limitation of their playback equipment. The size of the screen has a little to do with it, yes. But, if the player/TV/connection combination "blurs" the original or you use the s-video or composite connections you might not see it as well -- the edge blocks and other artifacts caused by transcoding are often masked. Some day you will upgrade and you'll see them -- and you might even find yourself doing them over.

It's always been my belief that it's better to "do it right the first time."

[itayab]

Thank's! =)

you had me

[jptheripper]

my p3 1ghz takes 28hours, and it is worth it to me

[archaeo]

yeah, callin a P4 'old' in this forum might not be accurate for a lot of us who still run those old workhorse P3's :D We just do a lot of overnight encoding.

[jamos]

with CCe SP and 3 passes total time is around 114 minutes for a full dvd-9 to dvd-5 rebuild for me on my FX-53. I am not sure if CCE SP is faster than basic, if it is not I would suggest you pay the 58$ for the basic encoder to save time..probably close to shrink timewise. Recode seems to be faster than shrink and does better with blockiness it is ok with little compression (though it will never be equal to encoding). Recode cost about the same as CCE Basic so its a no brainer if you want better results buy CCE basic.;)

Plus with DVD Rebuilder Pro you can set the process to low priority..I can play 3d games at the same time that the encoder is running..no lag!

[jdobbs]

Interestingly on my system CCE Basic is about 15% faster than SP (both v2.70).