Easy way to select multiple segments not to re-encode? And menu is "overshrunk"

[blutach]

I have a movie which can fit and so only wish to re-encode the extras and menus.

I can't seem to find a way to select all the segments in the VTST in Preview/Edit at once and then Force no re-encode. Tried Shift, Ctrl etc.

Am I missing something? Or is there a global setting I can use.

While I'm on this, is there a hidden setting or something that can turn off the default "Show extra segments only" in View/Edit menu? I really like to see all segments and if I want not to re-encode the movie, it seems this is a logical thing to show, not hide.

Another easy suggestion for the view/edit menu would be to have the keyboard shortcuts next door to the actions (or underlining a key letter). Hope this can be done.

http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/4070/untitled4ra.png

EDIT: While on this no re-encode thing, the feature bitrate goes very funny after selecting no re-encode. Notice that Rebuilder was going to allocate more than the original to the movie (it recovered -167Mb) but the resultant BR is very low. Doesn't seem right. Little bug?

EDIT2: What happens is that the movie does not get re-encoded (no problems here), but the extras get higher bitrates than they originally had, and the menu cops all the reduction (220Mb down to 50Mb). This does not seem right.

TIA

Regards

[jptheripper]

um, there are letter hot keys

b is blank, s is slideshow, i think n is no reencode..

[blutach]

um, there are letter hot keys

b is blank, s is slideshow, i think n is no reencode..
Umm - I read the readme and know that. Just trying to make things easier. And since you did too and only "think" N is no re-encode, that proves my last point (In fact, it is F).

My other questions still stand.

As well, as said above, the reduction was taken all from the menu (shruk from 220Mb to 50Mb) and the extras were increased in size slightly. This can not be right. Am I doing something wrong or have I missed something? Pertinent files to look at here (http://www.digital-digest.com/~blutach/Rebuilder problem.zip).

Regards

[jptheripper]

yes im sorry, i misread your post

no you cant do it all at once

[blutach]

It's a pain - take a movie like JFK with 80+ chapters/cells - doing each manually. Maybe twice after a re-preparing.

Also, this taking everything from the menu is puzzling me. I guess, if the movie is no re-encode, then DVD Rebuilder (http://dvd-rb.dvd2go.org/) sees nothing as an "extra" and only "shrinks" the menu, but I could be wrong.

Regards

[blutach]

Addendum:

jdobbs says here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=789176#post789176) that if the main feature doesn't need re-encoding, there will be a message at the end of the prepare saying so. For some reason, this message did not appear, despite the fact that the menu and movie together (including 2 audio tracks to be discarded) total just 3.10Gb.

-----------------
[13:24:05] Phase I, PREPARATION started.
- VTSM_01: 114,372 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 9,500 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_01: 1,514,798 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 119,512 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_02: 73,830 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 7,420 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_03: 5 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 1 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_04: 55,709 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 5,803 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_05: 49,490 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 4,351 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_06: 63,685 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 6,518 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_07: 75,887 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 7,764 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_08: 770,151 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 78,785 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_09: 5 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 1 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_10: 5 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 1 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_11: 5 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 1 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_12: 5 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 1 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_13: 5 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 1 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_14: 5 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 1 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_15: 5 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 1 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- VTS_16: 5 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 1 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- Reduction Level for DVD-5: 92.2%
- Overall Bitrate : 3,505Kbs
- Space for Video : 4,101,088KB
- HIGH/LOW/TYPICAL Bitrates: 5,818/400/3,505 Kbs
[13:28:15] Phase I, PREPARATION completed in 4 minutes.
Very confused now.

Regards

[jdobbs]

I'll go back an look at it.

1. The negative "recovered" value should mean that you have additional space freed from the main feature that is applied to the extras.. somehow.

2. Just guessing, but the menu may have gotten smaller because it was filled with a lot of blank space that compressed exceptionally well and saturated the encoder. I've seen that on several discs.

I don't understand the "3.10GB" comment. The disc couldn't fit as-is on a DVD-5 -- as it needs to be reduced to 92.2% of its original size based on what DVD-RB saw. So the message wouldn't be displayed at the end of PREPARE.

[blutach]

Thanks for that jdobbs.

On your point 2, this was not the case. There were no unreferenced VIDs for example or black rubbish and the bitrate of the menu was not exceptionally high (I calculate it to be about 4900Mbps). The quality of the menu output was pretty bad, while of course, the quality of the extras was terrific (given they had higher bitrate allocated to them than originally).

Re your point 3, must be my misunderstanding - I read your other post as if the main feature could fit without re-encoding, then a message would be generated saying "no need to re-encode main movie". Clearly, in this case, it can (after stripping off the 2 unwanted audio streams, the VTST is just 2.36Gb - it is a short film; just 80 mins including 5 mins of credits). This might actually be a useful feature to have for us "Force no re-encoders".

Appreciate the help.

Regards

[jdobbs]

That's true. But in order for the main movie to fit when reducing it to 92% -- you'd have to get enough space from the extras to increase it. If you'd selected "steal space from extras" for example at 10% you probably would have gotten a "no encode" on the main feature (depending, of course, on the size of the extras).

[jdobbs]

BTW. This was just the first cut on this... I'm working on some ideas of doing analysis for you and "make suggestions" --- something like "If half/half is selected you can avoid reencoding -- would you me to select that mutha'?"

Ok... maybe it won't work like that -- but something that can make it easier.

[JohnGalt]

Re your point 3, must be my misunderstanding - I read your other post as if the main feature could fit without re-encoding, then a message would be generated saying "no need to re-encode main movie". Clearly, in this case, it can (after stripping off the 2 unwanted audio streams, the VTST is just 2.36Gb - it is a short film; just 80 mins including 5 mins of credits). This might actually be a useful feature to have for us "Force no re-encoders".

Guess I misunderstood that as well. Blutach's suggestion does sound like a good idea, as well as an option like "Extras: Half-D1 and Steal Space to Fit" in cases in which the movie is small enough that it would not, itself, have to be reencoded (small enough to fit by itself on a DVD5). Then RB could figure out how much extras should be shrunk in order to achieve the desired size (38% or whatever the case may be).

Still, none of this is absolutely necessary. If I can take off a few foreign audio tracks to make a film small enough for a DVD5, I'll fire up trusty ol' Shrink.

[blutach]

That's true. But in order for the main movie to fit when reducing it to 92% -- you'd have to get enough space from the extras to increase it. If you'd selected "steal space from extras" for example at 10% you probably would have gotten a "no encode" on the main feature (depending, of course, on the size of the extras).Seems this is the way the prog works.

-----------------
[10:56:37] Phase I, PREPARATION started.
- "Steal Space from Extras" mode (10%) is enabled.
- etc etc etc
- Reduction Level for DVD-5: 92.2%
- Overall Bitrate : 3,505Kbs
- Space for Video : 4,101,088KB
- Movie improvement from extra reduction = 9.3%
- HIGH/LOW/TYPICAL Bitrates: 5,756/400/3,505 Kbs
-- FEATURE video will not require reencoding.
[11:03:57] Phase I, PREPARATION completed in 7 minutes.
Does this mean the movie is now marked for no re-encode and I can merrily go on my way?

Regards

[jdobbs]

Yes it does. In fact you could have just done a One-Click.

The shortcoming right now is that there is nothing that tells you what might do the trick. I'm working on that.

[jdobbs]

@JohnGalt

If you removed audio in DVD-RB, and the recovered space was enough to allow an unencoded reproduction, DVD-RB would automatically take care of it.

BTW, who is John Galt?

[JohnGalt]

If you removed audio in DVD-RB, and the recovered space was enough to allow an unencoded reproduction, DVD-RB would automatically take care of it.

yeah -- I dunno why I use Shrink for that. I guess just b/c I usually rip with Shrink w/o transcoding (setting desired output size to DVD9), except in the cases of my new DVDs that Shrink can't handle. I think I just like Shrink's colorful bar that shows how much space the movie takes up. Totally redundant, but I guess I like charts & such, or I'm just attracted to bright & shiny things. That's next on my request list: give me some colorful charts, jdobbs! You can even use randomly-generated data if you like, just make sure there's some dynamism. I want to see things changing over time; it will give me something to look at while I sit around waiting for the last 1% of encoding to finish. :)

BTW, who is John Galt?

;)

[blutach]

I dunno who JohnGalt is either, but am very happy to report that with 10% stolen space from extras, the encode went well.

A comparison with DVD Shrink at no compression for the main movie, shows that under DVD Rebuilder (http://dvd-rb.dvd2go.org/), the menus were encoded with 15Mb more than Shrink (and extras 15Mb less out of 1.8Gb), so no real difference, except of course, the encode with Procoder 2 will more than compensate for 15 lost Mb out of 1.8Gb.

I wonder if a user selectable steal space % is not a silly suggestion? Or letting users know that if you steal space at such and such a %, then the feature will fit without re-encoding.

@jdobbs - Can I also reiterate my suggestions in post 1 regading underlining key letters, "show extras only" not being on by default and being able to select multiple segments for non-re-encode?

Thanks again.

Regards