RipBot264 v1.18.3 - Simple and easy to use GUI -> IPOD . PSP . CONSOLES . BLURAY

[asarian]

Personally I use DVD-SL (4480MB) and resize 1080 to 720. You would be surprised how small difference is between those two in terms of quality.

You are loosing alot of fine details! Don't be fooled! Compare original with encoded and guarantee you will be shocked how bad it looks like. :)

All kdding aside, though, 1280x720 is a 2.25 (!) times lower resolution than 1920x1080. I would consider that a major loss in detail. But, like I said myself, we all use RipBot for different reasons, so it's all good.

[asarian]

I'm trying to find a way to manage when I can/can't use my computer because ripbot is encoding. Sometimes just letting it go overnight isn't long enough

This ability to pause/suspend RipBot activity is a longstanding issue which seems remarkably persistently ignored. :)

At long last I've just resorted to doing my rendering inside a Vmware box (Windows 2003 server, with 4 vCPU's). Rendering slowdown (due to obvious virtualization) is actually surprisingly minimal. This setup has the great advantage that I can go to my computer in the morning, hybernate the Vmware box, and continue to use my computer for other stuff, until night cometh again and I resume the RipBot task.

[asarian]

How do you get the original sup files to work with ripbot? I have been changing them to srt first as if I select the subtitles track in the analyse stream, I don't get subtitles on the disc. Forced subs such as Kill Bill have their own forced subtitle track.
If you let RipBot create a blu-ray structure, just mux the original PGS streams back in later, with tsMuxeR. That's what I do, at least.

it would be nice if RipBot could actually use the .sup files for hardcoding them into a movie, like we do for .srt now. After all, these PGS streams are basically just images being superimposed over the movie (which is what a physical player does anyway).

Honestly, I don't really fault RipBot for not having this ability. Last time I checked (which was, granted, a couple of weeks ago), the time-index info on the .sup files hadn't even been fully documented and understood yet (a kinda essential step). When some of the clever Doom9 gurus figures it out, though, I'm sure we'll get the facility of hardcoding PGS streams, too.

[Atak_Snajpera]

All kdding aside, though, 1280x720 is a 2.25 (!) times lower resolution than 1920x1080. I would consider that a major loss in detail. But, like I said myself, we all use RipBot for different reasons, so it's all good.
Wake up there! If you use ridiculous 2GB file size 1280x720 will always look better than 1920x1080. Even at DVD-SL 720p will have more details than washed-up 1080p at the same bit-rate. Math says 2.25 higher resolution but in fact difference for human eye is alot smaller. I will have to show screenshots that 1080p is very often useless!

[asarian]

Wake up there! If you use ridiculous 2GB file size 1280x720 will always look better than 1920x1080.

Who said anything about 'ridiculous 2G file size'? You said:


Personally I use DVD-SL (4480MB) and resize 1080 to 720


To which I stated that you lose 2.25 times more detail than with 1080p.

Unless you meant, "I would use...," which makes for an entirely different meaning, of course. But from what you wrote, I gathered you were saying that 1280x720 is what you (generally) encode at.


Math says 2.25 higher resolution but in fact difference for human eye is alot smaller. I will have to show screenshots that 1080p is very often useless!


That's a fascinating argument to have. As I'm sure some would say the difference between 720 and 480 isn't all that big, either. But Full-HD is defined at 1080p, and I like it that way. :)

[nurbs]

A lot of the blu-ray discs I have don't really have the detail to justify the 1080p resolution. You can do a simple test. Make a screenshot then resize it to 720p, then again to 1080p and compare it to the original. There will hardly be a difference. You lose some noise/grain, but that's it mostly.

[asarian]

A lot of the blu-ray discs I have don't really have the detail to justify the 1080p resolution. You can do a simple test. Make a screenshot then resize it to 720p, then again to 1080p and compare it to the original. There will hardly be a difference. You lose some noise/grain, but that's it mostly.

Why, there's a lotta crappy Blu-Rays being put on the market, for certain: hardly remasted, sometimes even bluntly upscaled, or too pixelated or lacking in color-depth and contrast. Which is why I always carefully read reviews about a certain release before I buy it. The first "5th Element", for instance, was rather bad. I only bought the second, remastered one. So, yeah, if the source is crap, I guess the buck pretty much stops there. But for the real good ones, specifically remastered for Blu-Ray, and from a good source, I definitely want that 2.25 times resolution.

EDIT: You also want to keep in mind, that very often, because of the way widesreen sizes are for movies, effectively, you'll only have an ~800p vertical area to work with, which is close to 720 already. So, scale down the whole 1080p to 720p, and your de facto film area is reduced to a measely 533.33 pixels in height! That's, height-wise, dangerously close to DVD quality. :)

[juGGaKNot]

The "mjpg" problem is gone with 11.5 ?

[nurbs]

@asarian:
I'm not talking about crappy sources. Even with high quality sources like Hot Fuzz the difference is small. I think the motion simply blurs all the small details that could be retained by the higher resolution. Then you have to take into account that when you watch the movie in motion the difference will be even less apparent. Personally I won't double the filesize so I can retain 2.25 times more noise and 5 percent more detail. Of course you can do whatever you prefer, I just found the discussion interesting.
Unless you are bound to certain resolutions, for blu-ray compatibility for instance, I don't see how wider aspect ratios can be a problem. You simply encode to a resolution that has roughly the same amount of pixels 720p has.

[asarian]

@asarian:
I'm not talking about crappy sources. Even with high quality sources like Hot Fuzz the difference is small. I think the motion simply blurs all the small details that could be retained by the higher resolution.

There's some truth to this, of course (it is, after all, the whole rationale behind CRF: to favor scenes with less or no motion, at the expense of high-motion material). Naturally, when blurry 1080p has the feel of 720p, blurry 720p would feel like it's even less.


Unless you are bound to certain resolutions, for blu-ray compatibility for instance, I don't see how wider aspect ratios can be a problem. You simply encode to a resolution that has roughly the same amount of pixels 720p has.

Well, the wider the effective aspect ratio of the movie, the less vertical space for it will be available (if you don't want to lose stuff to the sides). Kill Bill, for instance, only has 800 vertical pixels to spare for the movie. The only way to make that fit into screen-filling 720p is to lose material to the left and right (if I did the math right, at a 1152x720 resolution with screen-filling movie height, vs. 1280x720 for an effective 533 movie height). All in all, 1152 vs. 1280 isn't all that bad, in terms of what you'd lose in scenery; although the difference between 1920 vs. 1152 seems more costly.

[dvgeek]

Atak - Many thanks once again for a great program. I've archived more than 50+ BD movies and every one of them is great!

I've been using v1.11.1 and just installed v1.11.5 and noticed something strange. Just for curiosity can you please explain why you moved from using DGAVCDec to video.mkv? The move increases the temp storage by as many jobs times the video size, as I do keep the files for remuxing the subs later.

Would it be possible for you to please provide a switch to use DGAVCDec instead of video.mkv, so that users could have a choice?

Thanks very much.

Cheers!

[survivant001]

One question. I have few movies and cartoons that I recorded with my receiver (coolsat-7100), and I want to convert them on put on my ps3. the format is .ts look like mpeg + mp2 as audio track. I open a movie in ripbot and the output movie is not sync. I opened the video in avidemux and the movie length is not the same as ripbot reported.

I want to cut this .ts to send it as a sample. Which tools should I use ?


here the output from mediainfo
General
Complete name : F:\Bakugan-2.ts
Format : MPEG-TS
Format profile : No PAT/PMT
File size : 490 MiB
Duration : 29mn 58s
Overall bit rate : 2 285 Kbps

Video
ID : 6690 (0x1A22)
Format : MPEG Video
Format version : Version 2
Format profile : Main@Main
Format settings, Matrix : Default
Duration : 29mn 58s
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 1 875 Kbps
Nominal bit rate : 1 347 Kbps
Width : 704 pixels
Height : 480 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 4/3
Frame rate : 29.970 fps
Colorimetry : 4:2:0
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.133

Audio #1
ID : 6691 (0x1A23)
Format : MPEG Audio
Format version : Version 1
Format profile : Layer 2
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 160 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Resolution : 16 bits
Video delay : -269ms

Audio #2
ID : 6692 (0x1A24)
Format : MPEG Audio
Format version : Version 1
Format profile : Layer 2
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 160 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Resolution : 16 bits
Video delay : 10s 963ms


avidemux show the movie lenght is : 27:01.488

[nurbs]

Well, the wider the effective aspect ratio of the movie, the less vertical space for it will be available (if you don't want to lose stuff to the sides). Kill Bill, for instance, only has 800 vertical pixels to spare for the movie. The only way to make that fit into screen-filling 720p is to lose material to the left and right (if I did the math right, at a 1152x720 resolution with screen-filling movie height, vs. 1280x720 for an effective 533 movie height). All in all, 1152 vs. 1280 isn't all that bad, in terms of what you'd lose in scenery; although the difference between 1920 vs. 1152 seems more costly.

You misunderstood what I meant. I wouldn't change the aspect ratio of the movie or crop anything besides the black bars. So the movie is 2.40:1. I would encode at 1480x616 or maybe a little lower if I wanted mod16.

[anon.j2]

This ability to pause/suspend RipBot activity is a longstanding issue which seems remarkably persistently ignored. :)

At long last I've just resorted to doing my rendering inside a Vmware box (Windows 2003 server, with 4 vCPU's). Rendering slowdown (due to obvious virtualization) is actually surprisingly minimal. This setup has the great advantage that I can go to my computer in the morning, hybernate the Vmware box, and continue to use my computer for other stuff, until night cometh again and I resume the RipBot task.
I've got a vmware license, I'll give this a shot. It's too bad, too. I'm sure there's SOME way to suspend/resume other processes in windows.

[Atak_Snajpera]

Who said anything about 'ridiculous 2G file size'? You said:
It was example regarding that post:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1217619#post1217619

That's a fascinating argument to have. As I'm sure some would say the difference between 720 and 480 isn't all that big, either. But Full-HD is defined at 1080p, and I like it that way.
Difference between 480p and 720p is alot bigger than 720 and 1080p for HUMAN EYES! You are obsessed by numbers. Some people claim that every 12 Mpix camera will always give better quality than other at 8 Mpix :) Electronic world is not that simple as you see in advertisment.
Your knowledge in this particular case is similar to example above.

[survivant001]

I'm not able to get this clip working in ripbot.
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=fc577931a2d88b41d2db6fb9a8902bda

always out of sync.

[Atak_Snajpera]

Original 1080p (Blu-Ray source)
http://img32.picoodle.com/img/img32/3/11/29/t_Original108m_e619e5a.png (http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?img=/3/11/29/f_Original108m_e619e5a.png&srv=img32)

Spline36Resize(1280,720).Sharpen(0.2).BiCubicResize(1920,1080)
http://img33.picoodle.com/img/img33/3/11/29/t_Bicubic1080m_8480bf9.png (http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?img=/3/11/29/f_Bicubic1080m_8480bf9.png&srv=img33)

Screenshots taken on Key Frame. If difference is barely visible at static frames so during motion you won't see any.

I'm not able to get this clip working in ripbot.
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=f...db6fb9a8902bda

always out of sync.
Is that hard to manually find correct delay? It took me less than 2 minutes to find that correct audio delay is around -1250ms.

I'm sure there's SOME way to suspend/resume other processes in windows.
have you used Procces Explorer?

[survivant001]

Spline36Resize(1280,720).Sharpen(0.2).BiCubicResize(1920,1080)


you use that to generate a 720p instead of 1080p ? (the result will be a higher bitrate of a better quality..right ? )

Is that hard to manually find correct delay? It took me less than 2 minutes to find that correct audio delay is around -1250ms.

I wan't able to find it with mediainfo.. I tough it was that the audio track had less fps than video. so the sync won't stay sync.
[/QUOTE]

[Atak_Snajpera]

you use that to generate a 720p instead of 1080p ? (the result will be a higher bitrate of a better quality..right ? )
This is just a SIMULATION how 720p material would look on 1080p display! BiCubicResize(1920,1080) emulates upscaling algorithm used by players.

I wan't able to find it with mediainfo.. I tough it was that the audio track had less fps than video. so the sync won't stay sync.
Like I mentioned I found audio delay manually. It wasn't difficult.

[asarian]

Original 1080p (Blu-Ray source)
http://img32.picoodle.com/img/img32/3/11/29/t_Original108m_e619e5a.png (http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?img=/3/11/29/f_Original108m_e619e5a.png&srv=img32)

Spline36Resize(1280,720).Sharpen(0.2).BiCubicResize(1920,1080)
http://img33.picoodle.com/img/img33/3/11/29/t_Bicubic1080m_8480bf9.png (http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?img=/3/11/29/f_Bicubic1080m_8480bf9.png&srv=img33)


It certainly doesn't look bad. The BiCubicResize image has about 3,000 less unique colors, but is still impressive, of course.

The thing of it is, though, maybe if you'd been part of the Blu-ray Disc Association, you could have convinced them to go with 720p. But 1080p it is. And you'll always gonna find folks like me, who simply don't want to lose anything: no colors, no resolution, no detail. no contrast, etc.

[~bT~]

And you'll always gonna find folks like me, who simply don't want to lose anything: no colors, no resolution, no detail. no contrast, etc.

so y do u re-encode :rolleyes:

[nwg]

I am sticking with 720p. Apart from the time saving and I am using just single layer DVD's, I only have a 720p display. So, at some stage I am going to lose resolution anyway whether it by downscaling or from the disc itself.

I tried to do a double layer dvd and the blu ray player just stuttered badly. It was fine through the computer. It seems not enough power to play the disc which is strange as it was still well below the max for AVCHD bitrates.

[asarian]

so y do u re-encode :rolleyes:

Yes. I have a 6T media server, and like to stream my movies to my PS3. And, like I said, for VC-1 material I'm forced to re-encode, so I do so grudgingly; hence my desire not to lose anything (or as little as possible).

[nwg]

Yes. I have a 6T media server, and like to stream my movies to my PS3. And, like I said, for VC-1 material I'm forced to re-encode, so I do so grudgingly; hence my desire not to lose anything (or as little as possible).

I will have 2TB of storage shortly. I can stream mpeg2 and VC-1 in original 1080p resolution but not many H264 titles. Sometimes the bitrate is low enough for them to stream but some H264 requires reencoding with ripbot to stream smoothly.

[asarian]

I will have 2TB of storage shortly. I can stream mpeg2 and VC-1 in original 1080p resolution but not many H264 titles. Sometimes the bitrate is low enough for them to stream but some H264 requires reencoding with ripbot to stream smoothly.

The PS3, on the other hand, streams H264 perfectly, also at 1080p, of course, but will only play VC-1 in a WMV container with 2.0 sound. *shudder*

[Atak_Snajpera]

The BiCubicResize image has about 3,000 less unique colors
Do you always watch movies with calculator? :rolleyes:

[diskborste]

Do you always watch movies with calculator? :rolleyes:
It's better if you say how you do it. ;)

[WildTexasChef]

I downloaded this program but it has a .7Z extension. what kind of file type is this? How do I extract it or run it?

Thanks
WTC

[Jad]

http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=.7Z+extension

Its a 7Zip file. WinRar will handle these natively, otherwise you can download the free app.

http://www.7-zip.org/

[~bT~]

Hi Atak!

A lil request please.

Can we please be given the option of using NeroAACEnc if at all poss? And an option to select default bitrate for AAC?

I mainly encode for iPod/PSP and use 96kbps all the time.. maybe these default options can be linked to certain profiles?

Cheers!!!

[anon.j2]

have you used Procces Explorer?
Since you're not willing to work on that feature, why not release the code so others could provide patches?

Suspend/resume isn't important to you and that's totally fine. It is important to some of us. Some of us can even code. Some of us can code and want to help RipBot be the best it can.

[mochevolete]

Hi, a couple of question :)

I've just discovered Ripbot, yesterday I use it to re-encode some MKV samples into a DXVA profile, but whatever I tried the result was a very little file with a very low bitrate.
I tried a couple of profiles, but the bitrate and even the file size has been ignored, resulting in a very little file (approx 1/10 of the source).
Only if the source was demuxed with Mkvextract I managed to re-encode the video properly, any idea why ?

And.. why I have to rename the .h264 extension of the just created video from MKVextract to .264 to make it acceptable to Ripbot ?

[Little OT]
If I have a video, already encoded, let's say with 10Mbps @L5.1, I can simply set the same bitrate for the re-encoding ?

thanks, Nik

[nwg]

I have a question. Why is there a need to create a video.mkv file of just the video. Why can't ripbot just encode straight from the mt2s or 264 file. I understand the need for analysing the video but why does it need to create a new video file and doubling the needed disk space.

[nurbs]

I can only guess, but on blu-ray the video is often split into multiple m2ts files, so after remuxing to a single mkv it might be easier to handle. With raw .264 files I wouldn't even know a source filter that can read them.

[Atak_Snajpera]

I can only guess, but on blu-ray the video is often split into multiple m2ts files, so after remuxing to a single mkv it might be easier to handle.
True. This is how eac3to works.

And.. why I have to rename the .h264 extension of the just created video from MKVextract to .264 to make it acceptable to Ripbot ?
Because I like old school 3 letters extensions :) Happy ?

[asarian]

Since you're not willing to work on that feature, why not release the code so others could provide patches?

Suspend/resume isn't important to you and that's totally fine. It is important to some of us. Some of us can even code. Some of us can code and want to help RipBot be the best it can.

Yup, I'm one of those people who would like to see a suspend/resume task. I'm guessing Atak has been ignoring it, because it's probably hard to do. Basically, you'd have to compile a suspend/resume capability right into x264 itself. And x264 would then have to store buffers, pointers, etc., and pick a key-frame, for example, to smoothly 'break' on. And have functionality to pick up where it left off. Pausing x264, of 'nicing' it to near zero CPU load, is much easier, of course.

[Atak_Snajpera]

I'm guessing Atak has been ignoring it, because it's probably hard to do.
true.

[nurbs]

If you just want to temporarily halt encoding you can use process explorer, if you want to turn of the computer use hibernate.

[laserfan]

I'm guessing Atak has been ignoring it, because it's probably hard to do.CTRL-S in x264 cmd window, or use Process Explorer Suspend/Resume.

[asarian]

CTRL-S in x264 cmd window, or use Process Explorer Suspend/Resume.

I was not so much thinking about pausing the process, but more about a true suspend-to-disk functionality, which could survive a reboot; hybernation won't really do for that purpose, as afterwards you then can only resume your task, or delete the hybernation data, whereas you might want to use your computer for other stuff. Such a suspend task would, indeed, be hard to make.

[HouseCat]

ATI stream is coming out soon. Is there any chance of ripbot somehow making use of it to speed encoding up?

[asarian]

ATI stream is coming out soon. Is there any chance of ripbot somehow making use of it to speed encoding up?

You're probably better off asking that in the x264 sub-fora.

[Atak_Snajpera]

ATI stream is coming out soon. Is there any chance of ripbot somehow making use of it to speed encoding up?
Forget it! CUDA didn't change anything and ati's solution won't change anything either.

[CyberTron88]

I think to be fair to atak, ripbot is (maybe i over simplify it) a gui just to take away all the complication of knowing what parameters we need to pass it with a suite of open source tools out there to get our rips running with just a few simple clicks. To create a suspend and resume, I assume unless the x264 is able to support that natively, it think it is probably out of the scope of the original aim of this tool maybe?

Given the resources available, I'm sure it might be better to do some features that are easier to implement (eg. multiple audio stream support) vs a suspend and resume?

If one knows coding, looking at the batch files that are generated, the ini files, and tools used, i think it is not that difficult to create something similar from scratch. Whether this should be open source is definitely up to his call, and open source does not necessary mean a good thing, and we might end up different fork of the codes going different directions and taking their own path.

For now, I'm happy what ripbot is doing for me, and I personally think I would hope to see ability to encode multiple audio steam if that's doable, else I won't lose sleep over this feature i would love to see.

[asarian]

To create a suspend and resume, I assume unless the x264 is able to support that natively, it think it is probably out of the scope of the original aim of this tool maybe?

Which is kinda what I said:

Yup, I'm one of those people who would like to see a suspend/resume task. I'm guessing Atak has been ignoring it, because it's probably hard to do. Basically, you'd have to compile a suspend/resume capability right into x264 itself. And x264 would then have to store buffers, pointers, etc., and pick a key-frame, for example, to smoothly 'break' on. And have functionality to pick up where it left off. Pausing x264, of 'nicing' it to near zero CPU load, is much easier, of course.

Also, even if one could patch this functionality into x264, you'd have to do so, with all necessary adjustments, for every new version of x264 (and that codebase moves pretty darn fast). So, yeah, this is not something we can realistically ask of Atak. Bringing x264 suspend/resume capability up in the x264 forums, that's another matter, though. :)

[Dr. Zoidberg]

Hi Atak,

Just wanted to say, like so many others, “great job” with Ripbot264! I have noticed however that under picture properties in version 1.11.5 it seems to ignore any re-size resolutions over 720x576 when I try and re-encode my DVD’s to mkv files. Sorry if this has already been mentioned but I couldn’t see it mentioned anywhere on this forum... however, the previous version, 1.10.4, didn’t have this problem, I could just select the “HD-Ready 1280x720” profile and start encoding. With this version I need to select “Automatically” from the Crop selection Dropdown Box first, then the “HD-Ready 1280x720” profile will show in the Size selection Dropdown Box? But, I don’t want to crop my DVD’s as this causes my movies to become stretched and distorted, so, after selecting the “HD-Ready 1280x720” profile I then put my crop selection back to “Do not crop” but doing this re-sizes my output size back to “Do not resize” 720x576?

So, I found this workaround, select “Automatically” from the Crop selection Dropdown Box first, then select the “HD-Ready 1280x720” profile and (this is the difference) click the down arrow button on the crop selections for “Top” & “Bottom” until they’re at 0, you’ll notice the size selection boxes stay at 1280 and 720 respectively but the size drop down dose change to “Don not resize”? So I just select Custom from this box and then I can encode as normal at 1280x720.

Is this intentional or am I missing something here? :sly:

By the way, this produces outstanding results from standard def DVD’s, great job!

Thanks again,

Doc

[~bT~]

open source does not necessary mean a good thing, and we might end up different fork of the codes going different directions and taking their own path
i'm glad this is closed source ;)

[CyberTron88]

Personally, as long as our requests are being looked into by atak, which I felt he is doing a great job so far, open source and close source have no meaning to me.

Everytime I faced a problem, I report it here, atak always respond with a fix pretty fast.

It works for me, and that's all I care. :)

i'm glad this is closed source ;)

[nwg]

Will Ripbot copy stream a DTS HD or TrueHD track and also retain the DTS/AC3 5.1 core?

[asarian]

Will Ripbot copy stream a DTS HD or TrueHD track and also retain the DTS/AC3 5.1 core?

Yes. TrueHD contains an AC3 core + HD data, like DTSHD Master Audio. The HD data is extra. DTSHD-MA and TrueHD work the same: at the basis is the 'core' data, and attached to each channel is extra HD data to complete the track to full HD audio. So, stripping the core would simply make a full HD audio track incomplete/broken.