Winavi , Xilisoft converters, or any other?

[dreamvampire]

hi everyone, i was just wandering, i am back in backing up my dvd collection business. I was using autogk those days, but now i have found that there are new softwares out there which can encode video's quiet faster than autogk and most freewares. some of them i came across is WINAVI, and the other is XILISOFT, Actually i found both of them from my friend who does not make any use of them. But i have a question, none of these softwares has a proper guide or anything like that. The biggest problem is how do i make my Encoded avi files to fit to a specific size, especially in winavi. does anyone know how to use winavi properly? step by step? like chopping off those black borders, then encoding movie in to a fixed size like 700MB? please let me know the step by steps. Even if it is about XILISOFT it will be ok. If you have any suggestions for me to buy a faster encoding software which gives good quality, recommend me, i wouldn't mind buying one. :thanks:

[blutach]

Both are, IMO, total and utter rubbish and all they do is spam forums with their junky guides and dororthy dix questions. You'll find hundreds of them if you google. I do hope this thread is not bait for them.

Regards

[dreamvampire]

Okay so i think in your opinion it is best if i stop using this crap and go back to my old AUTOGK even though it is bit slower

[LoRd_MuldeR]

There are a lot of alternatives to AUTOGK nowadays. Just to name a few:
MeGUI (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=96032), StaxRip (http://www.planetdvb.net/staxrip), Avidemux (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=126164), SUPER (http://www.erightsoft.com/SUPER.html)...

[dreamvampire]

Thanks for your information mulder, if anyone else has any other recommendations, please feel free to post. thanks for all your help, now i can do some trials and see which one works fastest for me on my new machine

[Dark Shikari]

Thanks for your information mulder, if anyone else has any other recommendations, please feel free to post. thanks for all your help, now i can do some trials and see which one works fastest for me on my new machine"Fastest" is stupid because they all use the same encoding libraries. Speed will only depend on the settings the app chose to use.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

"Fastest" is stupid because they all use the same encoding libraries. Speed will only depend on the settings the app chose to use.

Also "faster" setting usually lead to worse quality (relative to bitrate consumption), while "slow" settings squish out more quality (at same bitrate).

There are some "insane" setting though. Therefore the slowest settings are not necessarily the best settings quality-wise...

[dreamvampire]

Aight! I already get it, so i'll stick to normal setting, it's not about the encoding time, it's about time that take to prepare the encodable file that takes time. But in softwares i've mentioned above they don't take any preparation time such as time to rip audio then encode, they always do it on the go. Well i hope ya guys get what i mean. I am trying few of the recommendations, some require Dotnetfx3.0,

[LoRd_MuldeR]

I am trying few of the recommendations, some require Dotnetfx3.0,

I think .NET Framework 2.0 is enough to run MeGU. At least it works fine on my WinXP machine :p

[Brother John]

.NET 3.5 feels faster though, especially concerning loading times. At least on my old single core machine. But .NET 3.5 includes everything except .NET 1.x, so it’s not too much of mistake to install it. Oh, and StaxRip needs it.