For only 5 or 6% reduction, should I use CCE/HC or Shrink?

[Stanley_A]

I'm trying to backup a movie (black and white, with some color).
Everything has been removed. This is just the movie, the audio file and a subtitle. I can't remove anything else.
DVDShrink says 96,6%.
DVDRebuilder says 93,4%.

My question is. Having to make such a small reduction, which program gives me the best result VISUALLY?
Even at this level, do the encoders still produce a better image than a transcoder?

And here's the log of the Rebuilder Preparation Phase:

[12:17:02] Phase I, PREPARATION started.
- DVD-RB v1.28.2
- AVISYNTH 2.5.7.0
- CCE encoder selected.
- Source: MOVIE
- VTS_01: 2.346.135 sectors.
-- Scanning and writing .D2V & .AVS files
-- Processed 178.448 frames.
-- Building .AVS and .ECL files
- Reduction Level for DVD-5: 93,4%
- Overall Bitrate : 5.442/4.353Kbs
- Space for Video : 3.955.206KB
- HIGH/LOW/TYPICAL Bitrates: 5.633/1.571/4.353 Kbs

[Video Dude]

I would use DVD-RB in redistribution mode. Most segments likely won't even be re-encoded. Only a few would, depending on the DVD.

You might even be able to get away with using the segment viewer to compress only the credits and leave the rest of the movie alone.

This would save both time and quality.

[blutach]

which program gives me the best result VISUALLY?
The one your eyes are happiest with. See rule 12.

But at the bitrates you are quoting, even transocders will produce an excellent result.

Regards

[manono]

We're being tested:

http://forum.videohelp.com/topic361375.html

[Comatose]

Or maybe he just wanted more opinions...

[smok3]

i don't remember reading the 'fact' that the encoders are always better than transcoders? (i would use dvd shrink)

[manono]

i don't remember reading the 'fact' that the encoders are always better than transcoders? (i would use dvd shrink)
I don't think it can be disputed that an encoder will do a better job if you know what you're doing. Since Stanley_A obviously doesn't - as evidenced by the fact that he lets DVD-RB do it, rather than doing it himself - then in this case I also would also recommend the transcoder. When shrinking by higher percentages the differences can become very obvious because a transcoder will keep the original quantisation matrix, and the average quant can get very high producing obvious artifacts. When using an encoder you can fit the matrix used to the material and the amount of compression.

Me, for such a little bit, I'd probably reencode the end credits or the intro and leave the rest untouched. This is similar to what Video Dude suggested, and maybe Stanley_A can figure out how to do that himself, if he's interested.