a complete guide from dvd to 700mb avi where can i find it???

[biftekaki]

hello
iam building a media server.and i would like to put all my dvd to the server.but to use a programm like clone dvd 2 and use a 4.5 iso image is unnecessary.
how does the releasse teams build 700mb movies whitout the black bars?and use stereo???

i try to read the guides but no change to find guide for that that i want.
thank you from greece :-D

[manono]

Welcome to the forum,

AutoGK is so easy to use that you don't really need a guide. However, there's a tutorial online as well as being included in the AutoGK download. It comes in a variety of languages, the tutorial does, so I'll link to the choice of languages and you can take it from there:

http://www.autogk.me.uk/modules.php?name=Tutorial

And here are a number of guides for both AutoGK, as well as it's more configurable (and more difficult to use) big brother, Gordian Knot:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=92089

And we don't discuss warez releases at this site.

[biftekaki]

thank you very much!

i dont want to discuss warez.but it was an a axample.i would like to know how they do it.will i have with autogk the same result???

thanks

[manono]

Will AutoGK give a result similar to the warez movies people download? I've seen better and I've seen worse. AutoGK will keep you from making beginner mistakes, and some of the idiots that upload stuff for the world could have saved themselves the embarrassment of releasing a useless piece of garbage by using it. However, anyone that knows anything does it all manually. They make their own AviSynth scripts and encode the video themselves using VDub or some other encoder.

[yetanotherid]

I must fit into the not knowing anything category as I use AutoGK and just let it do it's thing. What would you do manually, as a general rule, which AutoGK doesn't do?


how does the releasse teams build 700mb movies whitout the black bars?and use stereo???

Why 700mb? By pre-selecting a file size all you're effectively doing is pre-selecting the quality without having any idea what that quality will be. Plus encoding that way takes longer. Ever noticed that some of those videos we're not allowed to discuss here look okay at 700MB while others look horrible? How small you can make the video without losing quality depends on how hard it is to compress, and each one is different.

Ideally you'd forget about file size. Open the DVD to encode using AutoGK (you need to manually rip the DVD to your hard drive first and I use RipIt4Me for the job), change the "select output size" option to "Target Quality" 75%, hit the Advanced Settings button, make the Output Resolution setting "fixed width" at 704 pixels, select either "keep audio" to keep the original DVD audio, or if you want to keep the file size down select CBR MP3 128kbps. Hit okay, then the Add Job button in the main program window and select Start. AutoGK will encode to XviD's optimum quality/file size setting, the quality will always be the same (relative to the original DVD) and the file size will be whatever it will be.
If you must pick a file size rather than a quality leave all the advanced options on "Auto" and let AutoGK do it's thing (hence "Auto"GK).

Personally if I was converting all my DVDs to use on a media server I'd not be using AutoGK or AVI. As much as I like AutoGK and have encoded virtually all my AVIs with it in the past, it's time to move on. Encoding using an x264 capable GUI and using a file format such as MKV is the way to go.

[biftekaki]

i like 700mb becuase it is small size, and some movies dont need a bigger quality for my taste.so with some movies i leave it orginal size on the server.
and mkv is more for hd use for me.
and why avi?for my devices, all "thouse" movies look great and work great. on my old thick tv looks great an i can't even see the differents sometimes.
and for movies in hd i have my hd tv.maybe it is inconvenient, but it works for me.
so i was curious how do the big teams do it so good.
i will try autogk.
is there a tutorial how they do it manually.
thanks

[manono]

I must fit into the not knowing anything category as I use AutoGK and just let it do it's thing.
Nothing wrong with that. And you're not trying to squeeze it into a 700MB CD either, are you? And you're hardly ignorant. It's for the lazy as well as for the beginners. :)
What would you do manually, as a general rule, which AutoGK doesn't do?
Lots, mainly filtering. By doing it all manually you have access to AviSynth's full range of filters. And often, when trying to compress a full movie to a single CD it's important to be able to make it more compressible. About all AutoGK has is Undot. Many kinds of sources it's unable to detect properly and apply the right filters. I'm referring mostly to poor standards converted videos, PAL2NTSC with field blending, NTSC2PAL with field blending, or PAL stuff with shifted fields. About all AutoGK can do with that stuff is to deinterlace with disasterous results.

But if all you work with is Hollywood's latest and greatest, using AutoGK, maybe at the same time giving the end credits lower quality, is fine. And if you mostly do Target Quality encodes, not caring about the final file size, and don't have one of those screwed up sources I mentioned, AutoGK is fine. But the sceners have to fit their stuff on a CD or 2.

is there a tutorial how they do it manually.
I don't know of any, although after you've mastered AutoGK switch to Gordian Knot, and from there it's just a short jump to doing it manually. I still use GKnot for such things as cropping and resizing and getting the bitrate. You can also use it for writing out a basic AviSynth script for you for you to edit as you see fit.

[yetanotherid]

and why avi?for my devices, all "thouse" movies look great and work great. on my old thick tv looks great an i can't even see the differents sometimes.

You probably won't. There's nothing like a CRT TV for hiding the horrible "blemishes" that are really obvious on a HD monitor. I've got VHS encodes which I couldn't watch on my PC monitor (and it's a CRT), but on a CRT TV they don't look too bad.
If you're encoding for a CRT TV (or a device with a small screen) then a width of 640 is probably the maximum you'd want to use. Anything over that (704, 720 etc) is only a marginal improvement when using a HD monitor, and something you'll probably never see on a standard definition monitor.

and for movies in hd i have my hd tv.maybe it is inconvenient, but it works for me.

Well the whole point of h264 is to compress the video more without losing quality, but I guess it depends if the intended playback device can decode it.

so i was curious how do the big teams do it so good.
i will try autogk.
is there a tutorial how they do it manually.
thanks

Well often the 750MB encodes are of a pretty low resolution, or they have a lot of compression artefacts, or both. It depends on the movie.
Sometimes they cheat by cropping a chunk off each side (so a 640x272 video for example, might end up being cropped to 608x272 to reduce the file size) .
Often softer resizers are used (which makes the video easier to compress) or a custom matrix is used etc. Removing noise with the correct filter can help, as can the type of de interlacing.

Myself, I'm lazy.... if I really had to keep a movie to a particular size I'd let AutoGK pick the resolution and resizer etc because in my opinion it always gives good results. It's probably possible to do better "manually", but I'm not sure whether all the extra work and time would be worth any extra gain if in the end all you're really wanting to do is watch the movie on a device such as a phone or portable player where you're probably not going to be able to see the gain anyway.

Maybe my philosophy is wrong, considering I only ever encode for quality, not file size and have therefore never really had to stress over ways to make the video easier to compress.

I'm referring mostly to poor standards converted videos, PAL2NTSC with field blending, NTSC2PAL with field blending, or PAL stuff with shifted fields. About all AutoGK can do with that stuff is to deinterlace with disasterous results.

It's interesting you should say that. I don't work with that sort of low quality stuff very often at all, but with some encodes (using MeGUI for example) where I've not been completely happy with the results I've found myself running an AutoGK encode and looking at the script it creates to see how AutoGK would do it.
Maybe not the best example but a couple of weeks ago I encoded some PAL DVDs of an old (British) TV series using MeGUI. I'll admit as I'm lazy I've never paid a lot of attention to different de-interlacing methods etc but I know when the results look good. In this case MeGUI was giving varying results when analysing an episode (no doubt correctly), some were interlaced, some were apparently hybrid film/interlaced etc and MeGUI picked the de-interlacing method accordingly. Most looked okay but I could see where some had been de-interlaced in parts (or not), some looked quite good and some looked fairly average. So while I had the files on my drive I let AutoGK convert the whole lot, opened each script, manually changed the scripts MeGUI was producing so as to de-interlace using the method AutoGK chose and then ran all the x264 MeGUI encodes again. After comparing the results I kept one of the original MeGUI encodes but I kept the remaining encodes from the second run.
Maybe I should try to understand the whole de-interlacing/film/hybrid thing better so I can start to second guess what a program is doing myself, instead of having to use AutoGK to second guess it for me. :)