InstantCopy/DVD2One Star Wars AOTC quality comparison

[MackemX]

Deleted due to differences of opinion :D

[mrbass]

great...looks great..thanks for the effort and work throwing these up. If you can remember what percent picture quality were you using for the main movie in Instant Copy? 80%?

[valnar]

I know many of the experts on these forums say its best to compare with dark scenes, but on my monitor, its hard to tell on those pics. Do you have samples from a brighter scene?

Robert

[Drubbel]

Nice of you to share this with the community !
Both IC and d21 showed nice results.

I would also be interested in what % you used in IC .


Thanks

[vljenewein]

All 3 look great.. I'm an old man..I remember snow on the picture tube tv when we had an antenna. We got 2 channels 1 was ALWAYS snowy. Never saw color TV until I was a Senior in High School

VHS is not even close to this good as DVD2ONE. I have DVD2ONE.. bought and paid for.. and I'm happy:D

[OsirisMedia01]

Whilst I dont know all the processes involved with DVD2One and IC, eg how they were programmed and work exactly I do know from experience with video encoding so far that you cant really expect better results from Something that takes 20 mins compared to 3 hrs.

From what ive see with Enemy at the Gates
1. Done with DVD2One, no padding so 4.36G file, it turned out great. No complaints on quality or picture problems at all

2. DVd2One, will keeping some extras, movie was reduces to around 3.6 gig, Explosion scenes, were noticably worse, and pixelation even occured.

3. IC with menus etc, video size was around 76%, and the file size of the video was around 3.5 gig, and it turned out a hell of alot better then the 2nd example. But still in comparison to the first, was less quality, but the first was allocated 4.36 gig so.

But yeah I concurr, really if you put them on par, I think IC will come out on top quality wise, you cant expect fantastic qaulity in 20mins. Dont get me wrong, both have their advantages, but if I could strip Video files in IC so I didnt have to take all the other crap rather then transcoding it to minimal, I think IC would come out on top.

But it is somewhat a apain in the ass to have to wait 3 odd hrs, but then we use to wait even longer with other programs.

[MackemX]

I used a setting of only 68%, and the IC results are more than impressive throughout the film, so you can see the quality is still quite good with IC even though it only allocated 3.43Gb to the film (136mins and 5.1 Soundtrack), leaving just under a 1Gb for the menu

Valnar in brighter scenes the difference is minimal apart from places where there are large patches of the same colour and the same blocking effect is again evident as it is in this 1st example but I am gonna post more examples, in fact what I will do is run DVD2One but allocate the full 4.37Gb to compare this also to see what results it gives. I must also mention AOTC has multiple angles

vljenewein you sure all 3 look great?, it is quite a difference in this example I think. If you can't see it, then is this why some people cannot seem to distinguish the quality difference due to not seeing the same picture as everyone else by whatever means they use?

Originally posted by OsirisMedia01
but if I could strip Video files in IC so I didnt have to take all the other crap rather then transcoding it to minimal, I think IC would come out on top. I think you can take out all the extras and have the movie only. 4.36Gb with DVD2One is obviously gonna be better than the 3.5Gb from IC but add a few 100Mb to IC and it will be back on par with space to spare for menus

p.s. the funny thing I always wonder is if it's worth making backups of the backups, cos I have now destroyed 2 recently (pure accidents both times) before making them useless and had to go through the whole compressing process again!

[OsirisMedia01]

lol you gotta wonder about the things we do sometimes hey?

[vljenewein]

yes you can make a backup of a backup. It will look just like the backup. If it was copied over error free, and should be, then the backup/backup will contain identical bytes of "1" and "0" to make up the code. Digital is exact, but analog is not.

[MackemX]

does the comparision link still work?

I have included a version of DVD2One with 4.37Gb allocated (big difference, but for some reason my page will not update to show it but it should be there)

:D vljenewein, I think you misunderstood my post as I was kidding bowt the backups, but thanks for the advice anyway

[MackemX]

going back to this difference of opinion in the quality stakes, I can on most occasions see a difference and a bigger one than others when viewing snapshots of pictures comparisions

will the fact I'm using a 17"TFT in optimal resolution mode (1280x1024@32bit) via a DVI link to my Geforce 4 card give a different output quality wise than someone using a normal 17" CRT monitor via VGA on a lesser performance graphics card? (if you have a TFT using DVI or even VGA you will see what I'm getting at)

I think it does, cos I've just stuck a 17" monitor to my 2nd output and you can see the difference between the 2 screens even tho they are showing the same picture!. I've also tried the CRT as the main output and again the TFT beats the CRT

I feel this difference via the computer adds to my point made in other posts, that the better your DVD/TV setup the more you should see the difference between a good quality DVD and a lesser quality DVD

[vljenewein]

Went back to the link and looked at all 4 pictures.

I have a 17" SVGA monitor with an nVIDIA 64mb AGP card with latest drivers. TV out too.

Couldn't tell the difference between origianl and DVD2ONE in either resolution...sorry.

Cheers!!

[MackemX]

Originally posted by vljenewein
Couldn't tell the difference between origianl and DVD2ONE in either resolution...sorry.

Cheers!!

no problem :D

I read someone mentioning a picture wan't good enough, but obviously an mpeg sample would be took big to download, so I thought the next best thing would be to put them side by side for a frame by frame comparision

I have 70 frames here and I'm gonna stick them up (when I get round to creating the webpages) so u can browse thru each frame and it will contain DVD2One & Instantcopy pics
side by side

[MackemX]

all the frames are uploaded if you wanna check it out, link is above in my original post which I have updated

[valnar]

Originally posted by MisterX
all the frames are uploaded if you wanna check it out, link is above in my original post which I have updated

It this a blind test? Which one is which?

I think the right side frame looks better. What did I win?? :D

-Robert

[vljenewein]

Well, I looked at the frames. If you find out any quality differences perhaps you have better eyesight than I.. or my eye.. that rhimes.. sort of like leean rimes.. huh?? *S*

We make wine for us and a couple of other wineries. It is really interesting to note when some passerby comes into the tasting room and says our blush is so much better than XYZ Vineyard blush.. when the truth is it all came out of the same tank on the same day into the same bottle.. just we stopped production long enough to change labels.. sometimes the label makes all the difference in what one "Preceives"

My perception is .. they are both good.. If DVD2ONE can fool the 99% as the quality..then they have done one heck of a job. Way to go Erwin and Rene' !!!!

really nice product.. Best there is.. No doubt about it.. look here!!!

DVD2ONE (http://dvd2one.com)

[vljenewein]

Looked at several frames before and after frame 15.. there is ABSOLUTELY.. POSITIVELY...EMPHATICALLY ... did I mention. SURELY.. no difference between top and bottom picture.. Nice series though.. I thought on frame 15 he was standing close to an open door way when I see he has a Graflex flash battery holder in his hand that has been modified to look like a lightsaber.. These were used on the older Speed and Crown Graphic cameras and held the batteries, and an adapter at the top for the flash reflector. Really neat items.. I have one for my camera. *S* Doesn't cut off people's arms, but sure gives the cat a funny look in the middle of the night with a #25 flash bulb in there.. Flash has a longer duration than an electronic stobe and cats hate that.:D

[MackemX]

Originally posted by vljenewein
Looked at several frames before and after frame 15.. there is ABSOLUTELY.. POSITIVELY...EMPHATICALLY ... did I mention. SURELY.. no difference between top and bottom picture
:D I think you or either, taking the p, work for DVD2One, using a TNT 4mb graphics card on a 12" monitor@800x480 with 256 colours or my eyesight is better than yours (no offence mean't by the way :)) or is it a combination of all 4?

joking aside are you viewing this in 1280x1024 32BIT mode as it sounds like you aren't as the pics shud be side by side so you can compare direct without scrolling?

surely you can see the blocking in the left pic, if not try Frame 38 (http://www.deano.dsl.pipex.com/frames/38.htm) and if you still can't then you are definetly taking the p :D

[mgd72]

Nice comparisons. I can see a slight difference in some frames. The DVD2One frames seem a little blurrier than the original while the InstantCopy frames are the middle road. Not that I don't like DVD2One. I still and will continue to use it. DVD2One actually does a decent job on sources with noise due to the blurring.

One small suggestion that may help would be to put a black background on the pages with the pics. It might help to see the details better. I know I am getting blinded by the contrast between the background and the pics ;)

Either way, great work.

Mgd72

[vljenewein]

I have a nVIDIA 64mb DDR AGP card in my Athlon Xp system CPU AthlonXP 2000+ (over clocked. *S*):D 512 MB DDR ram, 80 gb hard drive,,but I'm only running at 800 X 600. I like that. ;)

I'll swithch to higher resolution to take a pee.... er peek. I'm running in 32 bit mode with millions of colors right now. BTW :cool:

At 49 I remember snow on the tv and you hoped you could see enough picture past the snow. Looked kind of intersting when we got better reception. Cable in the 70's was kind of funky! you would get ghost images, as there were still broadcasting stations near by that caused interferrence on channel 3 and you would get a lot of ghosting. VHS looked great! DVD Looks fantastic.. DVD2ONE looks fantastic!! Besides, as they say back in Nebraska, where I'm from... " It's paid fer!!":D Same reason I use Nero and not burn now, record max, make my dvd, burn complete, hole in one or others.. I'll make what I bought work or by God they will know about it!! LOL

Nice pictures though.. I'm serious about the graflex camera flash holder though!

Cheers!

[vljenewein]

Went all the way up in resolution..made for a very small picture, but I think the right side picture is a wee bit better.. about 10cents worth.. that's it. my 2cents worth.. went back to 800 X 600 so I can read again.. my eyes are not eagle eyes like ya all!! LOL

[MackemX]

:D you say you're only 49 cos by the sounds of the way you witter on like Uncle Albert from Only Fool's and Horses you seem to be 99, is that you in the avatar?(or do you look extremely like Einstein), cos it's a shame your witty cracks ain't as wise as him

800x600!??!??!?! for viewing, the latest mobile phone has better res than that

I think you gone a bit too far in the joking stakes now as judging by your other posts here and elsewhere it's a bit obvious that you are in fact able to distinguish quality differences, so why do you have to continue making such meaningless posts and pretend to see no difference? (7 posts alone here and outta that I doubt that one decent post could be made due to all the useless drivel bloating them, I suppose it's one way to get your post count up)

it's also pretty obvious when it come's to DVD2One & InstantCopy comparisions you act like a horse with tunnel vision wearing blinkers!

if you are really that obsessed with DVD2One, does it mean you have to blatantly try and disprove that InstantCopy wipes the floor against DVD2One when it comes to quality regardless of speed?. I agree that the speed/quality ratio is very slightly in DVD2One favour but that's it because when you allocate the same amount of filespace to each DVD2One loses

the only good thing DVD2One is good for is is copying the movie is a short amount of time if you ain't fussed about quality loss. Agreed it's acceptable upto a certain point as some DVD's with extras & soundtracks stripped are then not 7Gb etc, so quality loss is minimal but then you lose all the features of a DVD and I am one who prefers those features

Using DVD2One version 1.02 to include menus/extras/soundtracks then again it wins on speeds but then quality loss suffers even more as shown in this example

Some people are undecided as to which to buy, and that's what I have tried to show to some people still not sure some examples

Personally, I like to watch my DVD as close to the original quality when I make a backup, but I also like at least the intro menu & chapter selection so InstantCopy is the better option for me, yet my friend has DVD2One and it suits him as he just wants backups of the kids DVD's as children aren't normally fussy about quality & menus etc

if you can't notice the difference between InstantCopy & DVD2one then that is your opinion, but for me personally I think IC gives a far greater clarity image whereas DVD2One loses this by blurring the image, thus still giving the effect of good quality but losing fine detail (and more noticable artifacts)

Now if I just wanted an ok quality backup of DVD2One quality, rather than all this fuss, I would just go down the local market or elsewhere and buy pirate DVD copies where someone else has done all the work and not even bother buying the original and just make a direct copy of that instead

so from what I can gather reading your posts here you should stick to drinking wine (what you make wine?, I would never have guessed by your posts :confused: ) and only post when you have something constructive to say and not just bleet on about your wine making business and saying "when I was a lad" & "during the war"

we could go on all day disagreeing which is better as they both beat each other in certain fields as both are great pieces of software but IC is the one that's best suited for my needs and thats whats gonna get my money at the end of the day

[MackemX]

Originally posted by valnar
It this a blind test? Which one is which?

I think the right side frame looks better. What did I win?? :D

-Robert you win by now knowing that you have passed the pepsi, I mean IC challenge!

as the pic you prefer is indeed IC :D

mgd72 thanks for your opinion on quality loss as it seems to be the same as mine, but I reckon we are one of a few who actually have 20/20 vision :D

[mpucoder]

MisterX does make a point. Posts from vljenewein would indicate some wine tasting without spitting has occured. While there is no one post that breaks any rule, we do have rules about staying on topic and not posting just to increase your post count. These rules are there to increase the quality, and therefore decrease the quantity, of information on this forum. That simplifies searches and returns more meaningful results to those seeking information.

[MackemX]

Originally posted by mpucoder
Posts from vljenewein would indicate some wine tasting without spitting has occured.
:D LOL

edited to include something on topic :)
from another of my posts elsewhere in the world, but updated scores

DVD2one best used for speed
Speed : 10 can't beat it
Quality : 4-9 - depends on size of file basically
Price :8 - cheap enough
Ease of Use : 10 - can't really get any simpler
Features : 7 - still no easy 1:1 solution
Total = 39-44/50

DVD2DVDR best used for minimal quality loss
Speed : 5 if you use CCE
Quality : 8-9 - depends again on size
Price : 10 - free (1 if you include CCE)
Ease of Use : 6 - very hard to set up initially
Features : 7 - good but only one PGC limit
Total = 36-37/50 (minus 9 if you include CCE)

InstantCopy best used for complete DVD9-DVD5 backup
Speed : 7 - nearer to DVD2DVDR speed than DVD2One
Quality : 6-9 - depends on selected files
Price : 8 - from initial prices
Ease of Use : 9 - takes some setting up, but easy to do
Features : 10 - basically u can copy 1:1
Total = 40-43/50

DVDXCopy best used for DVD9 to 2x DVD5
Speed : 7 - depends what you keep
Quality : 10 - same as original
Price : 6 - could be cheaper
Ease of Use : 9 - simple to use
Features : 8 - very good options for splitting
Total = 40/50

DVD2One actually just beats IC, in fact its close between the 4 but individual field scores are quite different

it's all down to the user needs at the end of the day

n.b. this is my personal view and I am not liable to anyone if they get any product and view it differently

[valnar]

Well, IMO, DVD2One doesn't beat IC on any counts. IC is very easy to use, and if you're too brain dead to figure it out and have to use DVD2One, you shouldn't be making backups anyway (let alone be allowed to touch a PC). And anyone who only has 30 minutes to make a backup, deserves the quality they get.

I realize we live in a world where Pentium 4's aren't even fast enough for the power users, but if you started on an XT or 286 like me, you'd appreciate the speed we have. Realtime transcoding is nothing to sneeze at.

Patience people. ;)

-Robert

[MackemX]

Originally posted by valnar
IC is very easy to use, and if you're too brain dead to figure it out and have to use DVD2One, you shouldn't be making backups anyway (let alone be allowed to touch a PC). And anyone who only has 30 minutes to make a backup, deserves the quality they get. that is a bit harsh :D, yet strangely enough sometimes true and I agree with you to a certain degree

slightly off my original topic but I need to get this off my chest as a there are a lot of different opinions on this forum

I think a lot of people views of a program (not just IC) are sometimes twisted by their knowledge of how to use the program to it's full potential and their system setup

how many people have slagged off IC, yet other's sing it's praises (me for one) and personally my only problem with IC is the filesize issue which can be corrected manually, Is it because I have a different demo version?, somehow I don't think so, it's more to do with the DVD I have chosen to backup, how I have ripped it, what I do with ripped files if anything before opening IC, which options I have chosen to do within IC, how I extracted the PDI file and which program I burnt it with. Now add to that all the possible user settings within the programs used in the whole process along with the actual operating system and programs installed within that affecting the programs you are using, then you have infinite combinations of getting a backup from the original

e.g. jdobbs is having a lot of trouble with IC, yet he still continues to try and in the end will probably get there (and be pleased with the results), as he believes it is his setup as he has even gone to the extreme of rebuilding his system, cos I'm sure if he came along to my house and used IC the way I have my system setup it would work! (tea and biscuits provided too :))

I'm not saying I'm an expert in everything but if I cannot use a program to get the effect other seem to get then I do not slag that program off, I go out and find out why I'm not getting the same results as it's obviously my system that is the problem or the settings I am choosing

e.g If I see someone struggling with a program I try and help them to the best of my knowledge or point them in the right direction, but I do not like it when people come onto a forum saying they have problems but then slag it off as sometimes (more times than not!) it's an actual user related/system setup/settings problem and maybe on the odd occassion the problem is program related

when I 1st tried using DVD2DVDR, it took me a few days just to get it to open! and a few more days to get comfortable on how to use it, but did I whinge about it?, no I persevered until I got the result everyone else seemed to get and boy was I happy with the results and feel I can now use it to it's best potential with no problems

now IC may lose some quality when up against DVD2DVDR but it more than makes up for it in the ease of use and time setting up stakes, and no messing with rebuilding the DVD afterwards which people don't include in DVD2One times (took me ages to originally get AOTC working with menus when I used DVD2DVR, tho DVD's with one PGC are simple to rebuild but still need extra time to rebuild)
Although DVD2One processing is quicker, it is different when it comes to ACTUAL time spent at the PC, in fact IC is probably quicker due to it actually burns the disc if you want it to as you don't have to mess on rebuilding
I mean c'mon, how many backups do people realistically need to make in a day???, is processing speed really an issue?, maybe it is for some people but I'm quite comfortable letting IC run regardless of being at the computer or not

I just wish I had the time to make top quality backups but as of now IC is my best solution, if I needed an even quicker way to do it and wasn't that fussed on having my backup as close to the original I would have then chosen DVD2One

to come to this conclusion I use the formula :

QUALITYxPROCESSING SPEEDxORIGINAL CONTENT PRESERVEDxDVD STRUCTURE RETAINED/TIME NEEDED AT COMPUTER

rant rant rant :D

[valnar]

To me, any of the CCE methods aren't even an option. I have a couple DVD's that frankly don't work with any other method except IC. Getting multiple angles, multiple-PGC's right and retaining subtitles, chapter breaks, etc. can either be very difficult, or flat out impossible when reauthoring.

Unless something better comes along, and I imagine patches are forthcoming for IC, I've hit the end of my search in DVD backups. IC is it!

-Robert

[vljenewein]

Originally posted by mpucoder
MisterX does make a point. Posts from vljenewein would indicate some wine tasting without spitting has occured. While there is no one post that breaks any rule, we do have rules about staying on topic and not posting just to increase your post count. These rules are there to increase the quality, and therefore decrease the quantity, of information on this forum. That simplifies searches and returns more meaningful results to those seeking information.

I hope mpucoder and misterx are not angry with me, as I only try to interject some lightness in my posts. I actually am 49 and I actually do use 800X600 because of the ability to read info. And I have to agree with others, that the second one of the series is a better quality picture. I am only interjecting that there are many, like myself, that do not have or are not running high resolution video and the diffrences between the two are there but are they worth the need to buy yet another piece of software to do transcoding.

You asked for opinions, and I have given them freely, and without trying to be judgemental on a product I do not have, just solely based on what I can see on my computer with my monitor of the images presented. Menus are, in opinion only, cute, and not necessary. While some may find them an asset I rather like go go straight to the movie, and if I want to skip to a different part, well.. there is always the chapter "GO TO" option. To each his own, but I never really meant to ruffles the feathers of misterx or others, just giving you my background on how critical do these things really need to be.

If I were in production I would worry about these things. Since I own the original and watch the back up and likewise for other family memebers, we tolerate the no menu things...actually prefer them. If I want to see the deleted scenes of "UNBREAKABLE" all I do is pull out the original and look at them.
Do you own the original, or is this some movie that you have borrowed from a friend or from a video rental place? Not a question to be answered, but just a thought to consider. Perhaps ALL the things like menus, extras, and all are more important then, since you do not have access at any given time to the original.

There was a post.. a thread that asked "Do you make copies from your own or borrowed?" Amazingly, the polls showed over 90% have copied from friends or from video stores. Not accusing anyone posting here ever..just an intersting fact.

If you like IC and think it's great, I applaud you for your choice of software. If you have DVD2ONE and like it.. I likewise applaud you for your choice, but I do not work for DVD2ONE, but I do see a lot of slamming on such an earlier pioneer in the field of transcoding this newer style of sofware that I often get carried away for bragging about them.. I do not appologize for that bragging, as I feel it is well deserved. And my posts on this thread will now end.;)

[MackemX]

Originally posted by vljenewein
Do you own the original, or is this some movie that you have borrowed from a friend or from a video rental place? Not a question to be answered, but just a thought to consider. Perhaps ALL the things like menus, extras, and all are more important then, since you do not have access at any given time to the original. I can't speak for others but personally I do own the original's
since my old stupid DVD player decided to close on me when taking out a DVD (funnily enough Star Wars) and destroying it, and why is it when you drop a DVD be it on cotton wool, it somehow seems to get scratched! (bit like buttered toast landing butter side down)

I decided it was better to make a £0.50p back than risk destroying a DVD again as it also saves on wear and tear of the cover, plus you can always make another backup but maybe not get a replacement DVD (OK so I'm fussy :))

but if DVD2One could offer the same menu keeping features as IC with a little better quality with larger files then it would just wipe the floor with anything else and one day it probably will and I'll be first in the queue to buy it, in fact probably 2nd behind you vljenewein :D

cheers, no hard feelings mate and can I pop in for a drink next time I'm round your way?

[DaRipper]

You guys should try the movie Sweet Home Alabama with both IC and DVD2One to see which quality is really better. The beginning cloud scene with DVD2One is horribly blocky with DVD2One. My friend tried it also and he saw the same problem. I wonder if IC will do a better job.

[MackemX]

Originally posted by DaRipper
You guys should try the movie Sweet Home Alabama with both IC and DVD2One to see which quality is really better. The beginning cloud scene with DVD2One is horribly blocky with DVD2One. My friend tried it also and he saw the same problem. I wonder if IC will do a better job. Overall I think the loss of picture quality simply depends on the original size of the VIDEO ONLY file (as if you had demuxed it 1st) and the VIDEO ONLY filesize afterwiards(if you demux the resulting file)

if you allocate the same amount filespace to Sweet Alabama for IC as you did in the resulting DVD2One file (MOVIE/AUDIO only), it will be better (by how much will increase the higher the diff between the original & the resulting vid only files), but obviously takes longer

How big was the movie including the audio you kept and how much did you allocate it?, as it's less than 2hrs so DVD2One should have given a very high quality!

I thought it was gonna be like Saving Rivate Ryan & T2 as IC is nearer to the original than DVD2One, even if I include the menu & chapter screens on both

The original T2 had blocks to begin with but DVD2One made even more of them, then add to that the pulsing and dot crawl effects in darker backgrounds that keep taking my eye away from main action in the scene showed a big difference between the two

everyone has different needs so they will get different results

[SniperKilla]

starwars ATOC did some funky stuff with the angles for the opening scrolling text, because they did 3 angles for the 3 different languages, when you play it after it being done with instantcopy, it combines all 3 angles so it plays a second of the english, a second of the spanish, a second of the french, then it keeps going till it gets done with it all, quite funny and annoying.

[MackemX]

strange, mine works just fine but now you've mentioned that I do remember it has 3 angles

yet my backup now only has 1 :confused:

I wonder how I did that?

maybe it happened when I stripped out the audio 1st using ifoedit I can't remember what I did

but luckily it works, so I'm happy :)

cheers for pointing that out tho Sniperkilla, one to watch out for in the future

[MackemX]

This is for those who could not see difference between the pics in my examples

In the past few days I have asked my mother, and two friends to give me their opinion on the quality differences between the pics but viewing them on their PC's

On my mothers computer I could hardly see the difference between any and only just on obvious frames like no's 16 & 38. My mother said they all looked the same :) but then she's not as fussy as me

and the other 2 computer's were no better showing a good comparision

I tried changing from 16Bit to 32BIT clour settings, different resolutions, still the same, very minimal difference.

So the performance of your hardware will affect the image quality you see. On my steup you can see the difference on the majority of pics and you cannot argue when both images are on the same screen at the same time from the same source as obviously my monitor does not display a poorer image on the left hand side

My mother and both my friend's have since seen the images on my PC and have changed their opinions

Apologies to all who could not see the same difference as I experienced as I have compared your opinions against what I see in front of me. If I saw the same quality image on my computer as produced on my mother's & friend's computers I wouldn't even bothered posting the pics or this thread!

The media used will have a slight affect also, look at the examples shown HERE (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=36085) regarding the quality of the certain DVD media and you will see what I mean when you look HERE (http://www.deano.dsl.pipex.com/icpic/sam.gif) at my test results when I tested the cheap media I use

If you compare playing a poor media on a cheap brand 28" TV and basic DVD player to quality media played back on say a Sony DRC 36" Widescreen TV and top quality DVD player with higher quality connector cables and optimal input/output settings for both TV & DVD then you will see a difference in the resulting picture quality

If you believe the difference aren't really noticable, take a walk around Currys superstores (or any other electrical superstore) in the TV department where they have around a 100 TV's on display and see if all TV's show the same quality picture!. Also have a look in the little demo room where they normally have the best TV with the surround sound setup and compare that to the rest

"In the end it's a matter of individual perception and the level of quality delivered by the playback system"

Never a truer word spoken!, as it explains the difference of opinion when discussing quality of images when they have been processed
(taken from DVDDEMYSTIFIED (http://www.idt-microsynergy.com/support/faqs/dvdfaq/dvdfaq_index.htm) , worth a read & note question 3.2 regarding the hookup options)

apologies again and I doubt I'll bother with quality comparisions anymore or get involved in a quality discussion regarding encoding software as everyone sees a different result on their own PC, so you will get a mixed response unless we all sit in the same room looking at the same images :D

[boden11]

there is always the possibility of BUYING star wars 2...


ehhh

eff that

:devil:

personally i don't mind the quality loss of dvd2one cuz it's not that noticeable to me. (i dont wear glasses) i use instant copy for the episode discs and for the movies i really like, i just buy em. but if it wasnt worth buying, then some quality loss isn't going to matter much, i mean its still WAYYY better than vhs or anything else out there. i dont think instant copy is that great of a program yet, still kinda weird and clunky interface. (why the hell does it even bother showing the video when it transcodes...doesn't that just slow it down????) and why cant u specify the filesize easily and why does it use its own proprietary iso format that is split into 4 parts....makes me iffy.

[MackemX]

Originally posted by boden11
there is always the possibility of BUYING star wars 2...


ehhh

eff that

:devil:

personally i don't mind the quality loss of dvd2one cuz it's not that noticeable to me. (i dont wear glasses) i use instant copy for the episode discs and for the movies i really like, i just buy em. but if it wasnt worth buying, then some quality loss isn't going to matter much
So you don't own many original's, you are just a very good customer of Blockbuster :D

[jockeycfc]

just a quick question

why all the fuss about dvd2one and ic both programs do a job that for ages we had to droll over our pc's and do it manually,both programs have a place in the dvd back up world.

you pay your cash and take what you get,both can only get better with time so what is the point of slagging of one against the other.

another question ?????

valnar do you work for Pinnacle? as all the post you make that i have seen on this forum and cd freaks you seen to be blowing ic trumpet all day long (no offence meant) just a question

[valnar]

No, I don't work for Pinnacle, but I also know IC has its limitations. I realize there are some DVD's that just crash with IC, and I'm awaiting a fix like many people.

To me, DVD2One is not an alternative, because I don't find the quality acceptable (unless the DVD is under 5GB to begin with).

Robert

Edit: Another analogy. Do any IC/DVD2One people still consider ReMPEG2 a viable alternative? Probably not. I just take it up another notch. I don't think DVD2One and ReMPEG2 are good enough. After all, we have to watch these DVD's!

[MackemX]

simply put A/B=C

A = input needed
B = processing time
C = quality

now some people are fussy about quality and some ain't and some people can wait but some want quick results

its a matter of personal opinion and requirements as to which is better

p.s. Valnar probably does not work for Pinnacle but probably gets the same high standard results like me, so that's why he blows the trumpet and I'm banging on the drums :D

we only do this as some people report that IC is crap or is full of bugs but they are not realising the true potential of this wonderful tool



LOL, you posted before me Valnar, Is that Cleveland OHIO, or Cleveland near BORO?

[xmenxmen]

Originally posted by valnar
No, I don't work for Pinnacle, but I also know IC has its limitations. I realize there are some DVD's that just crash with IC, and I'm awaiting a fix like many people.

To me, DVD2One is not an alternative, because I don't find the quality acceptable (unless the DVD is under 5GB to begin with).

Robert

Edit: Another analogy. Do any IC/DVD2One people still consider ReMPEG2 a viable alternative? Probably not. I just take it up another notch. I don't think DVD2One and ReMPEG2 are good enough. After all, we have to watch these DVD's!

Not to be rude, I just hope your wife looks like a supermodel.

[boden11]

no it goes:

friends -- free rentals
wherehouse -- limited selection, tho $1 dvd rentals (all, but /day)
blockbuster -- for those videos not available thru friends or wherehouse

:)

Originally posted by MisterX
So you don't own many original's, you are just a very good customer of Blockbuster :D

[vljenewein]

I have a bought version of DVD95COPY I got last night from www.dvd95copy.com ,from the maker/web site at DigiMagic Tech. I took one of my movies, an older one, Men In Black and did a full rip (something I really don't do as it just takes up more room) of the movie as it is required for DVD95COPY to work properly. I created 2 separeate MIB folders on my hard drive for the result to go to and let them do their thing.

This is really not a good example in one regards because my MIB movie contains both the wide screen version and full screen version on same disc. But, in another realm, this was a good example to see how well the separate movies look (DVD2ONE and DVD95COPY) with this type of set up.

DVD2ONE: choose full screen movie, title 7 from the menu of DVD2ONE at the beginnig and saved just the english, angle 1 setting. Movie come out very well, you have to look hard to find any minor flaws, and noticible, but not distracting (at least to me) in the scene near the beginning where the space craft crashes into that farmers truck.. it's a nigth scene and you need to look at the house as it's background is constant and therein lies the "problems" with those progams that have to recompress or transcode, is the constant scenery. But in all, came out acceptable for me.. quite good.

DVD95COPY: Since I got the "full meal deal" with this I get the menu in the beginning that lets me choose wide screen or full screen. Herein was it's downfall. It had to save both movies that take up obviously more space than a single movie. I choose the full screen. BTW the menus looked pretty good. Watched to movie,especially the night scene, at the farmers house where the space craft crashes into his truck. VERY noticable shifting on the house and pixilation. Even the scene inside where the woman and "man/insect/alien) talk has noticible pixilation. I don't have the high end video stuff like others so it may be enhanced (problem/pixilation). Positive thing is nice to have the menu there to choose where to go, etc. Negative is this movie has 2 different formats and has much more to transcode than a movie that almost fits onto one DVD.

I'll have to try it now with a single movie DVD that is not too overly big and take a better look. DVD95COPY did what it said to do and made 1 DVD back up with all the stuff, but, unfortunately, the main thing.. the movie... in this example, has lost a bit.