DVD95Copy, DVD2ONE or InstantCopy. Which is best for video quality? [Archive]

Calypso

5th March 2003, 02:05

I don't think he was asking which is the fastest... he was asking which has the best quality.

I don't know anything about DVD95Copy, but many here have indicated InstantCopy may produce better quality than DVD2ONE. I tend to agree.

There is no reason that InstantCopy will not compress a movie only Disk- as long as the IFO structure you start with is correct to begin with- it should work fine.

MackemX

5th March 2003, 02:25

LOL :D, I know IC is better quality (have you not seen me ranting in every other post about it being better :)

it all depends on users needs and as you can see kevinswystun mentions no menus or extras, so in other words he is allocating the full 4.37Gb to DVD2One and quality loss regarding most DVD's using DVD2One when transcoding will be very minimal and only noticable on longer films or films with multiple soundtracks that have been kept

IC has filesize issues (losing 300MB) along with the fact you will still have to keep at least 30% of the menu for it to process, so for a menu of say 250MB you will need around 70MB, add the 300MB IC loses then you will end up 370MB less for the movie with a file of 4GB

this 370MB lost will probably be around 10% of the actual video file if you subtract the MB for the audio

So IC and DVD2one cannot be truely compared 1:1 regarding quality with movie only

The only way to do this is oversize IC to predict the Main Movie Title to be 4.37Gb (the figure in the brackets), then just strip the movie out after IC has processed and IC WILL be better quality but the difference will depend on the size of the original movie & audio selected (has anyone tried this?)

on this occasion regarding no menu's or extras DVD2One will be the best option for the majority of cases as it will be a lot quicker and the speed/quality ratio is better to IC

I myself personally use IC and would probably use it even if I wanted to keep the movie only whereas some people like quicker results

SniperKilla

5th March 2003, 02:32

dvd95copy

MackemX

5th March 2003, 02:37

Originally posted by SniperKilla
dvd95copy
you sure?

can you deslect menu's and extras with it now cos I can't with the demo, so this will use valuable space which could be utilised in the movie only title

I'm about to post some pics with menu's and the quality regarding this tool, tho the main movie quality is on a par with IC if not better but that is to be expected due to small space allocated for menu's

SniperKilla

5th March 2003, 04:51

heh, people need to stop trying to defend instantcopy :)

yes dvd95copy compresses the menus and extras to the max, and it gets them to under half the size that instantcopy can get them to at 30 percent, and they are actually WATCHABLE unlike instantcopy at 30%.

dvd95copy will make instantcopy a thing of the past once they give us the option to select what the extras are and what the main movie files are, so that it iwll work with episode dvds.

SniperKilla

5th March 2003, 05:19

http://members.verizon.net/~vze4dt3c/compare.html

and
someone else ran this comparison

http://spoonman.roarvgm.com/dvd95copy/

enough said :)

MackemX

5th March 2003, 05:21

Originally posted by SniperKilla
heh, people need to stop trying to defend instantcopy :)

yes dvd95copy compresses the menus and extras to the max, and it gets them to under half the size that instantcopy can get them to at 30 percent, and they are actually WATCHABLE unlike instantcopy at 30%.

dvd95copy will make instantcopy a thing of the past once they give us the option to select what the extras are and what the main movie files are, so that it iwll work with episode dvds.

guess I'll have to upload some pic's from the menu's from my use of DVD95copy cos I cannot see how they are watchable. The blocking is unbelievable as they're about are 5mm square covering the whole screen when it's a motion menu

now back to original post

allocate 3.9Gb of space for the video file each to DVD2One/InstantCopy/DVD95Copy and the remaining 0.47Gb for a soundtrack (typical example of DVD backup with 5.1 soundtrack) and InstantCopy will win everytime and the bigger the original video file the bigger the difference

I ain't defending anything but answering the original question from kevinswystun was which has the best video quality without menu's or extras and the correct answer to that is InstantCopy if used properly :)

that may then be affected by the user's time limits and this is what will determine whether the extra quality is worth the extra processing time, but bear in mind sometimes DVD2One requires more user time to complete

p.s. the difference in the main movie files when comparing IC & DVD95Copy in no way makes up for the quality loss on the menus

basically it's all down to the user and his preferences so there will always be differences of opinion but sometimes I do feel some opinions of these 3 pieces of software can be questionable (not pointed at anyone in partcular tho)

All 3 are great in their own way and hopefully will improve

MackemX

5th March 2003, 05:44

Originally posted by SniperKilla
http://members.verizon.net/~vze4dt3c/compare.html

and
someone else ran this comparison

http://spoonman.roarvgm.com/dvd95copy/

enough said :)

guess I could go on posting all day and night but you still won't get my point

simply put, if IC was allocated the exact same amount of video space that have been allocated to those examples, on most occasions it would probably be closer to the original than the other 2. If CCE was allocated the same amount then it would put all 3 to shame

These examples do not show what the original video size was or what the resulting video filesize was and probably aren't a true reflection of a quality comparision

for all we know the original video only file for X-men may have only been reduced by a small amount and by the looks of those pics it probably has because even CCE would struggle to produce quality that good on an average reduction

now the fact most users of IC use it to maintain menu's & extras this in turn has an effect on the main movie quality, but that slight loss of quality is more than made up by the quality of the menu's & extras

Do I really have to do another FAIR comparision to prove that IC is the winner when it comes to identical resulting video files?

and the Star Wars comparision is totally misleading as I can bet those video file allocation were also unbalanced, and seeming as you have no info on these sizes from when you did them, it cannot be classed as a true comparision

that's my opinion and I'm sure some will agree and some will disagree with me but hopefully no-one will be offended because at the end of the day I want good quality and at the moment I know which is best for me but my choice may not be the choice of others

but I do feel it is unfair when comparisions are shown when they are not neccessarily evenly balanced, so maybe I am defending IC in a way but I feel I have good reason too

If in time some true comparisions do arise, then I may just change my opinion

cheers

SniperKilla

5th March 2003, 05:53

well i believe you should try before speaking :)

and starwars had a 600mb menu reduced to 189mb and it looked great.

MackemX

5th March 2003, 05:57

this is the standard of quality for the menu when I used DVD95Copy on Planet of the Apes (http://www.deano.dsl.pipex.com/dvd95copy.htm)

now tell me that is good quality for a full screen motion menu?

enough said :)

SniperKilla

5th March 2003, 06:01

its a menu, it looks fine for what it is, a menu.

MackemX

5th March 2003, 06:20

Originally posted by SniperKilla
its a menu, it looks fine for what it is, a menu.

wahay, touched a nerve

it looks fine?!??!, so you cannot see the 5x5mm blocks all over the screen

it's a pity you don't live locally as you would be more than welcome to come and and have a cup of tea with a few biscuits and see what I'm looking at and it certainly don't look fine!

your monitor is giving you a misleading opinion of the quality of the image which is quite a variation (think of a 100 TV's in an electrical shop showing the same picture, the picture quality is not the same on every one is it?) as I have previously mentioned in my Star Wars thread and retracted my comments as I now feel the quote in my signature says it all. People who also have an eye for image quality and have the means to show will know exactly what I mean

but your comments are quite one-sided so I have felt the need to come to the assistance of newbies looking to purchase a program when you are blatantly biased yet have no valid evidence to prove this is the best choice in this post

again please look at the original post, menu's has nothing to do with it anyway :), and I have answered the guy's questions with as truthful an answer I feel possible

now for this DVD95Copy cannot be included as you cannot select movie only, and as previously said this will have an effect on the movie quality

InstantCopy has this option all be it a hack and oversizing, but it is still possible, but overall DVD2One is probably the better option for kevinswystun

There are methods to supply DVD95Copy with only the movie, but then if you supplied IC or DVD2One the same files again IC would probably be the better quality regarding the main movie

I think it's early days to judge the 3 programs when no-one has posted a TRUE comparision and when that time comes my opinion may change

SniperKilla

5th March 2003, 06:34

d*** i never seen anyone who cared so damn much about how good the menu looks, cce the menu if you care that much :)

hakko504

5th March 2003, 10:02

@Sniperkilla

There is no need for that kind of language. #4 (http://forum.doom9.org/forum-rules.htm)

rufusrex

5th March 2003, 17:47

Question on the first comparison - Originally posted by SniperKilla
http://members.verizon.net/~vze4dt3c/compare.html

The IC7 sample frame says "automatic resize" - does that mean that you didn't lower the extras and titles and delete extra audio tracks to make more room for the movie? If there were a lot of extras and audio tracks that would obviously effect the quality of the movie where DVD95 automatically lowers the extras.

kevinswystun

5th March 2003, 21:39

This is why I like this site/forum. So many deferent opinions.

Thank you MisterX for your replays, your guilds and help with my question about which program to purchase. You’ve done your homework.

Sniperkilla: I think as MisterX wrote “it’s early days to judge these (3) programs”, the best is yet to come.

But I thing for me one thing is certain, I will never encode again. After a year using CCE and 20 hour waits, Transcoding is the future.

MackemX

5th March 2003, 22:00

Originally posted by rufusrex
Question on the first comparison - Originally posted by SniperKilla
http://members.verizon.net/~vze4dt3c/compare.html

The IC7 sample frame says "automatic resize" - does that mean that you didn't lower the extras and titles and delete extra audio tracks to make more room for the movie? If there were a lot of extras and audio tracks that would obviously effect the quality of the movie where DVD95 automatically lowers the extras.

good spot, so it was an unfair comparision

don't forget the phanton 300MB that IC also misses

enough said :)

I think my thread says it all about making comparisions HERE (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=47869)

SniperKilla

5th March 2003, 22:25

im sorry but the 300mb on the main movie that dvd95copy may have had over instantcopy, isint going to affect the quality that drasticly.

just so you will stop crying about non fair comparisons, im going to run ic on ep2 again now, with max compression on the menu and the 1 extra.

ill be back in about 7 hours with my results

MackemX

5th March 2003, 22:39

Originally posted by SniperKilla
im sorry but the 300mb on the main movie that dvd95copy may have had over instantcopy, isint going to affect the quality that drasticly.

just so you will stop crying about non fair comparisons, im going to run ic on ep2 again now, with max compression on the menu and the 1 extra.

ill be back in about 7 hours with my results

LOL :D

I'm sorry but it is, 300MB from a VIDEO ONLY size of around 3Gb is gonna have an effect. That's around 10%

You don't have to run the comparision because it still won't be a true comparision and I can't be bothered to do one again after the last STAR WARS AOTC comparision I did

just try reading my thread HERE (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=47869) and you may just give up on this bitching when you understand how the before and after VIDEO ONLY sizes affect the differences in quality and are the only factors in a TRUE quality comparision. Nothing Else!

You seem to have blinkers on regarding DVD95Copy, so can I ask if you work for them or are you getting a commission from sales?

try to answer politely as I see your previous posts have been edited, but I do hope you see the reason why I still continue this discussion with you

More experienced users will no doubt agree with what I am saying, but somehow you don't but I feel your opinions & showings are very misleading to newbies to the DVD backingup lark

cheers :)

Do I really need to upload a pic of Yoda from my copy of AOTC from my use of IC?

rufusrex

5th March 2003, 23:04

I think that BOTH programs may be the way to go. What I'm going to try is start with DVD95COPY to shrink the extras as much as possible, then replace the movie VOBs with the originals, then use IC7 to do the movie. Wait, this seems like double the work. I think both tools are great and really have a hard time telling the difference. Since I've already bought IC7 I don't think I can justify spending $45 for DVD95, I'll try the demo. You guys are making my head hurt. I've gone from using CCE and encoding extras down to 30%, then re-encoding the movie with the space that was left over. Got great DVDs but it took FOREVER. With IC7 and DVD95 it takes way less time, comes out ALMOST as good and is way easier. I'm happy with either.

MackemX

5th March 2003, 23:15

I mentioned in V*****P forum that DVD95Copy looks like the lovechild of DVD2One & InstantCopy that hasn't fully developed :)

and when it does fully develop, it will be the best tool out there

SniperKilla

5th March 2003, 23:29

no, im just going from what i have seen, that it produces better looking movies then instantcopy and dvd2one can.

also, i tried doing starwars with instantcopy, with everything down, the highest i could get the main movie to was 3.7 some gigs, so i dident even waste mey time cause im sick of you saying blah blah thats not a real comparison blahblahblah blah.

so if instantcopy cant even get to that size, doesent that make dvd95copy already better looking at that movie only?

SniperKilla

5th March 2003, 23:35

actually, its 3.11 gigs is the max that instantcopy will be able to give to the movie, with the menu and the one extra at max compression.

so dvd95copy was able to give the movie a whole extra gig, with the menu and extra, and they both look better then they will with instantcopy at full compression.

hummmm what seems to be the better software here.

rufusrex

6th March 2003, 00:16

MisterX and SniperKilla -

You both have valid points. I'm currently trying Animal House, will try both IC7 and DV95. I'm sure they will both do a great job, I'm curious to see if I can notice a diference. They both seem to have advantages, I like being able to keep the menus at 80 or 90 percent in IC7 but I also like the fact the DV95 can shrink the extras and titles even smaller and better quality than IC7. If you care I'll post my results in tomorrow after I test both. I am a neutral observer and am not taking sides (yet) in this heated debate.;)

nyplayer

6th March 2003, 00:56

The reason why Dvd95Copy does a great job on extras right now is simple there is a bug in it and it completely strips the audio of the extras..

SniperKilla

6th March 2003, 01:33

actually thats funny, because i have full audio in my menu and the one extra thats on the disc

MackemX

6th March 2003, 02:02

what version have you got SniperKilla? 1.1 or 1.2?

my demo version version of 1.1 has audio in all the extras & menu, but some people on the DVD95Copy forum are complaining about audio loss

Myself I have got the speed issue, where it reports 400+mins but that depends on the film I think as some have finished in minutes, but I think has been fixed in ver 1.2

Hopefully they may get bugs sorted and maybe I will try it again, but I would really interested if they implemented a system where you could control what % of the 4.37Gb that each Title will be allocated

a type of slider bar system, a little like IC's but obviously working a lot better :)

I know the new version has a setting that makes the reduction equal but it would be great if you could decide which extra actually get a little better quality instead of them all

I am yet to have a good look at the quality of the main movie apart from the few posted, yes it looks good but like I said previously the menu/extras suffer greatly but with control over compression of each Title this will be improved and distributed to suit the user needs and requirements then IC better get it rear into gear or else it will be left behind

Obviously the main movie may suffer, but depending on how much it may be worth it for that little extra quality on menu/extras

It would be nice to see a comparision from someone that has a high bitrate and large areas of the same colour/darker images as these are the areas that show the greatest quality loss when compared to the original due to the massive reduction in bitrate

I know DVD2One suffers with pulsing/dot crawl(whatever it's called) in these types of scenes and I find it distracting while watching the movie, so that's why I'm probably fussy on maintaining quality also

so I would like to see what DVD95Copy does with scenes of this nature, as the demo only limits the 1st 10mins or so, but I would like to see further into the movie as I know DVD2One average bitrate reduces more into the film

cheers :)

mrbass

6th March 2003, 03:34

Originally posted by nyplayer
The reason why Dvd95Copy does a great job on extras right now is simple there is a bug in it and it completely strips the audio of the extras..

that is correct...I didn't get jack squat audio in my extras...dvd95copy has a ways to go.

MackemX

6th March 2003, 04:47

is it not just certain DVD's that lose the audio?

Is the menu vob that's missing the sound part of the Main Movie VOb or part of the VTS Vob?

or is it both?

Ive ran 4 tests now and all the menu's have sound :confused:, crappy pics but at least they had sound

I have version 1.1 downloaded again today

Xitrum

6th March 2003, 04:54

I did get sound in my extras.
My is version 1.1

nyplayer

6th March 2003, 05:10

The new verson is 1.21.. This is the one that fixes the bug when there is full screen and widescreen on the same dvd. This is the one that produces no sound in the extras.

Full Screen and widescreen along with episodics work.

geffroman

6th March 2003, 07:49

I have been playing with DVD2One and Instantcopy... and NOW I don't wanna pay for DVD95 as well... I have built several successful movies and have found one thing for sure...

A fully packed and feature rich movie with extras CANNOT be duplicated to fit on one 4.37GB if it started out as 8GB disc... Not and keep any quality...

SO heres what I did... Instead of buying MORE and MORE software I bought a Sony DVD Progressive Scan Jukebox... I use 2 sided DVD 9.4 disks from Ritek... I keep all features and part of the movie on side one and use that wonderful IFOEdit program to split the second part of my movie to side two... So my disc functions just like store bought with one very minor exception, I have to hit a button on the remote called FLIP at the end of the first half of the movie...

When I get to the split... I go pee... refill my diet coke... come back and hit the FLIP button on my Sony remote and back to movieland I go... I build the second side of the disc to start where the first side ended without seeing the menu again...

I love having full un-compromised video quality and full features...

If you are a MOVIE only buff, think about this... The Jukebox holds 300 discs... You could have 600 movies in one machine on double sided discs... You can even load your VCDs and CDs into it...

I just know a simple piece of hardware has sure improved my DVD experience... I know a lot of you enjoy the challenge of hacking... But if you are like ME and are truly looking for high quality movies with full features to watch on your HDTV and don't wanna look at FBI warnings and repetitive studio logos this is the ticket...

The DVD player cost about twice what those three pieces of software cost... but I am really happy with perfection...

If only I could get these double sided discs in a 2x or 4x for a reasonable price...

Regards... Jeff

29ways

6th March 2003, 11:23

NIce! That's something I like to do geff. Movies bigger than 4.3 gigs I'll just span on two DVD-rs so there is no vide-quality loss. Movies that slightly pass over 4.3 I'll just trimm down until it fits on a DVD-r.

MackemX

6th March 2003, 15:52

I can get all 8Gb onto my discs :D, in fact, 3 DVD's onto 1 DVD!

well very soon maybe :)

this is what I've pre ordered

DVD PLAYER (http://www.avland.co.uk/sony/bdzs77/index.htm)

no more messing with stripping :p

BIG PICTURE (http://www.deano.dsl.pipex.com/sony.htm)

p.s. wake up and stop dreaming

cowboysfan

6th March 2003, 20:13

this maybe a stupid ? and i may be answering myself but i'm curious about something i did with instant copy version .80 i ripped pearl harbor dvd with dvd decryptor and went in and did custom settings and
removed everything but the ac3 5.1 then went to video tab and moved it
all the way over until it was at the 4.3 gig mark.... my output was
5+gig file... is this b/c that video tab is for only the actual size of the video or is it for a total output and if so how do i determine how much i can increase it and get everything i want at or under the 4.3 gig mark.. i have done no tweaks or anything to instantcopy. i have used it the way it was received... now i went back in left everything @ standard setting and did pearl harbor again and got it right under 4.3 gig with everything and looked good if not great in my opinion. so should i just go with the latter or can someone give me some advice on the first steps i tried