New DVD 9 to 5 program: DVD Shrink 1.02

[MackemX]

movie-only ripping best audio subtitle streams

p.s. a guy on vcdhelp reckoned that Nero 5.5.10.30 changed region setting after using DVDShrink and now you also mention it debug77 but not using nero. When I ticked them all I just get regions 1-8 enabled in the main IFO, is this not the case for every DVD then?

[aGeS]

My first attempt with this new proggy:

U-571 Collectors Edition ripped straight off the disc.

Had to put every video stream down to level 4 and leave out 2 audio streams to get the predicted size under 4.37GB. Had the program running for about 35-40 min. at my XP1800.

Quality of the main movie was quite low and much worse than what DVD2One makes. I don't usually use DVD2One but have tested it with the same movie (U-571) once.

What was also bad was that the final size of the output files made a total af 4.41GB.


Conclusion: This proggy got alot of new and kewl features to offer but it still needs alot of work before it can keep up with DVD2One, InstantCopy and such.
Ofcourse it might be good when you got movies that dont need alot of compression before they fit a DVD5 but with large DVD9 it just cant match DVD2One... yet!

[Codewiz]

I am not using the program at all for compression. I am just using it because it is easy to modify streams and vobs so I have more space for Instantcopy use.

[mpucoder]

There is a difference between region flags and RCE. AFAIK none of the programs here hunt down RCE, which is active code (commands). For RCE removal use IfoEdit, or go for generated PGCs (movie only).

[mrbass]

RCE is that thing dvd studios put on dvds to prevent Region Free dvd players (like in Australia) from playing DVDs at all. Has this RCE note being removed been a factor in burnt DVD-Rs not playing in Region free (hacked firmware) with dvd standalone players? I'm curious now.

[mrbass]

Originally posted by MisterX
movie-only ripping best audio subtitle streams


I think I'll go with that one..thanks MisterX and 2Cool for the suggestions. morbass you gotta love it and it's easy for me to remember for some odd reason
"...and if you can get the MORBASS size down to 4.37GB..."

[geffroman]

DVD Shrink, DVD95Copy and DVD2One all do just about the same quality when you compress the same amount of Data within reasonable ranges no greater than 30%... InstantCopy does a little better job with quality if you can live with it's bugs. Those facts are not in disput by those in the know.

Others shrink the hell out of all but main movie as a default... DVD Shrink shrinks all data equally but allows so much more. You can't compare DVD2One or DVD95Copy to DVD Shrink unless you use the same parameters... If you do, the difference in result is not going to be visible unless you compress below reasonable standards... If you want to compare 45% compression on one program to 37% compression on another then you are not interested in quality anyway and comparison is really irrelevant...

Don't get me wrong... I don't favor one or the other... I use the best tool for the job... My arsenol contains IFOEdit, Nero, SmartRipper, DVDDecryptor, DVD2One, DVD SHRINK, VOBRATOR and many others... These I use daily... It just depends on the original as to what approach I take...

What people are finding out is that you just CANT compress 9 Gigs of stuff onto 4.37 Gigs and expect it to look like 9 Gigs...

The best copy protection Hollywood has is this sizing issue...

If you want all menus and all special features and full movie at high quality all on on 4.37 disc then you MUST USE CCE... and learn a lot about doing this... and spend HOURS...

If you have been doing this stuff manually you understand the limitations... If you are learning with 15 minute Transcoders and want to compare them side to side you need to understand how they work... what the parameters are doing to all the data before you can compare movie quality...

Everything is a compromise... If it wasn't you would just go buy a second copy of your movie from Amazon.com and not bother with all of this...

And as a side note... if you are doing 35 minute or longer transcodes on an XP1800 then you have other issues with that computer to look at as well... Unless that was Decrypting time included...

Lastly, I'd like to thank DOOM9 and specifically "2COOL" and all the guys that have made it possible for me to even get this far... You guys rock...

Regards... Jeff

PS - Did you know DVD Shrink even allows splitting of PGC at the FRAME level... That you can pick and choose VTS/PGCs to include in a project... Don't let the small window fool you into thinking this program is as limited as the others... It is quite powerful...

[firewired]

Just finished Resident Evil: R1, not the Superbit, processed into an ISO image using DVDDecrypter. DVD Shrink took 16 minutes on my overclocked P4 2.2 -- which elicited a collective gasp from all of us who were present.

I transcoded using the custom streams option: Kept all the extras Dropped the DTS track Dropped the French 5.1 track Used Level 1 for the movie Used Level 3 for the extras.Original size was just shy of of 6 GB. Transcoded size was 4.22 GB.

My impressions? Movie detail was amazingly accurate and comparable to the original. Couldn't tell the difference on my 34" Sony Wega DRC. Take note I was using Level 1 so loss was minimal.
Menus were left at full size, shades of several failed experiences with Instantcopy.
The extras at Level 3 were passable. not surprisingly, blocks were evident particularly during high motion scenes. Interview shots were fair. Overall, quality kind of reminded me of a VCD.
So far, I'm a happy camper. I'll try this on a couple of problem cases tomorrow and let you know how it goes.

[hattia]

If I have to compare against re-mpeg....I would say that this soft is a miracle...

If I have to compare against CCE....I would say that this soft is ready for garbage....

...CCE still the winner...very ahead of the others !!

[2COOL]

Originally posted by hattia
If I have to compare against re-mpeg....I would say that this soft is a miracle...

If I have to compare against CCE....I would say that this soft is ready for garbage....

...CCE still the winner...very ahead of the others !!

Did you read this post in this thread that mpucoder mentioned about CCE and DVD Shrink? http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&postid=292179#post292179

CCE does not fit into this class of DVD shrinking softwares.

[aGeS]

When I normally make DVD9->DVD5 convertions I also use CCE but I think its very exciting to test all those new tools that seems to do a fair job while being fast. I do know that tools like DVD2One use transcoding instead of encoding and that this gives it its "advantage" in speed.

When you talk about comparing data you don't have to go into details always. I got the same movie as input and want the same output size (4,37GB) from all 'em programs.
From a average users point of view (someone who just wants to make DVD9->DVD5 and dont wanna use the time to master CCE) you dont care about how the program achieves this as long as the output is 4,37GB and the quality is good.
The ones amongst us that knows about compression, transcoding, CCE, Scenarist etc. etc. can talk hours about the tech behind these new programs like DVD2One, DVD Shrink, DVD95Copy and InstantCopy BUT the average user dont give shit. This user just wants the best result without having to spend hours figuring out different tech matters.

This is why I compare input/output and size - that is what matters to most users of these programs as explained above.


Before replying plz get me right: This shall not keep us from discussing the tech behind the programs but it is clearly not wrong trying to test programs as most users will do - only the parameters input/output, size and quality.

[Areku]

This one's for Doom9 and for all of you to check:

Official home page for DVDShrink is http://dvdshrink.org

Comments are welcome!

Thanks! ;)

[n.phelge]

Originally posted by SniperKilla
i did those already, i even ran the ripped dvd through both programs again, and its still saying i have encrypted data, meanwhile dvd shrink goes throuigh it with no problem

I had the same problem. The movie I processed through DVDShrink was one that I had already ripped to the harddrive using DVDDecryptor, so I wouldn't think that anything should have been encrypted. But, DVD2One gave me an 'encrypted data' error. When I initially used DVDShrink, I only had the Region 1 toggle selected - maybe that is a factor?

I took the files, loaded them in IfoEdit, and did 'Region Free' and 'Get VTS Sectors', which did some corrections. DVD2One still complained about encrypted data, and then when I tried to load the files into DVDShrink, it gave an error and would not process them.

What Region options are folks selecting for their DVDShrink processing?

[MackemX]

just tick them all then it's region free as it enables 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 & 8

check the main IFO before you burn or process or whatever you do :)

as for the encryption errors with DVD2One, maybe DVDShrink is Key-checking every Vob instead of once

[MackemX]

again CCE raises it head, we all know CCE gives the best quality from compression and like for like there is only one tool out of the 4 other self contained packages that can touch it and that is IC

the guys on this forum who have other tested it for themselves fairly or have seen the fair comparisions laid out will agree. At high compression levels the difference is minimal and only apparent during a freeze frame zoomed analysis on a high definition monitor. At 85%+ on the majority of TV's it is probably impossible to tell them apart from the odd part of a frame during some scenes. The lower the compression the bigger the difference gets between the 2 but again during playback on the majority of TV's it's not as obvious

even at 70%, IC can produce a good standard of quality that is more than acceptable for 90% of people out there for a backup and the same goes for the other 3 at say 80-85% rates

but CCE is probably not an option for over 95% of people who wish to backup not just due to mastering the program, there are few factors which I don't need to list (but will if need be) as to why people don't use CCE

now that don't leave many people opting for CCE and I feel that more CCE users will be persuaded to change to one of the other tools in time than vice versa

InstantCopy is the program that has came close to CCE capabilities but Pinnacle are paying the price for it trying to save time using one pass due to random sizing. Add the few niggly (but overcomable in most occasions) bugs and it's no good for some users

Now if they actually decided to implement a 2 pass(or even optional pass ammount) which would fix the sizing, I wonder how many of the diehard CCE fans would jump ship? and if they fixed the two main bugs then a few more would jump again

I've jumped now mainly for the saving in user input and effort cos when I ready to process my backup after say 10-15mins of Ifoedit, I normally get over 80%(more than acceptable) for my main movie using IC with about 5 minutes input and then I use DVD95Copy for the extras afterwards to get some decent quality menu/extras (roughly 50% of people ain't even interested in menu/extras) but more importantly 4.37Gb

from DVD9 original to DVD5 burning in 20-25mins simple input :D

I wonder how many newbies would be persuaded to use CCE after using the other tools which are so easy to master and can actually give good results?. Like I mentioned before, CCE users are dwindling and unless a program that contains roughly the same options as the others offer now and does it all automatically producing a DVD that is ready to burn and the whole package costs less than say 100$ and doesn't take much to master then they will continue to dwindle

Phew!, so to finalise, when a CCE user states that other users should use CCE for their backing up method, they are simply wasting their time as most users in here will have made there mind up anyway whether CCE is an option or not and 99% of newbies, after trying the 4 main tools and the CCE method will also decide that it ain't option for one reason or more

So that not very many people to persuade is it?, one good thing is that it does throw up the good old disussion again :D and no doubt this won't be the last time CCE is compared with the rest and we all have a natter

p.s. I just wish someone would invent an automated DVD stripping tool as would make life so much easier :p

[jdobbs]

On the CCE debates...

There are two routes for backups. The easy way (IC7, DVD95Copy, DVD2one, and DVD Shrink) and the hard way (AVISYNTH, CCE, Authoring, IFOEDIT, and IFOUpdate). Just a couple of months ago the hard way was the only way.

There is no doubt that you will get better quality from the hard way. My personal experience leads me to believe that fact to be true every time (I don't think IC7's quality rivals CCE at all - but that is debatable). But it takes a lot of time, skill, in-depth knowledge of tools, and you put about $100 worth of labor into backing up a $19 DVD. That isn't necessarily a bad thing -- because you also get really smart on DVDs and their inner workings. On the other hand, many people really don't give a rat's ass about inner workings.

But -- have you ever tried to back up a multiple PGC, multiple angle, interleaved VTS that has blank audio in the middle of it? If you have then you know this method's limitations... The hard way becomes the virtually impossible way.

History shows us that given a choice, most people take the easy route. These "easy" packages don't do a great job, but they do a good job. Sometimes very good.

This is clearly the future of DVD copying. That's the reason I'm watching these packages so closely.

Will CCE play a role in the future? I don't know... maybe. At some point some clever person at Custom Technologies or elsewhere might notice this market and put a nice little transcoding shell around their engine (the best in the world, rivaled only by TMPEGEnc). But if quality always won, we'd all be watching Betamax right now...

[cupfart]

So this program is almost perfect. The ONLY thing that needs to be added is the ability to reencode so you can include ALL the menus and exclude the extra info.

I.E. I was backup up Rush Hour 2 which is a FULL dvd9. So all i expect to get out of it is the Movie and NO extra features which is fine. How many times do you really want to watch the extra crap?

Anyways, you can do this by re-authoring BUT you cannot include the menus because it will just run them as if there were movies.. that is almost pointless.

Or you can re-encode, but you have to include all the extras. Yea, you can downsize them, but even if you'd downsize everything in level 4 the DVD would be too big for a dvdr. What doesn't make sense is that you can exclude audio streams by unchecking them... why can you not exclude the movie too? That's the only think I think that needs to be added.

If I am missing something, please let me know, but it looks like that feature is missing. Once that is added this program will beat the rest of the competition.

[MackemX]

It aint almost perfect though it just almost perfect for movie only options (quality is debatable)

the complete package of movie only/1:1 backup tools, none of the 4 programs are almost perfect as sometimes people want more than just the movie

the best would be a complete hybrid of the best features of each mainly being

DVD95Copy title removal feature - not perfect if you remove menu's but perfect for removing the Titlesets though Title/VobId removal not an option (yet)
InstantCopy's quality & audio/subs removal - option to use this reducing technique or use lesser quality for speed instead. It also keeps original mapping for audio/subs unlike some
DVDShrink's Cropping features & Speed - self explantory

that's why at the moment to guarantee succesful backups everytime I still have to author the DVD previous to feeding them into any of these 4 programs as I want more than just a movie only backup and none of these can remove the menu/extras 100% of the time without failing

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE can someone create a tool that will insert blank frames of 0.xx secs into any PGC/VOBID you wish to replace so that I and others do not have to do this manually using Ifoedit/Ifoupdate, surely it can't be that hard

So basically you rip the DVD, tell the program what you wish to keep, it processes it and spits out a DVD ready now for en/trans-coding if need be but more importantly 100% compliant like the original

It would be setup a bit like DVDToolbox (using DVDShrink's frame analysis for cropping if cell removal was possible) but instead of just doing one stream at a time you can do the lot

giving 4 levels of optional removal. DVDToolbox only goes to Level 2 when it gives you the option to extract

1. Titleset
2. Title
3. VOB ID
4. Cell

you can process the 1st 3 levels manually using Ifoedit/IfoUpdate before feeding it to one of these en/trans-coding tools and it always work which is what I now do religously and never have problems and persuaded a few more to follow, so why do programs now try to do the whole process in one go and as fast as they can yet fail miserably, it's because they try to do it all in one process instead of stages

It takes me 4 stages to backup a DVD

1. Rip all files in Filemode
2. Author by removing the crap using Ifoedit/Ifoupdate
3. Process to reduce (main movie IC and then DVD95Copy to process menu/extras)
4. Burn with Nero

end result is 4.37Gb of DVD with an IC encoded movie and all the menu/extras I decided to keep but most importantly 100% fully compliant in a Standalone. I ain't the world's best DVD backup person but I stick to a routine and it works everytime

Stages 1 & 4 are already easy to do as the tools are out there to do this so Developer's forget about that for now and implement it after if need be! and Stage 3 can be done with any of the 4 programs also without problems apart from the few problematic DVD's

it's the programs that try to do stage 2 that trip up on most occasions as none can remove video 100% of the time and work and the nearest to perfection is DVD95Copy as it inserts the 0.xx sec frames when a Titleset is removed. This is great if you only remove the Titlesets but when people remove the wrong Menu titles then they risk destroying the structure and that's how DVD95Copy trips up

what you need is a tool that will scan the DVD to get exact video sizes (bit like DVDToolbox's analysis) then let the user decide what video/audio to keep, it then removes it properly, then it lets the user decide what rates to compress it by

after telling this removal tool/feature what you want to keep, it would take 10-15 mins to process but it would maintain the complete original DVD structure because it would be inserting blank frames. In fact after it's done the optional analysis it could even ask for reduction rates before processing the DVD to remove unwanted video before reduction if the user couldn't come back after 10-15 minutes

then this tool would reduce the DVD but maintain the structure and if it's over 4.37Gb THEN process the video for reduction and as you are not removing anything during the en/trans-coding process it will still work afterwards

simple but damn effective. I just wish I was a programmer so I could write it myself instead I gotta do it manually with Ifoedit/Ifoupdate until someone does!

In fact it's DVDToolbox in reverse cos instead of extracting a Title stream you want to keep you are extracting the streams you don't want but having the option of removing more than just one stream

surely it can't be that hard and hopefully some bright spark will read all the crap above and see my ideas behind the method and create the perfect backup tool or at least a DVD stripping tool that can be used before one of the other programs :D

[cupfart]

If I movie on the dvd is 4 gigs and I want to keep the quality, I am not going to compress it. So I don't understand peoples complaints about wanting a program that will do a 1:1 copy of everything - it's just not going to be the same with you compress a 9gig file to a 4 gig file. Your going to lose quality. If you want all the goodies and quality of a dvd, then watch the REAL dvd..

[MackemX]

cupfart (cool name :D), you obviously are a movie only fan but if you look at another post I put up in the forum you will see there are actually more movie+menu+extras guys than movie only guys who posted in that thread

I strip the garbage I don't want and on most occasions I normally compress the movie at around 85% using IC and the extras at 40% using DVD95Copy. OK the quality of the extras isn't perfect but it's more than acceptable on my TV for me but at least I have what I want and also have a high quality main movie

People who backup DVD's are mostly trying to preserve the originalsto stop other's from wrecking them from careless handling whether in the home or when you loan them out, but some do it for other reasons :D

the movie only option solution has been around for ages and ages and DVD2One was the 1st to offer such simplicity with the BIG RED BUTTON option but personally if I wanted movie only I would probably still use CCE Basic & Ifoedit but that's another story

until just recently there were no complete packages that could do 1:1 backups or offer the option to get rid of the crap you don't want. You needed both the knowledge, time and money to create such projects

IC changed all that as it was the 1st tool to attempt it and although it failed, it's still one helluva tool when mastered (which is easy) and has it's uses. DVD95Copy came along and offered more reliability than IC and eventually DVD2One did 1:1

and now DVDShrink also has joined the 1:1 backup tools field (it's not just a movie only tool, it's actually a 1:1 tool that has other features :p)

but as of yet not one can remove the stuff you don't want perfectly on 99% of DVD's and the 1st to do so right to to movie only and offer decent quality will be King of the roost :D

but even a separate stripping tool would be good and no doubt one will arise soon and the sooner the better for me :p

[cupfart]

I guess you could put me in that category. I have a HDTV and I want full quality of the movie. Most of the time I find the extras to be crap, but some of them are hilarious like Rat Race had a blooper outtake. I would definitely have to add that one...

I also know the whole deal with having to take hours of time to backup one dvd... I'd say my time spent on backup up a dvd is not worth the price of just buying the same dvd if it gets screwed up. Now with the "one button wonders" it's no problem.

I have taught myself quite a bit over the past year with the dvd structure as I have made my own DVD for cupfart.com (that's where the name comes from). I just need to take some time to make the dvd case cover and dvd cover, but I haven't work with graphics for a while. But this is a little besides the point whatever it was :)

Anyways.. it's just surprising that dvdshrink through the re-encode mode will allow you to unselect a ac3 stream but not a move.. that's all he needs to add. Seems like it should be perty simple with the file structure.

[waldok]

Time to drop the old "CCE vs the world" war and let me explain the point of view of a DIF4U+CCE+reauthorist fan. MisterX, you know I'm a great CCE defender, but I know you'll understand my point here.

All this debate about quality is just a matter of personal perception. I won't quote that quality is in the eyes of the beholder and such blabla. Still, this really is a personal and individual matter.
As for me, I tested all these tools (DVD2one, DVD95Copy, IC, DVDShrink and I can't get by far a satisfactory quality. That's a "personal" fact, friends who saw the movies obtained with the tools find they are OK, I simply don't. Call me stubborn, but I'm the one who's watching the backups so I like to please myself :) That's why I'll stick with the good old CCE method, with which I get fantastic quality everytime. Putting comparisons aside, there is something nobody can argue with, CCE is a great MPEG2 encoder.

Now, there is no comparison possible between the manual and th automated methods, and I feel there is no way CCE fanatics will drop it for some "one click" tool. Why ? Simply because it is and will be "transcoding" tools. Shrinking from 9Gb to 4.35 with good hopes in quality requires more than that and implies some accurate bit reallocation at reencoding time, preferably multipass, which those tools won't achieve, simply because it is not their primary goal. That's why I advice to drop the comparisons, because there can be none (and I don't mean there is a good way and a bad way).
I fully respect people who want easy, cheap and quick solutions. Iparticularly respect the efforts that some people here made for understandinghow thse tools work and share this with others (MisterX, MrBass, I mean you). I undeerstand it is a legitimate request not to spend hours trying to backup a DVD. Yes, the "manual" route is long and complex, but people who use it really want to learn and master the process and want what they call quality in the end. These are 2 very different audiences, and there is more than enough room for both in the forums.

Forums are now well organized enough so that adepts of the "manuel way" meet in the DOitFast4u/Docce4u and advanced authoring forum while adepts of the automated way meet here. There should be no argument between both communities since they obviously have different goals. To be honest, I recently used IC with some success for transcoding a prticular slide-show VTS that the manual way wouldn't cope with easily. See, I'm almost lost to the dark side already...:rolleyes:

So peace to you all, I hope you'll find the tool of your dreams soon, I'm back to reauthoring "the hard way"...for my very own selfish pleasure :D

Waldok:cool:

[cupfart]

how can someone lose quality if only the movie and menus are selected and none of it gets compressed? Are you just saying that when you have to compress the dvd to fit, then CCE is the way to go? I personally haven't tested compressed quality because I know it will suck. There is no way a compressed version will look the same as the original.

[MackemX]

@waldok, I agree with in every way, as I too was comfortable using CCE and enjoyed messing about from the learning to the mastering stage and I'm also really fussy about quality

agreed IC is not as good as CCE at the lower compression %'s but the only thing I'm not too sure about is that if during normal playback you can see a worthy time/effort difference from a 85-90% compressed video using CCE & IC then I envy you truely cos you must have one set of good eyes and one helluva a system. Yes there is a difference in quality but it's ever so slight at these high compression rates, so like jdobbs mentioned is it really worth all the time/effort/expense to back up a DVD that would probably cost less than time/effort involved for that minimal difference?

I compress the menu/extras as much as I need to maintain that 80%+ for IC, anything lower something gets stripped that I realistically won't miss as I can always dig out the original if need be. Anything over 85% with IC is more than acceptable unless you have a very very high standard and the means to view it and can actually see the difference with a similar CCE DVD during playback

and if I really want the extras that badly that it affects my main movie all I would do is put them all on another 80p/$1 DVD which would be 100% quality and have the movie+menu on the main DVD which would benefit even more from extra space

so that's how I find it hard to believe that CCE is now really worth the time/effort/expense unless you have all the tools now and the experience to use them already when IC can give such good results for so little effort and get close to CCE at high %'s

like I said if IC did do a 2nd pass or more, not only would the resulting filesize be ok but the quality would increase slighlty as it would know where to compress heavily and where to do it lightly
and I'm sure CCE user numbers would be reduced again

don;t get me wrong, I enjoyed the experience and hours learning and getting excellent results from CCE for the time & effort involved cos it's makes you feel proud hen your project is successful

but now it's so easy to use IC with 80%+ settings and sacrifice that little bit of quality and yet get a better result overall for the time/effort involved and if you want better than that then like you said it's all down to personal standards

this 'war' is a bit like an owner of a Ferrari gatecrashing a Ford Custom Car owners club and saying my car is better than yours

yes the Ferrari is better performance and looks we know that, but some Fords can come close to the Ferrari in performance and the Ford IC Cosworth is one such Ford :D

basically at the end of the day, 99% of people would want the Ferrari but realistically 99% will end up with the Ford (or equivalent) :cool:

[fern420]

well after all my testing i cant realy see a diffrence in dvd2one and dvdshrink, from the naked eye and the foolproff point of veiw. however i see alot of people using example movies to test on that i easily fit on 1 dvd-r by using ifo edit, smart ripper and the old school method of removing unneeded audio tracks. these new programs are great but if alot of the newbies read the oldschool methods they would never need a program like this, and if you do, this is how i look at it, are you going to watch the movie more than once a month? if so spend the extra $1 and make it a 2 disker, i know people hate this but why sacrifice qualtiy to get up one time during a movie to change the disk. these programs i find just perfect for some episodeic dvds like transformers and sanford and son, however i tested dvd2one on sapranos and the quality loss was more than i can handel, i poped the extra $1 to make them into 2 diskers. i guess the major bottom line is do you enjoy that movie enough to spend the extra $1 to make it a 2 disker? if its a "collection" only movie then no go ahead and use a compression type program but ill tell you, i wont dare do a dvd over 6.2 gigs on a program like this, theres noway around a quality loss, and i didnt buy a dvd burner to make svcds, lololol. But all my cudos to the freeware makers, you do a hell of a job on your work and it doesnt cost anyone anyhting, so noone should complain.

[waldok]

Wise enough, MisterX, as usual.
By the way, name is Waldok, not WalDORK (unless you meant it :p)

Splitting movie and extras over 2 DVDRs is not an option for me, wince here in France you won't easily find cheap DVDRs so I'd rather buy the movie again.
Up to now, CCE is the only route that gives me great quality for BOTH the movie AND the extras and allows me to keep everything on a single disc with minimal quality loss.

Maybe when IC or some other comes out with some efficient 2 pass reencoding algorithm then I'll do the move. Not now, John, thanks.

This being said, all I wish for you is to enjoy your movies (after all that's the goal of it all).:)

@cupfart
personally haven't tested compressed quality because I know
it will suck

Sooo wrong. You should definitely try it. You will be surprised by the quality you can maintain with a good reencoding (OK It takes time). Keep in mind some encoded movies will use the available 9GB on a DVD9 just because it is available and won't try to optimize bit allcation at encoding time. The encoding process can usually be optimized for a smaller size and preserve quality and believe me it works pretty well...

Latest example, Mulholand drive R1, movie is spread over 7 VTS in the original disc, more than 8GB data, and it finally compressed to a 3.5GB Vob-set, no noticeable loss in quality. Hard to believe ? Well,
maybe it's time to try it yourself.

Have fun.

Waldo(R)k:cool:

[ulfschack]

I do DVD "backups" of divx /xvids DL:d from the net. Sometimes I dare to make two movies (DVD origianals) and have them both on the same DVD (my kids don't see the difference). But most often I put DV projects on disc and make copies (protection copies really :) ) for select relatives.

Then, sometimes, I actually make a quick "movie-only" copy on RW if me or my wife haven't had time to view the rental before return (time-planning and kids don't mix). THIS is where ic, dvd2one, shrinkDVD, etc come into play, and only here.

Tell me again why CCE should be phased out. And when you can't ... please try to differentiate between transcoding (mindless rewriting) and encoding (intelligent bitdistribution able to make mpegs from scratch so to speak)

(Besides I can't understand why it's "CCE against the world" when TMPGEnc makes the best quality (at least for interlaced DV). So when talking about taking our time to get the absolute best Q, why not take the full step ?)

Hope I don't step on too many toes

cheers

[MackemX]

yep, I agree if the quality suffers that much stick it on another DVD (I didn't know DVD's were that expensive in France :eek:)

episodic DVD's are easily split while maintaning menu's (and much the better option) and even the likes of longer movies of 2hr30min+ will still look ok if you put menu/movie only on one DVD and the menu/extras on another

CCE is only gonna be an option for these who use it now cos very soon and very few newbies will take it up due to the increasing quality from the other stuff, but I do wish CCE technologies or similar would offer an all in one package cos I'm pretty darn sure it would be the Mother of all backup tools and sell 1000's :D

I have just again been onto Pinnacle support about their bugs and offered them another DVD to try help them fix their sizing issue

It is a shame because IC do save the Video quality for each title yet the value is still 0 in the log and discdatafiles even after processing :confused: and if they did implement a 2 pass it would be bloomin great

p.s. just previewed and saw you had posted, greatest apologies my friend, I have changed my post, sorry :(

[ulfschack]

I can take it :)

... and prolly defend it too.

I DO apoligise tho for being OT seeing as this is not really what the title of this thread describes

[MackemX]

IC is not really in the same class engine as the other 3, it's nearer to CCE than those at the higher levels

let's just say that CCE is the MAN UTD (currently one of the best) tool, IC is LIVERPOOL (the best on some occasions and can match MAN UTD) and the rest are mid table teams :D

[ulfschack]

Ok, so in what way am I asking for help towards my "illegal" endeavors? Moral, copying, ownership and all that jazz has been covered in excess allready and I don't think that the mere knowledge that someone on this board hasn't actually paid for everything he or she uses qualifies for closing a thread. If it does however, I'm truly sorry and will stand corrected.

However, as you might have guessed, pirating was not my main concern in the above reply.

cheers


PS I read the chick-car-horse joke ... nice morale :)

[MackemX]

no offence mean't at all by the way, only trying 2 help

I'm edited my posts anyway, it's upto you if you wanna do the same, but bear in mind when you ask for help next some people now know what it could be for :)

[ulfschack]

Apart from the dubious content my opinions are still something that think are worth mentioning.

Point taken, and thanks for the timely warning :)

And to close: When I say DL:d from the net ofcourse I mean from my own LAN where I have legal Divx copies from personal DVDs that I lost through the course of time. But hey, that's why we make these backups in the first place, isn't it?

cheers

[mpucoder]

A couple of things:
@ulfshack It really is a violation of forum rules to admit you have illegally obtained your video.

@all this forum isn't about the relative merits of CCE vs transcoding. CCE will endure, and has several forums related to it (CCE, DoCCE4U, DVD Authoring, et al). It is assumed by coming to this forum that you want to know more about these programs.

This thread is closed now, but you should have noticed there is a new release of DVDShrink, and a new thread for it.