Nero Recode 0.90 beta

[DVD Maniac]

I like the conspiracy theory and it certainly does explain the points you make about donations and slick interfaces / functionality.

If the rumours are true that DVDShrink is still being developed then its a less credible theory - why bother if the end game was to release Recode? If DVDShrink 2.4 DOES appear that will really get us going!!!!! :p

[thop]

I like the conspiracy theory as well, it all comes together quite nicely.

[daddy_fizz]

posted by dvdshrink HIMSELF over at digital-digest forums

My system is not HT enabled

However the next version of Shrink will hopefully use more threads, which may or may not improve performance on HT enabled machines...?

About video resize, it would be a nice feature, but it won't make it into the next version, sorry!

its coming, be ready...

~Fizz

[thop]

It still makes sense, because OEMs or drive manufacturers don't bundle freeware with their computers/drives, main reason being that they have no reliable partner to talk to. Highly risky business to depend on the mood of one college student (to use the typical stereotype). Those guys like contracts, and their partners wearing suits.

DVDShrink is no threat for Recode. If anything it will make Recode sale even better, because people who like DVDShrink already, but are not very tech-savy can buy Recode and the tech support that comes with it.

[Richk50]

"I like the conspiracy theory and it certainly does explain the points you make about donations and slick interfaces / functionality."

Actually DVDShrink is a CIA Agent and uses the program to pass messages to his field agents.

[thop]

Now you're just being silly Richk50 .. while we are perfectly reasonable! :)

[geffroman]

Well I downloaded the NERO Vision package and installed it FREE from Nero. It is not a charge item and it works stand alone whether you have NERO 6 or not. It does not need a serial number.

I still believe that SHRINK is the development product and that the things we all asked for in SHRINK like 1% increments ended up in RECODE. Nero will only put solid working features in RECODE as they have seen the IC disaster...

New versions of SHRINK (in my conspiracy theory) make sense because it is better to test future RECODE features on US rather than the buying public or their OEM drive customers...

I THINK WE HAVE BEEN DUPED INTO BEING QC FOR NERO...

But I am happy to be a guinea pig if it gets me new tools...

Jeff (My real name)

[luphy]

Geffroman,

Try resetting your computer's date to 1 month ahead.
Then you will get the demo expiration message.
It is not free, you need a serial number to continue running
NeroVision Express, and Nero Recode. You get no message about
the days remaining when you run Recode, but you do when you run
Express.
It is a separate serial number from the one used to register
Nero 6 Ultra.

[willb2d]

Sure you can run it and you get no nag screen or expiration date. If you run Nero VisionExpress demo, you get the expiration date.


Evidently, Recode also expires if you manually delete the Nero VisionExpress folder and clear up the registry. My intent in eliminating the non-Recode componants was so as to ensure that I'd never accidentally run VisionExpress and start the expiration process. But the effort was in vain, and Recode announced that the "demo period has expired."

I'm just going to wait for the next Shrink; I don't need the hassle.

[geffroman]

Anyone know why Recode takes 2 to 3 times longer to analyze and 30% longer to recode than does Shrink...?

[Erik_Osterholm]

Originally posted by DVDRFreak
I must disagree when you say greatly reduses time. When using DVDdescryptour to build an ISO with all protections removed (RCE/Macrovision/CSS/User restrictions) will just take about 10-15 minutes.

It is also better for your DVD player to first build an ISO.

That would depend entirely upon how fast one's DVDRom rips DVDs. Takes me nearly 40 minutes in some cases, which is about the same amount of time it takes to DVDShrink it. Besides, DVDRoms are designed to play movies, which are typically longer than that 10-15 minutes you quote. Obviously the less time the laser is on, the better, but it's not like they aren't designed to be on longer than that.

Anyway...
All the protections can be removed using IFOEdit. Takes about 2 seconds. Ripping to ISO takes (let's say an average of) 30 minutes for me, then Recode takes about 50. DVDShrink takes 40 minutes, then IFOEdit takes less than one minute to remove the protections. I'm up 40 minutes with this method, although I can't do some of Recode's niftier functions like keeping the DVD structure while removing streams and having a true sliding scale for recompression.

That's why I'm hoping that DVDShrink 2.4 gets more like Recode. I'm not holding my breath for it getting rid of the protections in one fell swoop, though.

[DVDRFreak]

Originally posted by Erik_Osterholm
That would depend entirely upon how fast one's DVDRom rips DVDs. Takes me nearly 40 minutes in some cases, which is about the same amount of time it takes to DVDShrink it. Besides, DVDRoms are designed to play movies, which are typically longer than that 10-15 minutes you quote. Obviously the less time the laser is on, the better, but it's not like they aren't designed to be on longer than that.

Anyway...
All the protections can be removed using IFOEdit. Takes about 2 seconds. Ripping to ISO takes (let's say an average of) 30 minutes for me, then Recode takes about 50. DVDShrink takes 40 minutes, then IFOEdit takes less than one minute to remove the protections. I'm up 40 minutes with this method, although I can't do some of Recode's niftier functions like keeping the DVD structure while removing streams and having a true sliding scale for recompression.

That's why I'm hoping that DVDShrink 2.4 gets more like Recode. I'm not holding my breath for it getting rid of the protections in one fell swoop, though.

40 minutes that is a very long time to rip. I use a low budget LG 12x DVD ROM player and I get maximum 15 minutes of ripping time. I never use the burner to rip because this is slow as hell (avg 2x).

The laser in a DVD rom drive has a maximum life cycle that it will function properly. The less I use it the better it is.

Usally when I want to keep extra's I recode multiple times (playing with the compression level of the extra's, to strip something or not)) and this is easier (faster) if I use an ISO or FILES on my hardrive. Plus it saves the laser of my DVD ROM.

[The Belgain]

Right, I just used Recode to do my first DVD9 -> DVD-R backup. The film was Saving Private Ryan R2 (not the DTS edition).

As well as being a very long film, it is notoriously very hard to compress since it is very grainy.

I wanted to keep all the extras, but this is seemingly not possible (Recode came up saying it would use about 5200 MB, and I couldn't lower the quality sliders below what they were at, so I got rid of one of the credits).

The film took about 80 minutes to transcode (from an ISO image mounted on HD), and oddly the CPU was not at 100% (total CPU time was only about 60 mins). This is on an XP2000+.

The result was far from perfect: quite blocky in parts, eg the opening landing scene.

I'll try doing it with IC, and then using CCE to compare the results.

Are there any plans for doom9 to do a test of DVD backup tools similar to the codec guide by any chance? That would be quite useful now that these are falling into the mainstream much more...


edit: DVD Decrypter took 15 mins to rip just over 8 GB. 40 mins for a rip does sound like a very long time...this is on a 12x Hitachi reader for me.

[geffroman]

Originally posted by Erik_Osterholm
That would depend entirely upon how fast one's DVDRom rips DVDs. Takes me nearly 40 minutes in some cases,

You must be using your DVD Burner to RIP movies if it takes you 40 minutes to rip a disc... That's got to be running at 2x top speed...

Personally I think it a small price to pay (around $40 US) to have a DVD ROM that will almost always RIP DVDs at 10 to 15 minutes... I also get the added benefit of putting less miles on my burner...

[Erik_Osterholm]

Originally posted by geffroman
You must be using your DVD Burner to RIP movies if it takes you 40 minutes to rip a disc... That's got to be running at 2x top speed...

Personally I think it a small price to pay (around $40 US) to have a DVD ROM that will almost always RIP DVDs at 10 to 15 minutes... I also get the added benefit of putting less miles on my burner...

I'm actually not using the burner to rip, but a cheap DVD-Rom. I'll look into finding a cheap one to substitute, but at the same time, if this one dies, I'm not terribly concerned. I'm not sure that it's worth my money at this time to replace it.

[Fat Bast'rd]

I bought the £270 dual Sony. By the time it dies from over-use, it'll be worth £2.70 and we'll all have moved on to a different format!

Stop worrying about it. You could be dead tomorrow!

[luphy]

"Stop worrying about it. You could be dead tomorrow!"

If that's true, why worry about making backups of your movies. :p


P.S. You know I was just thinking about the last software that got so much attention when it first came out - Clone. I almost feel sorry for it as it's gotten swept aside by Nero Recode - and from what folks are saying, Recode does a better job than Clone anyways.

[SirCentipede]

@geffroman, DVDRFreak, Erik_Osterholm

I do have the same problem as Erik_Osterholm using DVDDecrypter to rip to iso:

It takes me about 40-60 min. using an older Toschiba 8x DVD-Rom Drive.
I can't understand how a 12x DVD-Rom (like the one DVDRFreak is using) drive will rip in 15 min., because it is just 1.5 times faster than my 8x DVD-Rom. Or am i wrong !? Pls can somebody of you explain it to me, because I might consider buying a faster DVD-Rome Drive if I can save such a lot of time with it...

BTW I think Nero Recode v.0.9.5.1. is a great and fast tool with a superb user interface. IMHO it does a better transcoding job than DVDshrink 2.3, but i wouldn't go lower than 70% reduction on the main movie, because at higher reduction levels recode tends to have macroblocks in the movie (I did about 5 movies with recode). As far as i can see IC7 still gets better results at higher reduction levels (let's say 50-70 %). At about 70%-99% i don't see any significant difference between IC7 and Recode on my 16:9 Panasonic Television.

But I'm still looking forward to DVDshrink 2.4 and hope that it incoporates some of the features of Recode especially the IMHO "better" transcoding engine of Recode.

[duartix]

I too have some DVDs that DVDDecryptor rips contantly at 2x.
Those are the CSS protected. It takes from 30 to 50 minutes depending on size.
ON those DVDs that are not protected my burner starts ripping at about 6x to end at about 11x taking from 8 to 12 minutes depending on size.

So it's protection related.

[Fat Bast'rd]

Originally posted by duartix
I too have some DVDs that DVDDecryptor rips contantly at 2x.
Those are the CSS protected. It takes from 30 to 50 minutes depending on size.
ON those DVDs that are not protected my burner starts ripping at about 6x to end at about 11x taking from 8 to 12 minutes depending on size.

So it's protection related.

Nah, different region code to what your player is set at.

[thop]

Yes it is protection related, and protected DVDs usually only get ripped 2x, BUT most drives out there ignore the protection flag and rip every DVD at max speed no matter what.

A rule of thumb is that the the cheaper the drive is the higher the chance that it is not locked down to 2x. I've always bought the cheapest drives available (artec, btc, ...) and they never failed me.

[sync]

My burner rips at 1X if I boot from my regular XP partition. If I boot from a partition with a fresh XP install the rip speed goes up to 4X. I also notice a doubling in burning speed with 2.4X +RW discs(from 1.3X to 2.4X).

[daddy_fizz]

a lot of dvd burners have limited ripping speed. Like my a05 had a 2x rip limit and it would take about 40 minutes to rip a dvd, then i got some hacked firmware from forum.firmware-flash.com and now i can rip at up to 12x :D lots of good firmware there...

~Fizz

[twinches]

I think these post have gotten off topic form the starting thread name of "Nero Recode .90 beta". Maybe someone should start a different thread to discuss ripping speeds. I subscribe to this thread because I want to read about Nero Recode issues, updates etc. not about ripping speeds of different drives. It would be nice to get this thread back on track. Just my 2 cents.

[SirCentipede]

Maybe these threads from the decrypting forum will end the discussion:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?threadid=43758

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=43748

Luckily there seems to be an answer to everything on this board.
It worked for me, 'cause now my DVD-Rom rips a movie in 9-17 min. :-)

So now let's swith back discussing recode...

[Fat Bast'rd]

Originally posted by SirCentipede
So now let's swith back discussing recode...

I find the sliders 'mess about' a bit. If you just click on the main movie slider, sometimes the menu or extras' slider can change.

[zeronegative]

I seem to have a problem disabling videos. When I pick the RecodeDefault.bmp or my own bmp (black with white lettering, 720x576) it shows fine when I play the recoded DVD on my computer. However, in my standalone, those screens become garbled with all kinds of colours and show through part of the last menu. Really strange. Has anyone experienced this as well?

Oh, I'm ripping PAL DVDs just to let you know.

[SirCentipede]

@zeronegative

I have the same problem with my PAL DVDs. I don't know what it is, i experimented with other resolutions as 720x576 (PAL) but it didn't work either. Maybe someone knows a solution to this problem !?

[zeronegative]

@SirCentipede

Have you tried it with NTSC titles? Unfortunately I have no NTSC DVD here as I'm in the middle of moving my stuff, but I wonder if it has the same effect. Weird thing is that it started going wrong after I ghosted my computer back to its old settings and reinstalled Nero 6, although the installation is pretty much the same as before.

[SirCentipede]

@zeronegative

no I haven't tried NTSC titles, yet, maybe I'll try on the weekend, if i can get my hands on one.
In the meantime maybe somebody from the US can comment on this problem, if he/she encountered it on NTSC titles, too.

[Chibi Jasmin]

Originally posted by zeronegative
I seem to have a problem disabling videos. When I pick the RecodeDefault.bmp or my own bmp (black with white lettering, 720x576) it shows fine when I play the recoded DVD on my computer. However, in my standalone, those screens become garbled with all kinds of colours and show through part of the last menu. Really strange. Has anyone experienced this as well?

Oh, I'm ripping PAL DVDs just to let you know.

I posted about a problem with the garbled "video removed" screen in the Nero Recode 0.9.5.1 thread...

[zeronegative]

@Chibi Jasmin

Just took a look at your post, you're encoding PAL DVDs as well when experiencing the problem. Which makes me all the more curious as to if the problem also occurs with NTSC. Maybe I'm going to rip open some boxes to find an NTSC DVD and do a recode on it disabling some videos. It's strange though.

Maybe I should deinstall Recode and install the original 0.90 to see if the problem happens there as well. I'm under the impression that my working DVD was encoded with 0.90 and the faulty ones are from the 0.95 build.

update: No difference between 0.90 and 0.95. I'm beginning to suspect that it might have something to do with Nero's MPEG2/DVD encoding abilities...

[Chibi Jasmin]

Originally posted by zeronegative
@Chibi Jasmin

Just took a look at your post, you're encoding PAL DVDs as well when experiencing the problem. Which makes me all the more curious as to if the problem also occurs with NTSC. Maybe I'm going to rip open some boxes to find an NTSC DVD and do a recode on it disabling some videos. It's strange though.

Maybe I should deinstall Recode and install the original 0.90 to see if the problem happens there as well. I'm under the impression that my working DVD was encoded with 0.90 and the faulty ones are from the 0.95 build.

update: No difference between 0.90 and 0.95. I'm beginning to suspect that it might have something to do with Nero's MPEG2/DVD encoding abilities...

Strange enough, the default bmp has a resolution of 720x576 as for a pal title...may I ask what standalone shows the problem?

About it being Recode's fault...don't forget that playback on the pc works...that does not mean too much, as PCs play things way out of specs, but it might also hint, that something is wrong with the standalones? I don't have the time to test with NTSC-titles at the moment...but I have some here, at least...maybe I gonna try someday...guess, you'll beat me on that one...I am too busy at the moment...

[rpboy]

Originally posted by zeronegative
Just took a look at your post, you're encoding PAL DVDs as well when experiencing the problem. Which makes me all the more curious as to if the problem also occurs with NTSC. Maybe I'm going to rip open some boxes to find an NTSC DVD and do a recode on it disabling some videos. It's strange though.
I have been taking titles out with Recode .90 and .95 and have not had the extent of the problem that you guys reported.

I am using NTSC titles and I create a 720x480 BMP file - usually with a graphic that says "Insert Disc 2" or something on it.

When I preview it on my PC, everything is fine. When I view it on my standalone DVD player, I get some shimmering of the picture, especially on the text. Its not garbled and can be easily read. It just shakes and shimmers.

That's the only thing I have noticed about the ripping titles on NTSC DVDs.

[zeronegative]

Originally posted by Chibi Jasmin
Strange enough, the default bmp has a resolution of 720x576 as for a pal title...may I ask what standalone shows the problem?

I've played it on a Medion DVD-player, which has never given me any problems before. I'm going to try a title on my Cyberhome later tonight, but the weird thing is that before I ghosted my computer to an earlier date everything worked fine. I did a rip of Vidocq and that one shows the disabled screen perfectly fine, whereas the later rips don't.

Here's some photos of what I mean, sorry for the low quality of the first picture but it's a photo from a movie projected on my wall. The second movie I couldn't project because the CyberHome doesn't take DVD+R.

1: (movie 1) Original 'disabled video' in WinDVD:
http://www.zeronegative.net/lj/1_windvd.jpg

2: (movie 1) Original 'disabled video' with CyberHome:
http://www.zeronegative.net/lj/1_cyberhome.jpg
(notice the black bars)

3: (movie 1) Original 'disabled video' with Medion:
http://www.zeronegative.net/lj/1_medion.jpg
(bitmap totally garbled)

4: (movie 2) Custom 'disabled video' in WinDVD:
http://www.zeronegative.net/lj/2_windvd.jpg

5: (movie 2) Custom 'disabled video' with Medion:
http://www.zeronegative.net/lj/2_medion.jpg
(bitmap totally garbled)

[ccclapp]

What is the current thinking about Shrink v3.o b5 vs Nero Recode?

Here are my needs and impressions:
1) I rip/backup to Hardrive and also sometimes like to burn a backup. I have been doing full file rips with DVDDecrypter, and MM via Shrink and burn via Nero. However, I am now concluding there is no good reason to save menues and extras to either HD or DVD...it just takes up space and makes playback harder (have to push extra buttons on a remote or keyboard ;) ). On the other hand quality is very important to me, especially on my HD back-up.

For these reasons (unless there are good reasons I am missing for doing it another way) I now want to BU MM only to HD with zero compression using the best rip available (I just want a totally lossless MM rip). Then as needed I will compress/edit that BU to burn to DVD.

I am finding the best way to do this is to rip and re-author in Shrink for MM only for my rip to HD. Then, compress and burn to DVD my second BU in one step with nero recode/nero6.

Here are my questions/concerns:

2) I find some rips from DVDD and Shrink still contain some regions, PU's, and other little issues. I can clean these in IfoEdit, but I would really prefer not to. I am considering running AnyDVD WHILE ripping. Would this enable EXTRA clean-up, or mess things up? Another option would be to run AnyDVD as I burn from HD with Recode. (I have seen that many use AnyDVD with Recode to go silmultaniously rip and burn.). What is the feeling about this??

3) In Recode, I have a problem that I get stuck on the dummy screen of "disabled" items during playback. I sometimes cannot get a movie to play because these get in the way. Has anyone else had that problem? I do not think this is the same as the subtitle problem, because there are no click-points on the disables scenes.

Thanks for the help.

[gnipooldd]

Hi all. :)

ccclapp, what version of DVD Shrink are you using?
If not v3.0 beta 5, I'd suggest you do, as it removes PUs and RCE. ;)

It can also do some neat tricks that v2.3 can't.
http://www.dvdshrink.info/re-author-v3beta5.php
http://www.dvdshrink.info/re-author-v3beta5-advanced.php
And even better (and not well known):
Applying different compressions to different parts of a title(s).
http://www.dvdshrink.info/mixed-compressions.php
This is very handy to apply "Still Pictures" to the end-credits (seamlessly), saving more space for the MM. :D

[ccclapp]

Originally posted by gnipooldd
Hi all. :)

ccclapp, what version of DVD Shrink are you using?
If not v3.0 beta 5, I'd suggest you do, as it removes PUs and RCE. ;)

...yes I am using Shrink v3.0 b5. My questions were based on this. And yes, I still get some RCE and UPs issues sometimes (as I also get w DVD Decripter sometimes)

Thanks

[gnipooldd]

Oh ok, I'll shut up then. ;)