DVD RB CCE Vs. DVD Shr1nk test results PSNR + SSIM

[darkpepe]

I was a bit disapointed by the quality of CCE, so I made a mathematical comparision to see if it was me, but the results show that I was right.
Wonder why ppl claim that CCE has a the best quality when it comes to backup DVDs. (The movie was shrinked about 58%)

-DVD Rebuilder One Click Modus with CCE 2.50 SP 3pass 4,32 GB
http://forum.gleitz.info/attachment.php?attachmentid=68427
-Shr1nk 3.2 Deep Analysy + sharp adaptive compensation 4,35 GB
http://forum.gleitz.info/attachment.php?attachmentid=68428


Here are also some screenshots:
http://service.gmx.net/mc/LnvebnYQGOcqZS7smd313BWQUbAnsl

[dragongodz]

Wonder why ppl claim that CCE has a the best quality when it comes to backup DVDs
hmm and i wonder why people do such limited testing(1 movie for gods sake) and think that proves anything.

heres an example for you. ddlooping did a test with dvdshrink 3.2 AEC with 1 of the lord of the rings films. his findings was that dvdshrink looked better than CCE to him. then he also tested terminator 2 and guess what ? CCE looked better than dvshrink. so what does that tell you ? simple, that different movies will give different results.

take a look at Doom9's codec comparison some time. you will see he does multiple films at different bitrates. also the films and scenes selected are of different types. this gives a broader idea of the different codecs capabilities.

since CCE has been used on a lot of films for a long time most people have found CCE to give, in general, a better quality output than dvdshrink when compressing to such lower amounts. no doubt with dvdshrinks AEC a lot of the films that were not good with older versions will look better now but that does not mean that it is always ,or even the majority of the time, better.

[p200002]

I am very interested in seeing some one come up with a full comparison between CCE and DVD Shrink, not something like movie A transcoded with program A is better than did it with program B. To me, I really can't tell the difference.

[wink]

Originally posted by darkpepe

Wonder why ppl claim that CCE has a the best quality when it comes to backup DVDs. (The movie was shrinked about 58%)


Maybe we are just crazy when we like CCE method more :)

[darkpepe]

Originally posted by dragongodz
hmm and i wonder why people do such limited testing(1 movie for gods sake) and think that proves anything.

You are definitly right at that point.
Maybe I do some more testing with CCE 2.67 as soon as I manage to create movies smaller than 5 GB with that version.

[jdobbs]

Mathmatic comparison? PSNR is just one of a battery of tests that would need to be run to determine what is better. Its results don't stand alone.

Example: If you ever ran a filter of any kind (let's say undot() or deen()) on a video input -- it would kill the PSNR while making the video more pleasing to the eye.

The difference between CCE and any of the host of within-the-compressed-domain transcoders is so intuitively obvious to the casual observer that arguing the point is like debating whether the sun will come up tomorrow....


[added] Another example: If you ran the output of pretty much any MP3 against the original source it would look terrible in a PSNR test because it uses psycho-acoustical modeling. Parts of the audio that are not detectible by a human being are removed from the original -- that's how it gets smaller. You can't compress anything without taking something out -- it's determining what you take out that makes the real difference in quality. PSNR only looks at differences -- without considering context.

[darkpepe]

I agree that PSNR is just a mathematical comparision, but SSIM is a good aproach to what a perceptional comparision would be.
Take a look at the screenshots, they do not tell anything about the quality of moving pictures, but you get an idea why the Shrink copy is better.

[Fr4nz]

Actually CCE is better than DVD-Shrink, so it is not true what you say.

[Fishman0919]

I have done over a 100 movies with DVD-RB and CCE 2.50 and I have done the same movies with DVD-Shrink 3.17-3.2, 99 out of 100 times DVD-Shrink screen shots looked better.... but cut out small clip for the two and running them back to back over and over so you can see the action of the movies and CCE just about wins all the time. I love DVD-Shrink but it just can't do what CCE can (from what I see, IMO)

[jdobbs]

This discussion has nowhere to go. Look back through the last two years of forums and you'll see it has been beaten to death. It comes down to this:

The opinion is like the anus, everybody has one -- but nobody cares about anybody elses.

The answer to this is obvious and I'm incredulous that we are even having this discussion. Which is faster a Ferrari or a semi tractor trailer? Well, let's see -- it depends whether is is driving down a highway or is falling off a cliff (now watch the amatuer physicists argue that one too).

[darkpepe]

Originally posted by jdobbs
This discussion has nowhere to go. Look back through the last two years of forums and you'll see it has been beaten to death.

The 3.2 version comes with an adaptive error compensation algorithm, so I believe it's time to have a new comparision.

I encourage ppl to have a look for themselves. Sure, Shrink doesn't give you the feeling of beeing a pro, but it seems like there is a bunch of nerds that care more about that than quality.

[erdoke]

Originally posted by darkpepe

I encourage ppl to have a look for themselves. Sure, Shrink doesn't give you the feeling of beeing a pro, but it seems like there is a bunch of nerds that care more about that than quality.

These things are too much on the subjective side to debate. (In fact, what is "quality"?)
For me the new CloneDVD gives better picture in less than half time compared to DVDShrink. If I need only a small decrease of the original bitrate I use transcoders myself. In this case I find the quality good and the picture is more like the original. But when you have a bright action movie well over two hours, the difference is significant in favour of CCE.
Of course that is my opinion or should I say anus.:D

[jdobbs]

DVDShrink is an incredible piece of software written by a genius. It is incredibly easy to use, very fast (generally), and if someone is happy with the results -- then they should unquestioningly do so. But please, lets not start another one of these "which is better" threads.

To me the difference is obvious -- and that's why I went to all the trouble of writing DVD-RB, just so I could take advantage of CCE. I'm not in it for the money -- because, frankly, I'd be better off with a paper route. But to someone else it may not be as obvious. Great. More power to them. Use DVD Shrink, InstantCopy, DVD2One, DVDXCopy, anything your heart desires. Use it to death. But I wish we wouldn't start throwing numbers around as if they actually mean something to impress the uninitiated or inexperienced...

I wish everyone would just make a choice and go for it and stop spending so much time trying to convince everyone else their choice is right.

This is my last comment on this thread.

[dragongodz]

I'm not in it for the money -- because, frankly, I'd be better off with a paper route.
too true my freind, too true. :D

Shrink doesn't give you the feeling of beeing a pro, but it seems like there is a bunch of nerds that care more about that than quality.
hmm and looks to me like someone is being a bit insulting because other may not agree. :angry:

The 3.2 version comes with an adaptive error compensation algorithm, so I believe it's time to have a new comparision.
Maybe I do some more testing with CCE 2.67 as soon as I manage to create movies smaller than 5 GB with that version.
yes thats the thing to do. take a bunch of movies, different types (high action, slow movement, cartoon etc) and try then at different levels of compression with both dvdshrink and CCE. then you should be able to see what gives the type of quality that you are happy with. people would probably not mind reading your results for a more thorough test, whether they agree with the results or not.

oh and judgement should be based on watching running clips as already said, not on PSNR or single frames. after all you dont watcha movie 1 frame every second do you ? :D

last from me aswell on this. i think everything that needs to be said has been.

[ozzii]

Originally posted by jarvis1781
the thing I like about CCE over Shrink is that you can change the resolution.

I like being able to make the extras into 1/2 D1. There is no question that CCE produces a better backup than Shrink.

If you try to back up an entire DVD with Shrink, the entire project just looks like an anus. :D

With DVDShrink you can also put manually the extra to 1/2 so you have much place for the movie. And you can also put different percent on different part of the main movie. Like more compression for the begining, the end of movie and no action scene.


Update
here is the exemple
_http://www.dvdshrink.info/mixed-compressions.php

[jorel]

hi all!
:)
i still don't use DVD-RB (i'm reading to learn first)
but i can't trust in the quality that darkpepe got form DVD-RB.:eek:

or he did something wrong or don't know how to use DVD-RB.
please boys, help that guy so much! he need!
:p

[jorel]

Originally posted by dragongodz
hmm and i wonder why people do such limited testing(1 movie for gods sake) and think that proves anything.

:p excuse me but i can't resist.
your right dragongodz,... and you "observations" are cool!

@ all
this thread is more than "informative" !
have humorous inside magnifcs details. :p

anyone can see the screenshots from the last link?
i got only one page in blue screen but without pictures! :confused:

[darkpepe]

Update:
New comparision ready! Screenshots available at the same link
http://service.gmx.net/mc/LnvebnYQGOcqZS7smd313BWQUbAnsl

Versions and settings remain the same. No PSNR results this time, as many complained about the purely mathematical nature of those.

-DVD Rebuilder One Click Modus with CCE 2.50 SP 3pass 4,29 GB
SSIM: (min/average/max): 0.79291 / 0.979839 / 0.99925

-Shr1nk 3.2 Deep Analysy + sharp adaptive compensation 4,35 GB
SSIM: (min/average/max): 0.78376 / 0.987430 / 0.99993

The movie was shrinked about 71%, so the screenshots are very similar.

Look close at the image with the hand on the mirror, that thumb looks much better with CCE. Also the eyebrows of the dark guy look much better with CCE.
But the image with the shot in the wall with smoke coming out of it, there I like Shrink more.
I believe I'm still sticking to Shrink 3.2 though it could be that some movies look better with CCE, it's not worth the time to try out both methods and keep the better looking movie.

The SSIM Numbers seem to be accuarate, Shrink IS much closer to the original.
Anyway, I would say that the CCE version wins this time.

[ozzii]

Link doesn't work for me :(

[jdobbs]

This discussion bores me. It's like arguing about how many pancakes it takes to cover a doghouse.

The answer is obvious -- if the math doesn't support it, then the math is wrong.

[robot1]

@darkpepe
Believe only to your eyes, to test a backup.
Sadly, there is no mathematical method to use, expecially when you compare a transcoded output with a new encoded one.
I had backup with DVD Shrink 3.1 with lots of macroblock (pratically unwatchable), with better SSIM then CCE's backup.
But CCE backup was almost perfect and good looking.
Don't trust SSIM or PSNR.
Anyway Shrink 3.2 is a very good tool, with different target than DVD-RB.

Link doesn't work for me too.
And screenshot are not very useful to compare videos: you could have take an I frame from Shrink and a B or P from CCE (or vice versa), so results can't be general.

[erdoke]

Originally posted by darkpepe

The movie was shrinked about 71%, so the screenshots are very similar.

Look close at the image with the hand on the mirror, that thumb looks much better with CCE. Also the eyebrows of the dark guy look much better with CCE.
But the image with the shot in the wall with smoke coming out of it, there I like Shrink more.


It is senseless to compare screenshots of DVD-Video. If you understand how these compressing engines work, fooling the human senses, you will get to the same conclusion as others: Watch the movie and forget about screenshots.

[VamPYR]

have anyone watch every movies by sticking their eye close enough to the tv screen or monitor or projector.
and say they not happy with their backup with certain program because they give different quality.
after encoding or transcoding many movie by trying different program,
each result are different in different program.

i encode some movie they both have a similar file size and running time, but release by different studio.(2 hours+/7gb+/-/FS 4:3/NTSC)
1 have good results but another one no.

if the movie look good in recode2 than i will stay on it,
if the movie look bad in recode2 than i will try RB+CCE,
sometimes encode or transcode give the similar results,
than i'll choose the one spend less time to finish my project.