New DVD Rebuilder Pro Prototipe design: Screenshots

[TECK]

As I promised before to jdobbs, I made a basic prototype for DVD-Rebuilder.
The prototype was created only to help jdobbs with his work, not to take in any way credits for his work.
If he accepts, I will send him the files so he can continue from there what i started.

jdobbs, as well any other forum member, please let me know what you think about my ideas.
The icons, as well the design is just an example, jdobbs have the last word in everything.

Main Page:

http://xs30.xs.to/pics/05212/rb.gif

Movie Options (selection):

http://xs30.xs.to/pics/05212/rb1.gif

Thank you for your input.

[Fishman0919]

Very nice TECK, very very Nice!

[DD51]

I LOVE it!

[-JS-]

Fantastic!

[int 21h]

Pretty neat, but afaik the current progress bar any more specific than it is now is impossible since DVD-RB can't tell when the current segment will be done, or where it is in encoding. So I would think you would need only one progress bar, maybe with the total progress / elapsed time on the bottom, and the current file on top of it. Awesome job otherwise.

[TECK]

I think there is actually a way to do this.
Basically, DVD-RB send the information the CCE, to encode each file.
I'm sure jdobbs have a way do display what file is in process...

The current PRO version displays 2 bars, one of the current file being processed and one for the overall job.

I hope jdobbs will consider my design.
If he does, I will also finish a very flexible "Preferences" panel, that will allow you to choose wiser your encoder options, as well the rest of the preferences.
Maybe we can convince the BOSS to integrate this design to his new 1.00 release. :)

[lab-one]

Nice work. I like it a lot. It's nice and clean.

[jdobbs]

Well you see the design -- I see the work behind it...

I like how it looks, but I'm not sure doing something like this for v1.00 is feasible -- as I'm pretty close to releasing it. Even if I decided to try it, I think v1.10 would probably be optimistic.

I'll give it some thought.

[TECK]

jddobs, thanks for the nice words, it really means a lot to me.
I know there is tons of coding that has to be done, to link the actual interface.
Let me know if I should continue to work on the Options panel. Is is ok with you, I will post more screenshots with the CCE options, when done.
BTW, I just installed the 0.93 Pro version. The ISO image is here... :)

[jdobbs]

It'll burn it too (with a little help from DVD Decrypter). :)

[Video Dude]

That interface is great! Good job.

I especially like the "Input Settings" pane, the overall design is very clean and neat. I sure hope it makes it into DVD-RB.

[buzzqw]

Good, very good job !

clean , and very windows style :D

and a suggestion : keep it clean as possible, more user friendly an newbye possible

BHH

[Edsel]

Add another "me too". Looks excellent, I'm a big fan of clean professional interfaces.

Definitely something to aim for in the future.

[artoor]

Good job TECK :) I like it. I'd like to use dvd-rb with interface like this :)

[valnar]

I smell a DVD Shrink killer coming over the horizon....

Robert

[SAPSTAR]

:cool: I love it !!! A really good job !

[lanius]

;) very nice :)

[jdobbs]

Originally posted by valnar
I smell a DVD Shrink killer coming over the horizon....

Robert I think they're two different programs aimed at two different audiences. Shrink is easy-to-use and fast, RB is all about quality of the output -- which can't be done fast.

[hobyho]

I definitely like the look and feel of this interface. Nice work TECK. :)

PS : Maybe you should setup a poll :D

[NaN]

Hi!

Your GUI looks great!! I love it!

However I think it's better that you stop the development, since only jdobbs can merge the gui with the core - if he's interested in and if rebuilders software design is cleanly enough designed (speaking of gui/core separation).

2nd it's unlikely that he likes your naming convention.

Cheers, NaN

[Balthazar]

Originally posted by jdobbs
I think they're two different programs aimed at two different audiences. Shrink is easy-to-use and fast, RB is all about quality of the output -- which can't be done fast.

Actually, DVD Shrink w/Deep Analysis feature is only marginally faster than DVD Rebuilder w/CCE (2-Pass). I have done several tests and found that on average it only takes another 20-30 minutes to perform a Rebuild. Interestingly enough, Nero Recode is the transcoder to beat in terms of speed. It is twice as fast a Shrink. I will always use Rebuild, but it is nice to know that it isn't THAT much slower.

[jdobbs]

No matter what interface I use... I will write the code for it. I'm funny that way.

I thought this was just a presentation of a conceptual interface. I do like it, though, and am seriously thinking about it.

[jdobbs]

Interestingly enough, Nero Recode is the transcoder to beat in terms of speed. It is twice as fast a Shrink. I'd bet Rebuilder with ReJig is as near if not as fast as any other transcoder. I can do an entire DVD in less than 30 minutes (optimal). But it kinda goes outside the "encoder" and "high quality" paradigm of rebuilder.

[nwg]

Originally posted by jdobbs
I'd bet Rebuilder with ReJig is as near if not as fast as any other transcoder. I can do an entire DVD in less than 30 minutes (optimal). But it kinda goes outside the "encoder" and "high quality" paradigm of rebuilder.

I have found Rejig to be the fastest Transcoder. I used to compare it with Shrink 3.1 and A lot of time it came out better. Shrink 3.2 is better though now when used with its Adaptive Error Compensation settings.

I have always liked Rejig with DVD-RB as I have used it when I wanted to do a quick job.

Interestingly enough, Nero Recode is the transcoder to beat in terms of speed. It is twice as fast a Shrink.

No it isn't. It is about a third quicker. A 30 minute process in Shrink can be done in 20 minutes with Recode on my system.

[jdobbs]

Ever use DVD2One? I haven't tried it in a while, but "way back when" it was rocket fast. Same problem as all of the transcoders with quality, though, that's why I wrote DVD-RB -- cause I was spending way too many hours using the old methods with CCE for the quality, but never truly getting a backup that worked like the original.

[TECK]

Originally posted by jdobbs
No matter what interface I use... I will write the code for it. I'm funny that way.

I thought this was just a presentation of a conceptual interface. I do like it, though, and am seriously thinking about it.
That's what it is, a presentation of a conceptual interface, jdobbs. As I mentionned on the first post, you have the last word on design, etc.
The hardest part is the actual coding behind the interface, not to throw some fancy tools into the designer window... we all know that. :)
jddobs, let me know if you want me to continue posting new screenshots for other options. The Preferences window is almost done...

Thanks guys for the comments, btw.

PS. The 'BOSS' thing came out to my tongue because I was encoding Donnie Brasco... :) Great movie.

[nwg]

Originally posted by jdobbs
Ever use DVD2One? I haven't tried it in a while, but "way back when" it was rocket fast. Same problem as all of the transcoders with quality, though, that's why I wrote DVD-RB -- cause I was spending way too many hours using the old methods with CCE for the quality, but never truly getting a backup that worked like the original.

I have DvdD2one but haven't used it in a while. It is fast but I still got faster results with Rejig/DVD-RB. It does depend on the compression and the DVD.

[samuelal]

OH-MY-GOD!

The interface is so clean and .. wowwwwwwwwww!

This could indeed be THE 'DVD-Shrink' killer GUI-friendly-wise.

Two suggestions if possible (@jdobbs/@TECK)
To take it closer to the edge of user-friendly, is there a way for you to provide the user more important data such as:
1. When selecting an option which is compatible with the current "one-click-backup", have the GUI show both current remaining/elapsed time on currently working .m2v file (derived from the user-slected encoder running time hooks) and on the currently working entire project.
Further more, have the GUI show a total time left estimation based on size of the entire project's m2v segment's size and current progress speed (again, derived from the user-selected encoder hooks).

2. When going through the "Input Settings" tab, is there a way to add more information which is updated in real-time concerning current project size estimation (based on what the user selects from the Titles/Chapters/Audio/Subtitles) via numerical data and a progress bar (like when using DVD-Shrink in 'Author' mode?)

Thank you very much for this!

I would galdly wait for DVD-RB 1.00 if it means shifting the focus to this incredible GUI implementation once all bugs/features have been completed.

Samuel.

[bteamfox]

I like the look of this! :)

[lark]

i have to admit that this looks great.
couple of comments/questions from me as well...

what did you have in mind with that "microsoft database"?

imho the input settings should go all the way to the cells.
was the idea to use this list as segment editor?
in that case you could use different icons for blanked, stilled, compressed, uncompressed etc.

regards
t :)

[jdobbs]

A couple more suggestions and this idea is going out the window... realism, folks... I can't stay in beta status for the life of the product.;)

My biggest concern with Rebuilder is that it works. Cosmetics are cool, but are secondary.

What I'm looking at is how I could use the current skin concept, with only a few extra bells/whistles to "simulate" this kind of interface. Otherwise you probably wouldn't see it for a long time.

[bteamfox]

Originally posted by jdobbs
A couple more suggestions and this idea is going out the window... realism, folks... I can't stay in beta status for the life of the product.;)

My biggest concern with Rebuilder is that it works. Cosmetics are cool, but are secondary.

What I'm looking at is how I could use the current skin concept, with only a few extra bells/whistles to "simulate" this kind of interface. Otherwise you probably wouldn't see it for a long time.

In that case gets my vote to bring it out as it is. The Current interface is easy to use. The one posted hear looks nice, but I would rather have a product that was finished and working any day.

[robot1]

Originally posted by jdobbs
My biggest concern with Rebuilder is that it works. Cosmetics are cool, but are secondary.

100% Agree.
THEK's work is great (the interface is really nice) but I understand jdobbs would need a great work and much time to implement it.
I prefer his time spent in other things (angle/menu reencoding...)

Anyway I think DVD-RB's interface is really good (both standard and Rockas' one) and the segment viewer/editor is great and easy to use.

[TECK]

Not to mention that devs have also real lifes, buddies, women, beer, etc., not only a computer screen. :)

[archaeo]

Originally posted by robot1

Anyway I think DVD-RB's interface is really good (both standard and Rockas' one) [/B]

Agree to that. I hope the windows standard will ALWAYS be an option, just for the pure simplicity of it :p

...less is more

[feedback]

Call me old fashioned but I like the gold & blue "historical" color scheme of the Rockas Interface.

If the new interface is put to use at least retain some of the look of the Historical DVD-RB, otherwise it begins to look to much like everything else.
Be Different. Don't follow the crowd. Just my Opinion. :)

Regards,

[TECK]

jddobs, check your PM's. I was away, sorry for the delay.

[SkoalWintergreen]

I agree that a working product is the most important attribute to something like this project, but that's for people like us who understand the process. Do not under estimate the need for an ascetically pleasing interface.

From what I gather Jdobbs is planning on charging 29.95 once the product reaches the 1.0 stage, and I would assume this is b/c the products value is worth that, and Jdobbs wouldn't mind a little capital for his creativity/hard work. In order to get a more mainstream crowd, you have to have a pleasing/easy interface. Something that looks professional so people will feel comfortable, and believe in the product.

If you want to go commerical, your book will be judged by the cover, if it looks nice and is easy to use, it's going to sell better than something that just works right. This scene is dominated by newbies, movie back-ups draws a lot of idiots and any 29.95 product is successful based on it's ability to draw those people in.

Just food for thought if you are thinking commercial...

[jdobbs]

Very important points. Thanks.

[bobrap]

From what I gather Jdobbs is planning on charging 29.95 once the product reaches the 1.0 stage

Any further info on this?:thanks:

[feedback]

SkoalWintergreen makes some valid points, however one of the first things one must do involving any new product launch is to determine who or what is the Target Market going to be.

Any one who has ever taken a Marketing class knows you have to define
your target market first.

One can't be all things to all people.

Do you want the, probably, broader market of Newbies or the more, probably, narrower market of advanced users.

As far as aesthetics, form and function must be complimentary to be successful in any product launch. That does not mean that, at least, the color scheme of the original Rockas interface can't be incorporated into a newer interface.

This all just my opinion.

Regards:)

[jdobbs]

My goal was to get v1.00 out by the first part of next week... but it may slip a week as I'm trying to get as much in from my list as I can.

[archaeo]

is multi segment encoding on that list??:D :D

[TECK]

Originally posted by bobrap
Any further info on this?:thanks:
Ya, make a donation, while still in beta...
If you are like myself, a guy who supported jddobs from the early stages of this product, then you will get a good deal. :)
Read more here:
http://dvd-rb.dvd2go.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=297

So hurry up... before jdobbs and rockas change their minds. :)

[bobrap]

Thanks for the reply:) Already donated and not bothered with the cost....just curious...:) :) :thanks:

[int 21h]

Originally posted by jdobbs
A couple more suggestions and this idea is going out the window... realism, folks... I can't stay in beta status for the life of the product.;)

My biggest concern with Rebuilder is that it works. Cosmetics are cool, but are secondary.

What I'm looking at is how I could use the current skin concept, with only a few extra bells/whistles to "simulate" this kind of interface. Otherwise you probably wouldn't see it for a long time.

What about changing the current skin format to something more standard like XML?

For instance, Winamp skins look like this: http://www.winamp.com/nsdn/winamp/skinning/modern/tutorials/2.3-simpleskin.php

XML is all custom, so you could make it as simple as you wanted to start off with.

Right now some of the skinning stuff doesn't seem to be that standardized. For instance, you can replace the graphic for some buttons, but you can't replace the graphic for other buttons. Also, all measurements in twips is somewhat offbeat, can we put in pixels instead? (http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=210590)

How about something like this:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<RebuilderSkin version="0.1">
<skininfo>
<name>Windows Standard</name>
<comment>Default Windows Skin</comment>
<author>jdobbs</author>
<screenshot="standard.bmp">
</skininfo>
<bitmap id="standard.button.add" file="add.bmp">
<bitmap id="standard.button.del" file="del.bmp">
<group id="standard.batchbuttons">
<!-- These are relative X & Y locations within this group definition -->
<button id="Add" action="batch_add" x="5" y="5" image="standard.button.add" tooltip="Add file to Batch">
<button id="Del" action="batch_del" x="5" y="10" image="standard.button.del" tooptip="Remove file from Batch">
</group>
<form id="main">
<!-- This X & Y actually determine where the buttons end up on the form -->
<group id="standard.batchbuttons" x="10" y="15" />
</form>
</RebuilderSkin>


Alot of those ideas are shamelessly stolen from the Winamp Skin format, but you get the idea. I think this would go a long ways towards giving skin designers latitude and consistency.

[curious d]

It's an interesting point about the business aspect of this program and the interface. One might recall the early days of internet shopping. What businesses learned was that if a website was difficult to navigate, people did not shop. If a program has a difficult interface, people won't use it. It's not because these people are "idiots", but more likely that most people are interested in simplicity. How many times have we decided that something wasn't worth our time to learn because it was just too complicated. I'm just getting into DVD-RB now and I can think of a few people who would love to back up their DVD's (this program being a great program for the job), but wouldn't want to learn which matrix and encoder and their proper settings would be best for each movie. Wouldn't it be great to have a button that states "setting ideal for CG movies" and another that states "settings ideal for action movies"? I realize it is a matter of perception and a matter of tastes, but it is surprising how many people are willing to sacrifice a bit of quality for simplicity. Of course, you can always have advance settings for those who love to tweak to "perfection".

By the way, I like the interface.:D

[dragongodz]

One can't be all things to all people.
so very true because no matter what you do someone will think something should be different, be it design or inner working etc etc etc.

and people wonder sometimes why programmers can get frustrated and snap things like "if you think its so bloody simple try it yourself". :D

[feedback]

@dragongodz

Point taken.;)

[TECK]

Originally posted by curious d
Wouldn't it be great to have a button that states "setting ideal for CG movies" and another that states "settings ideal for action movies"? I realize it is a matter of perception and a matter of tastes, but it is surprising how many people are willing to sacrifice a bit of quality for simplicity. Of course, you can always have advance settings for those who love to tweak to "perfection".

By the way, I like the interface.:D
That's the idea with the new interface. If you integrate any "on the sight" info (see screen 1), so people can see it rightaway what it means, it will be way easier for them to selet the right option.

One thing is sure, djobbs said it will consider it... :)
That means, even if the interface is not totally integrated, parts of this discussion will reach him and help him design a better future product.

Thanks guys for the positive comments.