Rebuilder/HC, not CCE talk

[elizerrojas]

i 'm a user of RB/HC but, it is very hard to find threads about about this combination , the mayority of the threads i see are about RB/CCE. those of you who use RB/HC or who know about this topic, please help me with some questions and concerns.

is RB/CCE better than RB/HC?
if it is, how much better is it?
is RB/HC better than shrink?
has anyone done any work on RB/HC vs shrink? what were your results?

please keep in mind that i'm only concern about quality, i couldn't care less for speed, i just let RB work overnight.

thanks for your input.

p:s: i'm tired of CCE talk(maybe because i don't want spend the $59 it costs but depending on your responds, i just might have to)

thanks again.

[Fishman0919]

is RB/CCE better than RB/HC?

Well quoting from forum rules #12, can't answer that because this question cannot be answered objectively. Each and everyone has their own view about what's best in a certain area. The best is what works best for you!..... what I tell you is best may not be what you or someone else thinks.... but if you ask "Does HC give similar results compared to CCE" yes.... sometimes better sometimes worst.... I love CCE Basic but sometimes I wish I didn't spend the money on it and just used HC

is RB/HC better than shrink?
has anyone done any work on RB/HC vs shrink? what were your results?


Again forum rule #12... but read this Link (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=91418&highlight=blind+test) ..... you can substitute CCE Basic with HC and you will probably get the same results

[feedback]

Well I like HC and QuEnc. If you go to the end of the thread "Rebuilders Matrix Editor" you will see some disscussion about them. In this forum of course.

I have been experimenting with different Matrices and had a problem with HC with one, but it worked O.K. with QuEnc, go figure.

I don't think we want to say what is good, better, or best as it is in the eye of the beholder and we don't want to start a battle over the different encoders. They all have redeeming points or people would not be using them. However, I don't see any improvement in my encodes using the commercial encoders. So, I don't use them, but hey, that's just my own opinion.

I do notice that HC is slower than QuEnc. but like you I encode overnite so who cares. Depending on the movie I sometimes don't see a difference in quality between normal and best modes. I do movie only most of the time, but I do the entire DVD from time to time.

Have you tried the different matrix types that come with the Rockas Rebuilder Matrix Editor?
Regards, :)

P.S. I use the DVD-RB Pro version 0.93.2

[TECK]

From my personal experience, quality wise, the best results you can obtain is with CCE, that's why everyone is talking about this nice combo...

[elizerrojas]

thanks everyone, i must admit i didn't read the rules, sorry didn't mean to break any (#12)
i've taken a little from every responce and it seems that i should stick with HC at least for now(no it isn't because of the $59)because after using it a few times(i've only done about five back ups with RB)i'm happy with the output's quality so far. i will continue to read other's responces to see what happen.

thanks guys. you are the best.

[gizzin]

Here's my opinion

I've used both HC and Quenc they both yield good results almost comparable to CCE. In my opinion if bitrate is 3500 they wield the same results as CCE if best settings are used. I find with bitrates around 3000 CCE does a better job. For interlaced material I find also HC and Quenc do a better job atleast on animation.

[BadServo]

I have traditionally used CCE on 6-pass (1+5) with good results. However, I ran a few tests this week using the HC Encoder and have to admit I'm floored by it. Based on the forum readings I've done thus far the general consensus is that HC approaches CCE quality very well and in some cases surpasses it. A complaint has been with teh speed of the encodes.

Well I'm here to say that compared to 6-passes, HC is damn-near blazing fast. During one of my tests on the film "Midnight Madness," the CCE encode took 441 minutes, while the HC encode took only 233 minutes. This is using the "Best" profile in the HC Settings.

After looking over the resulting files side-by-side with a group of friends, more people felt that the HC version was of superior quality. Even those perferring the versions admitted that the HC encode of of remarkable qulaity and that the difference could be chalked up to some arbitrary personal factor. All in all, I feel that the perceptual quality difference is insubstantial to recommend CCE with it's price over the freeware HC.

For those asking about animation, I have found the same resutls as above on all animation encodes I've attempted. The most striking difference being on "Akira" in which block-noise is substantially reduced in the HC encode.

If I can only get a simple solution for spreading HC encodes across my 3 main PCs, I'll really be getting somewhere.

[curious d]

Out of curiosity, what matrix are you using for your CG and non-CG animation? Thanks.

[BadServo]

I use QMatOp on all my prepared sources prior to encoding.

[curious d]

Thanks for the info. I want to use QMatOP, but I'm not sure how to use it. There is a part 2 download which ZipGenius can not open (something about a header problem) and when I tried to use part 1 only, it was taking longer that 8 hours to go through the first VOB file. Since then, I donated to get DVD-RB Pro, but the file for this is only the GUI and I think I still need part 2. Further, the directions to this program are a little confusing to me. Could you offer me a little insight to this program? I have Java 1.5. Maybe I should contact Sapstar.

[feedback]

Quote:
When the next version of HC?
Next release is almost finished.
Quote:
And with which improvements?
- compressed database, size will be 30% of the old one
- improved motion estimation, means better quality especially for high motion scenes
- biased compression curve
- shutdown command

I just saw this post from yesterday in the "Other MPEG 1/2 Encoder" forum.
I hope Hank315 has a batch version for DVD-RB.

Regards,:)

[hank315]

I hope Hank315 has a batch version for DVD-RB.Sure, already did some tests with DVD-RB 0.93.2 and HC015, runs fine :)

[feedback]

That is good news. I use DVD-RB Pro. v.93.2 and I think you two guys (hank315 and jdobbs ) have very complimentary applications that work well together.

I use HC most of the time and QuEnc. some of the time. I used CCE basic trial and for me I couldn't justify buying that app., as yours is just as good or better in Quality, IMHO.


Regards,:)

[gandalf027]

IS there any kind of guide for us to use HC? I've been using CCE for quite some time, but i'm willing to try another one.

[feedback]

@gandalf027

Go to the "download" section of doom9 and get the HC 0.14 zip or download Here (http://www.doom9.org/Soft21/Encoders/MPEG2/HC_014.zip)

The zip file which contains the HC app. also contains an Adobe PDF document/guide that explains how HC works.

Regards,:)

[gandalf027]

Thanks, gonna do that :)