dvdshrink vs nero recode

[Subwars]

has anyone test these to extensivly and found one to be better then the other both seem to be very very similar with their features looks to work the same way both have a 2 pass option ect ect... one would assume that recode would have to be better considering it's still developed and shrink hasn't had anything done to it in ages but what are other peoples opinions... i have been using shrink for awhile now and am quite happy with it but if recode could do just that bit better job being more developed :confused:

[blutach]

Recode is about 15% faster but can't handle even CSS encrypted disks - to use it on a commercial movie, you will need to rip the disk with DVD Decrypter or the like first.

Regards

[Subwars]

i allways rip with dvd decryter first anyway but you say it's faster a few mins per movie isn't really of any importantence it's if it give better or worse quality

[blutach]

If you want better quality, use DVD Rebuilder. Recode and DVD Shrink give adequate quality on high bitrate originals.

Regards

[elizerrojas]

to blutach. don't take this wrong but, the question was, which one was better between shrink and recode2.

people do this all the time, we newbies look for expert's help and they don't answer the real question.

[Chetwood]

Maybe it's because newbies do not search the forum for old postings concerning those matters they are about to ask.

[Subwars]

Maybe it's because newbies do not search the forum for old postings concerning those matters they are about to ask.

find me a post where someone has allready asked the difference between these 2 cause i did search and i didn't find any didn't find a great deal of talk about recode at all

[Sir Didymus]

...and please consider it is against the forum rules to ask "what's better between"...

Apart this, it seems to me the answer given was complete (almost same quality) and precise, given the impossibility of defining in an objective manner the term. The further suggestion, to encode the title istead of trancoding, was just provided (I suppose) as a hint for obtaining significant benefits in the process of movie resizing...

Cheers,
SD

[elizerrojas]

Maybe it's because newbies do not search the forum for old postings concerning those matters they are about to ask.

there is a post that does talk about this topic but, how answering with something totally unrelated to the question is going to help?

[setarip_old]

@Subwars

From what I've seen, the quality of output of NERO Recode and DVD Shrink is strikingly similar...

[elizerrojas]

@Subwars

From what I've seen, the quality of output of NERO Recode and DVD Shrink is strikingly similar...

now that is a answer and a right one at that.

[2COOL]

IMHO, DVD Shrink and Recode seem to using the same encoding algorithm as far as quality goes. But Recode's encoding time got optimized for a quicker process so that gives it the edge over DVD Shrink's time. Keep in mind that both software are development from the same author.

[Subwars]

ok good stuff

[elizerrojas]

i also believe that their quality output is the same. recode2 faster that's it.

[Taelon]

I haven't used recode so this may not be accurate, but my understanding is that recode doesn't allow selecting the type of AEC to be set in the GUI, it needs to be set by manipulating registry keys.

If the quality of the transcoding between Shrink and Recode is equivalent, and recode's only advantage is a minor speed gain over Shrink, I don't see any reason to switch considering Shrink allows AEC customization in the GUI.

[blutach]

@elizerrojas
... a few mins per movie isn't really of any importantence it's if it give better or worse qualityThe above quote is why I mentioned an encoding option.

In any event, I didn't take it the wrong way. :)

Regards

[Subwars]

@elizerrojas
The above quote is why I mentioned an encoding option.

In any event, I didn't take it the wrong way. :)

Regards


yes but using cce or something isn't just a few more mins it's a few more hours

[blutach]

Fair enough mate. Later.

Regards

[setarip_old]

@elizerrojas

now that is a answer and a right one at that.

Glad you liked my answer. I find that most times simple and direct is better ;>}

[thewonderer]

one thing i've found while trying out recode over dvdshrink, is that it seems to oversize sometimes, even if you put the indepth analysis on. Also, I prefer the interface of dvdshrink. I reckon there also a couple of bugs, like it will still do an analysis before copying across a dvd which doesn't require any shrinking (ie no compression)

[setarip_old]

@thewonderer

I reckon there also a couple of bugs, like it will still do an analysis before copying across a dvd which doesn't require any shrinking (ie no compression)

Why would you use NERO Recode with an already "ripped" DVD5? All you have to do is use NERO Burning ROM to burn in "DVD-Video" mode...

[Subwars]

@thewonderer



Why would you use NERO Recode with an already "ripped" DVD5? All you have to do is use NERO Burning ROM to burn in "DVD-Video" mode...


i think i know the answer to this one it's called movie only mode cut out all the extras and sometimes you get just the movie and it doens't need any compression so you still need to use dvdshrink or nero or whatever to make the new dvd

[setarip_old]

@Subwars

If it's a DVD5, a one-to-one copy (No compression) can be made without the need to remove any extras...

[Subwars]

@Subwars

If it's a DVD5, a one-to-one copy (No compression) can be made without the need to remove any extras...


yes you would be 100% correct in saying that but show me where he stated dvd5

[setarip_old]

As stated by "thewonderer"" copying across a dvd which doesn't require any shrinking (ie no compression)

A DVD that requires no compression also does not require the use of NERO Recode. Whether a DVD5 or DVD9, "thewonderer" has indicated that the DVD requires no compression. If he/she meant something other than that, it hasn't been stated...

[Subwars]

well the way i see it is that an original disc being a dvd 9 riped in movie only mode and the movie part of the disc only being exqual or less then 4.7gig would still require the use of dvdshrink/nero to make the new movie and there would of course be no compression and with dvdshrink if thats the case it just does the job doesn't analyse cause theres no need but nero will do an unnecessary analyse which is the point he was making that it does a first analyses when not needed but you saying why use it at all well if it's a dvd5 well of course you don't but if it's a dvd9 and you rip it as movie only it can still end up having no compression

[setarip_old]

I guess we won't know for certain unless or until "thewonderer" posts more information...

[aaron10]

I side with subWar's logic. If the original (or a remastered full disc) will fit on a DVD-5, you might still want to use reauthor mode to get rid of the menu, etc. so the final product is a movie-only disc. Many people do not like menus or studio promos, so reauthoring material (even though it is already DVD-5 sized) would make sense. It saves having to deal with a menu and having to watch lame promos. There are other ways around this but reauthoring is an easy one. I'm not sure if this is theW's rationale but it might be.

[m1ckran]

Sorry to leave it so late before replying, but I've only just spotted this thread. I hope you're still waiting for constructive answers.

I've been using DvdShrink for some time and about a month ago I bought Nero Reloaded, which includes Recode. I have to say that I'm pretty disappointed with the performance of Nero software, especially after believing they were the cream, but that's another story.

I found Recode easy to use and faster than DvdShrink. Recode also includes a handy "merge" option to combine several vob files into a single unit.

On the whole, after testing several dvd's using both programs, I have to say that I prefer DvdShrink. Video output from Recode is certainly a little brighter and can initially appear to be more impressive than Shrink. On the other hand, Shrink produces slightly darker output but, almost paradoxically, provides more detail. Somehow, the picture seems more solid with greater contrast than Recode can manage.

Using the same source files, Recode produced artifacts where Shrink did not. Not many, but it only takes one splat to put you on edge and ruin your viewing pleasure.

I know Recode is written by the same author as DvdShrink, but I think Nero have sacrificed quality for speed and ended up with a program I consider to be inferior to DvdShrink. In my opinion, with compression rates of about 70-75% of original, DvdShrink produces a more realistic 3D picture.

Hope this is useful.

[Subwars]

good reply definatly appreciated

[undercover_dancer]

m1ckran - what EAC profile do you use?

[Subwars]

m1ckran - what EAC profile do you use?


eac profile?

[m1ckran]

eac settings:-

Shrink
Deep analysis
Sharp (default)

Recode
Advanced analysis
High quality

Just a thought, but I think it's well worth downloading DVD-Rebuilder and trying that in one-click mode. It's easy to use and can often produce better results than Shrink. If you go to their website, you can download the complete installer package that does everything for you and makes the whole process very easy. Recommended.

Mickran

[kappa]

My two cents compressing K19-R2-greek:

This is a poorly produced dvd, with several encoding artifacts polluting the source. I have a 1600x1200 LCD so nothing escapes the eye. I first used Recode with all the settings for best quality and compared it to Shrink with maximum sharpness.

At the beginning of chapter 2, there is a welder's arc reflected on a metal surface with very rapid lighting cahnges, producing some blocking in the source. With both Recode and Shrink, the blocking becomes more pronounced and visible. Here Recode produces less blocking than Shrink.

At the beginning of chapter 3, there is a landscape view of the submarine exiting the port, where one can see several buildings in the background, with an area of rougly 25x25 pixels for each building. Here there is a lot of "dancing around" of the outlines already in the source. This gets pronounced and a bit blockier in Shrink and very pronounced and fuzzy in Recode. Shrink wins in detail preservation hands down.

I then tried using Shring at the default sharpness setting. This produced blockiness mostly comparable to Recode's in chapter 2, without sacrificing details in chapter 3.

I was about to keep this last encoding, when I decided to do a Rebuilder run. And, quite expectadly, this kicked the transcoders' butts!! At an average bitrate of 3300 kbps and with 2 passes, CCEAQM=1 and "Normal" filter, the produced result was almost identical to the source. No blocking, and near comparable level of details.

So I'll keep on using Shrink when it's too crappy a film to do anything else and Rebuilder for everything else. See, I'm about to get my X2 3800+ :p

[MSlv]

Recode oversizeing? It never happened to me! Not even once! All recoded DVDs were exactly 4460 MB.

[feedback]

I side with subWar's logic. If the original (or a remastered full disc) will fit on a DVD-5, you might still want to use reauthor mode to get rid of the menu, etc. so the final product is a movie-only disc. Many people do not like menus or studio promos, so reauthoring material (even though it is already DVD-5 sized) would make sense. It saves having to deal with a menu and having to watch lame promos. There are other ways around this but reauthoring is an easy one. I'm not sure if this is theW's rationale but it might be.
For what's it worth, I agree with your insight aaron10. ;)

Regards,:)

[setarip_old]

I guess we'll never know for certain what "thewonderer" actually meant...

[bluemax]

new question. re: DVD shrink . I am trying to combine 2 home made dvd's to one dvd and then burn them together . Should I shrink one at a time compile and burn them together with nero. I really would like to change the 2 menus to one menu also
the problem is that I need to know how to save the files without sending them to nero to automaticly burn independently.
thanks

[Subwars]

new question. re: DVD shrink . I am trying to combine 2 home made dvd's to one dvd and then burn them together . Should I shrink one at a time compile and burn them together with nero. I really would like to change the 2 menus to one menu also
the problem is that I need to know how to save the files without sending them to nero to automaticly burn independently.
thanks


i'm certainly no expert on this but i would sujest doing both the movies together in shrink in the re auth mode i have done this myself with shorter kids movies.... as for the menu if you still really want some kind of a menu you would have to try and make one up for youself and i'm not sure but i think people use things like ifoedit to merge stuff together ie to add that new menu in i'm not sure exactly on that side of things..... but unless having a menu is really important right now i would just use shrink like i said and burn that 1st movie will be on track 1 and 2nd movie on track 2 just skip forward to it easy as...

if i'm wrong on anything anyone jump in and say so mainly on that menu side of things i know i could be wrong

[Chetwood]

There are several ways to add such a menu, check out my guide (http://www.dvdshrink.info/chetwood/PgcEdit_menuimport.php) for one method.