User User name Password  
   
Sunday 14.9.2025 / 19:27
Search AfterDawn Forums:        In English   Suomeksi   På svenska
afterdawn.com > forums > software specific discussion > dvd shrink forum > i used to think clonedvd2 was better but i was wrong
Show topics
 
Forums
Forums
I used to think CloneDVD2 was better but I was wrong
  Jump to:
 
Posted Message
Member
_
25. August 2006 @ 08:08 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
I kept reading here that DVD Shrink was better than CloneDVD2 but I didn't believe it. Although, CloneDVD2 is a little faster and easier to use. I did a test and DVD Shrink won hands down. With DVD Shrink and ImgBurn I got much better quaility. I'll never go back.

This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. August 2006 @ 08:12

Advertisement
_
__
AfterDawn Addict
_
25. August 2006 @ 08:31 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
If you like Shrink and have Nero then try Nero Recode, by the same developer as Shrink, it is faster and you get the same great quality. Clone is last on my list for transcoders I only use it for DVD's that have low compression.


crumbles
Junior Member
_
25. August 2006 @ 10:14 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
Arniebear...I think I have it clear.

Dvdshrink only works in conjuction with Nero (7!).

But Nero (7!) usually is packaged with Nero recode - which is, in your opinion BETTER than dvdshrink is/was.

So we can all ditch our dvdshrink programs completely.

Jury is still out on dvd clone for me. I like the program except for splitting dvd's....but maybe I just haven't figured it out.
Staff Member

4 product reviews
_
25. August 2006 @ 10:20 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
arnie,
can you tell me your approximate times for copying using Recode as compared to CloneDVD2? I always heard recode took much longer and therefore stayed away from it. thanks in advance

Member
_
25. August 2006 @ 10:27 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
Hey DVD, hows it hangin?? I used recode a looong time ago and i am doin this from memory. I think that recode took app 1 hr (might even have been an hour and a half) to create the files ready for burning, and then you have your burn time. I use CloneDVD at the moment and it seems to be about 45 mins to an hr (max) to do a DVD from start to finish (new DVD burnt as well). I will try out recode again and give you better answer later on as I hav a couple of DVDs to backup.
AfterDawn Addict
_
25. August 2006 @ 10:29 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
I don't think that Recode takes all that long, but I always rip to my HDD first and then transcode. The length of time depends on your computer specs and whether you have chosen the adavanced analysis and slow encode for the best quality. Clone does not include the 2pass in their program. I also usually just do movie only so it is faster than if you do the whole movie. I ran Silent Hill through and it took 12 minutes to transcode with no advanced or slow encode and that was from the file ripped by RipIt4Me. If you do the movie from disk with AnyDVD running behind it will take longer, but the output from Recode is excellent compared to Clone. Where Clone has the other two beat is in reauthoring and being able to keep a functional menu, Recode/Shrink cannot do this, especially if you want to split, as I have done with some TV series disks. You can substitute Still Images in Shrink but Clone is still better for an edit.


Staff Member

4 product reviews
_
25. August 2006 @ 11:33 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
ktulu and arnie,
thanks for the quick responses and insight. ill give recode a try when i have time because for me i love the advantage of CloneDVD and then decrypter to burn the image in terms of easiness. for movies that need good quality (king kong, tv boxsets) ill make sure to use recode.

Member
_
26. August 2006 @ 14:01 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
DVD, clone isn't too bad for burning, it all depends if you weant to have an image to burn more than once. decrypter is still the dogs danglies when it comes to burning (and creating) ISO images as far as i am concerned. Still havn't tried recode, i can't find it at the moment and my PC crashed on me (good old m$XP)
MovieDud
Suspended due to non-functional email address
_
26. August 2006 @ 14:35 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
I'm with arniebear, I prefer Recode 2 over CloneDVD 2, and depending upon the type of compression used I will make adjustment in the Recode 2 reget file. Rebuilder Pro/CCE Basic or AutoQmat is still my fav based on High compression copies, and then I use Recode 2 and the length of transcoing that is done isn't that long at all for my system, I too place everything on the HD so that my drives are not being taxed by the usage. CloneDVD 2 is great for splitting, especially when keeping menus...menus and main movie, and then another disk with the extras and menu. Pretty simple and I have yet to have a disk done in this way that doesn't function correctly.
MovieDud
AfterDawn Addict
_
26. August 2006 @ 16:11 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
@MovieDud

Hello to you my friend, hope all is well with you :)


jjpitt
Newbie
_
26. August 2006 @ 18:25 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
Hi Guys: Have read this forum from its beginning, and have gained immense knowledge over the years. I agree with arniebear and MovieDud: I have only backed up about 275 of my DVDs,so my experience is less than their's; but I have used all said programs.

Nothing beats DVDClone2 for reauthoring and keeping the menu. Just don't activate the transcoder by choosing DVD +/-R DL in the settings. Eliminate all of the crap that you don't want...easier with DVDC2 than with any other program. Burn to your HD.

Then Encode with DVD-RB + CCE of your choice. I actually prefer HC to CCE and get better results with equal # of passes for MOST DVDs. The more time that it takes, the better the results. A true-ism. HC takes longer on any computer set-up, but my results agree with several other forum contributors who have done impressive studies of scientific comparison. In the end, beauty IS in the eye of the beholder. My setup is so fast, the extra time of HC is insignificant since I want the very best quality.

TROPICAL MONTANA



Lead Foot
Tropical Montana
Advertisement
_
__
 
_
MovieDud
Suspended due to non-functional email address
_
26. August 2006 @ 19:35 _ Link to this message    Send private message to this user   
@arniebear, yes things are well. Just been very busy lately and haven't been on line as much. Hope your doing well? Have a good evening.
MovieDud
afterdawn.com > forums > software specific discussion > dvd shrink forum > i used to think clonedvd2 was better but i was wrong
 

Digital video: AfterDawn.com | AfterDawn Forums
Music: MP3Lizard.com
Gaming: Blasteroids.com | Blasteroids Forums | Compare game prices
Software: Software downloads
Blogs: User profile pages
RSS feeds: AfterDawn.com News | Software updates | AfterDawn Forums
International: AfterDawn in Finnish | AfterDawn in Swedish | AfterDawn in Norwegian | download.fi
Navigate: Search | Site map
About us: About AfterDawn Ltd | Advertise on our sites | Rules, Restrictions, Legal disclaimer & Privacy policy
Contact us: Send feedback | Contact our media sales team
 
  © 1999-2025 by AfterDawn Ltd.

  IDG TechNetwork