|
DVD SHRINK VS NERO!
|
|
|
kwamesead
Junior Member
|
5. October 2006 @ 05:16 |
Link to this message
|
I have had many debate with various folk concerning the quality of dvd's burned from Nero and DVD Shrink. Is it true that the burn quality of shrink is inferior to that of a dvd-/+r burned with Nero? If so, why is this so? Another question: 'If DVD Shrink has it's own burning engine why does one need Nero installed for it to function?
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
Car.Mike
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. October 2006 @ 05:43 |
Link to this message
|
kwamesead,
Welcome to the forum. Shrink does not have a burning engine and that is why it has to use Nero,DVDD or Imgburn to burn the DVD. Since the author of Shrink went to work for Nero essentially the quality is about the same but I think Recode is a little better. Quality of the images created though is always in the eye of the beholder
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
5. October 2006 @ 06:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
pazzini
Suspended permanently
|
5. October 2006 @ 06:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
I agree with Car.Mike Recode IMO does have a slight lead when it comes to picture quality. Recode is also faster than Shrink, again not by much.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. October 2006 @ 06:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
I too am a Recode fan, but I prefer 6.6.0.18 to the new 7 version. Seems like the 7 takes longer, quality is the same either version. My two and half cents :)
|
|
oneacer
Member
|
5. October 2006 @ 06:35 |
Link to this message
|
I have great results with Shrink. My dealings with Nero were a long time ago and negative. I am sure things have changed, but Shrink has always done a great job for me. FREE is a plus.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. October 2006 @ 07:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have never used Recode, but have it. Version 6. I am going to use it tonight for the first time. Ripping with DVDFab. I hope that it is fairly intuitive to use.
|
Senior Member
|
5. October 2006 @ 08:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
hello all,
I also prefer to use recode over shrink. the only thing i dont like about recode is there is no option for the output to be an ISO file like shrink has, but its not that big of deal, to deal with.
"When I look at the smiles on all the childrens faces, I just know theyre about to jab me with something."- Homer Simpson |
|
Car.Mike
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. October 2006 @ 08:37 |
Link to this message
|
9mmruger1,
If you have not updated Nero make sure you only go up to 6.6.0.18 as the updates above that are a bit screwy.
Just use "Remake a Movie" in Recode and follow the GUI as it really is simple
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. October 2006 @ 09:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
@Car.Mike
Yeah, that is the version that I have. I've read lot of stories about the problems with version 7 to scare me away. I am looking forward to digging in with recode. I have been so busy this summer that I have not had time to play with anything let alone my backups. Slowing down now though, so I'll give it a go.
Thanks for the reply.
Cheers.
|
Member
|
5. October 2006 @ 10:18 |
Link to this message
|
Quick question, was the original poster asking about actual burn quality or image quality? Not trying to sound like a smart-a$$, but I'm really wondering what the actual question was asking. If you are talking about actual burn quality, then alot of factors play into it such as burner make/model, firmware, media, burn speed, burning engine, etc. Shrink doesn't have its own burning engine, but I have have seen better results when I use DVDD or Imgburn as opposed to Nero 7, I burn with Verbatim MCC-004 at 8x. And there is a definite increase in burn quality when I use Imgburn when burning my Verb. DL DVD+R media.
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
5. October 2006 @ 11:25 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by 9mmruger:
Yeah, that is the version that I have. I've read lot of stories about the problems with version 7 to scare me away.
You know we can work out your Nero problems if you have any, but you don't have to use Nero for the burning...Recode will make a VIDEO_TS folder for you and you can burn it through build mode with Imgburn.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 5. October 2006 @ 11:26
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. October 2006 @ 12:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hey Loco,
Not sure if I have any problems yet or not. Gonna give it a go tonight. I'll PM you if I need some advise okay!
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
5. October 2006 @ 12:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
Let 'er rip....I prefer saving my Recode files to HDD and burning with Imgburn. Have you tried the latest release? It is something to behold.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. October 2006 @ 12:52 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Have you tried the latest release? It is something to behold.
I have to agree this program has come a long way, can't wait to see the what the future holds. It works a treat :)
@rugger
Here is a guide that shows how to build an iso with ImgBurn.
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/383878
|
|
HelpPleas
Member
|
5. October 2006 @ 20:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
guys,
whats great about building and iso? not being smart, just don't know much about this stuff.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
5. October 2006 @ 23:41 |
Link to this message
|
* DVD Shrink is only transcoder now, it was once a good ripper (well, still able to rip some movies, but not RipGuard or ARccOS with Puppetlock).
* DVD Shrink is not a burner (burning engine)
As for quality, I'll take Nero Recode 2 over DVD Shrink any day, any time, plus it's much faster (nearly twice faster than DVD Shrink).
|
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
6. October 2006 @ 00:45 |
Link to this message
|
guys i haven't had any problems with Nero 7 at all , using 7.0.8.2
BTW alkohol is the 7.5.1.1 verison working out ok? i was thinking of updating if it was
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. October 2006 @ 01:09 |
Link to this message
|
@aabbccdd
To be honest with you, I haven't had any issues/bugs with Nero 7.5.1.1, so far all of my burnings (backups) are successfully burned. I've used the following applications and I can confirm that they're flawless.
* Nero Burning Rom
* Nero Recode
* Nero Express
* Nero ShowTime
* Nero Vision
|
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
6. October 2006 @ 01:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
great i think i will update then ,
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. October 2006 @ 01:47 |
Link to this message
|
@Loco
Had the granddaughters last night so was not able to spend the time with recode that I needed to. I will give the imgburn a try. I do have the latest edition, but have not used it. Is imgburns burn engine better than Nero or clone?
@arniebear
Hi buddy! Thanks for the guide. Is this for DL burns only?
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
6. October 2006 @ 04:09 |
Link to this message
|
@alkohol and aabbccdd
I'm still using the original Nero 7, 7.0.0.0 I think as it hasn't let me down yet.
@Ruger
Imgburn build mode can do either DL or SL burns...arniebear beat me to the guides, I was too lazy to start making them. I do have a guide for using the queue function though. I forgot you were a clone user, I've not used it so I don't know, but I would probably still use Imgburn over clone or Nero Burning Rom.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 6. October 2006 @ 04:10
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. October 2006 @ 05:13 |
Link to this message
|
@Loco
Any idea how a burn engine works and directs the lazer in a writer? I have trouble comprehending how the lazer in my DW1650 could differentiate whether it is using CloneDVD, imgburn, or Nero to burn, and how the data coding to the dye in the disc by the lazer would be different.
It would probably be interesting to know if anyone has done any study on the quality of burns using the big three burn engines. Same file, burned with three different engines in the same drive. ...I must have too much time this morning...LOL
|
Moderator
1 product review
|
6. October 2006 @ 09:14 |
Link to this message
|
Sorry if my response was misleading...what I should have really said is that I prefer Imgburn to the other programs, even though I've not tried clone I'm not inclined to at this time. I have done a small amount of testing with the two programs and the difference is negligable at best.
http://forum.digital-digest.com/showthre...8695#post438695
Quote:
I have trouble comprehending how the lazer in my DW1650 could differentiate whether it is using CloneDVD, imgburn, or Nero to burn, and how the data coding to the dye in the disc by the lazer would be different.
I don't think it is a matter of the laser recognizing the files from different programs and how they tell the laser to burn the image as much as the files being made from a compliant source, firmware and the quality of the media that you use.
I don't think it really matters what program you use to burn as much as how the files are made that you are burning. In Nero's case, the program is just so big and bloated that it takes very little unstableness in a system to produce a coaster. In the case of Imgburn, the only thing it does is convert folders to ISO's and burn...there is less to go wrong in the equation IMHO.
It all boils down to using current firmware or a firmware that you know works with the media that you are using and of coarse always use quality media.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
aabbccdd
Suspended permanently
|
6. October 2006 @ 09:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
9mmruger1, i think thats more of a drive quality issue than a software issue
|
