|
DVD Rebuilder with CCE Basic Vs. DVD Shrink
|
|
Staff Member
2 product reviews
|
13. June 2004 @ 06:22 |
Link to this message
|
There is one more semi-important difference. CCE SP allows you to set the Bias, which is explained in the DVD Rebuilder Settings thread at Doom9:
Quote:
This setting controls how CCE distributes the bitrate. To quote jdobbs:
"When you do your first pass the bit allocation per frame/gop is set based on a constant quality. The bias determines how much weight is given toward keeping that allocation. Setting it higher prevents wild swings in bit allocation between frames/gops. Setting it lower makes the encoder allocate more bits to high demand areas as needed and less to low demand. ...The higher you set this value, the closer you get to CBR rather than VBR."
I don't have any idea what value CCE Basic sets the bias to, and I've never compared its output to SP's so I can't say for sure that it makes much if any difference.
The number of passes isn't even as big a difference as you might think. In fact Rebuilder's author has made a point of saying, on multiple occasions, that there isn't a noticable difference between 2 and 3 passes on most movies anyway. I can neither confirm nor deny that because when high compression would be required I usually split across 2 discs.
Prior to the update from 2.67.x to 2.69.x you also couldn't set the Quantization Characteristics, which determines the number of bits used for solid colors vs. the amount used for motion. Ideally you want this set to the lowest value that doesn't cause solid surfaces to exhibit "banding artifacts". In english that means that if solid colors appear to be made up of separate bands you need to set this higher. This should be implemented for CCE Basic finally in Rebuilder 0.53. I've been adding it to my REBUILDER.ECL file since I found out I could use it.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
13. June 2004 @ 06:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'm more than satisfied with my first attempt using Rebuilder/CCE basic. I have a dislike for split movies and if I can get a pleasing result on a single disc then that is what I's prefer to do. If one is going to split large movies onto 2 discs then the quality of compression becomes irrelevant. It wouldn't matter which apllication is capable of accompoplishing this since the result would be a perfect uncompressed movie. DVD X copy can do this.
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
13. June 2004 @ 07:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
Siber
The inherent poor resolution of the underlying TV signal makes a good monitor infinitely better for testing video quality. If you have as Plasma screen TV you might have somewhat of a point.
Donald
|
|
siber
Member
|
13. June 2004 @ 07:46 |
Link to this message
|
|
64026402: a bit condescending? All I was stating was that it becomes more difficult to assess quality as the screen becomes smaller. To give an extreme example: would it make much sense to have a High Resolution 1100 line screen (Plasma, LCD, whatever...)if it was 4 inches across? High quality software and resolution only matter as the size of the screen gets larger. If you want to call that 'somewhat of a point', that is OK. As I don't want to keep beating a dead horse, I think I am going to leave it at that.
|
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
13. June 2004 @ 08:03 |
Link to this message
|
|
Don't worry, the horse was dead long before you got to it.
The point was simple. Bigger isn't always better for testing video. TVs are a low resolution devices limited by legacy standards. This is made more obvious the larger you get.
I like big TVs, but definition is not their strong suit.
Donald
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
13. June 2004 @ 08:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
Bigger is better for testing picture quailty if we are talking about two TVs' of the same format (HD or not). If the lines of resolution are the same for both the smaller and larger sets, which many if not most are, then a larger set is more likely to reveal any flaws in the source. A good analogy would be a 35 millimeter photograph enlargened to the point where it becomes fuzzy. Same photograph with the same set of original detail but the smaller is going to be clearer.
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
13. June 2004 @ 08:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
If you are talking 2 TVs of the same format then the larger one would do a better job of showing the lines and dots as well.
If you have obvious pixelation then a larger TV would should the same blocks just larger.
My point was the computer screen has a much better chance of seeing the smaller defects without getting lost in the poor resolution.
To bad we can't just all get 60" plasma monitors. There is compromise with both setups.
Donald
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
13. June 2004 @ 08:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
If you have obvious pixelation then a larger TV would should the same blocks just larger.
If you have obvious piexelation then it's obvious on any set but it will still look worse on a larger screen. The problem here is taking into consideration deficiencies in the human eye. Smaller things are just harder to see and as result are less obvious. But having them enlargened on a larger screen brings them within the range of what the human eye can see.
Of course we can't all buy larger TV sets but keeping within context of the original debate, that's a moot point. I will however agree that even though a computer monitor might be small (mines 22 inches) because of its high resolution it can be used by zooming or Pan scanning to discover flaws. If you can't get a bigger screen to enlarge the movie, then enlarge the movie on a smaller screen.
Back to DVD shrink: I am being sincere when I suggest that you need to experiment a little more rather then getting caught up in supporting Shrink on faith, without first qualifying it.
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. June 2004 @ 08:56
|
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
13. June 2004 @ 09:03 |
Link to this message
|
|
Along the DVDshrink lines I have been recreating the comparision tests for the other programs in the comparision threads.
The results thus far is that shrink is better than any of the one click programs in video quality.
People who aren't getting similar quality most likely aren't setting it up correctly.
I will test DVDrebuilder but I will already concede the quality issue as the encoding is indicated to be superior with CCE and the process is cumulative quality wise with multipass.
For what I am doing the process is likely to time consuming to be of use daily but it could be a good additional tool for the right use.
Donald
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
13. June 2004 @ 09:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
then you'd better try again because there is no way that DVD Shrinks is as good as and in ascending order DVD20ne, instant copy, and DVDcopy 2. When I say it's not as good I mean especially on larger type 9 movies.
People who aren't getting similar quality most likely aren't setting it up correctly.
What do you mean setup? We're talking about an application that a 6 year old can setup and use after a couple of minutes of study.
To say you've made comparisons of others mentioned on the "comparisonn thread" sounds disingenuous to me, since you've only made mention of it now to support your unqualified point. Why didn't you join and post with the rest of us while the thread was still active? You were certainly welcome to. I see no point in continuing this debate since it has already been resolved by several other very capable participants. We're all wrong and you are right. Right!
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
13. June 2004 @ 14:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
The results I came up with were from my labor so I tend to give them more credence than the statements from others unless there is objective data to back it up.
Unfortunately the only comparison I saw in the comparison thread was the initial admittedly flawed test so I have no other data to compare my results to.
Statements about DVDshrink vs other programs have been made without any real effort to show where the opinion came from.
As far as one click programs go I have actually done my part and ran the tests. If you don't agree with my results then show something to help me understand yours.
Please don't get to angry with me. If I didn't respect your opinion on this matter I wouldn't be testing and conversing about this.
I am still a newbie but I am trying hard.
I am looking for the truth. Not just supporting one program. I would love to say that a program that I spent good money on was better than this free one. I learned about it from you guys after spending a lot of money on other programs.
_
_
Donald
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. June 2004 @ 15:01
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
13. June 2004 @ 15:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
I wasn't intending to insult you but you over stepped your bounds in areas I don't think you know a lot about yet. Many people don't know that DVD Shrink and Nero recode have the same author, which would explain many of the features found in Nero Recode 2. And yet DVD box rated them both at the bottom of their tests.
The DVD Shrink version used in the test was an older version but the Nero recode version was up to date. The author of DVD Shrink was hired by Ahead (Nero) to help create recode 2 and it's likely to be his most advanced compression engine yet, but it still fell at the bottom of the pack. I began the best transcoder thread as a quest for the truth, because I wanted to get the most out of my media expenditures, not to bash DVD Shrink. The application has acquired a cult following of individuals that will claim its glories without ever having truly compared it.
I think that DVD Shrink is a wonderful application but it is far from the best. If you want to find out instead of disagreeing with us to be disagreeable join us. I would look forward to another participant.
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. June 2004 @ 15:54
|
Member
|
13. June 2004 @ 15:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
i forked out the doe for the basic, well worth it and now i wonder how safe it is to leave a computer working overnight coz it takes soooo long.
Has anyone heard of Dell comps going on fire/blowing up during the night and killing all the people in the building?
What are passes?- i know i looked in the glossary but it wasn't much help.
Do the amount of passes change the overall file size or does it remain the same and the quality get better?
|
Staff Member
2 product reviews
|
13. June 2004 @ 15:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
You shouldn't have any problems from leaving your computer running overnight. If you do I'd say you need to upgrade whatever heatsink/fan combination came with it, but unless you've overclocked the CPU it shouldn't be a problem. If you have overclocked I'd recommend going back to the original clock speed because it can cause problems and will almost certainly cause more wear on the CPU.
More passes may or may not make a difference (depending on the source and who you ask), but the filesize will be the same. It's not really important with CCE Basic because the only VBR mode is 2 Pass (1 analyze/1 write).
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. June 2004 @ 15:47
|
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
13. June 2004 @ 16:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
To participate in this project what would the requiremnts be. What programs do I use. What do I do first.
Donald
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
13. June 2004 @ 17:21 |
Link to this message
|
 GO VOLS !This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. June 2004 @ 17:22
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
13. June 2004 @ 19:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
As far as I'm concerned a real interest in doing this and a willingness to share information is all that's required. You might want to do as bigorange suggested and review some of our earlier posts to get filled in, and try some of the applications that we tested for quality. Many of the appications like instant copt have full use for a limited time.
You will have to burn what might seem like redundant copies of test movies to make comaparisons with, but they'll help you make a more educated analysis. You'lll find that we are all somewhat different in our choices but not a whole lot. If you have questions then you can ask any of us online and someone will answer. Vurbal has mentioned that private messaging can result in the same question being asked more than once, and as a result are better posted so that there is less likelyhood of it being repeated.
Keep in touch.
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
13. June 2004 @ 20:05 |
Link to this message
|
I have rebuilder up and running. Still working out the settings. CCE SP 2.67 has serious issues on my dual machines but 2.50 works good and is SMP aware.
I'm half way through the encoding and everything seems smooth.
Once setup is complete it looks like an easy backup so if I don't have any more problems I'll run as many movies as I can through for testing.
I'm ripping directly from the DVD with rebuilder using DVD43. Does anyone else use this method.
DVDdecryptor was used in the guide.
Donald
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
13. June 2004 @ 20:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
6402...that was one of my questions, I'm running anydvd and I thought maybe you could bypass decrypter without using it at all. Good to know. Now, if you can do that with dvdremake or vobblanker, you should be able to take out features and not disable menu function and go directly into rebuilder. Any thoughts?
GO VOLS !
|
|
siber
Member
|
13. June 2004 @ 20:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
64026402: you ARE taking this testing seriously. I am looking forward to reading about your impressions. Using 43/AnyDVD/RegionFree/etc should make no difference
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
13. June 2004 @ 20:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
yeah, that wasn't really my question. I guess I didn't make myself clear. I know those 3 programs are basically the same, what I was asking is: do you think a dude could use one of them in conjunction with vobblanker or dvdremake and then go directly into rebuilder? sorry bout that. By removing some special features rebuilder wouldn't have to compress as much thus making an even better pic while retaining menu function.
GO VOLS !
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. June 2004 @ 20:31
|
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
14. June 2004 @ 03:00 |
Link to this message
|
For the moment, keeping the extras is important for testing at high compression amounts. I'm working on Monster which was running about 50% on DVDshrink.
I have ran of a copy on Xcopy and pinnacle and 1 click.
I switched to CCE SP 2.50 and Rebuilder .52 after some problems with CCE SP 2.67. I am going to start from scratch tonight.
I encoded the leftover files from rebuilder .32 last night but the results weren't compatable with the new setup, So it wouldn't rebuild. I was just making sure it would encode.
Donald
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
14. June 2004 @ 05:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
Be sure to let us know what kind of problems your having because we may hve already encountered them. I've been trying to remove the multiangles from the movie using DVDremake and I think that I've succeeded only to run into interleaving problems. Good luck.
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
Member
|
14. June 2004 @ 06:07 |
Link to this message
|
holy shit, i won't say how rebuilder and cce is the best way to transcode because so many other people have...but i will. on a modest 28" - perfect quality.
i am just praying for the multi-angle processing- dealy to be supported in the future.
i've gotten 1 coaster out of 2 from the ricoh's bought from dvd-and-media.com. the one that worked was cce+rebuilder and the one that burnt but didn't work was DVD2One.
nero recognised it when i looked in the disc info but the dvd drive or the dvd player didn't, yarg!
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
siber
Member
|
14. June 2004 @ 06:30 |
Link to this message
|
|
There is a high concentration of 'video perfectionists' on this forum. I predict that - once the news is out on Rebuilder/CCE on a grand scale - this way of doing things will take OFF. Neilm247: one more convert...
I really am looking forward to all the new experiments that are ongoing with CCE and the combining of it with various other software programs.
|
