|
DVD Rebuilder with CCE Basic Vs. DVD Shrink
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
27. July 2004 @ 13:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
thanx, brian, just downloaded it.
You're exactly right about my curiosity, will try it tonite on "Big Trouble".
Don't know if a new PC will help ya on DVDCopy 2,lol, hope so.(or is this just an excuse to get a new one?)
Congrats again on the new position.
 GO VOLS ! |
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
Senior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 14:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hey folks ... I think its "Welcome Back Kotter" time for Sophocles. Wednesday, right?
Sophocles ... don't be a stranger. And ... good luck!!! 'Hope you don't end up with the proverbial "student from hell."
.
.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. (Pablo Picasso) This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. July 2004 @ 14:49
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
27. July 2004 @ 15:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
Doc
Thanks but the proverbial student from Hell is one of my area's of specialty. Take care when you print these comments because if bigo's wife is reading this, it could weigh heavily on her few remaining days of freedom.
LOl
" 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/. |
|
rj-x
Junior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 19:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
hey guys im back, so dvdshrink 3.2 is out, what are your thoughts? bigo does it have that double pass like you were talking about?
--rj
|
Senior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 19:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hi rj-x...welcome back.
Yeah guys, this thread is about the old Shrink. ...Wuhduhyasay we start a new Shrink 3.2 thread and ask for comparisons to other transcoders? Anyone want to do the honors?
.
.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. (Pablo Picasso) |
|
rj-x
Junior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 20:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
I definitely would like to see that and definitely would like to hear comparisons especially towards rb+cce
--rj
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
27. July 2004 @ 20:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
rj-x,
the new shrink is very impressive. The new quality controls and added features will appeal to everyone. In other words much improved quality in the pics and you're gonna LIKE it.
It was very hard to keep quiet about the ability to now retain menu function after editing by replacing each extra(or all) with a still pic, much in the same way Nero's recode works. I think this is one of shrink's best improvements.
Doc, I was going to start a new thread about the new shrink and everyone's opinions or comments, but I saw where brian has asked for a new shrink only category, so I thought I would wait and see what AD is gonna do. I think shrink 3.2 with all it's imrovements and popularity deserves it's own platform.
If everyone else thinks this way maybe we outta let AD know it in brian's thread.
Hey sophocles, I suspect you are like my wife in that "students from hell" present no problem whatsovever. After teaching for so many years that kind of thing becomes 2nd nature, am I right? lol
_
GO VOLS !
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. July 2004 @ 20:20
|
Senior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 20:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
'Sounds good to me. Let's see what AD says.
_____
Edit: bigo...where's the thread?
.
.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. (Pablo Picasso) This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. July 2004 @ 20:26
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
27. July 2004 @ 20:29 |
Link to this message
|
GO VOLS !
|
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
27. July 2004 @ 20:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
BigO is definitely right when he says the improvements to Shrink make it better than the previous versions. Without a different platform the discussion could get confusing. Several posts ago a person could be talking about how poor Shrink was in comparison and now be saying it is better than some it was worse than. Confuses me.
Anyway BigO, someone should start a new 3.2 Shrink thread to differentiate from the old.
|
Senior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 20:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
Thanks for the link. It's a good idea, and I signed the "petition!"
.
.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. (Pablo Picasso) |
AfterDawn Addict
|
27. July 2004 @ 21:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
brobear, if we start a new thread, would it be wasted if AD decides to give 3.2 it's own category?
GO VOLS !
|
Senior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 21:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well, it will be interesting to see how quickly AD responds. I think Praetor had a good point in that the DVD section needs tidying up.
So, if there is going to be a new section, what threads would you guys like to explore? New features, comparisons, ... what?
.
.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. (Pablo Picasso) |
AfterDawn Addict
|
27. July 2004 @ 21:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
I think anything having to do with 3.2- comparisons, how to questions, user comments, suggestions, using it in conjunction with other apps, guides, etc. You name it, right?
GO VOLS !
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. July 2004 @ 21:14
|
Senior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 21:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well, all this would be covered at some point. I guess I'm wondering what's at the forefront of the minds of those following this thread?
I personally would like to know about results requiring a lot of compression. Essentially, I would like to establish Shrink's limits/limitations in this area.
.
.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. (Pablo Picasso) |
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
27. July 2004 @ 21:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
BigO
3.2 is a decent prog and fills a niche in the scheme of things (like good freeware). However I wonder of the merit in giving it a separate section. When one gets through giving the details of the improvement, where do you go except to praise or criticism. After all, it is only an improvement, not a totally new program. Unless one is going into higher compression, the quality settings are of little use. So recording larger movies with better quality is the only thing I see going on. Noteworthy, but not enough to legitimize the Shrinkites yelling their mantra...Shrink, Shrink, Shrink...
|
Senior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 21:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
brobear ... you make a really good point. And, if Shrink is given its own section, it could pave the way for the type of cultism that exists on other sites. I know of two right now that are downright hostile to any objective discussion.
.
.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. (Pablo Picasso) This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. July 2004 @ 21:29
|
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
27. July 2004 @ 21:36 |
Link to this message
|
|
Doc409
Prelims show that once the improved Shrink starts going over 40 to 45% compression, even with the quality settings the picture starts getting fuzzy. I pushed it to about 50% and did a light magnification. You could see the pixels starting to break up a bit. Not noticable except as a slightly fuzzy contrast. I have to admit, some of the lesser transcoders would be breaking up at 50%. The breakup was more noticable in action scenes. This wasn't really scientific, but is a prelim for anyone wanting to pursue breaking a video down for analysis. That 6 viewer BigO is fond of shows a lot.
So , the improvements are simply better performance at higher compression. I noticed the difference coming in about 25 to 30% compression. For those with superior encoding software, 20% compression is where they shift from regular transcoders to the superior products. Shrink does have the market cornered for its price range. ;)
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
27. July 2004 @ 21:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
brobear, DVD2One and DVDXcopy both have their own categories, you don't think shrink deserves one? I guarantee more people use shrink than those two combined.
While it is only an improved version, I think the improvements are monumental enough to merit a title of new software.
I disagree (good naturedly of course) that it doesn't deserve it's own platform. There's a lot of buzz out there and as it stands now it's all over the place, I think a collective for it would be appropriate.
It's all irrelevant of course because it will be up to the powers that be.
BTW, you know I am not a "shrinkite", I laud many apps out there and use them all in one instance or another, but in this case -because of it's popularity and the new improvements, I believe it does deserve it's own little spot in AD. More and more people are coming into the backup genre and newbies will always try shrink because it's free, it needs a place for them and us to go to.
BTW," Without a different platform the discussion could get confusing. Several posts ago a person could be talking about how poor Shrink was in comparison and now be saying it is better than some it was worse than. Confuses me." your words brobear, not mine. heh heh
GO VOLS !
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. July 2004 @ 21:48
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
27. July 2004 @ 21:43 |
Link to this message
|
Doc, brobear:
As you both know we tested shrink against DVD2One and it beat it for me every time. Of course it won't measure up to RB/CCE at 40% or more which is why that's what I'll use at those compression rates. But for 30% compression or less, I have no problem with shrink. For in between, IC 8 and DVDRemake suffice quite nicely.
GO VOLS !
|
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
27. July 2004 @ 21:56 |
Link to this message
|
You are probably right about the devotees of Shrink. And X Copy is sort of going the way of the dodo. Big Brother sort of has his hands full trying to control what is free in the public forum.
If you notice, most of the X copy problems were brought to the open forum for discussion. The private section, with its many company restrictions, couldn't or wouldn't discuss the various aspects of the program. Shrink is similar in that irregardless of the thread and title, someone brings it up. I've even done it myself in using Shrink to diagnose if a problem was system wide or a software failure. I don't even see maintaining a separate section for the DVD2One as things stand. Good software, but nothing outrageous.
Instead of comparisons and discussing what works, we could have individual cheering sections. Granted, the complaints and praise could be localized. And a person with expertise in one program could help the other needy folks venerating the same app.
|
Senior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 21:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
Kinda like a forum, eh brobear?
.
.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. (Pablo Picasso) |
|
brobear
Suspended permanently
|
27. July 2004 @ 22:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
Doc
There the question arises, open or closed?
|
Senior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 22:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
Big-O, I would have to agree that Shrink has changed enough to be new. While there are new features, what makes it new in my book is that the transcoder is entirely different. It no long drops every third frame to get its space, but takes it mostly from the B frames. A mag look at the frames also shows different algorithms being aplied.
.
.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. (Pablo Picasso) |
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
27. July 2004 @ 22:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
brobear ... my point exactly. I think you've pointed out quite well what happens when these things have their own room. It ain't good.
.
.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. (Pablo Picasso) |
