|
Shrink/Recode v. DVD Rebuilder
|
|
Member
|
18. February 2007 @ 04:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have been using shrink and now recode for quite some time without any problems and just wanted to see if people thought rebuilder was actually worth the additional time. I have not actually completed a movie with rebuilder yet because after 6 hours it was still not done. that seems like an awful long time. Is the final product significantly better than what you get with Shrink/Recode?
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
laddyboy
AfterDawn Addict
|
18. February 2007 @ 05:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
Member
|
18. February 2007 @ 06:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
Laddyboy:
Thanks.
|
Senior Member
|
18. February 2007 @ 07:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
i'm with shrink/Recode2, unless you have a very big sceen TV, you'll see no difference. Recode2 amd shrink are the best transcoders i term of quality output.
Nero Recode2 or Shrink using deep analysis and AEC/ fabdecrypter or anydvd running in the background/ IMGBurn to burn/main movie only mode= perfect.
|
Member
|
18. February 2007 @ 08:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah, I don't have a big screen tv and it just seems like rebuilder takes forever to do the job. so unless there is a huge difference in quality i think i will just stick with shrink/recode.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
18. February 2007 @ 09:35 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by hamillp:
Yeah, I don't have a big screen tv and it just seems like rebuilder takes forever to do the job. so unless there is a huge difference in quality i think i will just stick with shrink/recode.
NOTE: ABQTMM = Assign Best Quality to Main Movie
Well, soon or later you're going to get one (45" - 55" big screen HDTV), so the choice is yours. I owned a 55" Sony widescreen HDTV and as much as I love Nero Recode's enhancements quality; "AA + HQSR + ABQTMM" or Recode's AEC changer by Solomon to "Max Smooth," I can honestly say that all of my backups done by DVD-RB Pro + CCE SP are better than both DVD Shrink and Nero Recode. Matter of fact, it looks amazing and beautiful.
Again, it is totally up to you to make the call.
|
|
2colors
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
19. February 2007 @ 07:59 |
Link to this message
|
We never stop learning.
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
19. February 2007 @ 12:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
hamillp
2colors addressed your time issues best. It's more your system resources than the software. What model are you using and what are it's resources, i.e. cpu, RAM, hard drive. Depending on the movie and the number of passes I run, it can range from 1 to 2 hours, not a lot longer than Shrink with Quality Settings in use. If you ever do a backup with RB/CCE SP at 3 passes in comparison to a Shrink backup for a high compression job, even on a 32" set, I think you'll see some difference. Pay particular attention to the background quality. The Hanks Encoder does well, just a bit slower (not 6 hours slow).
|
Member
|
19. February 2007 @ 12:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have a Dell 933 Mhz; 512mb Ram; 80GB harddrive;
1-2 hours does not seem bad at all. I could certainly live with that but 6-8 hours just seems crazy.
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
19. February 2007 @ 12:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
That's not a very fast processor or much RAM. I have a dual core AMD processor running at 2.8GHz with 2GB of C2 performance RAM. Encoding is a CPU intensive process and the more processor you have the better. Even your Shrink output would be faster with a more powerful system. We work with what we have, but let's not complain when using base entry systems. Most newer transcoding and encoding software wasn't intended for a system like yours. There's a lot between minimum requirements and what works good.
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
19. February 2007 @ 12:33 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by hamillp:
I have a Dell 933 Mhz; 512mb Ram; 80GB harddrive;
1-2 hours does not seem bad at all. I could certainly live with that but 6-8 hours just seems crazy.
Would that be a P3 and what is the operating system, XP or whatever?
|
Member
|
19. February 2007 @ 12:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yes, I believe it is a P3. I am running XP Pro. Unfortunately I cannot add any more memory. Eventually, I will have to buy a new one but I am going to put that off as long as I can.
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
19. February 2007 @ 12:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
XP requires more memory than the 98 that most of those systems came with. I'm not putting it down, in it's time it was a good processor. I have personal acquaintances still using them. But even if you could add more RAM (which I believe is possible, you might have to change cards), the money would be better spent toward a newer system. CD burning was a big thing with that technology, DVD burners and movie backups came later.
Good luck. The problem isn't really the software. Hope you can get that new system sometime in the not too distant future. You'll probably enjoy the improved performance for more than just doing DVD backups.
|
Member
|
19. February 2007 @ 13:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah, I am sure I would. It performs reasonably well although I will not be able to rip movies as fast as many others. But for most things it is fine.
As for the ram, the user's manual indicates that the maximum that it should take is 512mb. Do you think that is wrong?? I would definitely consider adding more ram if I thought I could.
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
19. February 2007 @ 13:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
Download the free version of SiSoft Sandra and check the board with that. It usually tells how much RAM a system can use. I recently upgraded a PC, not a Dell, and it could use more than 512. It had 2 256MB sticks with 3 slots. I added an additional 512MB stick to it. A lot depends on chipsets, but it had the same size P3 processor. As I said before, I'd save any money on upgrades for a newer system.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. February 2007 @ 13:08
|
Member
|
20. February 2007 @ 06:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
PacMan777
You are everywhere. Thanks for your help. Used your tool and I cannot add memory. Probably would not be worth it, as you suggest, anyways. I can, however, try DVD-RB on my work computer. It is a P4 2.66Ghz, with 1.25 GB of ram. It may not be the best but it should be able to do it in a shorter period than the other computer.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
PacMan777
AfterDawn Addict
|
20. February 2007 @ 08:48 |
Link to this message
|
Times vary, but with a P4 @ 3.4GHz doing a 3 pass encode with CCE SP I get times between 2.5 to 3 hours. A 2 pass encode would be faster, and some say as good. I prefer the extra pass as insurance. The CCE Basic (retail) only does 2 passes and that's what most people use (CCE Basic trial times out, won't work). The Hank's encoder is freeware and does a good job, but is slower than CCE. With a dual core AMD at 2.8GHz the time improves to about 1 1/2 to 2 hours. A fast processor and hard drive(s) along with a lot of RAM helps.
|
