Originally posted by sammorris:

---

All the decent programs I've seen use all of your CPU, because that's the most efficient. Not sure why you'd be seeing far less unless you're I/O limited for input. With standard def DVDs I can see how that could be a problem.

---

Originally posted by sammorris:

---

All the decent programs I've seen use all of your CPU, because that's the most efficient. Not sure why you'd be seeing far less unless you're I/O limited for input. With standard def DVDs I can see how that could be a problem.

---

Originally posted by sammorris:

---

Well, I naturally assume nobody is going to have I/O so bad that they'll be I/O limited for encoding video. I would naturally assume when encoding a DVD, that they aren't going to be making the full 16-24x DVD read speed (22-33MB/s) when encoding, as that is unlikely to be a quality encode. Likewise when encoding content from a PC, the data rate off the hard disk is going to be far higher than the process rate.

---

Originally posted by sammorris:

---

3D printers have been around for quite some time, I know someone that has used one. The problem is they're mostly limited by what material they can build out of (most use ABS plastic), and they are also quite slow, of the order of taking 80-100 hours to produce relatively small objects. it's amazing technology, but with CNC milling machines already used on an industrial scale, this isn't really bringing anything new to the fore except placing materials construction in the hands of smaller businesses.

---

Originally posted by omegaman7:

---

That'd be HC encoder. It supports quads at least. But it's only marginally quicker, and the results are a debate. Some think that HC is as good as CCE, others think CCE is a little better. I really haven't done much testing with it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it ;)

---

Originally posted by sammorris:

---

Depends, 7-8GB for 1080p if it's a film is somewhat on the small side. That's an OK file size for an 80 minute file, but anything beyond that, and the bitrate isn't really high enough to prevent visible compression artifacts. For 1080p I usually try for 6GB per hour as an absolute minimum.

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by sammorris:

---

Depends, 7-8GB for 1080p if it's a film is somewhat on the small side. That's an OK file size for an 80 minute file, but anything beyond that, and the bitrate isn't really high enough to prevent visible compression artifacts. For 1080p I usually try for 6GB per hour as an absolute minimum.

---

Sam,
I process them to DVD5 or DVD9 depending on the quality. It works out pretty good. I totally un-compress the files when I rip them, and process those files with DVDRB/CCE. 12GB generally takes me 2 hours to rip, rebuild with CCE 2 pass and burn to a DL DVD9. I don't have to get involved with BD, or have to buy a BD player, and I don't have to spend many more hours. I'm more than happy with the quality. I don't see enough difference in picture quality to justify the time or expense! It's not 100% perfect, but I don't mind settling for about 98% quality!

Russ

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by sammorris:

---

Depends, 7-8GB for 1080p if it's a film is somewhat on the small side. That's an OK file size for an 80 minute file, but anything beyond that, and the bitrate isn't really high enough to prevent visible compression artifacts. For 1080p I usually try for 6GB per hour as an absolute minimum.

---

Sam,
I process them to DVD5 or DVD9 depending on the quality. It works out pretty good. I totally un-compress the files when I rip them, and process those files with DVDRB/CCE. 12GB generally takes me 2 hours to rip, rebuild with CCE 2 pass and burn to a DL DVD9. I don't have to get involved with BD, or have to buy a BD player, and I don't have to spend many more hours. I'm more than happy with the quality. I don't see enough difference in picture quality to justify the time or expense! It's not 100% perfect, but I don't mind settling for about 98% quality!

Russ

---

So you must convert the m2ts to dvdifo prior to using DVD-RB as it doesn't transcode BD file formats.

There is a big difference between a converted BD -to- DVD format, over true HD and if you could pass the color test you would hopefully see the difference, it is noticeable.

It is definitely better and noticeable to have a BD player and HDTV than a hybrid DVD. For someone critical in the audio world you fall way short in the AV world.

HC is no ware as good as CCE or ProCoder they both are superior and I've even compared them in front of a novice who could as well see the difference.

The 3D scanner/printer is not going to change the world either although it is cool and has its place. For you and I it is way too expensive to buy, maintain, and use to make it a value. Also that plastic wrench is not going to hold up to the torque that a good forged steel wrench will.

Stevo

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by sammorris:

---

Depends, 7-8GB for 1080p if it's a film is somewhat on the small side. That's an OK file size for an 80 minute file, but anything beyond that, and the bitrate isn't really high enough to prevent visible compression artifacts. For 1080p I usually try for 6GB per hour as an absolute minimum.

---

Sam,
I process them to DVD5 or DVD9 depending on the quality. It works out pretty good. I totally un-compress the files when I rip them, and process those files with DVDRB/CCE. 12GB generally takes me 2 hours to rip, rebuild with CCE 2 pass and burn to a DL DVD9. I don't have to get involved with BD, or have to buy a BD player, and I don't have to spend many more hours. I'm more than happy with the quality. I don't see enough difference in picture quality to justify the time or expense! It's not 100% perfect, but I don't mind settling for about 98% quality!

Russ

---

So you must convert the m2ts to dvdifo prior to using DVD-RB as it doesn't transcode BD file formats.

There is a big difference between a converted BD -to- DVD format, over true HD and if you could pass the color test you would hopefully see the difference, it is noticeable.

It is definitely better and noticeable to have a BD player and HDTV than a hybrid DVD. For someone critical in the audio world you fall way short in the AV world.

HC is no ware as good as CCE or ProCoder they both are superior and I've even compared them in front of a novice who could as well see the difference.

The 3D scanner/printer is not going to change the world either although it is cool and has its place. For you and I it is way too expensive to buy, maintain, and use to make it a value. Also that plastic wrench is not going to hold up to the torque that a good forged steel wrench will.

Stevo

---

Stevo,
I got a score of 4. I can see well enough. I'm very fussy about my Video too!

I DL my HD content, it's not from disk. I don't want any part of BlueRay, and I don't think I'll ever own an HDTV. We don't watch much TV around here, maybe a couple of hours a week. I think I set a record here last month because I watched Jackie's PBS Special 4 times and a couple of Antiques Roadshows. You can forget most sports because it's all about making money and buying Championships, while kids go to bed hungry across America because they have no food! Greed Prevails! Nascar and F-1 are like soap operas. Couldn't tell you who won the SuperBowl last year! I did watch the World Series. I had to root for the Giants. The rest of the time there's not very much worth watching on TV. I don't do stupid, so network TV is out! LOL!!

What I had in mind for the printer is eliminate the scanner as it's by far the most expensive and sophisticated part, make a basic printer and live off the materials and templates! I'm sure the tools are more a novelty than anything I'm just beginning to see Ceramic/polymer infused titanium impellers for miniature air turbines now, that will live at 500,000+ rpm!

Russ

---