|
Is DVD Rebuilder/CCE worth if for less than 20% compression?
|
|
|
alpha6164
Newbie
|
13. August 2004 @ 16:52 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have DVD REbuilder/CCE and have had great results using large dvds such as LOTR. Many times using DVD shrink I can get it to less than 10-15% compression removing the crap I don't need. I wonder, if its worth the several hours of Rebuilder for such a small compression, or if one could tell the difference. All opinions and inputs appreciated.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
ddlooping
Senior Member
|
14. August 2004 @ 10:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hi alpha6164,
As everything to do with quality, it is very subjective.
It is also highly dependent on the viewing equipment.
Some will say CCE is better than DVD Shrink, whatever the level of compression used.
Others, that DVD Shrink with Deep Analysis will be as good if not better at Ratios > 85% (CCE tends to introduce "mosquito" noise).
Others, that they cannot see the difference between an original and a DVD Shrink backup, even when the Ratio is > 70%.
I'd personally suggest when the required compression is 15% or less, go with DVD Shrink (with Deep Analysis).
I'd also suggest you make your own comparison tests.
Using v3.2 with its new "Quality Options", you might be pleasantly surprised. ;)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 14. August 2004 @ 10:54
|
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
14. August 2004 @ 14:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have enjoyed using DVDrebuilder and since I have purchased the software and it does make what I can only describe as perfect backups of the original I go ahead and use it any time I compress a movie.
For reference I have never had CCE introduce any atifacts or noise into a movie and have not heard of any from other experienced CCE users.
I have tested DVDshrink3.2 and am satisfied with the results quality wise if I let it do full analysis and quality settings. But it takes 2 hrs on average. With CCE using RBfarm I getting a 1hr average encode.
In addition, if time is the concern, you can encode several movies overnight with the built in batch mode on Rebuilder.
You can't do that with shrink.
Quality wise, even the DVDshrink author had conceded that encoding was ultimately better than transcoding.
If money is a concern think shrink is very nice.
But if you buy CCE for large movies use there is no reason not to use it on any compressed movie.
Donald
|
|
ddlooping
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 01:12 |
Link to this message
|
64026402, DVD Rebuilder/CCE twice as fast??!! :o
I'm gonna need to check RBFarm.
I was not aware of that, hence my recommendation for using DVD Shrink when compression was < 15%.
You can do a sort of batch encode with DVD Shrink.
Simply open several instances: one DVD/instance. ;)
alpha6164 , for more views on the matter, you could check the doom9 forums. ;)
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
15. August 2004 @ 10:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
I was going to setup RB farm but my wife and son wouldn't let me get my hands on their PCs. The ingrates, after all I built them. LOL
I find that it doesn't really matter because I use batch processing. I've done up to 5 at a time and all while I'm away from my PC. My encode times with CCE are generally pretty good to begin with about 2 hours and 20 minutes for each movie. I'm building a dual CPU server system sometimes this fall and that along with my current PC (P4 3.149 ghz) might make it worth my time to try RBfarm. But for now batch processing is as much convenience as I need.
" 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
|
15. August 2004 @ 11:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hi Sophocles
RBfarm was usefull for me because I can't afford the latest fast setup so I had several medium speed computers running for backups.
Since I was already using multiple computers it seemed reasonable to try farming. It saves the extra parts on the other computers since the CPUs are the only thing taxed.
If you go Dual proc just remember there are some programs that balk at SMP and may have difficulty working. I have 5 Dual systems setup right now.
I use a single proc older computer for flashing components like DVD burners or PCI controllers. Flashing programs sometimes have problems.
Donald
|
|
ddlooping
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 11:41 |
Link to this message
|
Ok, now I get it.
The majority of DVD-backupers will not have the option to use RBfarm though.
For them, CCE will still take about 3-4 times as long to process the files as DVD Shrink, right?
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
15. August 2004 @ 11:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
64026402
All good points and the reason I may yet go for a faster single proc. CCE oddly enough supports and recommends dual processors but not hyper threading. Since I've been using batch processing I don't even notice the passage of time, largely because I'm sleeping and working. I estimate that I have an easy 14 hour window with which to batch process up to 6 movies so speed seems a little less important as well.
Thanks for the advice.
BTW I like your Star Trek thread.
" 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/. |
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
15. August 2004 @ 11:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
ddlooping
Sort of but since I do it with batch processing when I'm not using my PC (sleeping working) it's kind of a moot point.
" 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/. |
|
ddlooping
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 11:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
It's a moot point as far as you're concerned, but maybe not for others, including alpha6164. ;)
|
|
brian100
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
15. August 2004 @ 11:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
To answer the original question. In my honest opinion using CCE with rebuilder at ANY compression produces better results than any other transcoder out there.
Looking for my old AD |
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
15. August 2004 @ 11:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
ddlooping
HOw true but the name of the thread is "Is DVD Rebuilder/CCE worth if for less than 20% compression? For me I would still have to say yes.
" 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/. |
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
15. August 2004 @ 11:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
ddlooping
How true but the title of the thread is "Is DVD Rebuilder/CCE worth if for less than 20% compression? For me I would still have to say yes because time isn't a restraint when I'm not there and really isn't a restraint for anyone who uses DVDRB.
" 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/. |
|
ddlooping
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 11:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
Fair enough. ;)
|
|
ddlooping
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 12:14 |
Link to this message
|
brian100, do you really believe you could tell the difference between a 10%-compression backup made with CCE and one made with DVD Shrink?
What about 5%?
More importantly, do you really think you could tell the original from the 5-10% backups?
I would propose a blind test, but my tests are notoriously biased, lol.
|
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 12:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
DVDshrink3.2 is only 3 times faster in low quality mode which CCE does not have.
If I were to use DVDshrink I would ude the high quality setting which is similar in speed to CCE.
It may be about 20% faster which is not usefull on a 2 hr encode.
I still use Shrink. But as a rule the compression part isn't used.
It is still a very usefull program when used for veiwing, ripping, testing, repairing, and making ISOs out of the results of encoding. I wouldn't be without it.
Donald
|
|
ddlooping
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 12:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
I seriously need to update my system.
Even when using v3.2 "Quality Options" at a ratio of 60%, DVD Shrink is still 3 to 4 times faster than DVD2DVD-R/CCE (Athlon XP1700+/512MB). :(
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 15. August 2004 @ 12:20
|
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 12:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sophocles, The dual Xeon is ideal for your purposes. Your backup times will be cut in half with only one machine running.
You could even run it in the background using RBfarm with your present setup when you had a lot of work to do. You encodes would be under the hour mark for big DVDs.
Also once you have used a dual proc system everything feels faster. You won't want to use a single proc system again. 6 ghz plus in one machine. You can't beat it.
Donald
|
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 12:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
DDlooping,
It may be DVDshrink is not cpu demanding in some parts now. How long does it take you to run a 3 hr movie with shrink on max quality. I'm figuring about 5 or 6hrs for CCE with your setup.
Donald
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
15. August 2004 @ 12:26 |
Link to this message
|
|
ddlooping
I would propose a blind test, but my tests are notoriously biased, lol. Now you confess. LOL
I think the point is that it really doesn't matter if you can see the differences or not. If the time needed to accomplish the task by either is essentially the same then why not use the one you're happy with. Even if you can?t see the difference it?s annoying to know that it?s still there however small. Like 6402 I also think that the beauty of DVD Shrink is its versatility. The sums of its individual parts are greater than its whole; it?s potentially useful to everyone who backs DVD even if they don?t use its compression engine.
" 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 15. August 2004 @ 12:28
|
|
ddlooping
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 12:42 |
Link to this message
|
64026402 , if its "Low Priority" option is not selected, DVD Shrink will normally use 100% cpu.
The tests I did included LOTR-FOTR.
It required a ratio of about 64% and took about 2 1/2 hours (including Deep Analysis).
If I remember correctly DVD2DVD-R/CCE with 2 passes took about 8 hours.
Sophocles, if the processing time is essentially the same, I do agree, simply use the method you're happy with.
I would go even further though:
Simply use the method you're happy with. :)
I only use DVD2DVD-R when fairly high levels of compression are needed because:
1) My PC is very noisy and in the same room as my bed (I live in a studio-flat).
Processing during sleeping hours requires me to use ear-plugs, which I'm not too keen on.
2) At low to moderate levels of compression (1-15%) I cannot see the difference between a DVD Shrink backup and the original, even on my EIZO 17" LCD monitor, at 1280x1024, viewed with WinDVD in Full-Frame mode (which is far less forgiving than my 32" widescreen Hitachi TV).
I did not confess anything, lol.
Maybe I should have said "...notorious to be supposedly biased". :D
|
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 12:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
I believe DVDshrink is a top notch program. If it could use CCE for encoding as an option then it would be complete. I am forever appreciative of the authors hard work.
Donald
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
15. August 2004 @ 12:47 |
Link to this message
|
ddlooping
If you use DVD2DVD-R then that makes you the only other person I know besides me that does. I like the fact it does the main movie only without the need to edit.
Quote:
I did not confess anything, lol.
Maybe I should have said "...notorious to be supposedly biased". :D
Sorry Double "D." "The cats out of the bag." 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/. |
|
64026402
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 12:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
DDlooping. It sounds like you have adequate reason to use Shrink for encoding at lower compression. I have no problem with this.
Since I have more proccessing available and my computers are in another room then I have no reason to switch to shrink for light encodes.
For reference. My trick for silencing warm computers is to use quiet 80mm HSFs on the procs, remove all case fans. The use a 5 dollar box fan on low in place of the left side cover.
It isn't pretty but it is dead silent and 100% effective.
I can't get too fancy with 10 procs producing heat.
Donald
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
ddlooping
Senior Member
|
15. August 2004 @ 12:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
"If it could use CCE for encoding as an option then it would be complete"
It is the wish of many, but will unfortunately never happen.
Thanks to both of you for the positive feedback. :)
|
