Digital Video Forums

Go Back   Digital Video Forums > Software Forums > DVD2one

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 3.00 average. Display Modes
Old 27 Jun 2007, 10:31 AM   #31
Digital Video Technician
Digital Video Technician
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 484
Default

just did "Black Snake Moan" with dvd2one V. 2.1.3, i did the whole disc, left the movie soundtrack only and english subs. the actual compression was 43%, i see no difference between the original and the copy in my 36 inch TV. maybe with a larger TV i would, don't know. it took dvd2one about 25 minutes. 43% compression is very high in my view, dvd2one handle it just fine.

Last edited by elizerrojas; 27 Jun 2007 at 07:29 PM
elizerrojas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 Jun 2007, 07:19 PM   #32
Queen of Digital Video
Queen of Digital Video
 
photo_angel2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Middle Earth USA
Posts: 3,558
Wink-2

Quote:
Originally Posted by locoeng View Post
I posted a link to the comparisons here Carla...please disregard the encoding quality pics....the link shows both encoders and transcoders as a comparison and I know they are in two separate classes, but the results of the different transcoders can still be seen there side by side. That was my original intent of posting the link, but no one seemed to catch it.
Looks like I may have to play with this one a bit.
and thanks for the link to the link LOL.

@evdberg,
Thanks for the info
__________________






IMGburn ** ** Nero 6.6.0.18 **Intelli Type Pro 6.1 **
photo_angel2004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 Jun 2007, 09:48 PM   #33
Who Farted?
 
locoeng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: behind you
Posts: 2,509
Default

You are very welcome Carla
__________________


"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person. It's not fair to you and no challenge for us."
Walt Kelly
locoeng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 02:04 AM   #34
King of Digital Video
King of Digital Video
 
NightTran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: eastcoast, on the beach
Posts: 4,224
Default

is dvd2one is really that good less then one hour and creat good quality?

Thanks
__________________
NightTran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 05:24 AM   #35
Digital Video Technician
Digital Video Technician
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightTran View Post
is dvd2one is really that good less then one hour and creat good quality?

Thanks

What?
elizerrojas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 05:37 AM   #36
Super Moderator
 
Chewy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: millenium falcon
Posts: 18,973
Default

a translation,
is dvd2one really that good that it can do a heavy compression is less than an hour without losing quality?

to test and use the trial version simply chose a video of less than 2 hours and then set your target
size to custom, say you have 5 gigs of video and 300 megs of audio

target size of 4.3 would be 80%

3.3 would be ~60%

2.8 would be ~50%

I reduced a 4.2 gig set of files to 3 gigs this morning in a similar test, only took 5 1/2 minutes with my
lame OC'd xp mobile(@2200)

Last edited by Chewy; 28 Jun 2007 at 05:47 AM
Chewy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 06:30 AM   #37
Super Moderator
 
Chewy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: millenium falcon
Posts: 18,973
Default

I pushed it a little further with a higher quality set of files
1hr 35 min at 4.2 gigs

3.9gigs video x .6

after adding back the audio I set size to 2700 MB
using a system that 50% faster it took a little over 7 minutes

other programs would take an hour

I really could not tell any difference in this ~60% compression, maybe a slight fuzziness on faster motion video
Chewy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 07:58 AM   #38
Digital Video Technician
Digital Video Technician
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 484
Default

So, it seems that we finally have a program that achieves both, speed while producing quality output as that of (or near to)shrink and recode2.
elizerrojas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 08:32 AM   #39
Super Moderator
 
Chewy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: millenium falcon
Posts: 18,973
Default

my next test will be to lower ouptut size to 2200MB
that should be equivalent to 54% compression from my original test of the whole video which was 3 hrs long

I expect to see a dramatic increase in time with some video degradation
My original test with the other program took over 2 hours for high quality
output
Chewy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 09:22 PM   #40
Who Farted?
 
locoeng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: behind you
Posts: 2,509
Default

I batch encoded season two of Deadwood...the first disc was only 29% compression, full disc only removed foreign audio and subs and kept menus etc. Didn't check the other discs, but they each had more content (extra episode each disc). It took and hour to do all four discs...I will burn the results onto discs tonight and check the quality.
locoeng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 10:10 PM   #41
Super Moderator
 
Chewy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: millenium falcon
Posts: 18,973
Default

well test 2 is complete, dvd2one only took 7 and 1/2 minutes to compress the 4.2 gig original to 2.3 gigs and the output showed very little degradation in quality, I then tested the other program with the same output size and no extra quality settings, it took 8 1/2 minutes and the output was unacceptable.

I hate to be a doubting thomas here but seeing is believing, loco's link didn't really show me enough detail to see any significant differences.

Chewy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 10:26 PM   #42
Queen of Digital Video
Queen of Digital Video
 
photo_angel2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Middle Earth USA
Posts: 3,558
Wink-2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy View Post
well test 2 is complete, dvd2one only took 7 and 1/2 minutes to compress the 4.2 gig original to 2.3 gigs and the output showed very little degradation in quality, I then tested the other program with the same output size and no extra quality settings, it took 8 1/2 minutes and the output was unacceptable.

I hate to be a doubting thomas here but seeing is believing, loco's link didn't really show me enough detail to see any significant differences.



Good morning chewy,

Have you tested this with a larger file size yet?

I may have to give this a try with a 4 hour flick and see how it does with time and quality.
photo_angel2004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 10:37 PM   #43
Who Farted?
 
locoeng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: behind you
Posts: 2,509
Default

Maybe we could get our own screen capture comparison thread going here..
locoeng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 10:38 PM   #44
Super Moderator
 
Chewy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: millenium falcon
Posts: 18,973
Default

it's not going to make any difference what size file set you start with, the trial is limited to 2 hours of video tho

all I was trying to do a perform a test anyone could duplicate before buying the registered version

4 hours is overdoing it tho, even a full encoder would drop the ball

3 hours is pushing the programs limits

loco, I wouldn't suggest that
Chewy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Jun 2007, 10:48 PM   #45
Queen of Digital Video
Queen of Digital Video
 
photo_angel2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Middle Earth USA
Posts: 3,558
Wink-2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy View Post
it's not going to make any difference what size file set you start with, the trial is limited to 2 hours of video thoall I was trying to do a perform a test anyone could duplicate before buying the registered version

4 hours is overdoing it tho, even a full encoder would drop the ball

3 hours is pushing the programs limits

loco, I wouldn't suggest that
Thanks for that info chewy,

Looks like I wont be trying that anytime soon, If I cant try it with what I want it for then the FREE trial is 100% useless. good to know now I wont bother downloading the free trial after all.
I will stick with what I have for the time being.
photo_angel2004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT +10. The time now is 04:37 PM.

Kirsch designed by Andrew & Austin


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright © 1999 - 2011 Digital Digest

Visit DivXLand   Visit dvdloc8.com