Nero Recode better than DVDShrink?

[blutach]

LMAO - I see our old friend Scuba Pete reported michi90.

Regards

[cynthia]

Still going strong...

[blutach]

What a real ar$ewipe. What was his name here again?

Regards

[cynthia]

ScubaPete

[blutach]

Nah - remember he quickly built about 1,200 useless posts, argued like hell, said he was leaving for weeks and finally buggered off.

Regards

[blutach]

Quality's Proof!! And here's one of my favourite posts from the guy - http://forum.digital-digest.com/show...282#post158282

There are many many more like that. What a hoot.

Regards

[michi90]

Hello !

Yes, for extreme low (sick) bitrates Recode 2 is better !

Try video bitrates below 16 MB/min with DVDShrink and then with Recode (both with 'maximum sharpness').
Do you know a movie about men in skirts and sandals with Russel Crowe ?
Collector's Edition ?
Yes ?
Try this one with all ac3 and dts !

DVDShrink produces some frames with extreme blocking and green areas.
Recode doesn't.
So the AEC algorithms are improved for those extreme low bitrates.

Is here any expert who knows a registry hack to convince Recode 2 to use the saved data of an already deepanalysed DVD instead of deepanalyse it again and again ?

Or simply uncheck the box ?

[blutach]

Welcome michi90. I have read some of your stuff on afterdawn - interesting reading.

I do not know the movie you are referring to with Russell Crowe. 16Mb per minute sounds awfully low bitrate. I would not consider that DVD quality. But they may be good for testing.

Nice to meet you anyway

Regards

[michi90]

No, of course this example (with dts and 16 MB/min video-bitrate) is an extreme test to show the difference between DVDShrink and Recode.
It is not a serious DVD-backup.
I'm not mad.
For a serious (high quality) backup you have to kick dts.
That's why I wrote 'sick'.

[michi90]

@ blutach

I spoke of a european (german) PAL-DVD of 'Gladiator'.

Sorry if some of my sentences and words sound strange, but I haven't practised my English enough since I left school.
I hope everybody here can understand what I want to say.

I don't know why, but I can't reproduce the differences (with the advantages using Recode 2) between DVDShrink 3.2 and Recode 2 at extreme low (sick) bitrates anymore.
So I do correct my earlier conclusions though dwflo has posted that he gets better results with Recode 2 (less quantizer artifacts).
Maybe someone else could test in Shrink's and Recode's re-author-modes if she/he find differences at those 'sick' bitrates (it makes only sense using the same AEC-mode in both applications - so check the Windows Registry if you have set "[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Ahead\Nero Recode\Preferences]"CompressMode"=dword:00000003" for 'maximum sharpness' !) ?
By the way 'maximum sharpness' produces ironically not the sharpest output under most circumstances (only at minimal transcoding ratios).
'sharp (default)' sharpens the picture more than 'maximum sharpness' at ordinary and high transcoding ratios.
If the original DVD contains much grain (like Gladiator) 'sharp (default)' produces ugly pictures (especially in scenes with zoomed faces).
I believe that they finally chose 'sharp (default)' for DVDShrink and later for Recode 2 as the initial (by installation) AEC-setting, because most beta-testers used Lord Of The Ring DVDs where the pictures are very clear (without grain), so that 'sharp (default)' produces no artifacts.
Comparing Gladiator with 'sharp (default)' or 'maximum sharpness' already in the opening scene (Russell Crowe's face !) it is obvoius that 'maximum sharpness' produces a more stable and clear picture (near to the original quality level).

From my point of view there are no differences in quality (Shrink vs Recode) at all levels of compression except one point.
The Shrink output is slightly sharper, possibly because its AEC-engine uses mainly the FPU (Floating Point Unit) and not all modern CPU extensions (SSE 2 or others) to increase the processing speed.
I don't know if this is the reason, but it sounds logical.
I'm not a programmer, but I remember that there are differences in decoding and encoding using FPU or MMX, SSE, SSE2, etc.
In DGDecode (successor of DVD2AVI) you can choose different iDCT algorithms and that leads to minimal changes (sharpness) in real-time when you look at the picture inside the window.

Fortunately the Recode 2 output is a little bit sharper than the original frames at ordinary compression ratios (at high compression the picture of course becomes softer).
So the advantage of speed using Recode 2 is not a real disadvantage for the picture quality.
Only if you can't get enough (in a sense of remastering) of sharpness reserves and the original DVD picture is much too soft for your eyes (or the limitations of your equipment) you better use the slow DVDShrink to get maximal sharpness.

[laserfan]

It's just that the log speces that - here is an example from RE2:

I did not know that Nero Recode produced such a nice log file. Does DVD Shrink also (i.e. have I missed this all this time I've been using it)???

It seems in my brief examination of Recode that it lacked some of Shrink's features (OTTOMH maybe trimming)? Am I wrong about this--does Shrink beat Recode in some features?

[cynthia]

You can do all the things with Nero Recode that you can do with DVD Shrink.

DVD Shrink don't have a log file.

[fuzzball2001]

im getting ready to download the update so that i hav Recode 2 i think it would be better than Shrink...

[michi90]

You get the same output quality with Recode 2.2.6.16 and DVDShrink 3.2.0.xy (15 or 16).
But Recode 2 is much faster than DVDShrink 3.2.
On the other hand I think that DVDShrink 3.2 is more user friendly and easier to use (switching AEC-modes etc.).
If you want to switch in Recode 2 to AEC 'maximum sharpness' (in my opinion the best setting) you have to go to the Windows Registry and change a DWORD-value.

[laserfan]

You can do all the things with Nero Recode that you can do with DVD Shrink...

When I select "Recode Main Movie to DVD" I don't seem to be able to apply selective compression to the movie like I could with Shrink.

One example is: select just the end credits and apply max compression, then select the entire movie beginning-to-end and the result would be "Mixed Compression". How can I get Recode 2 to do this??? It won't let me move the compression slider...