HC16 slower than HC15?

[UncasMS]

ohh, lovely

will test this minute

were you, by the way, able to reproduce any lockup when using rebuilder with *encoders minimized* active?

[ElBoricua433]

I can't even find that new version of HC Encoder

[UncasMS]

i should think that hank315 has disabled the downloadlink

[UncasMS]

i have run a full length testrun with the latest HC 016 test release 2 (09-14-05; 634.880kb) via dvd rebuilder 1.0 rc 5.1 and the usual setting *run encoder minimized*

everything went perfectly fine

no hanging, no hickups

good job, hank315!

concerning quality: i'll try to watch this film tonight and report back if i spot any of the macroblock problems, that some people reported for the previous release

[UncasMS]

concerning speed: 016 IS faster

having done a full length testrun with hank315's latest 016 test release 2 today, i wrote down the encoding times of two of the segments

now i have done another testrun with 015 and here are the results:



segment A with 2943 frames

• HC 015 - pass 1 => 2:19
• HC 015 - pass 2 => 2:00

• HC 016 - pass 1 => 2:14
• HC 016 - pass 2 => 1:55

segment B with 1725 frames

• HC 015 - pass 1 => 1:18
• HC 015 - pass 2 => 1:08

• HC 016 - pass 1 => 1:15
• HC 016 - pass 2 => 1:05

[ElBoricua433]

yo do we really need to change settings to get the best quality or leave it as default?

[Lownox]

Thanks for the time comparisons UncasMS. As soon as hank315 lets the public have HC16 I will download it and put it to good use. Must have been something in my system that was slowing HC16 down. At least I will know where to start looking once I get it. Everyone's help and input is very much appreciated.

[UncasMS]

yo do we really need to change settings to get the best quality or leave it as default?

what exactly are you referring to?

[ElBoricua433]

anything I guess

[UncasMS]

well then the answer is: YES, changes can improve your results

^_~

[blutach]

In DVDRB, you can change the Options, HC Options, Quality/Speed Selection to Best to get best output. This will be slowest though.

Regards

[UncasMS]

concerning quality: i'll try to watch this film tonight and report back if i spot any of the macroblock problems, that some people reported for the previous release

i have watched the title and i must say: perfect job

everything is just fine

using BEST profile with hc and very low matrix + fluxsmooth for the somewhat noisy title

[ElBoricua433]

so do you guys still recommend CCE or Procoder?

[Lownox]

Take it from me. I bought CCE Basic and HC15 does as good a job encoding as CCE Basic. It (HC15) does a better job with low bitrate movies. If you are going to be encoding home movies or somthing that you can specify a high bitrate on, CCE Basic MAY be worth the money. But that is just my opinion, and everyone knows that opinions are like ***holes. Everybody has one.

I hope those astrics don't get me it trouble.

[UncasMS]

having to choose between cce and procoder, i'd definitely go for PROCODER

here, however, we were discussing HC and hc is an awesome freeware encoder, which many prefer to the cce basic version, that'll cost you ~$58


++++++++++++++

another speed comparison - full length this time

HC 015 - 220 min
HC 016 (latest test release) - 213 min