RB 1.03 Pro vs DVD2ONE v2 vs ...

[UncasMS]

you're right, elizerrojas, they deserve a thanks every other day
^_~

[jeo]

thanks UncasMS,
cool thread,good surprises in the results.
(cool thread when remove my posts later)

as jdobbs wrote today:

CCEAQM may create in incompatible stream.That's why it is only available as a "hidden" option. When you buy a new player for Christmas and your backup doesn't play right -- please don't blame DVD-RB. Deciding to use AQM was your choice.

...i'm afraid too.

can you please use CCE alone as encoder(all default without aqe,etc) and post the results?

regards

[UncasMS]

can you please use CCE alone as encoder(all default without aqe,etc) and post the results?

sure thing, no big deal

maybe i will test nic's quenc 062 experimental release before


the cce compatibility issue using aqm has been mentioned before - autoqmatenc is said to be dvd compliant however using this feature

[jeo]

all right.

now i'm "afraid" to use HC and trash my old CCE2.5 after see the result.

regards

[UncasMS]

why afraid to use hc?

it looked better than cce 270 in most cases

[jeo]

why afraid to use hc?

it looked better than cce 270 in most cases

afraid to use HC? no more! is really better in the pictures.
i'm afraid to trash CCE after use HC.
(was a joke(was?),you don't understood)

what do you thing if i encode the fifth element with cce and with HC?
i know 5th element that don't need compression(the movie,not the "girl" )and RB advice about it when you start.
it's only for test to see what will happen.
is one valid test?

regards

[UncasMS]

well i cannot judge your version of 5th element

the version i know holds a very massive dts soundstream among other audio streams

of course it will be a decisive factor if you skip dts or keep it

all in all the length and the amount of action scenes make the difference; and 5th element should hold enough action to give it a try

rebuilder will state the (average)bitrates if you like - simply UNtick the *1click* option and hit prepare (or abort after preparation when using *1click*)

something like this will turn up:

- HIGH/LOW/TYPICAL Bitrates: 3.993/600/3.178 Kbs

an average of 3000kbps or less should make difference visible more easily because at 4000kbps one will seldom see differences between the encoders

[jeo]

rebuilder will state the (average)bitrates if you like - simply UNtick the *1click* option and hit prepare

after hit prepare came one advice and here is not the right place to post about it i think.
can i open a new thread with all details from my dvd and what will be selected to test?

thanks.

[UncasMS]

help yourself to a new thread

[jeo]

help yourself to a new thread

it's done,thanks

[UncasMS]

cc 270 WITHOUT aqm:


1.


2.


3.


4.


5.



the results surprise me a little bit as the first 4 pictures are IDENTICAL!
only number 5 shows slight differences at two spots and i cannot even say that one of the two looks better or worse

in other words: what was this aqm good for?
i dont see anything changed and thus no good reason to use it when this features takes quite an additional time

cce with aqm: 139 min
cce without aqm: 127 min WHILE USING THE PC!

[jeo]

what was this aqm good for?

you got my words friend.
this is what i was trying to post.... and i ask more

regards.

[ajp]

Just wanted to say thanks for this thread. I have been thinking about going beyond DVD Shrink, and but didn't know what to pick. I also was very impressed with HC for a freebie.

[Webslingerac]

another transcoder - another set of screenshots - a new speed record: 13min transcoding time

it is clonedvd 2.5 this time:

I just wanted to clarify: this is ELBY.CH's Clonedvd 2 (or Slysoft.com's), correct--and not the one from http://clonedvd.net ?

If so, it seems to me you should have been using Version 2.8.5.1 of Clonedvd 2 from elby.ch--and not version 2.5 (given 2.8.5.1 was out since July 2005).

[UncasMS]

it is the elby.ch version 2.5.3.3