Which Transcoding Tools Produce The Best Picture Quality.

Hey Sophocles, was getting ready to download intervideo copy dvd and saw this thread in the forum. Picture quality great but.......you can check it out here.http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/77631
_X_X_X_X_X_[small] [bold]GO VOLS![/bold]........Dell Media4600, XP home,Pentium 4 @2.80GHz/800Mz, 512MB, 280 HD w/8MB, 17" flat panel, AIO-A920, 8x DVD-ROM, integrated 5.1 audio, HP dc4000, Plextor PX-708UF[/small]

 

I used a translator but the software crashed when I tried to load a file. Even with a translator the language barrier would be too much. We need an AD German member to do this one for us or we'll have to wait for English support.

For DVD info

www.dvdhounds.com

 

I own Xcopy. The picture quality isn't that good. Certainly no better than shrink or nero.
With all the talk of dvd2one I tried it today. I am not impressed. Poor interface. Lack of options and doesn't look any better than shrink on the same movie.
The only one I haven't tried is intervideo. I guess they aren't proud enough to have a demo. No thank you.

The idea is good to compare but I already have the best apparently. I will keep on testing though.

 

bigorange

I also saw that thread some days ago (I was directed there by frisk), it was fortunately after I decided to try DCDcopy. I ve spent quite a bit of my time trying to reproduce the pixelations viewed by that thread's patrons, but I was unable to do so. I backed up 7 large type 9 (DVDs with no problem). It seems to happen to some but not to others and if it was just a software problem then how does one explain the successes. I searched the internet and found no other such pockets of disfavor toward the product which leads me to consider other possiblities. Maybe there was a codec conflict forced onto the application. Who knows I jsut know that it worked for me but my real preference is still DVD2one.
_
_X_X_X_X_X_[small]"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." Sherlock Holmes (by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, 1859-1930)[/small]

 

Last evening I was using DVD2One to connect a 'flipper'. I was just using it to edit and send the files to the HD. I also sent a set of files to the HD with Recode 2. The files were connected using DVD2one. I then burned the DVD2one created files with Intervideo and the Recode 2 created files with Recode 2. For some reason the results were better for the Recode. This was about 7GB, so not a real strain on any of the programs. Does anyone see where I may have gone wrong and ended up with better results with the Recode? I did a recording at over 8 GB with both Recode 2 and DVDCopy and both provided an excellent picture on a 60" TV. My poor old eyes couldn't see the difference and the speed test went to Nero. All of these do a good job and I think I'll take the advice and use DVD2One some more.

 

I think sophocles, after reading what u had to say and reading that thread, even if i'm lucky enuff to get it to work(and my luck ain't all that good to date) if it's no better than dvd2one why bother? I think I'll stick to dvd20ne and nero or recode for the larger movies. It's been fun.
_X_X_X_X_X_[small] [bold]GO VOLS![/bold]........Dell Media4600, XP home,Pentium 4 @2.80GHz/800Mz, 512MB, 280 HD w/8MB, 17" flat panel, AIO-A920, 8x DVD-ROM, integrated 5.1 audio, HP dc4000, Plextor PX-708UF[/small]

 

Use DVDRebuilder and CCE SP or Basic

 

I do believe that Recode and Shrink when using deep analysis give them an edge in quality on heavily compressed films.
I have only had one film that had a less than great full disc copy. That was Embrace of the vampire. Authoring showed 4 movies on one disc. Full screen, wide screen, and an uncut version of both.
It played OK but the resolution was visibly lower.
The movie wasn't good enough to bother with deep analysis so I just copied the 2 wide screen versions.

To be honest I am surprised that all the available programs do as well as they do. I am happy to have all the choices at hand.

 

64026402,
Why use shrink at all? Aren't you decrypting and processing the file to HD only to be reprocessed and burned? Wouldn't it be quicker (half the time) to use Decrypter to decrypt the files to HD or use a background decrypter to just process and burn direct with Recode?

 

Brobear,
I use Shrink and Recode in different circumstances, not at the same time. I was just indicating that deep analysis sets them apart from the other programs. It adds time but maximizes quality to the point that other programs would be unlikely to improve on.

 

64026402,
I'll agree on the deep analysis. I try to use it whenever possible with both the Shrink and Recode. It's a little more time consuming, but I'll give up a little time for quality any day. I wonder if the WinDVD Copy 2 is in deep analysis all the time? It does good work under high compression where some others programs start to fail.

Sort of confused me there the way the Recode and Shrink were together, my mistake.

 

Always use advanced analysis in recode, well worth the extra 15 minutes. I've done it both ways and I think the difference is unbelievable.
_X_X_X_X_X_[small] [bold]GO VOLS![/bold]........Dell Media4600, XP home,Pentium 4 @2.80GHz/800Mz, 512MB, 280 HD w/8MB, 17" flat panel, AIO-A920, 8x DVD-ROM, integrated 5.1 audio, HP dc4000, Plextor PX-708UF[/small]

 

flip218

Using DVDrebuilder with CCE basic is a time consuming process, but I tend to batch encode over night, whenever possible. The results are far superior to any transcoder. (In my opinion)

The subject of this setup is off topic as CCE basic is an encoder RATHER than a transcoder.

For my 2 cents I feel that Pinnacle Instantcopy is by far the best transcoder available at the moment.

 

Hey brian, how user friendly is pinnacle instantcopy and what do "you" use it in conjunction with?
_X_X_X_X_X_[small] [bold]GO VOLS![/bold]........Dell Media4600, XP home,Pentium 4 @2.80GHz/800Mz, 512MB, 280 HD w/8MB, 17" flat panel, AIO-A920, 8x DVD-ROM, integrated 5.1 audio, HP dc4000, Plextor PX-708UF[/small]

 

Pinnacle is simple to use, but sometimes suffers with "undersizing" or "oversizing" of file output, yes it's infuriating!!. It takes longer than all of the other transcoders, probably 2 to 3 times longer. Pinnacle can accept files from Shrink (un compressed), DVDdecrypter or existing files stripped with either DVDstripper, Vobblanker, titelsetblanker. It can burn directly to DVD or can output as an ISO image, then DVDdecrypter can be used to burn it.

It aint free though, but a free trial is available. Give it a go, you've got absolutely nothing to lose, and great results to gain!

 

brian100

I downloaded a fully funtional trial copy of Pinnacles Instant Copy and did a back-up. The rip took 14 minutes with Derypter, and then it took instant copy another 81 minutes to process and burn. I think it took so long because it was doing a deep scan. The result was excellent but not visually better than DVD2one but for $30 it is definantly not over priced. It also has some adjustments that you can make such as movie only and faster processing. I think that it may really show its stuff on large type 9 movies. Definitely an application that warrants discussion. The trial runs for 15 days.

 

Checked the site DVD.box and the various backup programs.

Of the ones they tested I only have Shrink and Recode 2.

I prefer recode 2. It does what I want and gives me the quality etc that I can live with. I guess you just can't beat the original copy for perfection.

I personally could not tell a great big of differnece in most of them.