VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date: Feb 2010
    Location: Socal
    Search Comp PM
    This may be the wrong place for this. I have about 50 BDs that I have to recode down to dvd size, which I have no problem with. The question is the best way to do this regarding the hardware in my computer. I have a 480GB SSd, and several HDDs for data storage. Will it be faster to rip, then process the video and send it to the hdd, or will it make any significant difference? I have prog files, OS, and a few other things on the SSD, though I have room for processing a BD. I've been ripping and storing the finished product on the hdd, and it seems slow. Any ideas?
    THanks.
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member fritzi93's Avatar
    Join Date: Nov 2003
    Location: U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Contrary to accepted opinion, I don't see why you couldn't process your BDs directly from disc. The usual objection is that doing so puts unnecessary extra wear on your optical drive. That may have been true in the past, but your i7 computer is bound to be pretty fast (though your details are skimpy). If you run a driver-level decrypter in the background (like AnyDVDHD or DVDFabPasskey) and use BDRB, the processing will likely take no more time to do the re-encode than to rip to hard drive. The bottleneck in that case is reading off optical media.

    My own computer can do it with BDRB in the same time it would take to rip to hard drive. If I'm processing from a ripped folder, it will encode at ~ 4X. Now, if I use something like Ripbot, processing is approx real time (that's down to the presets), plus time to demux the disc. Ripbot first extracts everything to its working folder before processing. So in that case ripping first is redundant anyway.

    At any rate, do all processing on a separate mechanical hard drive, not your SSD. You'll gain nothing (in processing time) doing it on your SSD, and that *will* result in unnecessary wear, i.e read/writes. The mechanical hard drive won't be the bottleneck.

    The only fly in the ointment is that a disc with newer protection likely has the main movie spanning multiple m2ts files, which will occasionally mess up BDRB and Ripbot. That is, they may fail to remap all the m2ts files correctly. It's rare, but I've seen it a couple of times. In that case, extracting main movie first with Clown_BD (decrypter running in background) will work without fail.

    Good luck.
    Last edited by fritzi93; 28th Jan 2014 at 16:38.
    Pull! Bang! Darn!
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date: Feb 2010
    Location: Socal
    Search Comp PM
    You've answered my question precisely, thanks. I was thinking that a direct disk to BDRB was hard on the optical drive, and it would be better to do the processing in the SSD. So wrong on both counts. As far as a problem with remapping all the m2ts files, I just process them to DVD-9 size and do a whole disk transfer. Haven't messed with Clown yet; seems Doom9 is down.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Isn't there yet another storage involved like to store temporarily encoded raw video stream before muxing it into mp4?
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date: Nov 2003
    Location: West Texas
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by fritzi93 View Post
    Contrary to accepted opinion, I don't see why you couldn't process your BDs directly from disc. The usual objection is that doing so puts unnecessary extra wear on your optical drive. That may have been true in the past, but your i7 computer is bound to be pretty fast (though your details are skimpy). If you run a driver-level decrypter in the background (like AnyDVDHD or DVDFabPasskey) and use BDRB, the processing will likely take no more time to do the re-encode than to rip to hard drive. The bottleneck in that case is reading off optical media.

    My own computer can do it with BDRB in the same time it would take to rip to hard drive...
    This does not echo my experience using BDRB. Ripping to the hard drive takes 40-50 minutes or so, sometimes less depending on the movie. Processing with BDRB takes 4 hrs doing a High quality, 2 pass encode and going to a 25gb target.

    My machine isn't cutting edge, but is not really slow either. Its an i5 3570k, running at stock speed of 3.4ghz.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member fritzi93's Avatar
    Join Date: Nov 2003
    Location: U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    BDRB can be pretty darn quick with the right settings. I do main movie BD-25 high speed encoding option, though I don't backup to BD much any more. More often, I encode to MKV, crf20. Either way, it takes only a little longer than ripping when using BDRB. There's the few minutes for the initial analysis, of course. Then the final mux or rebuild, during which the optical drive isn't running.

    I've just about gone over to using Ripbot for MKV encoding, though. I can tweak the encoder settings and use a slow preset, which yields better quality and somewhat smaller file size for a given crf. Again, after the demux, the optical drive isn't involved.

    Anyway, I'm just saying...It's not like the old days with a P4 running DVDRebuilder. Depending on one's computer and encoder settings, the optical drive isn't necessarily running a lot more by encoding direct from disc. If you use BDRB that is, or your program of choice does an initial demux of all assets.
    Pull! Bang! Darn!
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads