How is everyones results with the new DTOX?

[kagharaht]

Well its been over a week now since the new version. How is the experience so far for people who are using the new engines? I mean quality wise. Speed is not much an issue anymore....30 min versus 20 hours is nothing to get upset about. I'm more interested in the quality of your DTOX outputs. I've kept the original engine for comparison. I think constant rate seems to yield the best results compared to variable.

I've also tried the old engine, which is suppose to be the same as the new version. Those results on the old engine is better than the variable on the new engine. At least to my eyes, so perhaps something is slightly different on the variable of the new engine.

So for me I'm getting great results with Constant on the new engine movie only. I only do movie only, since I can always watch the orignal for the extra stuff that I never watch anyway.

[WiseWeasel]

It's working swell for me. The constant mode produces good results, and doesn't take too much longer (if at all). It's nice that they fixed that bug with the progress bar crapping out when the app is hidden. Seems to work perfectly, best $55 I've spent on software. Now, as soon as I get my shiny new G5 dual 2 GHz, I can give this soft a run for its money, though the hard drive will likely be the bottleneck at that point, which is really NOT the case w/ my lowly (but reliable) G4/466.

[kagharaht]

Can you imagine if you can load up the rip on the 8gig RAM. I mentioned this on the other site.... Maybe 8 is still too small. 16Gig ram. Load it al in RAM and no more bottleneck....

[WiseWeasel]

That would be wicked sick, but you still need to write to HD, which takes longer than to read from HD. Having two separate drives for source and destination helps with that, but that's about as good as you can hope for. I haven't seen any tools to make RAM disks with OS X. 16 GB should be possible once 2 GB PC 3200 DDR SDRAM DIMMs are available, no reason it shouldn't be, what with a 48 bit memory address space.

[TheConfuzed1]

I just registered the program myself. Is v1.1.0 the newest available? That is what I'm using. I've done two discs so far, and they seem great.

[AntnyMD]

I've done a handful of discs on the Constant setting. Originally I'd used DVD2OneX on a couple of discs that have PCM audio only, and the old/Variable setting had to crunch the video way too much (because PCM takes us so much space). Now with Constant, the video looks much better. I can still see blockiness from time to time, but thats not really the fault of the new coding option -- it's just PCM audio only leaves so much room for video.

At first I was disappointed in the time it took Constant to do the job, but I'll go for quality over speed every time. I mean, I remember the days when it took 24 hours per disc to do a 2-disc VCD, so I'm practically giddy over DVD2OneX.

[galactica]

edit error

[galactica]

I find it really difficult to tell the difference between the constant setting and the variable setting with the dvd I did

I grabbed the longest movie I had at hand (Pearl Harbor) and to be honest its really diffuclt to tell if there is better video quality with the constant setting (from what i can tell on my LCD screen) than with the varible setting.

dvd2one.com says
"New engine with constant compression ratio for better image quality in long movies (2 1/2 hours and more)" ( http://www.dvd2one.com/ratio.php )

It does take longer (Im thinking its around 2x how long it took with the previous version - maybe others can verify this)

but AntnyMD has a good point, even with it taking 30min or so longer, its still a really fast process.

[theMotoMan]

Galactica,

I think you just experienced a glitch in the Matrix. I just got a deja vu from your last post.

[galactica]

HAHAHA
you know i think it was because i closed the browser window right after the page that says "your message was entered properly" comes up

it was to be an edit, not a double post