DVD-Shrink, DVD2ONE, IC7, DVD95Copy, DVDXCopy

[astroruben]

What is the difference between them other than some variation in feautures and interface? I wonder if there is an online comparison between those tools. Which ones produce the best quality output for:

1) keeping all DVD contents with transcoding
2) movie only
3) movie, menu and jump to scene, while removing the rest

Thanks for clarifying such a mess!

[scottvf]

IC is good quality but slow (1 hr -2 hr)
DVD2one is good quality and fast (10-20 min)
DVD-shrink is not as good quality (in my trial) but fast (10-20 min)
DVDXCopy is good quality and fast, but leaves on copyprotection and adds a warning screen.
DVD95Copy - haven't tried it. (since the other ways I use is good enough)

In my opinion use dvd2one to shrink your movie. It will do movie only or full disc.

[macleod]

Best quality output is going to get a number of different responses. I started using DVDXcopy when I got my burner. I never used it for compression and only if the movie would fit on one disk. Since I didnt use it for compression, the quality was fine. I didnt like it because of the 321 thing that it puts at the beginning of the movie

I then started using DVD2one (original release) and thought it was great. Then dvdshrink came out and I thought it was the greatest thing in the world.

Last night I made a backup of my spiderman DVD as it is getting some scratches and dvdshrink choked on it, so I used dvddecrypter to rip it to my hard drive. For whatever reason dvdshrink wouldn't accept the file, so I figured that I would give dvd2one another try (I had exclusively been using dvdshrink since its release). The result was horrible compared to the many movies I have viewed since using dvdshrink. I then decided to clean the dvd and use dvdshrink, which, as expected, showed a fantastic result.

My vote is dvdshrink all the way. I am sure there will be many people saying that XXX is better, but for my purposes and on my 32" new toshiba the results are fantastic.

Also, after using dvd2one, my system is so sluggish, I have to reboot. I can do a milliion dvd's with dvdshrink with no problem.

[MackemX]

Deja Vu

[txpharoah]

My findings:

1. DVD2one is good quality and fast (about 10-30 min)
2. IC7 is good quality but slow (about 1-2 hr)
3. DVDshrink is not as good quality and slower than DVD2one (about 1 hour). Has crashed a few times on me with some discs.
4. DVDXCopy is okay quality, but adds junk to your disc.
5. DVD95Copy is okay. Haven't used it much. Demo crashed on me.
6. DVD2DVDR crashes on me for no reason. And its in German. Requires CCE if I remember correctly.

Given the cost, quality, speed, and reliability of the program, I use DVD2one exclusively at the moment.

DVDshrink probably has the best interface, but not worth the lower quality or extra time.

[Northstar]

DVDShrink has good quality is fast, and has ripping ability.

DVD2ONE is fast has no ripping ability, but you can max out the amount of space used for movie only then you get good quality.

I rip the files i want with DVDShrink first with no compression then i use DVD2ONE to compress it to the desired file size i want so i using the maximum space on the disk, this is a let down with DVDShrink or id use DVDSrink exclusively.

[red lion]

DVD2ONE is better than dvdshrink in my opinion because it is easer to use and very fast
dvdshrink is now slower (version 2)

[Bota2112]

DVD2ONE all the way!

[vance43211]

for the best quality encoded picture

instant copy 7 is the best,

but it the slowest of the rest

i don't mind the time though,

i from the old school

when burning a dvd 9 to a dvd 5 took 24hrs to do,

and u had almost perfect quality Too

[xistan]

In my opinion there is no DVD backup tool that actually does it all in a simple high quality way. Try it your self and you will see what I mean.

DVDShrink has a very nice approach (Especially the new 2.x series), however I have also had some issues with certain movies. And some really annoying ones like 99% percent done when program crashes for no apparent reason. Quality is getting better, and soon this might be the best of the best for one button backups. Tries to keep the disc navigation so there is no choice of removing certain extra material. Either keep it all, or do a reauthor and keep the main movie.

Instant Copy also has a very nice approach. It won't let you do all movies either. After spending a lot of time tweaking the compression ratios some movies has crashed the program for me.

DVDXCopy does nothing for me. I don't like their approach of making things harder for you (like proprietary warnings, no "burning" to hard disk etc. By the way, it has crashed on me too. The split to 2 discs can be performed using DVDToolbox instead, and movie only with XPress? Well use DVD2One.

DVD95Copy I haven't tried.

DVD2One is mainly for main movie backups only. Full disk mode gives you a bare minimum of control. But this program is the only one that haven't crashed a single time. And the results play flawlessly on my Pioneer.

Well I haven't really said anything I haven't said before. I need to stop answering these threads....

/C

[xavierdemon]

Remember this is only my opinion,

IC7 produces the best quality, taking 1 to 2hrs. However it only makes a full disc, trying movie-only usually results in less compatible DVD.

DVDxCopy - not interested in using this program, why would you want to split your DVD to 2 DVD's. Pointless, reminds me of flipper discs.

DVDxCopy Xpress produces high quality in a resonable time. However the DVD's produced suffer from freezing, jumping picture on some stand-alone DVD players . I find if you strip the DVD again and then use Stomp to burn, it produces a more compatible disc.

DVD2ONE - quick simple and easy, quality is good, not as good as DVDxcopy xpress or IC7.

DVD95Copy - can't say i've used it much, so my opinion wouldn't count.

DVD-Shrink and version 2 produces the lowest quality of them all, mind you its still very watchable and in my own experience, re-authoring causes the DVD to start half way through, which isn't good.

If your looking for just one program to use, you'd probably best of with DVD2One. However it never hurts to have some other apps just in case.

I basically use IC7 and DVD2One, if the film is short say 1hour and a half i'll DVD2One any longer i'll use IC7. I'll also use IC7 if i want to retain the extra features on a DVD.

Hope this helps.

[MackemX]

couldn't resist

What is the difference between them other than some variation in feautures and interface? I wonder if there is an online comparison between those tools. Which ones produce the best quality output for:

1) keeping all DVD contents with transcoding

DVD2One & DVD95Copy will give the best quality results here throughout if used alone and would be very hard to split due to them using the full 4.37Gb. IC would give better quality but it would be hard to get 4.37Gb 1st time so quality would suffer but using my method shown HERE you can reduce the 2nd run dramatically to as low as 10 minutes

or another Method to get excellent quality for the main title is to use the Hybrid method of using IC for the main title and then DVD95Copy(you could use DVDShrink) for the menu/extras resulting in 4.37Gb of the best quality using these 4 programs. Method is HERE

2) movie only

DVD2One & DVD95Copy will do for most or even DVDShrink if it can get 4.37Gb. IC would be hard to hit 4.37Gb without any fine tuning afterwards and it cannot work with 2.35:1 movies and produce 4.37Gb so quality suffers greatly again.DVDXCopy sticks warnings in, but I'm not sure on quality due to lack of use

3) movie, menu and jump to scene, while
removing the rest

mostly same as #1 but again if you keep a few extras then IC will be the best if you can hit the 4.37Gb mark within a quick 2nd run. Hybrid method again is good if you have enough extras/menus

the quality you get in the end probably just depends on how much user input you wanna put in and I'm not a RED BUTTON MAN and I spend say 30 mins backing up a DVD (mostly using IC and DVD95Copy/DVDShrink) to ensure the highest possible quality while still having the simplicity of a few clicks

[vance43211]

i kinda agree with MackemX

each program has it's strenght and weaknesses

if u use a hybrid approach (a combination of some of these and other programs)

u will get the best results

[ddlooping]

Hi all

Traffic, PAL, R2, movie-only.

DVD2One v1.1.3 vs DVD Shrink v2.2 (30%, no cropping. Better quality, 25%, was achievable with end-credits cropped).

http://www.poker-faces.com/temp/2one-shrink.html

The difference between the two backups is not as pronounced during normal viewing but is still very much noticeable.

How wants to play the game?

[nspyr]

DVD Shrink Keeps on crashing with me. I think DVD2ONE is the best.

[Super Warrior]

My favorite is DVD2one.I love it's simple,easy to use design,fast speed and the way it uses up the full 4.36GB filesize everytime.The quality is also nice as well.

[vance43211]

it may use 4.36 gig everytime, but ic7 show better quality even if it uses only 3 gigs for the whole movie

[Bob W]

it may use 4.36 gig everytime, but ic7 show better quality even if it uses only 3 gigs for the whole movie

You believe that I'm sure. Just for kicks I made copies of a 6.9GB DVD for my mother and two sisters. On one I used IC7 and on another DVD2one and the third DVD95. On playback only the DVD2one version looked to be of slightly less quality than the other two copies on my 48 JVC as played through my Sony progressive DVD player.

[Super Warrior]

it may use 4.36 gig everytime, but ic7 show better quality even if it uses only 3 gigs for the whole movie

Okay now that is a bit of a stretch.I realize IC does deliver slightly better quality,even better when the extras are removed/downsized.

But if an entire DVD includeing menus&extras were to be processed strait with both programs with no prior resizeing.No way would IC7 still look better at an even 3GB,missing a whopping 1.36GB of space.

[mrbass]

xavierdemon
DVD-Shrink and version 2 produces the lowest quality of them all, mind you its still very watchable and in my own experience, re-authoring causes the DVD to start half way through, which isn't good.


txpharoah
3. DVDshrink is not as good quality and slower than DVD2one (about 1 hour). Has crashed a few times on me with some discs.

ok dvdshrink 2.0 yes did suck quality wise....2.2 and 2.3 it's a whole new ball game as the engine was completely revamped. It's awesome quality. I'm never gonna use IC7 again most likely.

dvdshrink

DVD Shrink 2.1 uses a completely different compression algorithm which is not comparable to 2.0.

It dynamically determines which picture types to modify depending on the compression required, and it does this for each and every picture in the movie. It supports "partial" reduction, where only a small number of blocks in each picture are reduced, and it attempts to distribute the resulting compression uniformly among all pictures, in such a way that the error introduced by this compression does not "propagate" or amplify as playback continues.

That about sums it up. If you haven't tried the new 2.3 you honestly don't know what your missing.

[vance43211]

Hummm, looks like i need give that dvdshrink new version a try


Bob W and Star Warrior

i still stick with my statement

ic7 has a way better encoder than dvd2one

ic7 has issues Especially with the last update and the undersizing issue, but even with that undersizing issue and all that wasted disc space that everybody complain about, the quality is still way better than dvd2one

on my 21 and 19 inch comp moniters and on my 46 and 52 inch TVs

if i'm in a hurry to make a dvd for my cousin or my stepmother i would
use dvd2one cuz i know they won't notice the difference

Star Warrior, i do main movie only

i can't stand watching all them previews, credits and warnings, so u are probaly right if i did a whole disc with menus and extras

[Super Warrior]

ic7 has a way better encoder than dvd2one

Yeah it is better but not THAT better.Also IC takes hours to process everything,where as DVD2One only takes about 30 minutes and is almost the same in quality as IC.

Imagine if in a later update,DVD2ones developers added the option of doubleing the time DVD2one normally takes in order to get better quality.It would be way better than IC then for sure and it still would not take as nearly as long as IC to process everything.

Star Warrior, i do main movie only

i can't stand watching all them previews, credits and warnings, so u are probaly right if i did a whole disc with menus and extras

Well either way if just the main movie was processed with both programs and soundtracks&subtitles all left intact.

There is no way IC would still look better than DVD2one at an even 3GB,missing a large 1.36GB of space.

[ddlooping]

vance43211, it would be great if you could try DVD SHrink v2.3 and tell us how it compares to DVD2One and IC7.

[vance43211]

ddlooping

i will do that in the next week or so

star warrior quote

vance43211 wrote:
ic7 has a way better encoder than dvd2one


Yeah it is better but not THAT better.Also IC takes hours to process everything,where as DVD2One only takes about 30 minutes and is almost the same in quality as IC.

Imagine if in a later update,DVD2ones developers added the option of doubleing the time DVD2one normally takes in order to get better quality.It would be way better than IC then for sure and it still would not take as nearly as long as IC to process everything.

vance43211 wrote:
Star Warrior, i do main movie only

i can't stand watching all them previews, credits and warnings, so u are probaly right if i did a whole disc with menus and extras


Well either way if just the main movie was processed with both programs and soundtracks&subtitles all left intact.

There is no way IC would still look better than DVD2one at an even 3GB,missing a large 1.36GB of space.

negative

it just isn't so

i not going to get into a silly argument with u over something that already been proven on this forum

it the way that they encode, the reason being dvd2one is so fast with not so good quality, ic7 such good quality but not so fast time

a lot of people don't have the ability to tell the difference ( i see u being one of them ) but i am not one of them people

if u don't believe me, check out the past forums.

the one that did tests and explain the difference in the encoding techniques

that is too much explaining for me on things that already been written

[HideOut]

I'm with Vance, better than 24 hours and its much prettier. If I'm gonna use a $1+ blank, its gonna be good. I just have several machines that'll encode...

My fastest is an XP2000, just bout 3 hours for most movies in IC, longer movies take longer and shorter take shorter. DVD2one and Shrink are nice but I want quality. I just cant wait to see what these programs are like 6 months from now...

HideOut

[Super Warrior]

negative

it just isn't so

Heh dude IC may have a slightly better encoder indeed.But no way in hell is it still going to deliver better quality than DVD2one for the main movie at an even 3GB with a huge 1.36GB of space sacrificed.

I think your letting your personal bias for IC distort your vision a little if you honestly believe that

[vance43211]

u can think what u want

first when i said 3 gig i was actually referring to 3.45 gig which was the smallest movie i ever made with ic7 (antwone fisher) and that was with the latest update 7.1.1

that being said, if u do an a/b comparison with the original movie which was around 7 gigs, you would hard pressed to tell the difference (especially zooming in)

dvd2one however, even with the whole 4.3 gig of movie filled in, you don't even have to do an a/b comparison of the original because the differences of quality are so obvious and are easy to see

you need to stop being so bias (if dvd2one showed a better picture, i'd guarentee u i would use it).

I'm an old schooler. i've have been burning dvds for 15-16 months now. it use to take 24hrs to burn a dvd (they had almost exact quality). i telling u ic7 is the best fast encoder (fast for me is anything 6 hrs. or less) out there now, but i going to see about the new version of dvd shrink. mrbass said it's has great quality and i know he know quality when he sees it
.
u are under the impression that because the whole disc is filled in with a movie and another disc is 75 to 85% filled in (in antwone fisher case 80.2%) that the quality on the former disc is better than the latter without
even taken into the quality of the encoding is ludicrous

now if they were using the same encoder, that would be a true statement (but they are not)

before u responde to this post

go do some a/b comparison, which if u don't know what that means, it's to compare the burnt versions of your movie with the original version and if u can't see the difference, go get somebody who can see

[wonderuss]

One thing i've noticed about DVD2ONE recently is it's ability to backup Columbia Tristar dvd's, everytime i tried one of these it must have had some type of copy protection that i had not come accross before where the disc would look like it was going to play in one of my stand-alone players...then would just stop!!!. I don't know what was causing this but it only happend with Columbia Tristar ones, so after passing the DVD through DVD2ONE (even if it's a single layer disc it does the trick it just re-copies the file and works it's magic) and writing the disc again........works flawlessley!!
and this was a problem i had with region 1 & 2 discs but not anymore.

[YnoT]

Hi Guys,

Does anybody notice the update of IC 7.1.1 has a little downfall.

I try one same movie with two different version of IC7 the result of

the 7.1.1 won't allow to burn more than 4.37gb.

As for the previous update 7.01, it allow me to burn 4.6gb

I know the 7.1.1 cut 50% of the encoding time, but lose the quality (only 4.37GB).
I prefer better quality than fast encoding.

DO you guys have those experiences?

Is there any way to fix that?
Thankz

[ddlooping]

YnoT, wouldn't using another software to burn your backups fix the problem?