ShrinkDVD Vs CloneDVD

[Ingram]

Ok here is the new and better done version

http://www.dart.net.au/users/jmalthouse/Compare/compare.htm

Still the same result :P

[Ingram]

[tompika]

DVD Shrink vs DVD2one here
https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=724368#724368

[Gazorgan]

You need more details. I'm assuming when you said 20% you meant that Shrink was at 80% compression?

It's not a fair comparison based on how shrink does menus/extras (basically no copmpression by default). By default, most Shrink DVD9's have only 2-3 GB's for the main movie, which really sucks. CloneDVD is better and shrinking menu's by default.

Having said that, DVDShrinks transcoding engine isn't the best, that's common knowledge. It is fast and free, and that's good enough for most.

[Ingram]

That compare is not clone vs dvdshrink

It was a leval 4 job. Which is 20%. I also compressed the menus and removed the extra's ofcourse. Menu's I compressed at around Leval 6-7. Still good quality.

Also the test disc is disc 2 of FOTR extended edition.

[tompika]

It was a level 4 job. Which is 20%.

Are you saying you used DVD Shrink 2.3 ?

[noki]

Ingram

thanks for providing the results of your work. Question/Observation...the fast scene example for the 2 progs were different scenes/frame. can you match the exact frame for the comparision when you have time? thanks again for all your work Also try v3.0b5 with Deep Analysis.

[Gazorgan]

That's what threw me!

Sorry, but it's totally useless. DVDShrink 2.3 doesn't matter since it's a dead horse. Never going to be a 2.3.1 or a 2.4. Heck, may never be a non-beta 3.0 I just don't consider 2.3 to be a current application.

It's not a bad analysis (vertical slices not side by side are easier to read) otherwise.

[noki]

also the shot that you claim favors Shrink is not conclusive...very difficult if not impossible to evaluate a split-scene where lighting, etc is different from the other part of the scene. but keep the shots coming...very interesting

[noki]

one last comment...which CloneDVD were you using? the one by Elby or clone.net? they are two totally different progs. also you might mention the version of shrink you were using (cuz we all think it was 2.3)thanks again.

[Ingram]

Any difference in quality between the 2 versions of clone?

Shrink = 2.3

CloneDVD = Elby 1.3.11.2

[noki]

hi Imgram,
have not used the clone.net prog personally. i think it has been around for awhile, and is at version 2.1.
any reason you are still using 2.3 versus the new and improved 3.0b5? could make a big difference in your results...especially with deep analysis in the latest version.
thanks again for displaying your work

[jimmalenko]

Thanks for attempting to do a comparison. It does help to use the latest version for a an unbiased comparison but at least you tried to help a few newbies. I haven't read your comparison as I am a DVDShrink man - I have tried Clone DVD a couple of times but in my mind the jury is still out.

Each to their own though.

[tompika]

Recode 2 (with second pass) is the program of my choice. (made by Mr Shrink)
Combined with AnyDVD 3 rips on the fly. Burns automatically with Nero 6.3

Although I do have DVD2one and CloneDVD, I used to be a DVD Shrink 3 fan (deep analysis).

[Ingram]

I'll take a look at the beta release then shall I

[Ingram]

Ok im going to start a new comparision and this time do it a little more professional so its not so gay

[Ingram]

Do you guys think the latest beta of DVD shrink would have poor quality compared to the proper release? Cos I'm doing the comparision now and compared to the orig and clonedvd jobs its shocking

[jimmalenko]

The beta is fine.

[Ingram]

Well ok, I'm uploading now, prepare for a shock because it seems CloneDVD IS the superior program for one click copies :P

EDIT:

Ok its up

http://www.dart.net.au/users/jmalthouse/Compare/compare.htm

[jimmalenko]

I hate to burst the bubble but after reading your earlier report I'm cynical.
I appreciate that you are having a go but I do not think that your testing methods provide a fair and equitable comparison. Having said that I don't think I could devise a better method myself. I guess the best method is whatever works for you, as beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.

Congrats for attempting !

[Ingram]

I hate to burst the bubble but after reading your earlier report I'm cynical.
I appreciate that you are having a go but I do not think that your testing methods provide a fair and equitable comparison. Having said that I don't think I could devise a better method myself. I guess the best method is whatever works for you, as beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.

Congrats for attempting !

Well It's obvious from the screens which is better :P

[jimmalenko]

Can I suggest that you do movie only in both so that there is a level playing field ?

[Ingram]

First is Shrink (L) second is Clone (R) last is original.

If you can't see how much detail the shrink image is missing clearly you a blind :P

[jimmalenko]

Just edited my previous post sorry. Bloody dial up !

Do you think that movie only is a fair comparison since both are doing the same thing ? How about comparison of time taken vs quality ?

[Ingram]

Couldn't really care about time. And as I said on the site it includes menus and extra's so that the program has to make do with what it has. Clearly CloneDVD does this better. But for testing sake I suppose I can do it again with only the movie this time. I'll be back :P

[jimmalenko]

My other thought was, I can see that Clone is closer to the original, but by the looks of the enlarged image, there is no pixelation - it actually looks clearer. Is that one of those things where you really need to watch the two to see the difference ?

[jimmalenko]

OK. We have proven that clone appears to do a better job by looking at the stills when menus etc are included and we want to see how each one does with what its got. We can conclude that clone must compress the menus better because it can provide more detail for the movie. We are not actually proving that it does the movie better unless we do movie only with both. That is the only true way to see.

Unfortunately my jury is still out. Anyone else ?

[Kerry56]

A shocking result? I can't see any difference in the first set of pictures and very little in the second!

[jimmalenko]

As I say, beauty is in the eye of the beer holder. The other comparison is price. DVDShrink = Free. CloneDVD - can be free !

[Ingram]

I'm doing movie only right now. And as for you Kerry56, you need some glass' 8)

Perhaps I should do a different DVD which is more cleaner and brighter than Snatch

And as for price, well some people may be concerned but when your burning dvds you most likely don't own I'm sure you don't care about using a serial generator :P