DVD Shrink or DVDClone2 or DVD Rebuild

[hlieboff59]

I'd like to get alot of opinions on using the above 3 encoders when backing up a TV series DVD. Is one better than the other? I just tried using all 3 and DVD Shrink takes about hour and a half to two hours. DVDClone2 took under I think a half hour and DVD Rebuild takes like 4 hours. There's a big difference
in time that's for sure. What does everyone prefer and if people can help me understand the mechanics or if one is better than another, I would appreciate it. Will I see a big difference between these 3? Thanks for your help.

[nelson133]

I find Dvdshrink to be adequate for most everything I do. I occasionally use Dvdrebuilder for disks that require more that 50% compression, nut in general., I don't see the great difference between the two that others report.
Nyah Levi

[Dv8ted2]

I prefer DVDshrink myself, but go with whatever works for you. In my opinion, shrink is the best because it is free.

[fritzi93]

Instead of giving the standard response: "Do a search, it's been discussed umpty-ump times", maybe I'll tackle the question.

There was a rather long thread at Doom9 on this subject, wish I'd bookmarked it, perhaps I'll try to find it. However, here's a good starting point for understanding how transcoders work:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?&threadid=63587

IIRC, one poster (in the thread I haven't found yet) maintained that DVDShrink (and by extension, transcoders in general) was in some cases the best choice. Not just indistinguishable, but superior. The argument goes something like this:

First there must be ample bitrate in the original movie. Yes, that varies, a "talking head" movie at the same bitrate will be "ampler" than an action movie. Basically, less motion vector data leaves more room for DCT coefficient data. It is in reducing DCT coefficient data that transcoders achieve "compression". The more there is to begin with, the less harm in removing some (requantizing). (Instant Copy works differently, but read the thread at the above link for an explanation.)

Second, the compression percentage must be low, so "I" and "P" pictures are basically unaffected. How low? Depends. A few percentage points, maybe.

So that still leaves open the question: How can a transcoder be superior? Because, UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS, it will only lightly touch the DCT data for "B" pictures, and otherwise do a near bit-for-bit copy. Re-encoding will always result is some degradation, no matter how small.

I dunno if I buy that or not, being just a hobbyist, not a professional. Sounds plausible, though.

So, I don't think there's a hard-and-fast answer, but here goes: Perhaps at a few percentage points, a transcoder is the best choice. Then there is an indeterminate range where transcoding will be indistinguishable from a re-encode. Heavy compression will always look better re-encoded, as with DVDRebuilder and an MPEG encoder. How heavy is heavy? Decide for yourself.

YMMV

[srenaud]

Shrink to do a movie only backup.

DVD Rebuilder to do an episodic disc.
Takes longer but looks better when higher compression is needed.

Just my 2 cents.

[archaeo]

So, I don't think there's a hard-and-fast answer, but here goes: Perhaps at a few percentage points, a transcoder is the best choice. Then there is an indeterminate range where transcoding will be indistinguishable from a re-encode. Heavy compression will always look better re-encoded, as with DVDRebuilder and an MPEG encoder. How heavy is heavy? Decide for yourself.

YMMV

Well put, in my opinion. There isn't a 'best' tool, there are a selection of tools, to be used according to the need. I like using several programs that includes RB (using CCE encoder), and DVDshrink. What I use depends on the compression, bitrate, and content of the source (action, stills, color or B&W, etc.). In one case you may find Shrink is more than enough, in others, even an encoder like CCE can't make it work. Every movie is different, and doing some research on bitrate, compression, source, etc is a good way to get the best backup.

[waheed]

Dependant on quality. DVD Rebuilder usually gives better quality as it re-encodes while dvd shrink compresses (i.e. just transcodes), hence the longer time required for encoding. I guess you cant really compare the two together as it would be like comparing apples to oranges.

As a general rule, for best quality is obtained at the expense of time and for quickest time is obtained at the expense of quality.

For 75% compression and above, I use DVD Shrink. Below 75%, I use DVD Rebuilder Pro (with CCE).