why decrypt to hard drive first?

[bleeatch]

Back when i learned how to burn dvds using dvdshrink and nero, the "how to" guide i used (from this site) had me back up the dvd with no compression to my hard drive as the first part. Then I would reauthor them, keeping just the main movie and audio for it.

Well today, after buring tons of dvds, one after the other, i decided to try skipping the no compression back up step, keep all the menus, leave it set to auto compression, then setting my burner as the backup target so it would burn it right away and not save an uncompressed copy to my hard drive first. It seemed to work just fine, dvd plays and everything is good. So then i try reauthoring it, saving just the movie, and backing it up the same way- straight to my burner, skipping the entire step of saving an uncompressed version to my hard drive first, then using that to modify and burn from.

So now im thinking, what was the whole point behind saving it to my hard drive first with no compression? From my understanding, it was to decrypt it, right? but now it seems like i never needed to do that. Am i loosing quality skipping that step? shrink still shows that the movie will be 90-100% compressed when i back it up and burn it, and the dvds seems to play fine, so whats the point?

thanks for any input, opinions, help, etc.

-allan

[aedipuss]

computers, drives and i/o busses were slower when dvdr first burst on the scene. any problem along the way could and can still cause a bad burn, but it's not as likely now. you will not lose any "quality" skipping the first step. quality is lost when shrink transcodes the video too much. at some point re-encoding with a tool like cce is a better way to get a quality video.

[jimmalenko]

Another factor is that when ripping to the hard drive first, you are limiting the wear and tear on your DVD-ROM by utilising it for 10-20 minutes at full burst, as opposed to ripping and transcoding on the fly, where your drive could be in use periodically for over an hour (if deep analysis and/or AEC is used). You'd probably find that the transcoding process of DVDShrink will work faster with the source being on the hard drive also.

[lordsmurf]

Very often, going directly from the disc to a new disc results in glitches on the final output. I've seen it before, it looks like crap.

[ROF]

I never to direct disc to disc copies. I don't care whether it's a CD or a DVD the results are always sketchy at best. Sometimes the disc will work, sometimes it doesn't and about 75% of the time it will work but eventually will start skipping or fail.

The time spent ripping to the hard drive first is time well spent so that you do not have to repeat the process later on when you realize your on-the-fly recording just died.

[MOVIEGEEK]

Whether I'm copying CD's or DVD's I always rip to the HD first,much less chance of getting errors.I posted a topic(which I can't find) a couple of years ago comparing ripping first to the HD vs. copying on-the-fly:ripping to the HD first was faster.

[jtoolman2000]

He is not ripping to disk on the fly. In a way he is still ripping to the hard drive. It's just that the files on the hard drive may have been transcoded ( if they required it ) I the case of a movie only sigle sound track, maybe there was no compression so basically the movie was copied directly with the ommissions of the un-needed parts.
.