dvd95copy 2.1 - best transcoding engine?

[mp3sum]

I have been backing up my DVDs to DVDR on and off now for a few months, and when dvd95copy 2.1 came out a few days ago, I did some testing after hearing it produced excellent results.

I shrunk several 8GB+ Soprano DVDs, keeping everything but a few unneeded audio tracks, and then examined the results on my parents ~50` flat screen TV.

I dont know why more people don't use dvd95copy, but as far as I am concerned, it beat them all. Here are the results (1-10) where 10 is the quality produced by 95copy:
dvd2one: 7
dvdshrink /w Deep Analysis: 9
Instant Copy 8: 9
Nero Recode (/w hotfix): 8

I also recently backed up Pulp Fiction and some other larger DVDs, and I get similar results with dvd95copy looking slightly (read noticably) better in most cases.

Does anyone else use this tool? I still frequent the forums and I will continue to compare as other transocding apps update. I hear clonedvd will have an improved transcoding engine in their new release. Please let me know your opinions.

Thanks, and happy new year!

*edit* Instant Copy was version 8, updated to reflect that

[spiderman2k1]

How about IC8

[mp3sum]

Barring the bad taste in replying to my own post, what I am really asking here is this: Is there a reason a lot of people dont use dvd95copy? I see lots of posts praising clonedvd, dvdshrink, Instant Copy, etc, and I didnt get a single argument to my statements here. Can anyone shed some light on the subject? Is the the maker of dvd95copy using poor hungry black/asian slaves to crank out code for this excellent software?

[spiderman2k1]

"mp3sum" This is the reason why people have a problem with it

http://www.dvd95copy.com/purchase.htm

ATTENTION:
Because of massive pirated versions of Dvd95Copy on the internet, I have implemented a new registration scheme, which is connected to a computers hardware.
This means if you want to run Dvd95Copy on a different computer, you need to activate it again for that computer. This prevents Dvd95Copy from being spread over the internet.

I have no problem if you share Dvd95Copy with a friend or use it on multiple computers. I just don't like to see it public downloadable for everybody on the internet. So simply repeat the registration procedure for each computer you have to get Dvd95Copy activated.
I'm really sorry that I have to bother you with this.

People have had problem activating the software on www.dvd95copy.com Also if you are having internet problem. You have to wait until your ISP is up to activating the software. People just do not like this. Some what like the old DIVX DVD player's about four years ago from "Circuit City"

When DVD95copy came out it wasvery bad the worth program out there. They release a beta version I think for free or a demo. There was block's all ocer the screen. Alot of people never tried it again. second for a long time they still had a demo to try out that was the old beta version that suck so bad no one like it after that. They have a new demo version one now I have not try it but I would say it has to be better but it's to late for some people that tried out almost a year ago. First impression is always the best.

One big problem for any one make a program trying to make money dvdshrink it free and there a free version of dvdfab also that all most people need and want. To find the free version of dvdfab just go to the tool's link on this page

https://www.videohelp.com/tools?tool=244#comments

[MackemX]

another reason I think it's not as popular is that there isn't a crack for it either, so there isn't as many users as other 'cracked' software

the ID for DVD95Copy is all automated and takes very little to request now. I have had DVD95Copy since the early days and I've had no issues with it including registration. I actually thought it was crap when I first used it but thrn found out using it with IC7 gave the 'best' results for me at the time as I could get higher percentages by using the hybrid method

the simple fact is I just don't use it any more as it went quiet for months while other tools grew and evolved and had better features

maybe it's making a comeback, who knows

[spiderman2k1]

"Enough Said"


http://www.dvd-backup.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=229&sid=042b34c634ad34fa81ce1e12927ff46d

[MackemX]

you sure it's 'nuff sed'?

I guess you ain't up to date on the registration process

[spiderman2k1]

"MackemX" Can you bring up to speed then registration process.

[MackemX]

the ID for DVD95Copy is all automated and takes very little to request now

I said it in my post previously , it's online activated now but again people may have issues even with this. Personally I don't but oviously some will but I fully understand Digimedic's the probable reasons why he chose this method and he will know it affects sales etc but it's his choice

[aleem]

I have not usd dvd95copy, but I am not sure how you have rated the picture quality of the four programs

dvd shrink has the most flexibility but quality is lowest out of all four progarms. dvd2one has a better quality then dvd shrink but has less flexibility. Also, IC8 & nero recode have the best quality.

what did you base these results on. Try backing up an 8gb dvd and see which program gives the best results.

[mp3sum]

Ah, very happy to see people are replying

As for the registration process, I can see that as being a slight annoyance.You only have to activate it once though, is it that tough to get a machine online once to register it? You could always just find the reg key it creates and copy it to another machine as well...

As for the quality aspect, maybe it was poor when it first came out, I only started using at 1.3. I did take several 8gb+ disks and use the newest version of DVDShrink (3.1), Nero Recode, and Instand Copy 8 and compared the results. Copy has always shown slightly better results, at least on the large TV I am testing them on. Someone posted that Nero Recode looks the best, and I have no idea how he came to that conclusion as it continually produced lower quality results for me. DVDShrink even looked better, which is odd considering it is the same developer for each. Instant Copy produces *very* similar results, and maybe it is my biased? that makes me think 95copy looks slightly nicer.

The point that its lack of popularity may be due to a dearth of pirated versions is well taken, and that is a whole nother discussion

Thank you all for your input, I am honestly looking to users of all DVD backups programs for advice and recomendations.

[MackemX]

The point that its lack of popularity may be due to a dearth of pirated versions is well taken, and that is a whole nother discussion

I wonder how many 'popular' DVD backup tools would still be 'popular' if they couldn't be cracked?, apart from the free ones of course

I think the funniest 'popular' one is something like Scenarist

[Laz]

I think the funniest 'popular' one is something like Scenarist

Hey I paid for my copy and you know it! lol :P

Very true, I once stated this on another forum and everyone went mad. Everyone seems to have the full version of CCE and paid for it which makes me chuckle - We all know that is total BS so why do we pretend to be whiter than white on such issues? A very good point though Mackem, if CCE was shall we say hardware activated and nobody had cracked it then how many posts on how great CCE is would we see? Very few indeed.

So the fact that CCE & Scenarist have been easily cracked and find their way all over the web has *definately* helped sell their product and prove to people how damn good they are.

So if/when someone does that to dvd95 copy then maybe the same could happen for that prog within it's field? Maybe the same too could apply to DVD Stripper also MackemX?

[MackemX]

@ Laz. lol

yep, I mean the cost of Scenarist and CCE (I know you can get CCE cheaper now) cost more than 99% of people's DVD collections (probably a 1000 DVD's) even if they were to buy 2 copies so the 2nd was a backup

I know DVDStripper will probably get cracked, though for the sake of £5 I guess most won't go looking for the crack anyway risking getting viruses etc

I guess if software is priced fairly then most people won't feel the need to seek cracks. Some people won't even pay £1 and want everything to be 'freeware' but not everyone can be at a PC for numerous hours for 'free' . I've got 10 kids, 7 dogs, 3 cats, 2 budgies and a gerbil to feed, not forgetting my beer and curry money also . If it wasn't for that lot then DVDStripper would be free!

@mp3sum, I guess the quality comparision will depend on what the source was and what equipment you are using to view the DVD backup with. I wouldn't take notice of the voting results as long as you are happy I guess DVD95Copy's popularity shouldn't really matter . Asking for others opinions is a very touchy area as everyone has different opinions of the same thing. If anything you have probably made people more aware that DVD95Copy is something to be considered again

[adam]

Everyone seems to have the full version of CCE and paid for it which makes me chuckle - We all know that is total BS so why do we pretend to be whiter than white on such issues?

No one is. There is simply no reason to assume that just because a program is expensive that no one buys it, or that just because a program is cheap no one steals it.

[MackemX]

Everyone seems to have the full version of CCE and paid for it which makes me chuckle - We all know that is total BS so why do we pretend to be whiter than white on such issues?

No one is. There is simply no reason to assume that just because a program is expensive that no one buys it, or that just because a program is cheap no one steals it.

Sometimes you don't have to assume as it's quite clear they haven't really got the legitimate versions of the more expensive software by looking at the nature of the post. I also know that even if it cost £0.01 that some would still go looking for a crack as that's what people are like, different . I stated most people as I do believe the lower the price the less people will want to crack it as they will want support and updates if the software is good enough in the first place. Supporting warez kills that off with the smaller guys as they don't sell in the 1,000's like a larger software company does so cannot absorb the impact it has. If people crack it for any reason then buy it afterwards then even though it's not morally correct, it does show they appreciate the efforts but who's to say what is right and what is wrong? I'm not saying warez is good or bad, I'm just saying what I assume so I hope nobody takes this personally . I bet a large percentage of people have something 'illegal' in their possession or household and I'm not talking just about PC software

I guess you could look at it in reverse. If you were the developer of a software how you would feel if you and everyone else you knew cracked your own software

I guess it's all down to the individual just like most things are as we all have different opinions and views etc

[tonymac]

I think mp3sum has his intended result now folks. When I see "POLL" I know someone is punting software they have some connection to.

[Laz]

I think mp3sum has his intended result now folks. When I see "POLL" I know someone is punting software they have some connection to.

Well if that is true he is obviously working for DVD2one/Pinnacle or CloneDVD then going by the results so far of the poll.

[tonymac]

You do not just go out and buy a piece of software to use "on and off" having heard it does a great job. Heard where? Do a search. And viewed on dads 50 incher!
It's bollocks

[ddlooping]

Here are the results (1-10) where 10 is the quality produced by 95copy:
dvd2one: 7
dvdshrink /w Deep Analysis: 9
Instant Copy 8: 9
Nero Recode (/w hotfix): 8

dvd shrink has the most flexibility but quality is lowest out of all four progarms. dvd2one has a better quality then dvd shrink but has less flexibility. Also, IC8 & nero recode have the best quality.

My god!!! Who to believe???

Thanks for your post, mp3sum, it's nice to see some are willing to share their experiences and provide details about the tests conditions.

aleem, are your observations based on personal tests?
If yes, how did you actually conduct these tests?

[aleem]

yes, it is based on my own anylysis of using these programs. I have used these programs a lot and have based this on my analysis. I have tested these programs and found that to tell how much quality is effected, you need to test large dvd 9 films, i.e. 8gb and more. I have, however not used the latest version of shrink, only version 3 beta 5.
Can anyone who has used the latest version of shrink found an improvement in qulaity.

Also, pls read the following article:

http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/114/

[AdamRA4]

I have not seen any difference in quality at all. I use shrink because you can control almost any aspect of the entire disc or you can do just the movie, or you cna split across 2 disc's at your own points. They are both great, I just use what I believe to be the better of the two. The poll also speaks for itself.

[MackemX]

Also, pls read the following article:

http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/114/

I wouldn't take much notice of what is said in that article. It's over 6 months old and just about all the softwares mentioned have new engines so results now would be completely different

I guess it needs updating as it would make an interesting read as it did back then

[Laz]

Can anyone who has used the latest version of shrink found an improvement in qulaity.

There were no changes to the transcoding engine that Shrink uses so there would be no change in pic quality.

However deep analysis accuracy was improved so that should make a small difference on many movies.

[aleem]

in fact as far as i am aware, dvd2one has the same transcoding engine. Laz has confimed the same for dvd shrink so this article can still be accepted.