How much is to much compression?

[berrywise]

I'm sure there could be a dozen different answers for this but I'll ask anyway. Has anyone come up with a good estimate on how much you can compress a video before it starts to looks like VHS?

I've just started backing up my videos and when burning dual layered discs I have been keeping the menus which I like (I like keeping deleted scenes etc and make still frames of stuff I don't like) and still keep the video quality at 80 percent when using DVD shrink.

Thought maybe some of you have burned many a DVD have come up with a good round number of what works versus what doesn't.

Also to tack on another question. I've been using (in this order) DVD Decrpytor to rip to my hard drive, then DVDshrink to compress, and then I use DVD Copy to burn.

Do I need to be using all three programs or is there a quicker way to get to the end product?

Thanks very much in advance,
scott

[petar]

It depends on the video. My personal experience is that movies "shrink" much better than cartoons, for example. I've put up to 4 hours of movies on one DVDR (joined Lord of the Rings EE disc 1 and 2 on one DVD, both for the FOTR and TT) and can't complain about the quality. Put also 4 hours of cartoons for the kids and the quality was miserable. In both cases used DVD Shrink 3.0 Beta with deep analysis. Can't remember what percent quality was but I remember I had to shrink twice in both cases so it couldn't have been above 40%.

As to your question on how much you can compress before it starts to look like VHS, I don't think it's a fair comparison. Compressing "too much" with digital formats will lead to blockiness on motion scenes but shouldn't affect colours, contrast, etc. Brand new VHS tape has very good quality and starts to get these problems after a period of time but it's not affected by blockiness. So, difficult to measure. It's like when people compare VHS with VCD.

[petar]

Clicked submit too quickly.

As for the second question, there's been already a debate on this site regarding (1) ripping with DVD Decrypter and compressing with DVD Shrink vs (2) ripping and compressing with DVD Shrink. Do a search. I don't think there's a program that can do both plus burn so you'll need at least two.

[Hardcoreruss]

when burning dual layered discs I have been keeping the menus which I like

Where can I get one of those ?

[jeremyp969]

The compression percentage in DVDShrink really doesn't mean anything. For example, if you have two movies both 90 minutes, and DVDShrink wants to compress the first one down to 50% to fit on a DVD5 and DVDShrink doesn't need to compress the second one at all, you'd think the second one would have must better quality, but this isn't necessarily the case. DVDs can be compressed at a bunch of different bit rates, the higher the bit rate the higher the quality but the larger the movie.

4.7 GB of a 90 minute video is going to have similar quality to 4.7 GB of another 90 minute video.

The real question you want to consider is how long of a movie is too long to put on a DVD5. I generally don't go over 2 hours for action movies and 2.5 hours for other movies. That seems to work out pretty well for me.

On the second question, DVDShrink will do all three for you....rip, compress and burn.

[PhreakPhish]

i dont like to go under 70% - but for music video's such as dave matthews in central park, primus, and beaste boys i had to go around 50 - 60% and really couldnt tell a difference -

[lenti_75]

i went down to 70% and it's perfect. from what i've read it gets ugly aorund 60% and below, but it's different from vhs, you start to get those "noise" blocks, the pixeled image...
dvdshrink can rip and burn but you need nero.

[VicodiN]

DVD Shrink does not burn... It has the capabilities to utilize and trigger Nero to burn.

Just a note - Im yet to get a coaster when ripping to HD with DVDdecrypter, reauthoring with DVDshrink, and burning with Nero. I swear by this formula.

[BSpielbauer]

>>>Has anyone come up with a good estimate on how much you can compress a video before it starts to looks like VHS? <<<

As others have mentioned, this is very subjective. I think it will depend mostly on 1) your own level of taste and tolerance, and how picky you are about video quality... and 2) the display you are watching on, its ability to compensate for lousy pictures (line-doubling, for example), and most importantly, the SIZE of that display you watch it on. What looks fine on a 27 inch direct view may look horrible on a 65 inch rear projection TV, and might even look worse on a front projector displaying a 100 inch image on a screen.

As for my own preferences, I always choose NO COMPRESSION. The original is actually already a compressed signal, technically. I do not want to compress it more. I am picky about video quality. I also am watching on a calibrated 65 inch rear projection, carefully tweaked and carefully monitored.

When backing up my own DVDs, I eliminate extras. I eliminate menus. I choose only the main movie, and sometimes eliminate some of the foreign language audio tracks as well. Then, if the main movie still runs too large to fit on a DVD-5, I split the main movie. I would rather shell out another $.98 and swap the DVDs in the middle of the film, rather than give up any quality of image.

I am sure I am in the minority, here, but I can see the differences even with a very small amount of compression. My first experiment, I ripped a film at 86% compression. The difference was easy to see, and a distraction to me.

As for the original question, at what point does it approach a VHS videocassette in quality? Hmmm... what is VHS?

(grin).

-Bruce in Chi-Town

[andkiich]

Too much compression is when after compressing the movie and you watch it, the results annoy you.

This is a subjective theme.

[energy80s]

A lot will depend on the original bitrate of the movie. A high bitrate film will compress much better (and allow for a greater shrinkage) than a low bitrate film. I compressed Raiders of the Lost Ark from over 7 gigs down to 4.3 gigs and it looked perfect. I have also compressed some James Bond extras by only 10% and they have looked awful (as they were already highly compressed to begin with).