Wich freeware encoder is best with DVD Rebuilder?

[julitomg]

Hi everybody

I really don´t do a lot of backing up but when I do I usually go the DVD fab decrypter/DVDShrink(in re-author mode to keep only main movie, etc..) route. However I´ve read a lot about how much better is DVD Rebuilder in terms of image quality. Of course it has a lot to do with the encoder used and Cinemacraft Encoder is highly recomended. DVD Rebuilder is supposed to work with CinemaCraft Encoder Basic/SP or HC or QuEnc or ReJig or Canopus Procoder, isn´t it? Ok, let´s say that I´d like to remain in the freeware side. I have a couple of questions:
1.- Between HC Encoder, QuEnc or ReJig wich one would you choose?, in other words wich one is the best of them? (I know it won´t be as good as CCE or Procoder)
2.- With the right free encoder, will the final transcoding quality be still better than what I can expect from DVDShrink?
Thanks

[Soopafresh]

HC is just as good as Cinemacraft or Procoder, IMHO. It isn't terribly fast, however.

[t0nee1]

I don't have CCE, but from what I understand HCEnc,which I use with DVDRB Pro,is comparable to CCE's quality outcome , except it's a slower encoder..BTW it does not transcode,which is what DVDShrink does.....Perhaps some other member could respond to CCE's quality vs other encoders mentioned.......

[Seeker47]

IPerhaps some other member could respond to CCE's quality vs other encoders mentioned.......

Just a wild hunch, but if you dig around in the VH forum archives, there may quite possibly be some threads along the lines of an "encoder shootout." It seems like a topic that would have come up. And if not here, maybe at Digital Digest or one of the other sites.

[träskmannen]

With the right free encoder, will the final transcoding quality be still better than what I can expect from DVDShrink?

Yes, if you do a full DVD backup with both tools the one from DVDRB should be better. I use DVDShrink with deep analysis as my first choice but if the ratio will be less than 80-85% I go for DVDRB. That is a very subjective figure, some will go as low as Shrink allows (65%?) and still swear that the quality is superb (it isn't!), some feel that 95% is a lower limit.

Just a wild hunch, but if you dig around in the VH forum archives, there may quite possibly be some threads along the lines of an "encoder shootout."

You will find quite some threads (search for encoder comparison as well as shootout) where there are about as many opinions as posters and where most involved are bashing and flaming away trying to prove that their favourite encoder is the best. You will most likely end up being more confused than you are now but not necessarily wiser.

What really matters is what YOU think - download trials and experiment a bit.

I used to use QuEnc but nowadays I use HC instead, I like the result better. Why? I really can't say, just a general feeling (plus that I suspect that I have been influenced by this forum, a lot of members have praised HC to the skies).

[fritzi93]

HC is exceptionally good at lowish bitrates. Compare HC to QuEnc with a really long runtime movie encode. The difference will be obvious; the QuEnc encode will be noticeably grainy in comparison.

I tried HC a few times and think it's comparable to CCE, but yes, it's much slower. So I use CCE.

[Supreme2k]

Soopa & fritzi RE: HC,

Do you have dual core or multiple processors? I have both an intel HT and an AMD X2, and they both give better than realtime results - intel at about 3/4, AMD at ~2/3-1/2 (ie. 3/4 = 45 min to encode 1 hr)

Knock on wood that it stays free, and don't go the route of Shrink.

[t0nee1]

Seeker47 wrote"Just a wild hunch, but if you dig around in the VH forum archives, there may quite possibly be some threads along the lines of an "encoder shootout." It seems like a topic that would have come up. And if not here, maybe at Digital Digest or one of the other sites.

I know how to use the "search" bar.....I'm not the one looking for an "encoder shootout".....perhaps you're addressing the OP right?.....just a hunch!

[guns1inger]

I run HCEnc on a P4 3Ghz HT CPU and get slightly slower than real-time when going from disc to disc and nothing else processing. For lower bitrates it is a great choice, and if you only have the free options at hand, it is the best choice.

[julitomg]

Thank you all, I´ll start doing some tests, but think I´m on the right track with HC.

[Seeker47]

perhaps you're addressing the OP right?.....just a hunch!

Well, yeah, but it was you who said:

"Perhaps some other member could respond to CCE's quality vs other encoders mentioned....... "

and I'm thinking in terms of that long, great thread on Proc Amps or TBCs, where someone who knew what they were doing posted their methodology ( so anyone who wanted to check or verify it themselves could), plus a whole bunch of comparative caps from "Ice Age", test patterns, and other sources, for all to see. It would surprise me if someone had not already done something like that to compare encoders.

[t0nee1]

Well,yeah but I thought the OP was "on the right track" already... but thanks for sharing that!......

[ntscuser]

I use the "trial version" of CCE which is free and unlimited with the "trial version" of DVD-RB and so far with no problems.