Nero, Alcohol 120%, Clone CD/DVD

znebojsa

Hi, I just want to ask about the uses of all these programs.
Is the following correct:

CloneDVD is used to encode and burn DVD MOVIES.
CloneCD is used to backup CD's and DVD's but not DVD movies.
Alcohol 120%, same as CloneCD, without DVD MOVIES.
Nero General Burning and other things...

Now, does CloneCD/Alcohol do the same as nero for burning (iso burning, cd copy, data burning, audio cd etc, just not all that uneeded stuff) ?

Finally can someone compare alcohol and cloneCD please, i hear most say alcohol is better?

Webslinger

No.

Transcode . . . Clonedvd uses a transcoder. Shrink and Nero Recode also use transcoders. Encoders produce better picture quality than transcoders. Encoders take far more time to compress, however. Clonedvd2 is faster than Shrink and Nero Recode at compressing. However, Shrink and Nero Recode offer superior picture quality (when the transcoder is used in these programs).

Clonedvd2 is capable of splitting a movie across two discs while retaining menus. Recode and Shrink cannot retain menus across split discs. However, Shrink and Nero Recode allow you to split the video anywhere you want--and not just at chapter markers.



Wrong. Clonecd is used in conjunction with Anydvd and Verbatim + R DL discs to produce perfect dvd movie backups that are uncompressed (perfect picture quality) and preserve the original layer break. This is one of the fastest and easiest solutions on the market (much faster and easier than using freeware) if you want to make DL backups of movies. In fact, I prefer this method when using Verbatim +R DL discs than using Clonedvd2 (Clonedvd2 will not preserve the original layer break position; Clonecd will). And if you can afford to use Verbatim +R DL discs (ensure you have a burner that allows for bitsetting changes), then Clonecd and Anydvd are no-brainers to choose, frankly.

While other people are still ripping, decrypting, transcoding or encoding, switching to other programs, and then finally burning, I'm sitting back, finished (after having clicked a couple of times in Clonecd with Anydvd running in the background). This solution is costly, but headache free, easy, and fast(er).

No. Alcohol 120% can backup movies (but Alcohol 120% does not retain the original layer break when using Anydvd and +R DL discs according to one dev on the Alcohol boards) when Anydvd is running in the background. Like Clonecd, Alcohol 120% does not let you edit movie content. Alcohol 120% also offers virtual drive support--and unlike Clonecd, Alcohol 120% also offers support for some Securerom protections. Clonecd, by itself, can not handle recent Securerom protected games. Clonecd does not do "Data Position Measurement"; Alcohol 120% does.

In my opinion, as of this post, GameJackal does a better job than Alcohol 120% if you want to run Safedisc or Securerom games without the original discs stuck in your drives than Alcohol 120% does (GameJackal tends to use smaller profiles and does not require 3rd party programs in order to get recent Securerom games working; I'm comparing this to Alcohol's virtual drives only). But what I've just stated is all Gamejackal does. Alcohol 120% does do a lot more (burns discs, for one).


No. There are free trials of all these programs; I suggest you use them. Nero allows you to create your own audio cds, for instance; clonecd and alcohol are used to copy discs.

No. Each program has its advantages and disadvantages. Alcohol 120% does offer more features in terms of backing up copy protected games (and/or running virtual drives).

If you want to preserve the original layer break for dvd movies when using +R DL discs and Anydvd, then use Clonecd.

znebojsa

Well, thanks for replying...umm

so you say clonedvd2 has worse picture than dvd shrink?

what is original layer break position?

Webslinger

Yup.

But Clonedvd2 transcodes faster than Shrink--and Clonedvd2 is more compatible with Anydvd than Shrink is.

The picture quality difference is more noticible at higher rates of compression.

If you're interested in Clonedvd2 solely for it's transcoding picture quality, I would look elsewhere, frankly. Transcoding isn't all Clonedvd2 does, of course.

People who use encoders generally use Dvd Rebuilder plus an encoder (there are some freeware encoders). Encoding produces better picture quality than transcoding. The cost is time spent.

I avoid all this nonsense (it's nonsense, in my opinion; transcoding and encoding are wastes of time in my opinion) by not encoding or transcoding. If you care about picture quality, why compress at all? Either split the video across two discs--or use a Verbatim +R DL disc. But this is just my opinion . . .

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.ph...1&postcount=21

If you require more information, use the search function. This topic (layer break/orginal layer break position) has been discussed a fair bit.

znebojsa

:S ok so what i wanted was to copy DVD movies to a dvd-r. I used to do this with JUST dvd shrink, but i read that it is not compatible with the newer protections. SO i saw this about anydvd and clonedvd and though this is great . but since you say dvd shrink has better picture...what do you reccomend (for fitting on 4.7)?

But for dvds that fit on 4.7 gb, you reccomend using cloneCD. Would using this with anydvd remove the protection in the copy?

And also in another thread you wrote that for exact copies you use verbatim dvd+r DL ones. why + not -

thanks

Webslinger

By itself, Shrink isn't compatible with newer protections. What you read is correct. However, Ripit4me is a free application that will work fine with Shrink. Anydvd also works with Shrink--but in some cases you may be required to rip files with Anydvd running in the background, and then you may need to process that rip with FixVTS (not always, but sometimes). FixVTS is free as well.

I don't. I don't recommend transcoding or encoding to compress video onto a 4.7 disc. If you care about picture quality why do you want to compress or shrink video? Regardless of whether you transcode or encode (to shrink video), you will lose video information. Transcoding and encoding do not provide lossless forms of video compression. Transcoding--and especially encoding add extra time to the whole process of backing up a dvd movie.

If you want to use 4.7 GB single layer discs, what I do recommend is splitting the movie across two discs without using any compression. In this case, I would recommend Anydvd and Clonedvd2 (for ease of use and speed).

But you can also accomplish the same thing (except you cannot retain menus while splitting over two discs) with Shrink and Ripit4me. These two programs are free. Using Anydvd and Clonedvd2 is faster, but more expensive.


No, I recommend Verbatim+R double layer discs (8.5GB or DVD9) only when using Clonecd. I do not recommend using single layer discs (unless the movie you are backing up can fit completely on a single layer disc without any compression whatsoever) when using Clonecd. But that situation is fairly rare.

Yes

I stated this in an earlier post in this thread, yes.



Clonecd will not retain the original layer break position when using "-R" Dual Layer media:

from http://www.slysoft.com/download/changes_clonecd.txt
"When Dual layer DVDs are copied to DVD+R DL media, the layer break position of the destination disc will be exactly at the same location as the source disc (does not work with DVD-R DL media, because DVD-R DL media has a fixed layer break position)"

Your next question might be why do I only mention Verbatim +R Double Layer discs. The answer is because Verbatim makes the only Double Layer discs worth using (so far) that I've encountered. The others are junk.

znebojsa

So for full backups without compression, whether the dvd fits on 4.7 gb or not, use anydvd with clonecd. Also what are the differences between - and + in 4.7 gb discs?

thanks for everythign

Oh i didnt see there was a copy dvd movies forum. Sorry ill post there now

Webslinger

You could, but this is what I would do:

8.5GB +R Verbatim DL discs = Clonecd
4.7GB single layer discs = Clonedvd2 (split the movie over two discs if you have to--just don't compress anything, in my opinion. You can if you want to--but keep in mind, if you're going to compress video, Shrink will produce better picture quality--and take more time producing that better video quality).

You need Anydvd running in the background when using both of these programs to backup commericial dvds.


Honestly, this topic has been discussed greatly, and there's nothing I can add to it. I would suggest using the search feature in these forums or simply using google to do a search. If your burner supports bitsetting changes, and if you find a brand and type of disc that works well for you, then really, it doesn't matter if the disc is +R or -R.

But for DVD9 or 8.5 GB discs, the difference does matter when using Clonecd and Anydvd (use Verbatim +R DL discs only to avoid headaches). And hopefully your burner allows bitsetting changes (can change the book type/field to "dvd-rom").

I see no reason for you to apologize or post elsewhere. /shrug

Take care

Webslinger

I see that you appear to be questioning my opinion concerning Shrink vs Clonedvd2 picture quality that's produced by transcoding video in other forums here.

I suggest looking at screens from

http://forum.digital-digest.com/show...9&postcount=23

and

http://forum.digital-digest.com/show...5&postcount=19


Regardless, I suggest transcoding and encoding are wastes of time, and you should avoid compression altogether (but that's just my opinion).