post your ratDVD filesizes and transcoding times

Since there are many different variables to consider, please use the following template to post your experiences.

CPU: 1.53 GHZ AMD Athlon 1800+
Memory: 768MB PC 2700
Source file size: 4.37GB
Resulting ratDVD file size: 1.13GB
Total conversion time: ~ 3.5 hours
Notes: Default ratDVD settings used. Source files contain video & audio movie only and no menus, no special features etc.

CPU: 3.2 GHZ Pentium 4
Memory: 2gb Dual Channel
Source file size: 5.62GB
Resulting ratDVD file size: 1.25GB
Ratio: 95 out of 150 (added this to see what settings ppl are using)
Total conversion time: ~ 3 hours
Notes: Full retail DVD used including all menu's and special features.

excellent quality! definately the new wave of the future of sharing dvd's.

one question, wesociety. What's the point on making a ratDVD file if you don't include extras?

I was just testing the app.

CPU: 1.53 GHZ AMD Sempron 2200
Memory: 192MB
Source file size: 4.37GB
Resulting ratDVD file size: 607,230MB
Total conversion time: ~ 5 hours

Notes: 8 Episodes of Friends on one disc done at maximum compression(40). Quality isn't great though. Going to convert it back up and see if I can squeeze an entire season onto one 4.7 disc.

Please tell us how is the quality after converting back those episodes into DVD. Thanks.

The re-converted DVD size is 2.54gb and the quality stayed pretty much the same - not good. It's watchable if you're not fussy, pretty much like a dodgy VHS copy, but it could be better.

Might try and see if I could run the re-converted DVD through dvd shrink and see what I get from that.

CPU: 1.53 GHZ intel P4
Memory: 512MB
Source file size: 4.37GB
Resulting ratDVD file size: 1.13GB
Ratio: 95 out of 150
Total conversion time: ~ 9.5 hours
Notes: Default ratDVD settings used. Source files contain video & audio movie and menus, no special features.
Quality is great.

Dell dimension xps gen 3

Window xp pro service pack two.

Cpu p4 ht 3.6ghzs

Video radeon x800xt express with 256ram

SB Audigy 2 ZS

2gig of ram

c drive wdc rapter 74gig

dvd rip flash gordon Source file size:4.8gig Total conversion size:1.18gig time: 4 hours ran with ratdvd defaults.

I hope that was that converting to ratdvd and back again?

He was probably multitasking I was playing Wolfenstein ET when I was converting my GITS SAC xDDD

CPU: 2700+ AMD
Memory: 512MB
Source file size: 6.01GB
Resulting ratDVD file size: 2.03GB
Ratio: 105 out of 150
Total conversion time: ~ 4.5 hours
Notes: Default ratDVD settings used. Source files contain video & audio movie and menus, no special features.
Quality is OK.

well found out last night that you can encode two dvd at once works great but thought you must have a high end pc to do this as my cpu running at 100% takes around 6 hours for both to encode.

Dell dimension xps gen 3

Window xp pro service pack two.

Cpu p4 ht 3.6ghzs

Video radeon x800xt express with 256ram

SB Audigy 2 ZS

2gig of ram

c drive wdc rapter 74gig

X2: X-Men United (Widescreen Disc 1)

CPU: 2.0 GHz Pentium M
Memory: 1 GB (800 MHz)
Source file size: 7.37GB
Resulting ratDVD file size: 1.63GB
Ratio: 95
Total conversion time: ~ 3.5 hours
Notes: Disc 1 contains the menus, movie, 5 audio tracks (2 commentaries, 3 languages), and 2 subtitle tracks. I was also doing some development work in Visual Studio, along with other work-related tasks (e-mail, web) while it was ripping. Interesting note - it's taking much longer (looks like it will take ~7 hours) to rip Disc 2, which is the special features disc. The size is 7.50GB, but I think the ratio of video to audio is much greater, and that's making it much slower.

heres a nice detailed log of someones experience with ratdvd. http://www.p2p-zone.com/underground/...achmentid=9905

Movie : Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

Original DVD size : 7.49GB
RatDVD file size (with 5.1 -> 2.0) : 1.44GB
Transcoded DVD size : 6.05GB

Quality : Default 95%

Follow screeshots of DVD generated from ratDVD file (note: ratDVD file was done with previous version of app, being readed and processed correctly by one)


Length of DVD generated: 4.27 GB

For comparing, follow screeshots from original DVD:


(The screeshots were captured with native tool from WinDVD and were compressed in jpg by one itself - I didn't any interference as resize, compression quality etc)

I very like of results. It's really amazing.

CYA!

To think i took some beating frome "Some Guy" in another thread in this forum just for suggesting to do what you "Brilliantly" did there with your screenshots danpos (and i did not find what he responded when i basically said for him to F&^k off).

judging from the screenshots... the quality is prety sh¡tty. Unless ratdvd does a better job I don't think it'll be a good alternative to DivX6, although it's also true that DivX still have a lot of work to do so that the menus are as great as the ones in ratDVD.

The quality looks fine for me. Of course from the screenshots you can't really compare to DivX, XviD because you don't have the important details like bitrate, etc. I think in terms of video quality DivX, XviD, ratDVD are all on the same level but I prefer ratDVD to get the complete DVD.

But I agree that it'll be interesting to see if DivX integrates menus the same way that ratDVD does. Sad thing is that they will NEVER be able to convert it back to DVD. And for sure I won't buy another DVD Player only to get DivX menus (if this ever happens).

@heffeque

I do agree with you that quality isn't good (the resulting video has a lot of blurry, with lost of many details), but I hoped an worst result. The reverse process was fine (I just press the button, I got some sleep and when I get up the reverse DVD was ready. The reverse DVD is fully functional. In addition, you've also to consider the great compressin suffered by original DVD (more than 6 GB). So, IN THIS CONTEXT is jugde the result (and the APP) AMAZING!!

CYA!

2.4 AMD 64 3700 (939)
2 GB PC3200 Corsair (Dual DDR)
ATI x850 PCI-e 256 DDR3 256MB
SB Audigy Sound ZS
250 GB SATA HD

This program is badass nice quality!

CPU: P4 2.4c HT enabled
Memory: 1GB
Source file size: 4.35GB
Resulting ratDVD file size: 1.3GB
Ratio: unknown
Total conversion time: ~11 hours

That seems like an excessive amount of time....could have easily done high quality dual pass in xvid in way less time. I'm going to try one with HT disabled since ratDVD only utilized ~50% cpu the entire process.

Sure, you could do a high quality two-pass conversion to xvid in less time (I agree that ~11 hours is excessive,) but, that is also a rather unfair comparison, which is somewhat missing the goal of the ratDVD format. Even on its home page, ratDVD says "the DVD movie download format."; DivX says it "lets you play, create and share digital video". The primary goal (or potatoes part) of the ratDVD file type, it seems, is to provide a compressed archival format to transfer a DVD; watching the archive seems to be more the gravy.

But what ratDVD allows you to do that DivX/xvid/WMV/h.264 do not is to archive the native DVD structure allowing full restoration of the original DVD. And that seems to be the fundamental difference. If you are only interested in the feature content of a DVD, this is obviously a moot point.

As for danpos' screenshots, you can't use those to judge. He clearly stipulates:
DVD screenshots cannot be compared using two 30kb jpgs. All things being equal, you could make a relative comparison. However, when you delve into the issue of audio/video compression, many things are done by compression algorithms - divx, mp3, etc. - that work on the psychoacoustic or psychovisual levels, that is, the areas that are less perceptible to the human ear or eye. A jpg looks at that same compressed data in an entirely different manner. Or, what you see is not the same as what a jpg compression algorithm sees.

Programs used: anyDVD (in background) & ratDVD

Source DVD: Pirates of the Caribbean
Disk Size: 7.51gig - (whole DVD)
ratDVD output size: 2.08gig
Conversion time: 8hr
ratDVD Ratio setting: 100 - (50~150)

System...
CPU: 2.4ghz (Celeron)
OS: WindowsXP home w/ SP2
Memory: 1.61gig

It is my understanding that DivX 6 has it's own native menu structure, and ratDVD does not. ratDVD simply copies the menu that the DVD author designed, and allows you to view it the same way as watching the DVD.