Comparison of AnyDVD with other ripping solutions

Hello…
I would like to share the results of a comparison i 've made with 3 popular ripping solutions…

If anyone from Slysoft would like to comment, that would be nice…

Source DVD: Hostel UR Region 2 Greek
Programs:
a)DVDFabDecrypter 2.9.8.1
b)AnyDVD 6.0.3.1 trial version(using AnyDVD ripper a.k.a FixVTS 1.24)
c)RipIt4Me 1.4.1.0

The outputs of ripping with these programs were opened in DVDRemake Pro 3.5.3…
In the following screenshots, appear the “reds”(serious warnings), that DVDRP reports, with each of the three…

DVDFab Decrypter 2.9.8.1

AnyDVD 6.0.3.1 trial version(using AnyDVD ripper a.k.a FixVTS 1.24)

Note: Trying to open this title, directly from the drive, in DVD Shrink/Nero Recode, with AnyDVD running in the background, results in “Invalid DVD navigation structure” error…

RipIt4Me 1.4.1.0

Great test zavlakas.

RipIt4Me appears to be a dynamite little program. It creates its own psl and then uses the last version of DVDDeCryptor and feeds it the psl. It also insists on using a recent version of FixVTS to ensure the resulting files are in top condition and ready for DVDShrink (or whatever your favorite program is). The results so far have been outstanding. And it is very easy to use. And free. How can you go wrong? I give it a “10”!!

i’d be interested in seeing the result of this test with clonedvd2’s output.

a good number of anydvd users use clonedvd2 to rip/process and not anydvd’s built-in ripper.

@reasonsnotrules
Ok…
Will try that…
Any specific settings, you want me to use?
I am not familiar with this program…

Don’t bother. I don’t think CloneDVD will touch the cell commands, if you copy while keeping menus.
The warning “cell command is not assigned to any PGC cell” is nothing to worry about. These cell commands reference the removed cells at the beginning of an Arccos/RipGuard protected disc.
The obsolete cell commands are left there intentional, they don’t hurt and they don’t influence playability and have no side effects. On the contrary, removing them and making a mistake while doing this could cause unpredictable side effects.
These unassigned cell commands just sit there, but are never executed (because they are unassigned). AFAIK this is no DVD spec violation so this should in no way be a “serious” warning.
AnyDVD will cause more of these warnings than for example RipIt4me, because it removes more cells at the beginning compared with the other decrypters.

@ zavlakas

Did you have the option “Remove tiny cells” enabled in RipIt4Me?

@cynthia_old
No…
Default settings…

Yes…
Processing with CloneDVD did not change anything in my tests…

I am attaching screenshots from another test…
Detonator Region 2 Greek
a)AnyDVD ripper
b)AnyDVD+CloneDVD
c)RipIt4Me
http://zavlakas.googlepages.com/DetonatorRegion2_screenshots.zip
Similar results with previous tests, except VTS_03, which is not protected…

perhaps anydvd should update its ripper to latest fixvts if it has not done so

@ron spencer
Read this…
http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p=1487507&postcount=8

@zavlakas,

To do a more fair comparison, I think you want to check “Remove tiny cells” in RipIt4Me, as Slysloft mentioned that AnyDVD removes more “junk” cells compared to other rippers.

Showing the warnings in DvdReMake Pro from different rippers is not enough. You want to show how much “junk” cells have been removed as well in the Programs pane (from the beginning to last cells). Show the Cell Commands pane as well. To minimize the amount of screenshots needed, you can paste the Cell Commands and Programs panes over the DvdReMake Pro right-side window in a graphic editor. In the Programs pane snapshot, you can remove the middle cells if it doesn’t fit in the DRMP window. Do this for the ARccOS/RipGuard VTS only.

From the Detonator comparisons, looks like CloneDVD2 removes more “junk” cells than AnyDVD ripper by looking at the size. Looking at the warnings, the unreferenced cell commands are not removed from these 2 products in VTS 2 domain. As Slysoft explained, leaving them there has no adverse effect as they are not referenced by any cell. However, removing them would make it more “clean”.

I thought DVDFabDecrypter has fixed this case “Program x points to non-existent cell y” already. :confused: Easily fix in no time.

FYI, the warning “Infinite loop. Command points to itself” has no playback problem as it will never execute due to the condition being false always. But it’s better to remove it just to be safe.

Have you compared RipIt4Me with PgcEdit PSL2 plugin wizard? The result probably is the same. Haven’t tested yet.

Either way, no ripper is 100% perfect and “clean” as new protections come out but you can always clean it up with DvdRemake Pro.

In my eyes, fair comparison is using every program with default settings…
…just like any inexperienced user would do…

My tests are concentrated in cell commands and programs…
Do not pay attention on the filesize and thus to the removed cells, by each program…
Due to the nature of the source(mounted ISO rip), RipIt4Me does not remove any cell, because there are no dummy sector insertion and the “remove tiny cell” option is off…

The psl plugin output has the same “reds” in “Video manager” and “VTS_02” with RipIt4Me, but has one additional red in “VTS_03”, just like AnyDVD…

IMO, showing how much protected cells are removed should be part of the comparison. The filesize will reflect that.

Are you saying that you based these comparisons on a mounted ISO rip? If so, then that’s not a fair comparison.

Anyways, it does not matter which ripper the user chooses as long as the ripped dvd plays fine.

Why isn 't it a fair comparison…
The source is the same for all…
And the cell commands and programs are identical to the original…

The question of what should be removed has no definitive answer…
Each developer has a different approach…
…and in this case, “the more cells removed, the better” is not always true…
Therefore, i don 't think this type of comparison is very usefull…
After all, we are only talking about a few Mbs(~1%)…

Mounted ISO rip indicates it’s already ripped by some ripper. This is not the true source. It should be from the DVD itself in the dvd drive.

True, a few MBs does not matter but that’s not really the focus. The point is to see how “clean” the DVD is as each ripper handles differently. In an unprotected and “clean” DVD, the first cell supposedly start with a video, not some tiny blank cell (of course, size is very negligible). The last cell can be a video or a blank cell.

ISO read mode in DVD Decrypter, only removes RC and RCE protection…
The IFO structure, including cells commands and programs remain untouched…

It doesn’t matter how many tiny black cells are left back, as long as the right cell commands are there to by-pass them during playback…

Like you don 't see them in the original, you also won 't see them in the back-up…

But the VOB content could be different as DVDD inserts dummy sectors where necessary, so it’s not considered a true original source. I’m assuming you’re running the comparison on an ARccOS DVD. Now I understand why you say:

Playback is not a focus here, but how “clean” the DVD is.

Isn’t the purpose of these comparisons is to see how well each ripper “clean” the DVD? Or you’re just wanting to show how many warnings DvdReMake Pro can catch from each ripper?

So are these statisically significant tests at N=.05 ie 5%???
They are not so are totally useless :bigsmile:

Better luck next time and have more data
these bogus tests serve no function :flower:

N refers to sample size. i think you mean does he disprove the null hypothesis at p>.05
:wink:

reasonsnotrules
You are right
(you are fresh out of college sighhhhhhh{those good old days of uncertanity , frustration and hunger})
My stats are abit rusty
but yes sample size almost =0 er 2
and no P value defined should be at least p>.05
and then expects the 2 tests to be VAILD and ACCURATE, PRECISE, what is the BIAS and VARIATION
etc, etc

reasonsnotrules
good catch
you are sharp

but bottom line
the tests are totally useless