New version experiences

vbimport

#1

just a few words on my initial experiences with the new version 1.2

Speed has certainly gone down - did a full movie using constant mode and it took approx twice as long to compress than the old version did. Its still very fast though, so if quality improves by it I dont mind the speeddrop. Qulity looked ok - but cant tell yet if its better. More testing and Ill get back with more results.


#2

There seems to be a small bug in version 1.2.0

I shrunk “Fawlty Towers” series 2 with constant bitrate. After hitting start a error message popped up: “unable to open vobfileset 0 in directory d:…”. The DVD was compressed without any problems nevertheless. Quality was excellent. Worlds better than with variable bitrate.

cu
Horst


#3

On long movies the quality is still bad. A lot of artefacts and a continuing sharping/blurring change. ( in and out of focus) I have tried ‘The English Patient’ and ‘Gandhi’ and ‘A beautiful mind’. On both compression settings. Not a real difference if you try variable/continu- bitrate. Both bad quality. On movies of a normal lenght there is a little difference. Continu works best for movie only. But the size of movies with a lot of extra’s are still always to small. In both compression modes. F.i. if the DVD is 7.5 GB and the film is 5.5 GB (2 GB extra’s) the movie only mode gives me a Video-TS folder of ± 3.7 GB. So there is too much unneccesary compression. I want it to be 4.36 GB!! Don’t be confused by this remarks. On A LOT of movies the app works very well. I know because i have made 150 DVD’s thanks to DVD2oneX!


#4

well, i really can’t complain about the quality of the new engine. tests showed that the constant copy is somewhat closer to the original, be that good or bad. i like the way of getting closer to the original.
there’s one thing i recognized though: the movie amelie (rc2, pal, movie-only) came out in different sizes: variable (version 113) was 4,36, constant (version 120) was 4,11. can anybody explain this? does this have something to do with the removal of “padding data”? (what is padding data, btw?)


#5

I was perfectly happy with the image quality, although the movies on my DVD are 3 hrs long. But I have to admit that there are no extras and that both audio tracks are only 2 channel.

cu
Horst


#6

Originally posted by uargh
well, i really can’t complain about the quality of the new engine. tests showed that the constant copy is somewhat closer to the original, be that good or bad. i like the way of getting closer to the original.
there’s one thing i recognized though: the movie amelie (rc2, pal, movie-only) came out in different sizes: variable (version 113) was 4,36, constant (version 120) was 4,11. can anybody explain this? does this have something to do with the removal of “padding data”? (what is padding data, btw?)

One would hope that savings (re: padding data) would be folded back into available space for compression…?