Hey everybody i just have a question about the transcoding with clonedvd.
Ok now i heard that when the quality says 100percent, it doesnt transcode at all and it doesnt compress.

My question is how is the transcoding done at 90% quality compared to 60% quality? In other words, does it only transcode some of the movie when quality is a 90% and alot of the movie at 60%.

Or does it transcode the whole movie at either quality percent but it just uses a different method at 90% quality than 60% quality????

And also after all transcoding is done for the 90% quality transcode, how close of it to the original video quality is it???? and would it be close to the quality of a video using CCE encoding to get it down to a dvd5????

Each movie is going to be different as different factors affect compression quality. Factors include the original bit-rate of the movie, how much of the original disc is devoted to the video portion and to a lesser extent the mastering of the disc. While there are no quick and easy rules, for my taste anything less than 75% or so isn't acceptable.

One other consideration I touched on briefly in the other thread is display device. The higher the quality of your display device, the more noticable any flaw becomes. That is if you are running on an HDTV that supports 720p or 1080p anything less than perfect isn't going to look good. The reason for that is DVD is a 480 (i or p) source.

Now if you do not have an HDTV than picture quality isn't nearly as critical. It then becomes a matter of 'how low can I go' and that is something that can only be determined through trial and error. After all, what might be acceptable to you may not even be 'watchable' to me or vice versa.

to add to what has alreayd been said:

you can actually watch the transcoding process in clonedvd2. click on the animated sheep and it changes to a graph. that will tell you how much transcoding is being done across the length of the movie.

if you're wondering how it actually transcodes, that's more of a tech question that slysoft or elby would be able to answer.

at 90% or above i doubtr you're going to notice any difference in video quality from the original nevermind from an encoder with a similar percentage. (depending on bitrate, etc as brokenbuga already mentioned)

best way to tell if you can tell the difference on YOUR playback setup is to do a test disc of each and compare them.

part of the fun of learning is trying things and finding out what works for you. don't be afraid to experiment!

Yes but even the original dvd's are 480i. and thats what htdv scalers are for right? the better the scaler the better it will upconvert a dvd to 1080i etc.

Also is there any slysoft techys that come into these forums and if not how can i get in touch with them to ask those questions i had in the original post about the diff transcoding between 95% and 60%

@ mikej3131,

I can you assure you that both Elaborate Bytes and SlySoft constantly monitor the CD Freak Forum and epically the CloneCD/ CloneDVD/AnyDVD Forums.

Elaborate Bytes and SlySoft can be contacted by addressing E-Mail to the following.

support(at)slysoft.com (replace (at) with @)

bugs(at)elby.ch (replace (at) with @)

Best Regards,
bjkg

Exactly. My point is that even with the best scaler, upconverting 480 to hidef leaves little margin for error. You will only see good results with a pristine signal. I watch backups on the small screen. For the big screen tho,even a disc backed up at 90-95% doesn't look very good. I might be more picky than others, but the difference is very much apparent.

It should also be said that the better the scaler, the more pronounced any error will be when it's output. As they say in the audio world... 'garbage in, garbage out'. "Garbage" is of course relative... this is not to suggest that CloneDVD2 does a bad job.

thanks bj

So i assume you watched a backup on a big screen that was 95%.
and if so, that kinda answers my question about "how much of a difference a 95% quality rip is to the original"

that sux cuz Im getting a big screen in a couple of weeks and i want my backups to look just as good on them

there's always the option of dual layer discs (a little more expensive) or splitting the movie across 2 SL discs. you'll have to get up and switch discs in the middle, but you'll have 100% quality.

I dont know what the big deal about this. In my experience clonedvd quality is extremely good in compressing a dvd to a dvd-5. If your so worried about quality then use a dvd-9-(double layer dvd) . Unless your viewing the movies on a gigantic screen 10 Feet high the quality with clonedvd is the same as the original dvd.

I have a big screen and 90-95% Quality looks damn good.

It depends on one's perspective. On a 50" TV, 95% will look fine. On a 104" projector screen, well 95% is a much different story. Bigger isn't always better. 480 (i or p) just doesn't have enough information to fill a screen of that size. Compress it and then you have even less to work with.

I would encourage you to try different settings and see how they work for you. Only you can determine what is acceptable. If your using a television backups should be fine. If you considering a projector and screen combo, I would suggest staying with the originals.

wow you should have mentioned 104" inches hahaha. yeah i would imagine you definitaly need the originals. You might even wanna upgrade to hddvd or blu ray

{lol}

I'm waiting...very impatiently...

Do you really want a technical explanation? Even if it's explained to you, you will probably not able to understand what is being said. The easy answer is 95% compression will result in better quality than 60% compression as less B-frames needed to be taken away and I-frame may not even need to be touched. Higher compression will mean that I,P,B frames need to be reduced. Visually, you'll see more macroblocks.

If you have an original that was encoded at high bitrate, transcoding at low compression will get great result - you'll probably cannot tell the difference even at big screen. But if you have one already optimally compressed at low bitrate, further compression via transcoding at 90-95% may look bad. So it all depends on how good the source is.

Since you're getting a big screen, you might as well encode. Get it right the first time. Re-encoding is always better than transcoding. Test it and you'll see.

There i agree, i don't know what for a screen you've but on my 42" plasma it's still fine.

toaddub, you're very knowledgeable about this stuff, but this is the only point i disagree with.

i fully believe that anyone that is THIS worried about quality should forget about compression altogether and use DL discs or split across 2 discs. that is the ONLY way to get maximum quality.

granted you'll get close results with encoding, but SOMEONE out there will always say they can tell the difference.

at this point i don't think we can help anymore. it's up to people to make visual comparisons on their own using their own equipment and decide what is acceptable for themselves.

Yep i heard that and thats why i started that noob thread about how a bitrate is found or calculated on a mpeg or dvd. i heard a 4.5 bitrate is above average and will look great ona big screen, correct me if im wrong

Unless you get a %100 quality rating on clonedvd2, that gives you 100% maximum quality right?

In general, > 4.5 Mbps will look good enough. High motion scene will require more than that.

From what I read, 100% quality in CloneDVD2 means no compression. So it should be 1:1 copy.

Of course DL discs or split across 2 discs will always be better since no compression is required. But this thread is about transcoding quality, I'm assuming the output will be in SL disc.

wel i take out all the features and everything, so 3 out of 4 of my movies using clonedvd for dvd5 SL were 100 percent quality

Hmm, well I see I've offended at least one person here. It isn't my intention to offend, if I wanted that I would post at any car board or sports team board. This place is a great place for information and is a very friendly board. That is why I post here.

Why do we go to the movies? I go because I want to 'escape from reality'. Only when one's field of vision is completely consumed, can we gain that 'being in the picture' feeling. Televisions can never recreate this sensation because they do not fill one's field of vision.

I would encourage anyone to take one of their DVD's and a transcoded copy of the same film to one of their local hi-end a/v shops. You know, the places that are open til 6pm and always empty. The one's that sells insanely priced gear that only the foolish buy. Ask them to demo their $50k projector that's being fed the video signal from a $40k scaler. (This is nowhere near my setup, lottery anyone?) Watch the original. More than likely, it will look amazing.

After you have a feel for the 'quality' insert the copied disc. More than likely you will not, yes that's correct, see a difference. At least not at first. In time, you will observe the picture just isn't as 'sharp'. In fact, it may even be comparitively soft. The picture will appear grainy, there will be traces of snow. You may notice mpeg artifacting that wasn't present before. Color's will not appear as bright or vibrant. Sit close enough to the screen and you will actually be able to make out the pixel structure on the screen (tho true with the orginal as well). All of these flaws are magnified on this kind of setup, because they are brutal with less than pristine sources. Switch back and forth between the two, the differences will be there. As you scale down in price points, the differences will become less apparent tho still present.

(At this point, ask for a demo of anything hi-definition and prepare to pick your jaw off the ground.)

I realize this is an extreme example. This type of setup is not attainable to most folks. However, a projector and screen combo that gives very good results is within the means of most people. I know of folks who just project the image onto a wall, and are happy with the results although I would never recommend that myself.

Going the projector route is very much like going broadband. Once you've experienced it, it's hard to go back. I still have televisions and in fact they are my primary viewing devices. Backups will always look fine on televisions. That is why I backup my DVD's. Transcoding does remove information and once it's removed it can never be replaced. Encoding, btw is very similiar. The breaking down and rebuilding of frames will always effect quality negatively.

In summary, backup's work fine for televisions. For projection systems, see if it works for you. IMO, and other's have shared in this too, it will not.

To anyone who has read this far, it is only my intention to offer advice and/or make suggestions. Moving forward I will tone down my approach. To those that I've offended, I am sorry.

wow i just did a little test here with my matrix revolutions dvd and was surprised at the results. Ok i stuck in the original and played with power dvd and saw at a certain point in the move the Bitrate was 5.44MB then i stuck in the backed up copy that i made with clonedvd2 at (%88 quality rating) and noticed at that same point in the movie the bitrate was 4.94MB.

I heard bitrate was the most important thing to look for when looking for quality and i also heard that above 4.5 bitrate is pretty good. And this backup was almost the same bitrate as the original (and thats at 88% quality in clonedvd2).

I take it thats a pretty good transcode and pretty good backup then?????

Corrct me if im wrong on this and if bitrate is not that important???? What are some other important things to look for???

@ mikej3131,

The true test is in the eyes of the beholder.

You viewing the original Commercial DVD Movie Title and the backup copy recorded at 88%. You tell us what the difference was when you viewed the original and the 88% backup copy. Was the 88% backup copy quality acceptable to you?

Best Regards,
bjkg

Both pretty much looked the same and very good. See the thing is, as of right now i dont have a big enough tv to tell the difference. My tv is 27 inches non hdtv, regular old boob tube tv. I could not tell on my 19 inch monitor either. im sure when i get my 40 inch lcd i will be able to tell.
But right now im just tryin to research some technical info and compare that way.
Anybody wanna take on my noob questions in my previous post from this one?

@ mikej3131,

Suggest taking your original Commercial DVD Movie Title and your 88% backup copy to Best Buy, Circuit City or any similar retailer and do a personal visual comparison test on their demonstration Big Screen Televisions.

Best Regards,
bjkg

If you have the time you may want to forget all about transcoding and look at DVD Rebuilder http://dvd-rb.dvd2go.org/ It does take longer and initially I found the learning curve quite steep but rebuilding a movie gives better results than transcoding unless only minimal compression is required