Loss-less dvd backup program

X

x_MaGiuS_x

Gawd
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Messages
821
I own 556 dvds that are spread out on 3 shelves and the floor because Im out of shelf space. Im looking for a way to rip the dvds since I can buy 3 terabytes of storage for a little more than a nice wood shelf big enough to hold all of my movies. It would be nice to be able to put all of the dvd cases in storage because they take up a lot of space.

Since I did pay for all of these movies I want to view them at full quality. Are there any options that allow for full quality rips while still providing some compression?
 
Could try encoding them with x264 (encodes H.264 files) by using settings that produce lossless output. Only down side though (well, with any lossless video compression) is that depending on the complexity of the source, the file size may be larger than the original. Thats where constant quality mode comes in. For this x264 specific example, if you encode them with a crf (constant rate factor, synonymous with constant quality) of, say, 18, you would get visually lossless output at the fraction of the size of the source. The closer the number is to 0, the more transparent it is to the source, until you hit 0, which is lossless. But then again anything but 0 is technically not lossless. I suggest you check out forum.doom9.org if you want to these methods out or need some more info/help on getting started.

With that said, what you could do is just rip them with a program like AnyDVD to get straight backup.

If you want to go an extra step, you could then remux the VOBs to mkv with eac3to, stripping any additional extras you don't need - these include smaller secondary audio tracks, commentary tracks, foreign language subtitles, etc - producing an output file smaller than the original VOBs, due to VOB's horrible overhead. And since you're remuxing, there is no quality loss at all as the streams are untouched.

As a side note, what I do with all my Blu-rays and HD DVDs is do the what I mentioned in the first paragraph. While not technically lossless, they are visually lossless to me at settings equivalent to using crf 18-22. Plus, on average, the size of the final file compared to the source is anywhere between 25-75% smaller (again, depends on the source complexity).
 
x_MaGiuS_x said:
Are there any options that allow for full quality rips while still providing some compression?
Click to expand...

x264/h264 is a good idea if you're interested in creating single file "rips" meaning instead of the full blown DVD content (movie, extras, all the languages, multiple audio tracks, etc) then something like HandBrake doing high level encoding (like the AppleTV preset) will give you some files to work with. If you want full blown rips with all the content on each DVD then you either:

1) Rip the disc to an ISO and use something to play the ISO off your server(s), or...
2) Use DVDDecrypter to "rip" the content to a folder (<movie name>\VIDEO_TS style) and then play the DVD from the folder. Most current media players can do that and play them from a folder without issues.
 
In the interest of a smaller file size I'd like the rips to be the full movie + full surround sound. I don't need menus or special features or anything else.

Joe Average, if I'm reading what you wrote correctly x264 is what Im looking for.
 
If thats the case, x264 is probably your best bet when choosing an encoder for this whole process.

However, its not as simple as opening your DVD with x264 and voila, reencode is made. It's unfortunately a little more painstaking than that. You'll need at least a couple other programs to help you get your DVDs to a watchable and reencoded form. Then there is the fun part of dealing with cropping, deinterlacing, telecine, audio synchronization, you name it. Because of this, starting the process can be very daunting... so here is my offer to help in any way I can. Send me a PM if you encounter any road blocks or just don't know how to get started.
 
I knew getting into this that it was going to be a lot of work. 556 dvds is probably gonna take forever to convert but I think it will be worth it.

Are there any encoders that will take advantage of a muti-core cpu and 8gbs of ram? If im gonna buy software I want to make sure I get the most for my money.
 
x264 can do up to 128 (or was it 256?) threads, so doing 1-2 threads per core will max out your CPU. RAM isn't really that important, as long as you have more than 1GB, you should be fine.

Best part about doing all this is that all the software needed to the conversion is open source (free!).
 
Just for the record, the "official" MPEG4 codec spec is called H.264 - using that codec and algorithm requires licensing fees to be legit. However, enterprising coders out there created an open source version of the same codec, with effectively the exact same results and it's called x.264/x264 soooo...

Now ya know.

And yes, HandBrake is properly multithreaded and will hit all the cores you throw at it. Great program, if not a bit laggy for the UI. Lots of options, features, but even on a massive quad box, it'll take time. h.264/x264 encoding is perhaps the most CPU/RAM intensive thing you'll find these days outside of running Prime95 or something similar.

Doesn't matter which encoder you choose of the many available, it's still going to take time to get the job done, and each DVD will be different, even if you had two movies that were exactly 2 hours long they'd both take different amounts of time to encode 'em.

So, get started... :D
 
H.264, also known as MPEG-4/AVC, is a video compression specification. x264 is an encoder. x264 encodes H.264 streams.

HandBrake is essentially a GUI that uses different open source libraries to transcode different files.
x264 (which happens to be used by HandBrake as libx264) is a command line encoder that does only that one thing. While the potential downside to x264 is it doesn't have a GUI (which can be easier to work with), it doesn't have a GUI (which can limit functionality).

Thought I'd clarify. ;)
 
Can't say what the problem is. Works fine for me (IE8/FF) and others I've given the link to. But yes, its supposed to swap images. Maybe you just can't see the difference between encoders? :p
 
Snowknight26, the link you provided has gotten me a little discouraged as the difference between the x264 and the original source is pretty evident to me.

My pc's resolution is 1680x1050. Not sure what the resolution of a 55" 1080p screen is. Would the difference be more or less noticeable on my tv than on my pc?

Sorry for all of the questions here guys. I truly am a noob when it comes to this stuff since I've always purchased my dvds, no dvd movie has ever been inside my pc.
 
x_MaGiuS_x said:
Snowknight26, the link you provided has gotten me a little discouraged as the difference between the x264 and the original source is pretty evident to me.
Click to expand...

It is a comparison between encoders at the mentioned bitrate. Of course you can raise the bitrate to make it visually transparent. It was merely showing the advantage x264 has over other encoders.

x_MaGiuS_x said:
Not sure what the resolution of a 55" 1080p screen is.
Click to expand...
1080p for TVs/monitors implies 1920x1080.

x_MaGiuS_x said:
Would the difference be more or less noticeable on my tv than on my pc?
Click to expand...

Since you are watching low resolution DVD on your high resolution screens, a slightly larger screen won't make the viewing experience any better. Either one would be fine to view DVDs on.

x_MaGiuS_x said:
Sorry for all of the questions here guys.
Click to expand...
Perfectly alright. I mean, after all, the purpose of these forums is to help the community.
 
Snowknight26 said:
Can't say what the problem is. Works fine for me (IE8/FF) and others I've given the link to. But yes, its supposed to swap images. Maybe you just can't see the difference between encoders? :p
Click to expand...

Well I had to reboot to add a hard drive (non-SATA) and when I came back I took another look and now that page works. Gotta love Windows, eh? :D

And just for the record, I use a Sony G400 color calibrated 19" CRT sooo... the differences are quite noticeable now that it works. Yes, x264 is pretty damned spiffy at what it does... now if only it didn't require such massive amounts of CPU time to encode to it. :p
 
It doesn't have to be CPU taxing. It all depends on what settings you choose and whether the time:quality tradeoff is worth it for you.
 
Snowknight26, don't you think it would be prudent to recommend MeGUI to help streamline the process for him?
 
It's a pick-your-poison situation with MeGUI. One one hand, you get an easily navigable and nearly streamlined process of reencoding content, but like most things, its not without issues of its own, especially with the new 3.1.1xxx releases that Kurtnoise13 has been putting out. If anything, I'd recommend RipBot264 over MeGUI at the time being, but thats just me.

What it does narrow down to would be the sharp learning curve of the command line encoder/frame server/decoder combination with limitless possibilities, or the much more easily-learned GUIs with less possibilities.

But hey, to each his own.
 
Snowknight26 said:
It is a comparison between encoders at the mentioned bitrate. Of course you can raise the bitrate to make it visually transparent. It was merely showing the advantage x264 has over other encoders.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up. I made the mistake of assuming those screenshots portrayed the maximum quality of each encoding method. I was definitely disappointed in the image quality of all of them compared to the original source
 
The biggest issue you're going to encounter is you're transcoding lossy content (all DVD and Blu-ray/HD-DVD content on the market is already crappy compared to the original untouched master footage) so, it's a "choose what looks best" situation. Personally, since I don't own a big ass HD screen yet (may never own one, who knows) I could care less. Hell, I've been using Badaboom (h/x264 encoding accelerator for Nvidia GPUs) the past two weeks or so crunching DVDs down to PSP format (bought one in nearly mint condition at a pawn shop last week) soooo...

On this Sony CRT of mine I can spot the differences but it's not something I'm gonna pull my freakin' hair out because of. 2-pass x264 encoding of DVDs at about 320 Kbps to 480 wide resolution (height changes because of the aspect ratio) that isn't as crystal clear as the original lossy content to begin with. It's a non-issue and not worth letting it get the best of ya...

For a single encoding solution, I still recommend HandBrake for Windows, Linux, or OSX which is was originally created for. The sheer strength/power of the command line options and the vastly experienced people creating it and using it at the HandBrake community forums can offer tons of possible configurations and options that will end up with you having some damned high quality rips, virtually indistinguishable from the original content.

It just takes a shitload of time, as noted before... :)

Personally, if I had 3TB of storage just for movies, I'd be ripping the raw content from the DVDs to the servers and playing it from that using a media player (DVD folders on the drive). To hell with transcoding - it's a complete waste of time that only ends up with even more lossy footage regardless of whatever quality settings and how much time you invest. I'd have DVDDecrypter and both my optical drives ripping stuff straight off with the default options one right after another and that'd be that.

The best possible quality you can muster from DVD media, or even Blu-ray if you're moving towards that stuff, and almost all modern media players will play DVD content from a folder on a drive as long as you rip all the necessary files and keep the folder structure (DVD\VIDEO_TS\<content>).

That's my suggestion... you'd get all those DVDs ripped, full original quality, in 1/20th the time and be enjoying them that much faster from the 3TB server... compare 10-15 mins to rip a typical DVD9 to a drive using DVDDecrypter and a 16x DVD drive to possibly 2-3 hours or longer to get extremely high quality x264 encodings per disc - and you'd really want to rip the DVDs to the hard drive first to speed up the final encoding anyway. Encoding directly from the physical DVD will take fucking forever per movie...

Is it really worth all that transcoding hassle to get even worse results? I don't think so...
 
Hello ... you people know a lot about video processing and stuff !
I too have a DVD collection and love DVD Shrink. It just doesn't work with new DVDs but AnyDVD works works fine with that.
See, I don't know much about this subject and I found my backup on HDD always close enough to the original DVD, if not as good as.

Since BluRay is slowly becoming standard (will still take a few years I guess), I definately prefer High Definition (1920 x 1080) over the PAL (720 x 576) or NTSC standard (720 x 480).

Have bought 3 BluRay movies: Transformers, Tears of the sun & A knight's tale.
I used ArcSoft Total Media Theatre to play them back on my Computer, but unfortunately it was only a one month trial.

Question please:

1. Isn't there a free add-on / codec for WMP to playback BluRay content ?
When I download some random high definition video clips from the internet, they all do work fine.

2. Would you know whether there is any software to u p s c a l e my normal DVDs ?
I have a BluRay player in my PC and an eVGA GeForce 8800 GT.

Thanks :)
 
1) Not sure, but I do know that Windows 7 can handle a ton of stuff natively without needing to install any additional codecs, I'm just not sure if it can handle Blu-ray content (it plays MPEG4 stuff without breaking a sweat).

2) You're in luck: the Badaboom video converter can use your Nvidia GeForce 8800's GPU to accelerate h/x264 encoding so it goes much faster and it can upconvert to higher resolutions with excellent results. I made a post in this thread located here:

http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1033530064&postcount=3

That shows a sample of the basic settings for converting regular DVD content to 1280x720 and an example of the results. Again, those were the default settings with Badaboom - obviously you can alter them to allow for higher bitrates which would of course affect the quality, and many other settings.

It's a commercial product but it's worth looking into.

Hope this helps...
 
Badaboom is horrible, I'd advise against using it for many reasons as seen here, here, here, here, here, indirectly here, etc.

And as I said previously, x264 is only an encoder, not a type of video. Badaboom does H.264 encoding, as does x264. ;)

To answer your first question Cov, if you don't mind sacrificing menus, you can decrypt the Blu-rays with AnyDVD HD then play the m2ts files in something like MPC-HC or using ffdshow and WMP.

As far as your second question goes, keep in mind that upscaling does NOT increase/create detail. All you're doing is resizing and adding some post-processing effects.
 
Yah, all transcoding is horrible, period, that's a given, but sometimes people just gotta do it. I'm currently working on transcoding all my actual physical DVDs (over 800 of 'em) to PSP compatible files at 480 pixels wide with respectable quality. I'm encoding them with embedded subs but I wish it was possible to encode them and include the subs which can be enabled or disabled. My Wife is deaf and so she requires them but I don't and hard-embedding them means I get stuck with seeing 'em onscreen... wish I could get around that limitation somehow, oh well.

Also, I'm pissed at the low volume of the PSP overall, even with headphones with high sensitivity. I'm still hoping to find a decent file-to-PSP format converter that will allow me to raise the encoded audio levels (not normalization, and not "dynamic range compression" because that still leaves the overall volume the same and that's too damned low).

Too many multiple application encoders floating around out there that bug me. HandBrake is PERFECT for this but alas, they won't add an actual volume tool to increase the volume in the encoded file when it's done. Damned shame, and if I was a programmer I'd do it myself but... I'm not so...
 
Joe Average said:
Yah, all transcoding is horrible, period, that's a given, but sometimes people just gotta do it.
Click to expand...

That's not what I meant. Not all transcoding is horrible, its just that in the case of Badaboom, its quality:time ratio is so bad in both aspects that most encoders can do better quality encodes in less time (x264, Ateme's encoder, Mainconcept's maybe, etc).
 
But, my point holds: transcoding - while it might appear to our eyes as "acceptable" to some degress - is a horrible thing, especially when going from one lossy format to another. As I mentioned, on this CRT I can spot the differences in even the highest quality encodes compared to the original footage, even if the original is lossy to begin with.

Movie magic has spoiled a lot of folks in the sense of them seeing some incredibly blurry image of a license plate on a vehicle as spied from space and then taking that incredibly blurry image and suddenly turning it into a bitmapped perfect image that's got clarity in spades... (yes we have some satellites up there that can literally look through keyholes <hint, hint>, but that doesn't mean that an original blurry image without details can suddenly be processed to a point of a nearly-perfect duplicate of the actual thing being imaged in the first place).

I'm not against you, Snowknight26, I'm right there with ya on this... just clarifying this one point. :)
 
Joe Average said:
1) Not sure, but I do know that Windows 7 can handle a ton of stuff natively without needing to install any additional codecs, I'm just not sure if it can handle Blu-ray content (it plays MPEG4 stuff without breaking a sweat).
Click to expand...

Unfortentlly, as I tested this last night in Win7 7000 64bit, an x264 encoded BluRay in an MKV container will not play naively in WMP. While it would be nice if it did, MPC-HC with its DXVA decoding is a much better solution. More control, and if you dont have a DXVA capable GPU, ffdshow and CoreAVC are always there.
 
If you want to rip it quick and the highest quality possible, use dvd decrypter and make iso's of the disc's.
 
Joe Average said:
As I mentioned, on this CRT I can spot the differences in even the highest quality encodes compared to the original footage, even if the original is lossy to begin with.
Click to expand...

Then you must not be looking at some well made encodes. Let's do some tests. I bet you can't distinguish the source from a reencode.

Which one is the source and which one is the reencode?

Set 1:
Pic 1 - Pic 2

Set 2:
Pic 1 - Pic 2

Set 3:
Pic 1 - Pic 2

Set 4:
Pic 1 - Pic 2
 
You're kidding, right? How can anyone be expected to do such a thing not having a control on the testing? :) I don't know what the original looked like so I don't have anything to compare it with. :D

Hmmm... honestly I'm stuck to answer, I could just look at the filesizes and get a really good idea which is which, but that would be cheating so I'm just gonna shut up now... hehe
 
The whole point was that you don't know which is which, especially in these 4 cases where the pictures are nearly identical.

Oh and file sizes won't help you with this one. Take that how you wish. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top