Whats faster? convert from DVD or after DVD has been ripped? using Handbrake

Discussion in 'Apple TV and Home Theater' started by MrMister111, Apr 5, 2010.

  1. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #1
    Hi

    starting to get my DVDs conveted so all can play at home from my Apple TV and my PS3. Apple TV preset plays on both devices fin using Handbrake but...

    I have Handbrake 0.94, 64Bit on my Intel iMac Core 2 Duo 2Ghz 2Gb RAM. I tried a film direct from DVD to Apple TV preset and it was going at about 15fps, and would have took about 4.5hrs for a 2.5hr movie, is this normal?

    Would it be quicker if I ripped the DVD to my HDD 1st and then converted using Handbrake from the HDD?

    cheers
     
  2. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    #2
    I get about 20fps with the DVD 'hosted' on my HDD.

    I think the time difference is negligible, but the main reason for encoding from a rip is to protect your optical drive from wear. Having your DVD drive spinning for 4.5 hours continuously for each DVD encode is really rough on the unit.
     
  3. Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #3
    It seems like, if you do straight rips from disc first, too (which are relatively fast), that you can then just queue them all up in Handbrake and leave your computer running overnight or for the weekend converting them all en masse....
     
  4. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    #4
    Indeed...that's an excellent point!

    ...and the automation process stickied at the top of this forum allows easy scheduling of this.
     
  5. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #5
    ah I thought it would be faster converting from the HDD direct mmmm.

    What software do you use to rip to HDD then? Any free ones?

    That automation method seems reall complicated to me. I just like to pop in a DVD, or video file and convert. I agree you could queue up in Handbrake though, but I don't really like running my iMac at 100% CPU all night though either
     
  6. Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #6
    It depends on what you mean by faster... if you're ripping at 15 fps right now, that's... just a little bit better than 1/2x the DVD speed spec (DVDs are natively 24-30 fps). Your DVD player shouldn't really have a problem reading and providing data to Handbrake at that speed, so there is really no substantial time lost in pulling data from the disc.

    Now, it might be a little faster if it's already on the HD, but you have to factor in the time you lost ripping it in the first place (which is, what... some 20+ minutes?).
     
  7. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #7
    Ok cheers

    what I meant is a whole conversion process from start to finish. I just didn't realise that converting a movie would take so long really, so on average for me a 2hr movie on DVD will take about double that to convert?

    Wow this means to convert for example an entire box set of a TV series will take absolutely days and days?
     
  8. Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #8
    That's kind of why we were suggesting automation... it's a computer. It's made to run. There's no harm in letting it do its job overnight (and in fact, if you run it at the right time of day, electricity is off peak and more environmentally friendly ;) ).

    It'll be faster if you select a less demanding destination format, but then it might not look as good on your Apple TV. Or, I guess, obviously, you could get a computer with 8 or 16 cores.... Otherwise, yeah.
     
  9. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    #9
    A "which is faster" test would require the exact same source dvd ripped with the exact same hb settings. One from a prerip from your hdd and one right from the source disk. This will tell you if your dvd drive is a bottleneck.

    As noted the time to prerip would have to be considered into the entire process as well, also as noted prerips allow you to queue up several encodes into hb for processing lets say overnight. Tough to do right from the dvd unless you have multiple drives.
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Ca$hflow

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Location:
    London, ON
    #10
    I use a program called Mac The Ripper. You can download it

    here -----> http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/22715
     
  11. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #11
    I have Snow Leopard v10.6.3 and it asked to install Rosetta? I think this is to allow older programs to run is this correct? I thought I was best to not let any olderProsts run on Snow Leopard with it being 64bit? And why it isn't installed by default?

    Also is it ok to run my iMac overnight then at 100% for say 8 hrs? Just don't like running my "baby" to hard ;)
     
  12. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    #12
    Let er' rip as long is it doesn't overheat, which it won't. Its not like the processor will wear out.
     
  13. macrumors 6502a

    millar876

    Joined:
    May 13, 2004
    Location:
    Peterhead, Scotland UK
    #13
    i get around 80fps ripping straight from the dvd and around 170-230fps ripping from the HDD after a bit of MTR.
     
  14. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #14
    Wow your joking on what hardware s that? in hour size for a 2hr movie how long is that to encode then please?

    ok just tried a RIP to HDD, and then a convert using Handbrake Apple TV preset on Aliens movie, the file is 2.93Gb!! I thought it would be much much smaller than this? is this correct?
     
  15. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    #15
    Possibly, if its the original Aliens that film is fairly grainy and has many complex scenes, which will kick up the bitrate using constant quality encoding. If its 2.93 GB then its 2.93 GB. I also recall the dvd mastering being fair to crappy on the original Aliens.
     
  16. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #16
    he he, your a mind reader!!

    so is this typical result though for a 2.5hr movie? will they all be that size? is there anyway to make them smaller as I was expecting them to be?

    so for this movie should I have selected file size rather than constant quality? if so whats a decent (I'm not too picky on viewing as long as looks good enough), file size I should pick for a 2hr movie for eg?


    cheers
     
  17. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    #17
  18. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #18
    thanks, so your in the camp that RIp to HDD and then convert using HB is best? or do you leave the Video TS folders to play direct?
     
  19. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    #19
    well, if you restrict the bitrate the quality will suffer, if you raise the rf value for constant quality ( which lowers the visual quality ) ... the quality will suffer. That is what bitrate was required to achieve the visual quality the HandBrake ATV preset asks for on *that source*.

    However as noted its on a source by source basis ... for example Lord of the Rings is longer and comes in at a lower file size since its a cleaner source.
     
  20. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #20
    Ok understand, just the Apple TV setting also allows play on iPhone but this file size is too big, will just have to put this film down to a bigger file size suppose.

    Will the HB Apple Universal preset come out at a smaller file size? be better for me for the devices I want? PS3, Apple Tv and iPhone 3GS?

    cheers
     
  21. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Location:
    Whitehouse, OH
    #21
    Everything equal, file sizes should be smaller when using the AppleTV preset versus the Universal preset, but the quality will be virtually identical.
     

Share This Page