sot: video redo vs womble?

ushere wrote on 1/30/2012, 10:07 PM
i've used womble for ages for simple mpg2 dvd stuff. works exceptionally well, even if it is a bit fisher-price'ish ;-)

i read video redo handles mpg AND h264 also without re-rendering.

is there any comparison and would you recommend it over womble?

Comments

Laurence wrote on 1/30/2012, 10:22 PM
I'm a Womble user as well. I tried Video Redo and hated it. I was tempted by Redo's AVCHD smart-rendering, but so far have seen no evidence of AVCHD smart-renders actually being of any practical use. Video Redo has a nicer looking GUI, no question about that, but I didn't like it as much when I tried to use it.
musicvid10 wrote on 1/30/2012, 10:55 PM
It seems what you start with is what you stick with. Johnmeyer is also a womblephile.

VideoRedo h264 is working, but still has some fine-tuning ahead (the GOP structure is incredibly complicated). OTOH, the MPEG-2 is bulletproof.

I have owned both for a few years. VideoRedo 100, Womble 0. The latter has been buggy, crash-prone, and unintuitive afaic. Of course, I also use Handbrake instead of MeGUI, if that's any indication. If I was 20 years younger, well maybe . . .
;?)
wombat wrote on 1/31/2012, 12:04 AM
I started with Womble, and switched to VideoReDo ... have been happily using it for years, though the interface is pretty clunky.
I pre-edit plenty of footage in it (mpeg2) before sending it into vegas, and can match settings in Vegas / DVD Architect well enough that they do not re-render unaltered video right through to DVD.
I have a client with an mpeg2 camera who does her own edit list in VideoReDo (which does the task easily across multiple clips) then sends me the tiny project file plus the raw video file/s, and leaves it to me to produce fancy DVDs for her model agency / training catwalks.
PeterDuke wrote on 1/31/2012, 12:57 AM
I used VideoReDo the other day to put on DVD a TV program that my wife recorded (digital). It was a cinch to cut out the ads and burn to DVD with menu without re-rendering the MPEG2. Vegas wanted to re-render.

I tried Womble years ago but didn't like the video display with PAL . It seemed to have been designed for NTSC. Maybe it was me or maybe they have improved, I don't know.
johnmeyer wrote on 1/31/2012, 11:32 AM
I've used Womble, starting with MPEG VCR, and then upgrading to MPEG Video Wizard when they had a one-day free download a year ago.

A week ago, I purchased VideoRedo because I needed to smart render H.264 AVCHD files. I have not yet used VideoRedo on native MPEG-2, VOB, or HDV files.

Things I like about Womble:

1. Fast.
2. Never had a problem with output files.
3. Handles joining MPEG-2 files that have different properties (bitrates).
4. There is a wonderful little hack utility that can take a Vegas EDL and translate it to Womble. This means I can set all my edit points in Vegas, using its faster and more familiar UI, and then do the actual cuts in Womble.

Vegas EDL to Womble converter: EDL to Womble.

Downsides to Womble:

1. I don't care for the UI. I find it difficult to find edit points, and even after all these years I feel vaguely "lost" when navigating the program.

Things I like so far about VideoRedo:

1. The UI seems to me much more "standard" than the rather odd Womble UI. I found it very easy to learn, and felt at home right away.

2. The support is fantastic. They even helped me when I was simply trying out the demo.

3. The program is actively being developed. I am not sure how active development is at Womble these days.

I am having some issues with VideoRedo AVCHD smart rendering, but they have already given me some workarounds that solve about 90% of the problems, and are working on things to help with the other 10%. At this point, I am able to use AVCHD for smart rendering, and most of the time it works great.

So, I may have been a "womblephile," but I am rapidly getting drawn over to VideoRedo.

As a postscript, I did try the Sony PMB software for smart editing of my Sony CX700V AVCHD files, and it does work, but it is so clunky that there is no way I could ever possibly use it for more than half a dozen clips. Also, it installs over 250 MB of completely useless ancillary software, and I refuse to let any company "take over" my computer or hard drive in that manner. There is a certain programming "mentality" that leads to this sort of bloat, and part of that is the underlying concept that they have the "rights" to my computer and can do anything they want. I often find various background operations and uploads and contacts with the Internet and other things that vaguely smack of adware when programs like this are installed (although I didn't keep PMB on my computer long enough to determine whether this was the case).


PeterDuke wrote on 1/31/2012, 9:07 PM
PMB is essentially a database program and like all the database programs I've looked at (not seriously tried) they take over your computer and expect you to change the way you have worked in the past.

After transfer, PMB wants to do face recognition, because it assumes that your videos are mainly people shots, which most of mine aren't. I kill it when it starts to do that.

I then move the clips from where PMB puts them to where I want them. Since it is on the same physical drive, the move is very quick (only a directory edit).

I use PMB for transfer of AVCHD because:

1. It remembers what has been transferred and only offers to transfer new stuff.

2. It glues long clips that have been segmented into 2GB pieces pieces back together again

3. Most important of all, it renames the clips according to shooting time and date.

I don't use PMB to smart render my AVCHD because I use Vegas 9c for that. (Vegas 9c may not smart render non-Sony AVCHD, but that has not been an issue with me so far.)
Laurence wrote on 1/31/2012, 9:58 PM
There's another option here.
altarvic wrote on 2/2/2012, 4:53 AM
Another one: Solveig Video Splitter
PeterDuke wrote on 2/2/2012, 7:05 AM
That one looks good!

Then there is AVS Video Remaker. Fairly basic program, but it is bundled with all the other AVS stuff for the same price. The main problem with me is that it does not stay activated and I have to fiddle around to activate it again each time.
altarvic wrote on 2/2/2012, 7:49 AM

This list of AVS tools for $39? Unbelievable!
PeterDuke wrote on 2/2/2012, 7:59 AM
AVS is $39 for 1 year and $59 forever.
PeterDuke wrote on 2/2/2012, 8:05 AM
Solvveig Video Splitter didn't do too well in my first test, a 28 second AVCHD clip. I passed the clip through without trimming. The result was a somewhat bigger file. When viewing with VLC player, I noticed some blocky miscoding about 2/3 the way through. When viewed with CyberLink PowerDVD, it showed a big jump at that point.

I am using the trial version. I thought it was supposed to insert a watermark, but I couldn't see it.
Laurence wrote on 2/2/2012, 9:05 AM
If it's adding a watermark it must be rerendering rather than smart-rendering.