 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / Australian Photography / June 2006smh article on burned media longevity
That oft debated issue rears its head again http://www.smh.com.au/news/cameras--videos/burning-for-the-long-haul/2006/06/14/ 1149964545127.html rb > That oft debated issue rears its head again With absolutely nothing new added, it's just a way for a journalist to make money from regurgitation of misinformation. (nice job if you can get it I suppose, he even seems to think gold CD's are a new idea!) MrT. > That oft debated issue rears its head again > http://www.smh.com.au/news/cameras--videos/burning-for-the-long-haul/2006/06/14/ 1149964545127.html > > rb Interesting, and some twit was running around here last week saying burned / backed up of factory pressed dvd's etc last longer than the original factory pressing. I find that hard to believe. Sure! I doubt they've been using gold media either.  SignatureSam the blackrat, remove the 'spam' to reply. http://www.intervocative.com/dvdcollection.aspx/mekon76 >That oft debated issue rears its head again >http://www.smh.com.au/news/cameras--videos/burning-for-the-long-haul/2006/06/14/ 1149964545127.html > >rb Well, recently I went through some of my earliest discs to see what was there. A Ricoh CD burned in 2001 has now developed a couple of unreadable files. These Ricohs have been very good while others have fallen over but now signs that these are starting to fall over. They have been stored in a case in a dark place and hardly ever accessed. Has anyone actually had experience of this happening with DVDs? I haven't, yet. >>That oft debated issue rears its head again >>http://www.smh.com.au/news/cameras--videos/burning-for-the-long-haul/2006/06/14/ 1149964545127.html [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Has anyone actually had experience of this happening with DVDs? I >haven't, yet. I have early princo which are 5 years old and still going along nicely, however princo of 2 years ago up to today have failed inside a few months of burning as have latest riteks and some tdk's. >>>That oft debated issue rears its head again >>>http://www.smh.com.au/news/cameras--videos/burning-for-the-long-haul/2006/06/14/ 1149964545127.html [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >nicely, however princo of 2 years ago up to today have failed inside a >few months of burning as have latest riteks and some tdk's. Come to think of it, I have had one fail after some months. That was a Laser brand SKC-made DVD-R, the worst media I have ever used. Most burned with such a high error count that I simply discarded them. I kept one test result, done with KProbe2 on my LiteOn burner: avg PI errors 976, peak 1370, avg PIF 107. The standard allows for 280 PI and 4 PIF, so you can see how bad they were. > Come to think of it, I have had one fail after some months. That was > a Laser brand SKC-made DVD-R, the worst media I have ever used. Most > burned with such a high error count that I simply discarded them. I > kept one test result, done with KProbe2 on my LiteOn burner: avg PI > errors 976, peak 1370, avg PIF 107. The standard allows for 280 PI > and 4 PIF, so you can see how bad they were. I had the same problem with a Lite-On burner too, when the same disks recorded perfectly on a Pioneer. The good thing about the Lite-On is you can see just how bad the disks are, when recorded on the Lite-On, and how much better they are when recorded on something else :-) MrT. >> Come to think of it, I have had one fail after some months. That was >> a Laser brand SKC-made DVD-R, the worst media I have ever used. Most [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >when recorded on the Lite-On, and how much better they are when recorded on >something else :-) Interesting. I take it you don't like LiteOns. I burned OptodiscOR4 and OptodiscOR8 media with excellent results. I have one test result here from an OptodiscOR4 burn: avg PI 0.92, avg PIF 0.00. Overall I have been very pleased with the quality of burns from my LiteOn with various media. Off course I always seek to have the latest firmware, usually CodeGuys, optimized for burn quality. :-) >>> Come to think of it, I have had one fail after some months. That was >>> a Laser brand SKC-made DVD-R, the worst media I have ever used. Most [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >LiteOn with various media. Off course I always seek to have the >latest firmware, usually CodeGuys, optimized for burn quality. :-) A lot of people bag LiteOn DVD burners for no apparent reason. I have two LiteOn burners (832S & 165H6S) which have served me very well and with quality patched firmware have delivered excellent PI and PIF results across a range of media. Some of the earlier LiteON DVD burners were a bit unreliable and many didn't handle DVD-R/RW media that well. Later models are just as good as Pioneer and LG burners IMO > A lot of people bag LiteOn DVD burners for no apparent reason. I have > two LiteOn burners (832S & 165H6S) which have served me very well and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that well. Later models are just as good as Pioneer and LG burners > IMO It wasn't only users who were bagging LiteOn DVD burners as reviews of the earlier generation drives were often unfavourable as well. Their CD burners had a very good reputation and strong following but LiteOn seemed to have lost the plot when they first started producing DVD burners and a lot of goodwill and reputation was lost during their transistion from making very bad to good product again. > A lot of people bag LiteOn DVD burners for no apparent reason. A box full of coasters (100's), tested appallingly with Kprobe2, from three seperate drives, is enough reason for me. How much do you usually require? In fact when the cost of failed disks was higher than the cost of a new drive, the decision to dump them became very easy :-) But what really annoys me is all the marginal disks I have that are currently readable, but for how long? >I have > two LiteOn burners (832S & 165H6S) which have served me very well and > with quality patched firmware have delivered excellent PI and PIF > results across a range of media. Wish my 832S did. Have tried every firmware I can lay my hands on including all the Code Guys ones. Results were marginal to start with, but became downright awful after very little use. >Some of the earlier LiteON DVD > burners were a bit unreliable and many didn't handle DVD-R/RW media > that well. Later models are just as good as Pioneer and LG burners > IMO Maybe they are, if you get a good one, I suppose. My tip is to only buy them from a very good dealer, if you must buy one at all. MrT. > Interesting. I take it you don't like LiteOns. Actually I used to love Lite-On CDR's once upon a time. Unfortunately the last 3 Lite-On drives I have bought all failed to perform adequately, so no more for me. >I burned OptodiscOR4 > and OptodiscOR8 media with excellent results. I have one test result > here from an OptodiscOR4 burn: avg PI 0.92, avg PIF 0.00. Wish I had got a good one too, or I wouldn't have a box full of coasters :-) > Overall I have been very pleased with the quality of burns from my > LiteOn with various media. Off course I always seek to have the > latest firmware, usually CodeGuys, optimized for burn quality. :-) I have an 832S with latest CG firmware that I only use as a reader now, a Pioneer 110D is now giving me *far* better burns. MrT. >> Interesting. I take it you don't like LiteOns. > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >MrT. That is what I have. I find it works best on DVD+R. > >I have an 832S with latest CG firmware that I only use as a reader now, a > >Pioneer 110D is now giving me *far* better burns. > That is what I have. I find it works best on DVD+R. I assume you mean the 832S, I tried DVD+R as well, no better. And I prefer DVD-R for video anyway. In any case a good burner will do both, not just claim it. MrT. >> >I have an 832S with latest CG firmware that I only use as a reader now, a >> >Pioneer 110D is now giving me *far* better burns. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >MrT. How is -R better for video? > How is -R better for video? I never said it was necessarily better, prefer was what I said. However -R is often more compatible with older DVD players. MrT. >> How is -R better for video? > >I never said it was necessarily better, prefer was what I said. >However -R is often more compatible with older DVD players. > >MrT. I thought you might mean that, but that would only be an issue if you have such an older DVD player or were making backups for players of unknown age. These days it is generally not an issue. There is always the option of bitsetting where the DVD+R is marked as a DVD-ROM which works in most cases. > I thought you might mean that, but that would only be an issue if you > have such an older DVD player or were making backups for players of > unknown age. Yep. >These days it is generally not an issue. There is > always the option of bitsetting where the DVD+R is marked as a DVD-ROM > which works in most cases. That's true, and I did try that. The results were still poor. Not a problem now that I don't use it any more :-) MrT. > I have early princo which are 5 years old and still going along > nicely, however princo of 2 years ago up to today have failed inside a > few months of burning as have latest riteks and some tdk's. I have many 10 years old that are still fine. The big problem is often the drive/disc performance at the time it is written. If a disk has lots of recoverable errors to start with, they can become unrecoverable over time. Another factor is the higher write speeds these days. MrT. >> I have early princo which are 5 years old and still going along >> nicely, however princo of 2 years ago up to today have failed inside a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > recoverable errors to start with, they can become unrecoverable over time. > Another factor is the higher write speeds these days. I agree with that. I've recently started converting stuff stored on cds to dvd and I can tell when my first cd writer (april 1999 to november 2000) started to go away.. Exact same brand of discs and I was able to get progressively less data off them from around october. 6 month break to the new writer and a brief flurry of all sorts of discs, all of which read perfectly. >> I have early princo which are 5 years old and still going along >> nicely, however princo of 2 years ago up to today have failed inside a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >recoverable errors to start with, they can become unrecoverable over time. >Another factor is the higher write speeds these days. CD's that are 10 years old or DVD's ? The reason I ask is the Pioneer DVR-103/A03 didn't get released until August of 2001. The earlier Pioneer SCSI Authoring burners came out 4 years earlier but were like $8000+ each and could not read or write to DVD-RW because that hadn't been invented at that time. The first Pioneer burner in the Pioneer DVR-101S came out in September of 1997. It connected via a SCSI-2 interface. The media were 3.95Gb discs. I tend to burn at the max speed of 16X all the time on various DVD burners I have owned over the years. I have media burns going back to 2002 which still play back fine today. SalesMart.com.au Perth, Western Australia http://www.salesmart.com.au ******************************************* Email Contact info on the above site. ******************************************* > CD's that are 10 years old or DVD's ? CD's. > I tend to burn at the max speed of 16X all the time on various DVD > burners I have owned over the years. I have media burns going back to > 2002 which still play back fine today. Which isn't long enough to prove anything unfortunately. I would sure prefer my DVD's to last more than 4 years! MrT. > That oft debated issue rears its head again > http://www.smh.com.au/news/cameras--videos/burning-for-the-long-haul/2006/06/14/ 1149964545127.html I've always believed that the 'R' media, be they CD-R, DVD-R or DVD+R, will have a very limited life. The recording relies on 'burning' the data into a dye layer on the media. These dyes are based on organic chemistry, which on the whole, is notoriously unstable, particularly if subjected to an unfavourable environment. (eg: high temperatures, high humidity, high light levels - particularly sources high in U.V. content) I believe that the re-writable media are in fact a better option for archival storage. The data is stored in a 'phase-change' metallic layer. Being a metal, it is far more stable long-term. The metallic layer is 'supported' by a 'dielectric layer' that IS based on organic chemistry. Failure of the dielectric layer will render the media impossible to erase or re-record, but the content already held on it should be safe. Just my 'two cents' worth. Calvin. > I believe that the re-writable media are in fact a better option for > archival storage. My worst experiences have been with rewritables. They have faded away within months. My suggestion : - Trust nothing ! >> I believe that the re-writable media are in fact a better option for >> archival storage. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >My suggestion : - Trust nothing ! I had some Melody CD-RW that were total rubbish. Their claimed 1000 rewrites! All mine packed up after only 10. But I have been using Mitsubishi and Verbatim DVD+RW with total reliability so far (Win98SE doesn't support multisession on DVD+R but does so on DVD+RW). | That oft debated issue rears its head again http://www.smh.com.au/news/cameras--videos/burning-for-the-long-haul/2006/06 /14/1149964545127.html | rb kprobe: from http://www.cdrlabs.com/kprobe/index.php (2.1Mb download) allows you to test dvd's by looking at the errors on the disks. the outcomes and experiences have been listed here: http://www.videohelp.com/dvdmedia princo AND TDK DVD's (and others) scored a GOOD rating, interestingly there are substantially more user comments, most very good, on Princo than the nest nearest commented upon brand.. 297 V 74 comments seems that the reviewers also get to state how many disks they've burned too - some of the reviewers have burnt a mere _single_ disk on which they've based their reports - the Princo brigade however all seem to have burnt 25, 100, 50 etc . I think the *best* way to resolve this is to check the error count on the various disks available and then treat the results as a guide*. As is stated there, compatibility is NOT a good guide to reliability, only the error count gives a true indication of fallibility. *as with film, every batch is different and because one review says their lot tested good doesn't mean the batch I buy tomorrow are also going to be as good and http://www.dvdinfopro.com/ DVDINFOProT by Nic Wilson is a DVD information program written in Visual C++ for Windows 95, 98, 98SE, ME, NT, 2000, XP. The program provides information & tools for DVD-R/RW DVD+R/RW burners DVD+R DL (Double Layer) burners DVD-ROM players. It also provides information on CD players & burners. "I get a lot of emails asking me how I produce my media test graphs and where do I find the drives and media information. Well the answer is DVDInfoPro produced by Nic Wilson This program provides me with all the drive information, media information and also produces all the graphs & charts I need to carry out my reviews. " Current version v3.52 17/02/2005 http://www.dvd-recordable.org/wwwimgs/media/flash/dvdinfopro/dvdinfoproadve rt.zip Free Version with embedded adverts 1.59meg. This free version will expire on 17/03/2005 www.DVDrecordable.org - another good site for reviews on optical media and drives | That oft debated issue rears its head again http://www.smh.com.au/news/cameras--videos/burning-for-the-long-haul/2006/06 /14/1149964545127.html btw, from CDMedia world - the goss on TDK's.. some of which are even MADE by TDK <!?> http://www.dvdmediaworld.com/hardware/cdrom/tdk.shtml and other brands.. http://www.dvdmediaworld.com/hardware/cdrom/dvd_info.shtml some stuff about quality http://cdmediaworld.com/hardware/cdrom/cd_quality.shtml and dyes.. http://cdmediaworld.com/hardware/cdrom/cd_dye.shtml the most durable dye, PhthaloCyanine, used in Princo's is also used by many other makers too but I see the TDK's listed here are using cyanine (what!!!) - the worst dye of the lot for longevity - and they use this in the disks that they guarantee for 100 years even tho the dye's only expected to last 10 years. OK, they don't list the dyes used in ALL the TDK's but hey - something funny going on here :-/ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.