DVD Archive Shelf Life
Marts
what brand of discs are you using and how are they holding up?
I've archived a bit of stuff onto Verbatim DVD-R and DVD+R discs. I'm wondering
if I shouldn't be rearchiving them onto fresher or newer discs.
I have stuff on CD-R that is starting to become unreadable, including a couple
of Kodak Gold CDs, when sold, were claimed to have a 100 year "shelf life". More
like 7 or 8 from my experience..
--
Two rules for success: 1. Don't tell everything you know.
Jeßus
> Any of you guys had any material archived long term on recordable DVDs? If so,
> what brand of discs are you using and how are they holding up?
>
> I've archived a bit of stuff onto Verbatim DVD-R and DVD+R discs. I'm wondering
> if I shouldn't be rearchiving them onto fresher or newer discs.
Do you mean re-writable discs? I have a few I did approx. 4 years ago
that are still holding up fine, which are Imations. Also some TDKs, but
they're only about 2 y/o. As for write once discs, I have plenty from 4
years ago that are still fine, actually I don't I have come across any
that are beginning to fail yet (now why did I write that... talk about
asking for trouble!). These are mostly cheap and nasty Princos as well.
> I have stuff on CD-R that is starting to become unreadable, including a couple
> of Kodak Gold CDs, when sold, were claimed to have a 100 year "shelf life". More
> like 7 or 8 from my experience..
Yep, so called 'quality' seems to be no guarantee of longevity. There
are so many variables during manufacture (materials included) that
whilst they can at least avoid known poor techniques or materials, it is
still an inexact science... even if they won't admit it.
Marts
> > I've archived a bit of stuff onto Verbatim DVD-R and DVD+R discs. I'm wondering
> > if I shouldn't be rearchiving them onto fresher or newer discs.
>
> Do you mean re-writable discs? I have a few I did approx. 4 years ago
No, "-R" types. ie. Record once.
> whilst they can at least avoid known poor techniques or materials, it is
> still an inexact science... even if they won't admit it.
Given some of the tests that I've seen done to various brands and types of
recordable DVDs, it's not surprising.
Right now, most stuff is stored on HDD and is backed up every month or so.
Nothing that I have is that criticial that it needs backing up every day, or
every hour, or however often it is that the paranoid run their backups.
HDDs are pretty reliable and have been so for a long time. I don't think that I
can recall a time when I've had a hard disk failure, starting way back with my
first one, a Tandon 20meg unit in an XT compatible.
Thing is, if I do ever have a failure, or if I accidentally wipe something or
whatever, it's nice to know that the DVDs can be relied upon for archive
retrieval.
--
Women do come with instructions. Just ask them.
Calvin
> I have stuff on CD-R that is starting to become unreadable, including a couple
> of Kodak Gold CDs, when sold, were claimed to have a 100 year "shelf life". More
> like 7 or 8 from my experience..
I've argued for years that DVD-R, DVD+R and CD-R would have very limited
lives simply because the storage mechanism is a layer of dye, based on
organic chemistry. Organic chemistry is NOTORIOUSLY unstable. (probably
just as well or evolution wouldn't work very well !)
The RW technologies CD-RW, DVD-RW and DVD+RW in my opinion offer a
better hope in terms of longevity. The storage mechanism in these media
types is a metallic alloy which undergoes a "phase change" during
recording. (between crystalline and isomorphic states) Provided the
metallic layer is protected from exposure to the elements, I expect the
data is quite safe.
REUSING these discs in the distant future MAY be a different story. The
metallic storage layer is isolated from it's surroundings by
"dielectric" layer, and this dielectric layer is again (I understand)
based to a degree on organic chemistry.
In all cases the substrate of the recordable media is polycarbonate, and
providing you don't exposure them to extremes of heat, UV light or
moisture, it should be quite stable.
My two cents worth...
Calvin.
Marts
> The only DVDs I have had go off were some attrocious quality cheapies,
> but I have had a number of CDs go off including some good brand ones.
I have a number of music CDs, of varying flavors that I've used for a long time
in a 6 CD changer in the car. They seem to all be holding up, other than one or
two. And they are either branded or unbranded discs.
Just that recently when looking for some files on backup CDs, they couldn't be
read. No error message just that the drive sat there and did nothing. It was if
no disc was in the drive.
Weird.
jh
wrote:
>Nighthawk wrote...
>
>> The only DVDs I have had go off were some attrocious quality cheapies,
>> but I have had a number of CDs go off including some good brand ones.
>
>I have a number of music CDs, of varying flavors that I've used for a long time
>in a 6 CD changer in the car. They seem to all be holding up, other than one or
>two. And they are either branded or unbranded discs.
Run dvd info pro over them. It will tell you how good or crap they
are. Don't use nero speed to test because results are unreliable.
>
>Just that recently when looking for some files on backup CDs, they couldn't be
>read. No error message just that the drive sat there and did nothing. It was if
>no disc was in the drive.
>
>Weird.
Not weird at all if you buy cheap media.
I have dvd's gonig back 5 years and they still play all these years
later. I have kodak cdr that play my mp3 and audio files well which
were recorded over 10 years ago. Some other brands namely the cheap
media has not lasted more than a couple of years.
jh
<newcas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 14:27:35 +1000, Calvin <nos...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>In all cases the substrate of the recordable media is polycarbonate, and
>>providing you don't exposure them to extremes of heat, UV light or
>>moisture, it should be quite stable.
>>
>>My two cents worth...
>>
>>Calvin.
>
>I have a CD-R recorded with music in March 1997 - cost me the earth
>back then.. It's a Kodak Gold brand disc.. Still plays happily today
>with no errors... as good as when it was burnt :)
I have kodak golds going back 10 years plus. Back when I paid for them
they were about $3 per cdr. They still play today. These were mp3 and
audio cdr's.
Run dvd info pro over the media and it shows how good or crap any cd
or dvd is and if its going to last well into the years ahead.
Nero speed gives un reliable results.
jh
wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 07:25:44 +1000, Marts <mart...@yahoo.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>Any of you guys had any material archived long term on recordable DVDs? If so,
>>what brand of discs are you using and how are they holding up?
>>
>>I've archived a bit of stuff onto Verbatim DVD-R and DVD+R discs. I'm wondering
>>if I shouldn't be rearchiving them onto fresher or newer discs.
>>
>>I have stuff on CD-R that is starting to become unreadable, including a couple
>>of Kodak Gold CDs, when sold, were claimed to have a 100 year "shelf life". More
>>like 7 or 8 from my experience..
I have kodak golds which I bought in the real early days which are 2x
speed and the last ones I bought from kodak were 8x. Some of these
burns were done about 15 years ago with the last burnt around 10 years
ago. Never seen one fail. I have all my older music audio cd's that I
still play to this day.
I can understand if you have little children then they don't handle
them as well as us adults which will effect the life of the disk.
Or place a magnet near cd's and they'l be destroyed.
>
>The only DVDs I have had go off were some attrocious quality cheapies,
>but I have had a number of CDs go off including some good brand ones.
>The data layer on CDs is right under the label so is vulnerable to
>damage including from the atmosphere, pens used to mark, etc, but the
>data layer on DVDs is sandwiched between two layers of polycarbonate
>so is well protected, but avoid keeping them in bright light or too
>hot or cold. I get the impressoin that DVDs last better overall.
>
>Brand of discs: DVD+R - Excel (Optodisc) A-Grade, Sony, Imation, all
>holding up well, DVD+RW - Verbatim and Mitsubishi also holding up
>well.
Optodisc often laser which is why they have such a bad reputation.
http://www.videohelp.com/dvdmedia?dvdmediasearch=Optodisc&dvdmediadvdridsearch=&type=11&size=All&dvdburnspeed=All&order=Name&hits=50&search=Search+or+List+Media
Imation not that much better.
http://www.videohelp.com/dvdmedia?dvdmediasearch=Imation&dvdmediadvdridsearch=&type=11&size=All&dvdburnspeed=All&order=Name&hits=50&search=Search+or+List+Media
Run dvd info pro over after a burn. It will show wether your burns
will last.
spodosaurus
> Marts wrote:
>> I have stuff on CD-R that is starting to become unreadable, including
>> a couple
>> of Kodak Gold CDs, when sold, were claimed to have a 100 year "shelf
>> life". More
>> like 7 or 8 from my experience..
>
> I've argued for years that DVD-R, DVD+R and CD-R would have very limited
> lives simply because the storage mechanism is a layer of dye, based on
> organic chemistry. Organic chemistry is NOTORIOUSLY unstable.
Horse shit. What do you think the plastics industry is based on??
--
spammage trappage: remove the underscores to reply
Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow transplant. Please
volunteer to be a marrow donor and literally save someone's life:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/
Franc Zabkar
finger to keyboard and composed:
>Any of you guys had any material archived long term on recordable DVDs? If so,
>what brand of discs are you using and how are they holding up?
>
>I've archived a bit of stuff onto Verbatim DVD-R and DVD+R discs. I'm wondering
>if I shouldn't be rearchiving them onto fresher or newer discs.
>
>I have stuff on CD-R that is starting to become unreadable, including a couple
>of Kodak Gold CDs, when sold, were claimed to have a 100 year "shelf life". More
>like 7 or 8 from my experience..
I haven't noticed any problems with my Kodak Golds so far, except that
I had one blank that couldn't be detected.
I generally do the following:
(1) Always burn at the slowest possible speed.
(2) Make redundant copies. For example, if I am archiving 200MB of
data on a 700MB CD, then I burn three copies of my data on the same
disc (or 3.5 copies).
- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
Calvin
>> I've argued for years that DVD-R, DVD+R and CD-R would have very
>> limited lives simply because the storage mechanism is a layer of dye,
>> based on organic chemistry. Organic chemistry is NOTORIOUSLY unstable.
>
>
> Horse shit. What do you think the plastics industry is based on??
The plastics used in optical media are primarily polycarbonate. This is
a an extremely simple polymer chain and quite robust. Like most
plastics, polycarbonate is bad news for the environment because of this
stability - it takes a VERY long time to break down when thrown out to
landfill.
The dyes on -R +R media on the other hand are quite complex molecules
with inbuilt "stability issues" - that is the whole point of the dye,
light from the recording laser can easily effect change in it !
That was my original point - the fact that the dye is of questionable
stability.
I'm not saying that it will fail tomorrow - or even in tens years time !
What I AM saying is, I think that in long term, the -RW +RW metallic
storage layer will outlast the -R +R dye storage system.
I have also read reports that repeated erase/rewrite cycles on RW media
will ultimately lead to data loss because the metallic storage layer
ultimately "malfunctions" and starts to change states without an
external application of energy. This is quite possible.
I doubt this would be anywhere near as big a problem for an RW media
that is written once only (like an R media) then NEVER erased and
reused. ie: the media is ONLY read.
Calvin.
Marts
> >Just that recently when looking for some files on backup CDs, they couldn't be
> >read. No error message just that the drive sat there and did nothing. It was if
> >no disc was in the drive.
> >
> >Weird.
>
> Not weird at all if you buy cheap media.
What was weird was the way that the disc was "seen" by the OS. Normally, when a
blank CD or DVD is inserted, something usually happens. Like an error message
that you can't read the disc, or a window pops up asking what you want to do
with it, or whatever. In this case with the old CD, old being probably 7 years,
now, the drive just sits there as if there is NO disc in the drive. It doesn't
spin up to try and read it, or any other action.
And as Explorer doesn't see it in the drive I can't run any diagnostic tools on
it, either.
> were recorded over 10 years ago. Some other brands namely the cheap
> media has not lasted more than a couple of years.
And I have cheap media that still works after 7 years or more. They're mostly
music CDs but there are a couple of data CDs, mostly backups that can be read.
--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people
appear bright until you hear them speak
spodosaurus
> spodosaurus wrote:
>>> I've argued for years that DVD-R, DVD+R and CD-R would have very
>>> limited lives simply because the storage mechanism is a layer of dye,
>>> based on organic chemistry. Organic chemistry is NOTORIOUSLY unstable.
>>
>>
>> Horse shit. What do you think the plastics industry is based on??
>
> The plastics used in optical media are primarily polycarbonate. This is
> a an extremely simple polymer chain and quite robust. Like most
> plastics, polycarbonate is bad news for the environment because of this
> stability - it takes a VERY long time to break down when thrown out to
> landfill.
>
blah blah and so forth :) Sorry mate, but next time you make blanket
statements that are obviously false, take time to reread your post
before clicking send. for example:
"Organic chemistry is NOTORIOUSLY unstable."
This is, quite clearly, bullshit *grin* If I say something like that,
please bring it to my attention, too :)
However, I'm interested to hear a mechanism for the breakdown of the azo
dyes in DVD writeable media, assuming its a chemical reaction and not
simple a mechanical issue.
Cheers,
Ari
jh
wrote:
>Which is why I mentioned A-Grade. I have used Excel DVD+R A-Grade
>guaranteed (OPTODISCOR4 and OPTODISCOR8) which have been excellent,
>the best discs I have ever used, but I have also used ungraded
>OPTODISCR16 which were rubbish.
There so called grade a is the same as grade d or worse from other
well known brands.
>
>I am not impressed with Imation either and will not buy any in future.
>I use KProbe2 for testing on a LiteOn 832S drive.
Do yourself a favour and use dvd info pro.
Kprobe2 like nero speed shows every media to be ok when in reality its
often the opposite. It is why so many use nero speed and kprobe2 to
glorify their media.
dvd info pro will acurrately scan for any bad sectors on the media
after a burn. Use crc scan then a pi scan for parity errors.
http://www.dvdinfopro.com/
jh
wrote:
>On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 14:56:45 GMT, j...@com.au (jh) wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:55:45 +1000, Marts <mart...@yahoo.com.au>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Nighthawk wrote...
>>>
>>>> The only DVDs I have had go off were some attrocious quality cheapies,
>>>> but I have had a number of CDs go off including some good brand ones.
>>>
>>>I have a number of music CDs, of varying flavors that I've used for a long time
>>>in a 6 CD changer in the car. They seem to all be holding up, other than one or
>>>two. And they are either branded or unbranded discs.
>>
>>Run dvd info pro over them. It will tell you how good or crap they
>>are. Don't use nero speed to test because results are unreliable.
>>
>I have never heard of this. Perhaps it is a drive compatibility
>issue?
Both nero speed and kprobe shows burns to be good when they are not as
good which is a mistake many get caught up in.
Run dvd info pro. Do a crc scan for bad sectors. A good disk will have
no bad sectors. Then do a pi scan. The ecma standard is must not
exceed 280 pie. If it does then don't expect to be able to play the
media in the future. If pie is 280 or less then the media should last
many years.
GK
PIPO test - I click the button and the PIPO window comes up, but it just
sits there (with the 'Start' control greyed out) and does nothing...
How do I kick off the PIPO test?
Thanks.
"jh" <j...@com.au> wrote in message news:46f66bbe.896234@news-server...
Marts
> I have kodak golds which I bought in the real early days which are 2x
> speed and the last ones I bought from kodak were 8x. Some of these
Wow, talk about early adopter...
Back in 1992, I cannot remember CD burners being available commercially. Were
you working in some recording industry or something that had access to these
products whereas the rest of us didn't?
--
Flying is the second greatest experience known to man. Landing is the first.
SJ2571
> I have stuff on CD-R that is starting to become unreadable, including a couple
> of Kodak Gold CDs, when sold, were claimed to have a 100 year "shelf life". More
> like 7 or 8 from my experience..
Don't rely on discs. The technology is still too new and unreliable.
Hard drives have been around for many decades and are much safer.
Big W are selling 160 GB removable drives for $98, so buy a few.
Jeßus
> "Marts" <mart...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message news:v4k5f3ltlkgi22elc...@4ax.com...
>
>> I have stuff on CD-R that is starting to become unreadable, including a couple
>> of Kodak Gold CDs, when sold, were claimed to have a 100 year "shelf life". More
>> like 7 or 8 from my experience..
>
>
> Don't rely on discs. The technology is still too new and unreliable.
> Hard drives have been around for many decades and are much safer.
Are they? Wait until you've had one fail and then seen what you think :)
Plus, you stand to lose a LOT in one go if a HDD fails, if that is your
only copy of data.
I've had plenty of HDDs over the years, very rarely do they fail - but
they can and do.
My last one that failed had 300GB of data - fortunately also backup up
onto DVD.
There is no one safe method of data storage.
Just saying.
--
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they
are free - Goethe
Franc Zabkar
finger to keyboard and composed:
>Marts wrote:
>> I have stuff on CD-R that is starting to become unreadable, including a couple
>> of Kodak Gold CDs, when sold, were claimed to have a 100 year "shelf life". More
>> like 7 or 8 from my experience..
>
>I've argued for years that DVD-R, DVD+R and CD-R would have very limited
>lives simply because the storage mechanism is a layer of dye, based on
>organic chemistry. Organic chemistry is NOTORIOUSLY unstable. (probably
>just as well or evolution wouldn't work very well !)
Paintings and printed works seem to last hundreds of years, if not
thousands. Films and photographs seem to survive quite well, too.
SJ2571
>> Don't rely on discs. The technology is still too new and unreliable.
>> Hard drives have been around for many decades and are much safer.
>
> Are they? Wait until you've had one fail and then seen what you think :)
They're a million times safer than a CD or DVD, is my point. And no, I've
never had a hard drive fail in the last 20 years, whereas the examples
here show that optical media seem to be lasting less than 10 years.
SJ2571
> Plus, you stand to lose a LOT in one go if a HDD fails, if that is your only copy of data.
The same can be said of optical media. Even though dual-layer is currently
the norm, you can lose 8.5 GB of data in an instant if the TOC is corrupted.
And when Blu-Ray writable media comes in, that's 55 GB of data at risk. It's
all relative, but hard drives are still way safer than optical media for
many reasons -- the most obvious being the enclosed platter which isn't
subject to scratches/fingerprints/etc.
Bonzo
"Nighthawk" <nigh...@allo.com> wrote in message
news:3p7nf3lcm2kn26u7k...@4ax.com...
They are
> the component in a PC that fails the most.
>
You should take better care of your hard drives!
I haven't had a HDD failure for ages. Actually I can't remember
having a HDD failure.
Regards
Bonzo
"There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and
Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact,
when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now,
about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the
absolute coldest period in the last half billion years. . On the
basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the
recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major
cause of the past century's modest warming?" Professor Tim
Patterson, aleoclimatologist, Carleton University, Appearing
before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable
Development
Calvin
> Hard drive failures are not uncommon. I have lost a couple. They are
> the component in a PC that fails the most.
I'd argue that point - Power Supply failures would actually top the list !
I agree however, any form of storage media is prone to data loss. The
main reason that Hard Disk Drive storage is superior is because the
storage media is fully contained and (basically) hermetically sealed
rather than the recording technologies being employed.
Hard Disk storage also has vulnerabilities: extreme temperatures or
large mechanical shocks can result in the erasure of a magnetic
recording. These points need to be borne in mind when choosing where to
store magnetic archives.
Calvin.
Marts
> Are they? Wait until you've had one fail and then seen what you think :)
I haven't had a hard drive fail, where you get the classic "crash", nor any
other type of failure since the purchase of my first HDD back in '87. I've
accidentally deleted partitions, erased the wrong directories, copied over newer
files with older ones. In other words, losses due to operator error. :-(
The idea of buying a few 160gb removables isn't such a bad idea. Buy say, 3 of
them and rotate the archiving duties between them is probably as reliable a
method as you'll ever see.
My only concern is that being removable, means that they're also portable, which
means that they will experience more manual handling than that of a fixed drive.
That exposes them to greater risk, say, of being dropped, banged about, etc..
I think that for the time being, it's probably just as safe, and cheaper, to use
a number of DVD-Rs to do the backups. Not that we have a lot of data to back up.
--
I must confess, I was born at a very early age. - Groucho Marx
SJ2571
"Nighthawk" <nigh...@allo.com> wrote in message news:3p7nf3lcm2kn26u7k...@4ax.com...
> Hard drive failures are not uncommon. I have lost a couple. They are
> the component in a PC that fails the most.
Oh no, not this stupid urban legend again! <Rolls eyes>.
Peter Jason
"Calvin" <nos...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:13fbhna...@corp.supernews.com...
Are these dyes phthalocyanines?
Marts
One PC couldn't read the discs. But another could. (Liteon and Pioner DVR108).
Both DVD drives are getting on 4 or 5 years old themselves. But the Pioneer was
able to read the discs. Dunno if the Liteon is on its way out.
"Groucho", a one time regular here has or had the same Liteon drive as he
recommended it to me. If he's still reading here, perhaps he can tell me if his
Liteons are still going.
Whatever, the DVD in question is a no-name brand that I picked up from somewhere
or other. I'm wondering if it's about to lose its integrity due to age or
whether the Liteon is starting to fail.