Which DVD+R?

[NightTran]

I used to had an sony 1693 it only burn at 4x in order for quality's good MCC02 was the only thing I could get to burn at 4x

[nwg]

It seems I can't do a quality scan. I have never had the need to do one as I don't believe they give accurate results. I have seen top quality discs give less than 50 quality yet they still play fine years later.

All I require is a CRC error check to be error free and the disc play 100% on all the players I have including the computer. I have burned four discs so far as they have all played fine.

[Mr. Smooth]

I haven't had any problems with any brand I have used. I usually go with what is on sale!

[nwg]

I have burned 15 so far with Imgburn (complete Futurama) and they all play fine so I am happy. They worked out at £0.13/$0.25 per disc.

[LT. Columbo]

nice to see someone else who shuns the scanning crap!

imaginary greens for nwg.

[Chewy]

play now, pay later

[LT. Columbo]

we'll see about that chewy. we'll just see. i got a few crappy discs with crappy burns that are supposed to not play after a few months play perfect still. almost 3 years old.(AML). when i see it, i'll believe it. the thing is you guys strive for very high quality scores, yet a score you may reject and deem (sh.it) may be perfectly good to last 50 years. too early to make any concrete rules IMO.

[Chewy]

test those disks in some iffy players, I have

they have problems

the bottom line is can your computer read the burns so you can reburn when
necerssary

simply take an older aml burn and do a disk transfer test and post the png

[LT. Columbo]

the bottom line is can your computer read the burns so you can reburn when
necerssary

absolutely. i've done it many times. maybe i'm lucky or maybe it's good enough a burn? i don't deny the science of the scanning chewy or your knowledge, just i think the scanning thing is a bit over the top (most of the time IMO and unecessary). plus it's a great way to wear the frickin hell out of a good drive for nothing (IMO). you burn to scan, i just burn. i've also got a bunch of memorex dvd's you guys say are "pure crap" and will "fail in 6 months" these are over 2 years old and play flawlessly - these are reasons for my skepticism.

[Chewy]

now scanning isn't gonna wear out a burner any faster than verifying, I just scan as a spot check. Hardly ever use verify. I finally used up some iffy disks by doing a quick scan on every burn, reburning anything that was below
50 in quality and pitching the bad ones. That was a waste of my burner, and what I get for buying hong kong TY clones/fakes.


I do try to keep an eye on my burn times, when I see a disk taking extra time, I will scan the burn before I delete the file from my hard drive.

when my buddy gave me some memorex's I scanned a few of the burns at first just to make sure they were a good batch

my verbs and ty's I don't have to scan very much, they are consistent

[masscamp24]

[quote=Chewy;484361]now scanning isn't gonna wear out a burner any faster than verifying, I just scan as a spot check.
I do that too but recently I receive this warning from imgburn (see log *) and I wonder if my drive is going bad or is it the disc? However the burn was good.

I 07:13:50 ImgBurn Version 2.1.0.0 started!
I 07:13:50 Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition (5.1, Build 2600 : Service Pack 2)
I 07:13:50 Initialising SPTI...
I 07:13:50 Searching for SCSI / ATAPI devices...
I 07:13:51 Found 2 DVD-ROMs and 1 DVD±RW!
I 07:14:09 Operation Started!
I 07:14:09 Building Image Tree...
I 07:14:10 Checking Directory Depth...
I 07:14:10 Calculating Totals...
I 07:14:10 Preparing Image...
I 07:14:10 Checking Path Length...
I 07:14:10 Image Size: 4,694,147,072 bytes
I 07:14:10 Image Sectors: 2,292,064
I 07:14:10 Operation Successfully Completed! - Duration: 00:00:00
I 07:15:02 Operation Started!
I 07:15:02 Building Image Tree...
I 07:15:04 Checking Directory Depth...
I 07:15:04 Calculating Totals...
I 07:15:04 Preparing Image...
I 07:15:04 Checking Path Length...
I 07:15:04 Image Size: 4,694,147,072 bytes
I 07:15:04 Image Sectors: 2,292,064
I 07:15:07 Operation Successfully Completed! - Duration: 00:00:04
I 07:15:07 Operation Started!
I 07:15:07 Source File: -==/\/[BUILD IMAGE]\/\==-
I 07:15:07 Source File Sectors: 2,292,064 (MODE1/2048)
I 07:15:07 Source File Size: 4,694,147,072 bytes
I 07:15:07 Source File Volume Identifier: DVD
I 07:15:07 Source File Application Identifier: IMGBURN V2.1.0.0 - THE ULTIMATE IMAGE BURNER!
I 07:15:07 Source File Implementation Identifier: ImgBurn
I 07:15:07 Source File File System(s): ISO9660, UDF (1.02)
I 07:15:07 Destination Device: [0:1:0] _NEC DVD+-RW ND-3450A 102B (E (ATA)
I 07:15:07 Destination Media Type: DVD-R (Disc ID: RITEKG05) (Speeds: 2x, 4x, 6x, 8x)
I 07:15:07 Destination Media Sectors: 2,297,888
I 07:15:07 Write Mode: DVD
I 07:15:07 Write Type: DAO
I 07:15:07 Write Speed: 4x
I 07:15:07 Link Size: Auto
I 07:15:07 Test Mode: No
I 07:15:07 BURN-Proof: Enabled
I 07:15:08 Filling Buffer...
I 07:15:09 Writing LeadIn...
I 07:15:41 Writing Image...
*W 07:22:49 Waiting for buffers to recover...
*W 07:23:01 Waiting for hard disk activity to reach threshold level...
I 07:23:03 Writing Image...
*W 07:24:40 Waiting for buffers to recover...
*W 07:24:44 Waiting for hard disk activity to reach threshold level...
I 07:24:46 Writing Image...
I 07:30:04 Synchronising Cache...
I 07:30:13 Image MD5: d0f2979960f01ba0cea4513ba7973383
I 07:30:15 Operation Successfully Completed! - Duration: 00:15:06
I 07:30:15 Average Write Rate: 5,318 KB/s (3.8x) - Maximum Write Rate: 5,931 KB/s (4.3x)
I 07:35:22 Close Request Acknowledged
I 07:35:22 Closing Down...
I 07:35:30 Shutting down SPTI...
I 07:35:30 ImgBurn closed!

[Chewy]

if it just started on a new batch of disks then it's probably those g05's causing it, they are highly inconsistent, even within a spindle

if it's doing it on every disk then it might be your laser's getting dirty/weak? and the AOPC is trying to compensate for it by slowing down the burn to keep quality
up

[LT. Columbo]

now scanning isn't gonna wear out a burner any faster than verifying, I just scan as a spot check. Hardly ever use verify. I finally used up some iffy disks by doing a quick scan on every burn, reburning anything that was below
50 in quality and pitching the bad ones. That was a waste of my burner, and what I get for buying hong kong TY clones/fakes.


I do try to keep an eye on my burn times, when I see a disk taking extra time, I will scan the burn before I delete the file from my hard drive.

i don't verify the burns either. i watch them. that is verify to me. i don't delete untill it is watched without problems. i also watch the burn times. i've seen it take a little longer on an rw once. pc was a mess at the time.

[Chewy]

Unfortunately I still have a daughter(19) who doesn't have a dvd burner yet and I get stuck backing up for her, her computer barely handles music.
When she got a title that I wouldn't even watch, I used my fake/clone hong kong disks and did a quick quality scan. It did waste 4 minutes of benq time.
My son already hit me up for one of my best combo drives and a nec burner.
now he's complaining that bitsett verbatims are locking up in his(my old) toshiba standalone.
will try a disassemble clean today, if you can resurrect a dvd burner why not?

old hillbilly saying "poor people have poor ways"

[LT. Columbo]

you mean you give your daughter crap discs for her back-ups?