DVD+R vs DVD - R

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:03:57 GMT, "HEMI-Powered" wrote in
:

David J Taylor added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

MikeM wrote:
I have used DVDs to back up digital photos on my computer. I
started using HDDs because I kept getting errors on the
disks. Since then I have read a number of posts about burning
speed making a difference. I am thinking of having another go
at disks, but burning at the slowest speeds. The speed
difference might explain my experience that DVD-RWs didn't
have errors, it seems it might have been because they are 4X.
I was burning the DVD-Rs at whatever speed my burner chose.

I've found it best not to use the top-rated speed, but burning
16X at 12X seems to be OK in one of my PCs, whereas burning at
16X sometimes gave errors on the verification pass.

What brand(s) of discs do you prefer, David, and what brand(s)
have you found to be more problematical than others. As I
commented in another post, I haven't had any speed-related
failures since the Roxio 5 CD-R days, none I can recall with many
types of media with Roxio 8.

My own favorite commonly available brands are Verbatim and Sony.
Best in my opinion are Taiyo Yuden.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:33:21 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

To be honest, I haven't done a lot of comaprison. The two 100-packs on my
shelf right now are marked Verbatim and Philips 16X DVD-R, but who knows
where they were really made? ...

Use a utility (e.g., Nero InfoTool) to read and display the internal
media code.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:02:48 GMT, MikeM wrote
in :

What's the latest thinking on when archived DVDs need to be copied to
fresh disks? After how many years?

Check them periodically, and copy when error rate starts to rise.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 01:03:03 +1100, dj_nme wrote
in :

MikeM wrote:

I was told by a salesman that the 50 packs of TDK DVD+Rs are $20
dearer than 50 packs of DVD-Rs because the DVD+Rs are intended for
archival use whereas the DVD-Rs are for recording things like TV
shows. This is not what I've been told about the difference in the
past. The packs seem to be almost identical, no mention of quality on
either pack.

It might also depend on what else you're planning to do with your burnt
DVDs.
Quite a few DVD players that I've recently used can only play back DVD-R
discs.

There are likewise DVD players that can only be used to play back DVD+R
discs.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 09:54:01 GMT, "HEMI-Powered" wrote in
:

John Navas added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD%2BR

In addition, DVD+R(W) has a more robust error management
system than DVD-R(W), allowing for more accurate burning to
media independent of the quality of the media. Additional
session linking methods are more accurate with DVD+R(W)
versus DVD-R(W), resulting in fewer damaged or unusable
discs due to buffer under-run and multi-session disks with
fewer PI/PO errors.

John, thanks for the link. I read the entire article but still do
not understand the apparent point.

The point is that DVD+R technology has more robust error management than
DVD-R technology.

http://www.ceqna.com/tivo-dvrs/989-tivo-3.html

Improved tracking / speed control / error-management technologies
reduce the number of rejects during manufacture and errors during
playback. Because of this, DVD+R disks are less sensitive to media
quality than DVD-R disks.

http://www.cdfreaks.com/reviews/Why-DVDRW-is-superior-to-DVD-RW

Why DVD+R(W) is superior to DVD-R(W)
[read entire article]

http://www.homefurnish.com/hometheaterelectronics/computers/dvdrvsdvdr.aspx

The ADIP system of tracking and speed control in a DVD+R recorder is
more accurate than the LPP system used by DVD-R, making it less
susceptible to interference and error at high speeds.

Also, DVD+R has a more accurate and stronger error management system
than DVD-R(W), allowing for more consistent quality. Additional
session linking methods are quite a bit more accurate with DVD+R
versus DVD-R, resulting in fewer ruined disks.

I've not seen Roxio 8 throw any
errors thus I have no direct experience but if the +R format
supports better error reporting, maybe I haven't seen it because
all of my burns have been error free with both -R and +R, at least
as far as Roxio "sees."

You're only looking at immediate hard errors. Sort errors are also
important because they can become hard errors over time and/or on
different equipment.

Do you have an opinion wrt my DVR throwing errors with DVD+R as
well as requiring a format by the DVR even though neither has ever
occurred with my PC?

DVD+R do not require formatting. Are you thinking of DVD+RW? Different
technology. Please be precise in your posts.

Of course, I've long known that on PCs occasionally and certainly
on the 2 different models with similar specs of the Panasonic DVR I
talked about are sensitive to media type because of the color of
the dye layer "confusing" the burning laser.

That's a myth. What matters are reflectivity and media quality.

John, would I be correct in assuming that you have experienced
errors with -R discs that burn OK with +R?

I experience higher quality burned discs with +R than with -R.

I will add one more
comment about my method of insuring or at least trying to insure a
truly error-free burn: no matter what the file type whether it be
JPEG, RAW, MS Office, downloaded app updates, MP3 files, just about
any common graphics or non-graphics file formats, I ALWAYS do a
number of sample reads/opens on the just burned disc even though no
errors have been reported. Now THAT has shown an occasional
problem. e.g., an entire folder full of MS 97 Word .doc files
burned correctly but none could be opened.

Then your burning software is fatally flawed and should be replaced.

Do you have any comments about Joliet vs. UDF? ...

I use UDF.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

John Navas wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:33:21 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

To be honest, I haven't done a lot of comaprison. The two 100-packs
on my shelf right now are marked Verbatim and Philips 16X DVD-R, but
who knows where they were really made? ...

Use a utility (e.g., Nero InfoTool) to read and display the internal
media code.

Thanks for that pointer, John. I'm not that fussed right now.

David

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:38:38 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:33:21 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

To be honest, I haven't done a lot of comaprison. The two 100-packs
on my shelf right now are marked Verbatim and Philips 16X DVD-R, but
who knows where they were really made? ...

Use a utility (e.g., Nero InfoTool) to read and display the internal
media code.

Thanks for that pointer, John. I'm not that fussed right now.

When you do get that fussed, free download from
http://www.nero.com/enu/support-nero8-tools-utilities.html

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 04:40:38 +0000, MikeM wrote:

I was told by a salesman that the 50 packs of TDK DVD+Rs are $20 dearer
than 50 packs of DVD-Rs because the DVD+Rs are intended for archival
use whereas the DVD-Rs are for recording things like TV shows. This is
not what I've been told about the difference in the past. The packs seem
to be almost identical, no mention of quality on either pack.

Thanks
Mike

The sales people will tell you anything. Generally, you know more than
they do.

John Navas wrote:

On 11 Feb 2008 06:05:00 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in :



MikeM wrote:



I was told by a salesman that the 50 packs of TDK DVD+Rs are $20 dearer than 50 packs of DVD-Rs because the DVD+Rs are intended for archival use whereas the DVD-Rs are for recording things like TV shows.



If you had brains would you be a salesdweeb at some electronics store?

If brains were dynamite, he would not have enough to blow his nose.


If you had brains would you be believing a salesdweeb at some electronics store?

? "MikeM" ?????? ??? ??????
...
I was told by a salesman that the 50 packs of TDK DVD+Rs are $20
dearer than 50 packs of DVD-Rs because the DVD+Rs are intended for
archival use whereas the DVD-Rs are for recording things like TV
shows. This is not what I've been told about the difference in the
past. The packs seem to be almost identical, no mention of quality on
either pack.

I always use printable cds and dvds. My vendor (www.cccira.gr) claims all
major brands optical media is made by OEM like sirius and re-labelled. I get
50 cd-r in a spindle for 15 euros, sirius, and 100 paper envelopes for, IIRC
7 euros. I use now TDK DVD-R without any problem (spindle again). No
problems with authoring and burning dvds, sofar. But, if I try to copy any
dvd, including my own, the computer reboots, in the middle of the process. I
have no problem with dvd burning at 16 by. But, I cannot make a copy of a cd
on the fly faster than 20 by, without risking a finalizing error. (My
computer is quite crappy with today's standards, 2.4 GHz celeron, 512 MB
DDR, IDE hard drive, geforce 4 mx 440, Intel i 848 chipset, QDI mobo, win 2k
greek).

Adding my 2 cents....



--
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
major in electrical engineering
mechanized infantry reservist
hordad AT otenet DOT gr