Page 1 of 1

Will BD-R discs be A LOT BETTER for long time archiving ?

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 3:45 am
by frank1
While reading all what is published about the so called «format war» Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD,
among all the arguments about capacity, costs and copy protection for movies
I found far more interesting the following thing about the sensitive material that is going to be used for recording.

My surprise was that TDK says that they use two non-organic layers
for manufacturing their write once BD-R discs.

I don’t know if others companies that have already announced Blu-Ray discs (like Sony for example) are going to use a similar technique for their BD-R discs or not ?

Press release from TDK about manufacturing of their BD-R discs
published on January the 5th 2006:

Here is the interesting part about how the data are written and protected in the BD-R format:
For the Blu-ray Disc, which utilizes ultra-high density recording to achieve its large capacities, scratches or dirt on the disc surface can cause data errors. To ensure reliable performance, the Blu-ray Disc was first introduced to the Japanese market in a protective cartridge. The BD-R and BD-RE Blu-ray Discs that TDK is now launching utilize DURABIS 2, the company’s exclusive hard coating technology. DURABIS 2 gives the recording surface extremely high resistance to scratches, fingerprint smudges and other dirt, thus eliminating the need for a protective cartridge.

TDK’s proprietary high-precision Spin Coating manufacturing process is utilized to form each Blu-ray Disc’s cover layer, which resides atop the recording layer. Because Spin Coating creates a cover layer with nano-uniform smoothness, exceptionally stable recording and playback characteristics are realized.

The write-once type BD-R discs incorporate inorganic recording material, which is entirely different from the organic dye used in previous write-once discs.
Because the recording layer is not affected by light, the discs are exceptionally suitable for long-term archiving.
The rewritable type BD-RE discs utilize a high-sensitivity phase-change recording material that displays stability and a low error rate, even after 10,000 overwrites

Fig. 6 Recording process with write-once type BD-R media


1. When the recording laser makes contact, its heat melts the Si and Cu alloy, which become mixed.

2. When the mixture cools, the hardened Si and Cu alloy become a composite, in which the recording mark is formed

Comparison with HD DVD still using organic dye: ... wsId=16533
The new dye used for the discs is the result of a joint development project by Hayashibara Biochemical Laboratories, a key manufacturer of dyes for DVD-Recordable discs, Mitsubishi Kagaku Media/Verbatim and Toshiba Corporation. Development of the new dye by Hayashibara, Mitsubishi Kagaku Media/Verbatim and Toshiba is a breakthrough for HD DVD-R. Standard DVD-Recordable discs use a photosensitive organic dye as the data storage medium in their recording layer.
[b] In the transition to HD DVD, manufacturers had to meet the challenge of developing a dye for HD DVD-R discs that could be used with the narrow wavelength of a blue laser and offered sufficient readout stability.
The organic dye is highly sensitive to blue laser light, has the uncompromised readout stability essential for practical use, and the solubility in organic solvent required for easy production of the dye recording layer by a spin-coating process.
As the HD DVD-R disc is based on the same disc structure as DVD discs, back-to-back bonding of two 0.6 millimeter-thick substrates, already installed DVD-Recordable manufacturing lines can utilize the new dye in efficient production of HD DVD-R

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 8:40 am
by Ian
I don't think TDK will be the only ones using inorganic dye. The way Blu-ray discs are constructed is very different than HD DVD and standard DVD's. Instead of being sandwiched between the polycarb, the recording layer is near the surface, which is why they all are using some sort of scratch proofing material.. and probably why they're using inorganic dye.

I'm no expert on dyes, but it sounds like the inorganic solution might last longer as its creating a reaction between the two metals. You'd think this would stand up better to time and temperature.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 2:05 pm
by [buck]
According to Ricoh, their HD DVD-R and BD-R discs both use inorganic recording materials.

By employing highly sensitive inorganic recording materials and high-precision stampers newly developed for next-generation recordable DVDs, Ricoh was able to achieve high reliability when writing and reading data. This will provide an advantage in further speed increases and multilayer structures. ... nguageID=2

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 4:16 am
by frank1
I don't think TDK will be the only ones using inorganic dye.

In this preview of the Pioneer BDR-101A Blu-Ray burner: ... 5&PageId=1
you can read following about the dyes used:
The recordable layer of a Recordable Blu-ray Disc, employs either organic or inorganic materials.
For a single-layer Recordable Blu-ray Disc, the thickness from the disc surface to the recording layer is 100 µm.

For example,
Fuji Photo Film Co. Ltd. has successfully demonstrated BD-R that can be readily put into commercial production using organic materials.

Furthermore, TDK has realized BD-R discs using inorganic materials (a Cu alloy layer and a Si layer). In addition to the type of inorganic materials used by TDK, it is also possible to use write-once phase change materials.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 3:52 pm
by islander
Is there any news on how good are hd-dvd and bd-r discs for long time archiving.
According to this ... &PageId=18
bd-r discs design is not so good. Here is summary:
"For now, our first test with Blu-Ray media brought to the surface a serious parameter related to Blu-Ray discs: The necessity for very careful handling and storage."

PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 3:59 pm
by Ian
BD-R media is actually pretty durable. The anti-scratch stuff they put on there makes it very hard to damage the data layer. As far as playback goes, I can see fingerprints and dust causing problems though.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:11 pm
by jberry
why would anyone trust and burnable optical media with 30-50 gig of data? I can see grandma and grandpa burning all their pics on it and scratch, etc. ruined.

Hard drives and RAID are soooooooo cheap they are they way to go for that amount of data.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 11:44 am
by dolphinius_rex
jberry wrote:why would anyone trust and burnable optical media with 30-50 gig of data? I can see grandma and grandpa burning all their pics on it and scratch, etc. ruined.

Hard drives and RAID are soooooooo cheap they are they way to go for that amount of data.

HDD's have WAY too many weaknesses, including magnetic waves, kinetic force, and too many moving parts. Optical media and tape backup will always be the safest archival solutions in my opinion.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 1:39 pm
by jberry
sorry dolph but those worries are ancient.....I have hard drives here that are 10 years old and still purring along. Meanwhile I have 6 relatives who have media that is 8 years old and, well, the data (pics mainly) are corrupt.

I think the notion that optical media is the panecea of storage is really a red herring. Hard drives are cheap, quicker, better. Get a bunch of cheap ones and raid them up. I really think optical media for storage is slowly going th way of the dinosaur. More and more people are going the way of HTPC.

BR writables have way too many problems that can go wrong. For DVD-R, CD, etc., maybe they are still ok. But anyone who uses BR for archiving is flirting with disaster. I use to do optical everything as well...but you know, hard drives are soooooo much easier, faster, and you can have multiple backups.

I can do 3 backups of all 230 gigs of our stuff so fast it is crazy. Two on network drives, one on portable usb for offsite (parents). Optical cannot and never will be able to do this. As people amass more and more stuff optical media cannot win. It provides a false sense of security (as most people only burn once). All PCs have raid now and everyone knows what it is.

Sorry...just my opinion; oh yah...consumer doesn't use tape.

I only use optical for our home movies now....too slow otherwise.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:01 am
by dolphinius_rex
I consider HDD's a very good primary holder of data for sure, but for making an archival backup I still think optical media is better. All it takes is a shock at just the right point to cause a drive head crash. Or if you leave the HDD unattended for too long the mechanisms could seize also.

Of course if you are not careful, you could easily end up with crap recordable media... there's no doubting that. And I certainly wouldn't jump on using DVD for anything THAT long in terms of archiving. Most DVDRs are really only safe for storing things up to 5-6 years, or maybe 9-10 years for the higher grade ones. CD-Rs are deffinately more reliable for long term, and I have high hopes that Blu-Ray will be closer in performance to CD-Rs then DVDRs. But again, you'll have to avoid the crappy discs as they come out.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 12:05 am
by jberry
Sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree...

RAID and NAS boxes are everywhere...even my parents (born in 1940s) have a RAID and they love it LOL....with music and video taking up so much space I think optical media really is becoming only for software, CD-DA stuff, and DVD-Video.

For me I have a raided drive in my PC...then every week I back that up to a portable USB drive AND another SATA trayless rack in just a matter of minutes I have 4 backups of EVERYTHING and the USB hard drive is my offsite thing. So many of my friends/colleagues (computer literate and NOT) do this. Optical media, while having its advantages for some small things, just cannot keep up. It is just far too slow.

I remember the days of thinking DVD-RAM was cool....slow but cool. Those days are long gone, I think, for most people now.

I doubt I will ever use optical media for backups again.

True hard drives have moving parts, but I can do far more in terms of multiple backups that I don't care. It is just so easy.

I also have no faith that BR blanks will be any more reliable than other media in the past.

In any case....the lesson for all is BACKUP, you have more digital assets than you realize!!!!

Happy New Year

PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:10 am
by Ian
I agree with both of you guys. At work, we first archive to hard drive. This is much faster and its easier to restore. For long term, we archive off to tape. It's slower but much more economical and its easier to store tapes than a bunch of hard drives. For consumers, DVD or BD media could be used in the same way.

You also have the convenience factor. Are you really going to want to rip a hard drive out of your computer and toss it in a closet? What if you want to take it to your friends house? In these cases, optical media is still the way to go.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:41 am
by jberry
actaully Ian, but vantec USB hard hard case is easy to bring to it all the time...with the bonues of bringing ALL of my pics, etc with me, not just a few.

Hey, you and Dolph mention tape....I never really thought much of this a cost effective alternative for LOOOOOOOOONG term storage? I know nothing about it. Can you give any links to reasonably priced manufacturers? I would like to check into it.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 12:00 pm
by Ian
Good point about the external hard drive. I've been buying a lot of those external cases lately. Still, I don't take them with me. They're too heavy for long trips.

Tape is not a good solution for consumers. While the tapes offer a good GB/$ ratio, the hardware involved is expensive.

Has anyone looked at Imation's Odyssey system? It looks like a cross between tape and HDD backups.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:57 pm
by Halc
Off topic and old, but as I was scanning for archival stuff again, I'll just post quickly.

1. HDs are not good for off-line archival, due to loss of fluid bearings in non-active use

2. HD RAID is NOT backup! How many times do we have to go through this. RAID is an online storage capability with added redundancy. That is completely different from backup or archival media.

Sure it may work for a long time as a storage system, but archival media it is not.

But back to optical discs.

Anybody head anything new about this TDK disc or seen any tests with it?

PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 3:05 pm
by Gen-An
Not my most favorite subject (I hate Blu-Ray) but the new BD-R LTH type uses organic dyes.