CDRLabs.com

so roughly 5 years ago, I decided to attempt to debunk the whole "sharpie's are bad for CD-Rs" thing. I took a Prodisc shiny silver surface CD-R, and burned it. Then I scanned it. Then I put 2 thick rings of sharpie marking along the inner and outer edges of the laquer, and scanned it again. Then I scanned the disc periodically over several weeks, then months. I kept the disc, and ignored it for a while. Now I've taken it out of "retirment" and scanned it again.

My original goal, was to compare time lapsed scans of the disc to the very first few, and see if the beginning and ending of the disc exhibited increased error levels, when compared to the middle of the disc.

Sadly, it appears I have lost all my original scans!

However, judging from the scans I'm seeing now, the disc chosen may have been a bad choice. The Prodisc CD-R has now degraded into such utter crap, that it's possible that if the were error rates increasing in a small amount on the inner and outer edges, I would not be able to tell!

An interesting thing I noticed was that I've received some conflicting scan data from several different drives though. The PX-712a reports very high errors at the beginning of the disc, up to about 1/3rd, which is beyond where I put sharpie markings, and the outer edge is fine. There are also C2 errors spotting all the way along the disc.

My LiteON 48125W has a HECK of a time with the disc, and shows thousands and thousands of errors according to Nero CD/DVD Speed... I'll re-test with K-Probe when I get a chance, but the results should be about the same.

Once I get my Plextor Premium drive installed again, I'll retest with that, and see what comes up again, and I'll post the scan as well at that time. Right now I'm just in the middle of a nasty system re-install, and all my logins and memberships with webspace servers have to be re-setup

So in conclusion.... I can't see any changes that might have happened because of the sharpie, but I can say with great certainty that if there *IS* quality issues caused by the shapie markings, then they were far FAR less significant then the degidation level brought about by time on the Prodisc CD-R.

For reference sake, the CD-R was kept in a CD Jewel Case, in a room temperature enviroment (my room ), kept out of direct sunlight, and usually any light at all. The CD-R was handled with extreme care, and there are no visible scratches on the disc, on either top or bottom. Also, I have not noticed any colour bleeding from the sharpie marks, or anything else that might indicate degridation, or cause for degridation of quality.

As a final note, I'm really REALLY happy I don't use Prodisc media for ANY personal stuff

Prodisc media sucks.

Next question what sort of jewel case ?
Based on what you put up the jewel case might have killed it in combination with low manufactureing quality.

RJW wrote:Prodisc media sucks.

Next question what sort of jewel case ?
Based on what you put up the jewel case might have killed it in combination with low manufactureing quality.

It was a blue coloured slim jewel case. Not the kind you buy in a dollar store either.

The disc had no significant degridation problems (going by memory) for over a year, so I don't think it was the case, but can't completely rule it out either.

(my emphasis)

dolphinius_rex wrote:so roughly 5 years ago, I decided to attempt to debunk the whole "sharpie's are bad for CD-Rs" thing. I took a Prodisc shiny silver surface CD-R, and burned it. Then I scanned it.

By scanning, I take it you mean a CD-Speed surface scan? I just started to hang out around here about 3 years ago, and there definitely were not any other scanning tools available.

Interesting test, BTW. Some of my oldest CDRs are on 8x (I think) white-surfaced ?printable?? Verbatim DLP, at least 5 years old (I didn't keep notes at the time). I labeled them using a permanent marker for overhead transparencies (various colours and thickness) and they scan just fine.

G

Are you sure 5 years ? Ehh what year is it 2008 ?

3/7/2003 6:43:43 AM - Dates the cdrinfo post about your test.
http://www.cdrinfo.com/forum/tm.asp?m=9 ... ey=sharpie

So unless the time is going much faster in Canada as in the rest of the world it's roughly 1.5 years.
Hmm hey does this declare the maxell statement they say you will get our media in a month and you end up waiteing a canadian half year which might now seem close to a real month.

So in world time. I think we can say 1.5 years ?

About coloured jewelcases it doesn't matter with the wrong solvent/plastifiers you can accelerate the destruction of poor manufacturerd media very fast.
(Remember the report in which they screwed up the ritek disc because of the bad case in the other situations the accelerated testings gave back very nice values of 100 years.)

MediumRare wrote:(my emphasis)

dolphinius_rex wrote:so roughly 5 years ago, I decided to attempt to debunk the whole "sharpie's are bad for CD-Rs" thing. I took a Prodisc shiny silver surface CD-R, and burned it. Then I scanned it.

By scanning, I take it you mean a CD-Speed surface scan? I just started to hang out around here about 3 years ago, and there definitely were not any other scanning tools available.

Interesting test, BTW. Some of my oldest CDRs are on 8x (I think) white-surfaced ?printable?? Verbatim DLP, at least 5 years old (I didn't keep notes at the time). I labeled them using a permanent marker for overhead transparencies (various colours and thickness) and they scan just fine.

G

Ok, maybe closer to 3 years then? I think I was using CD Doctor or whatever that one was called. It predated K-Probe, but was after WSES.

I have no sense for the passing of time

RJW wrote:Are you sure 5 years ? Ehh what year is it 2008 ?

3/7/2003 6:43:43 AM - Dates the cdrinfo post about your test.
http://www.cdrinfo.com/forum/tm.asp?m=9 ... ey=sharpie

So unless the time is going much faster in Canada as in the rest of the world it's roughly 1.5 years.
Hmm hey does this declare the maxell statement they say you will get our media in a month and you end up waiteing a canadian half year which might now seem close to a real month.

So in world time. I think we can say 1.5 years ?

I think the dates on the forum were screwed up a little bit when things were changed. I was working for my current employer only 1.5 years ago, and I started the sharpie test with my previous employer, which wouldn't have been any sooner then 3 years ago I don't think.

I clearly remember that Prodisc media. Deffinitely a bad choice for testing. I don't have any of the the ones I bought left that are readable. (Highest failure rate I have personally seen in CDR's) I do have Ritek and TY that are all marked up with Sharpies and doing fine after a couple years.

Here's a Ritek (Maxell) 48x disc that's about 2 years old, just scanned. It has a date and a reference number written on it that spans the entire radius on one side.

not bad at all!

For myself, I don't believe sharpies cause any noticable damage to CD-Rs... but I like to test even my own beliefs out whenever possible

Hmm Theorethically since sharpies are solvent based I can clearly see why they can be problematic for some media.
However there is this part that the solvent does have to get to a critical place first. This last is very small if you got some good manufacturerd media.
With stuff from Prodisc, MAM, MBIL however I can understand why it might be problematic.
So MAM had a good reason as self protection to judge that it was the sharpies. While it was more that there media was so poor made that it could be manufactured by these guys.


Befor blaimeing solvent based markers completely. Think about this if you store this bad manufactured media with some writing (with sharpies) on it in a bad jewel case then probally the jewel case is much more worse as the solvents from the few lines you put on a disc.

About the time.

End of 2002 was the first test round I did with disc's on CDA3000 and reported on cdrinfo. Cdrinfo list this as 12/6/2002 on cdrinfo which should be correct or very close to the time. Your tests should be later since at that time I used CDA3000 the first home testing tools started to arrive.

Hmm it seems that cdrinfo lists time as month - date -year.
So I made a little mistake with that in the above calculation.
So based on that posting and the time line.
I come on allmost 2 year for the Prodisc disc's.
so Roughtly 2 years is possible if I check mail and other stuff.
So Dolphinius Rex it seems that time is really going (to) fast for you these days.

Sharpies are alcohol based.
"Solvent based" generally refers to markers that contain a petroleum based solvent. This is the type of marker that eats CD's.

dolphinius_rex wrote:Ok, maybe closer to 3 years then? I think I was using CD Doctor or whatever that one was called. It predated K-Probe, but was after WSES.

Well that dates it pretty closely. CD Doctor became useable (for most of us here) in Dec. 2002 when cfitz translated the Japanese original to English.

I remember this well because it was instrumental in getting me to sign on here shortly after (after lurking for close to a year).

G

Now just to cover my screw up.

Well the problem is that on my day to day base the term solvents does apply to all solvents used in industries and that includes alcohol.

So I should recheck if the term applies also in the specific case next time to avoid these sort off slip-ups.

So thanks for the correction/pointing out.

So did I screw up then and are sharpies harmles from the theoretic point of view ?

Nope.
The story remains the same. Because the dye can also react with alcohol now if it was water (like in edding cd-r markers) then it wouldn't count since most dye compositions hardly solve in/react with water.

Please note that you need very poor manufactured disc's to actually spot this behaviour and with this poor manufactured stuff you probally allready have much more other things to watch out for as you marker is based on anything else as water.

So to put it simple I wouldn't worry about sharpies in any case.
For good media it's no problem for poor stuff you allready have to much other things to worry about.

MediumRare wrote:

dolphinius_rex wrote:Ok, maybe closer to 3 years then? I think I was using CD Doctor or whatever that one was called. It predated K-Probe, but was after WSES.

Yes it should be CD Doctor. Hmm which makes me think that I might have some of the old test data. Should I look for it ?

MediumRare wrote:

dolphinius_rex wrote:Ok, maybe closer to 3 years then? I think I was using CD Doctor or whatever that one was called. It predated K-Probe, but was after WSES.

Well that dates it pretty closely. CD Doctor became useable (for most of us here) in Dec. 2002 when cfitz translated the Japanese original to English.

I remember this well because it was instrumental in getting me to sign on here shortly after (after lurking for close to a year).

G

Ok... then almost exactly 2 years ago then I suppose. Man, I really suck with time!

EDIT: Which is why all my data was date stamped in the file name even... before I lost it that is.

Even in school I really could not grasp dates in social studies

RJW wrote:

MediumRare wrote:

dolphinius_rex wrote:Ok, maybe closer to 3 years then? I think I was using CD Doctor or whatever that one was called. It predated K-Probe, but was after WSES.

Yes it should be CD Doctor. Hmm which makes me think that I might have some of the old test data. Should I look for it ?

Probably not worth it. The discs looked relatively fine back then I'm pretty sure. I wouldn't have run the test if the scans sucked even back then (also, I wouldn't have used Prodisc at all if that were the case).

Man... I really should go warn my mother who used a lot of Prodisc media from the same batch She still has a spindle left over even, of unburned discs...

MediumRare wrote:I remember this well because it was instrumental in getting me to sign on here shortly after (after lurking for close to a year).

Well, then I did at least one good deed during my time here: I prompted you to sign up. It wouldn't the same around here without you.

dolphinius_rex wrote:Man... I really should go warn my mother who used a lot of Prodisc media from the same batch She still has a spindle left over even, of unburned discs...

What?!?! The media maven gives his mother the reject junk he won't trust for himself?!?

I guess the cobbler's children really do have no shoes...

cfitz

cfitz wrote:Well, then I did at least one good deed during my time here: I prompted you to sign up. It wouldn't the same around here without you.

He wasn't the ONLY one affected.... I woudn't have gotten into CD testing (or DVD testing) if it weren't for your efforts. CD Doctor changed the way I looked at blank media, and along with a small number of key people, was pivotal in the bringing of me into this industry

dolphinius_rex wrote:Man... I really should go warn my mother who used a lot of Prodisc media from the same batch She still has a spindle left over even, of unburned discs...

What?!?! The media maven gives his mother the reject junk he won't trust for himself?!?

I guess the cobbler's children really do have no shoes...

cfitz[/quote]

Ack! Back then it looked like the disc was fine! And besides that, my mother never listened to me about media back then. There was one instance when I told her media was useless and crap, and she bought it ANYWAYS just because it was a purple bottomed CD-R, and she liked purple. But she listens to my opinion on media now

cfitz wrote:Well, then I did at least one good deed during my time here:

You've done an awful lot of good deeds around here!!! And, like the regal cetacean, quality tests (CD speed surface scan, then CD Doctor and KProbe) also changed my burning habits radically.

Back to scans of old discs:

Here are 2 scans of an old CD like I mentioned above. The first one (with my Epson Perfection 3170) shows that I didn't use a "sharpie" to label it- it was more like a "dullie". But it also show that a lot of pigment and stuff was transfered to the upper surface.



The second scan was done with KProbe at 48x on my LTR-48246S and is the type most people think of (at least here) in connection with CD's:



As you can see, the quality is still excellent! I'm not sure anymore which burner was used 4 or 5 years ago- probably a 4x Teac SCSI model but maybe a POS Acer 4/4/32 (I didn't keep notes at the time).

G

dolphinius_rex wrote:He wasn't the ONLY one affected.... I woudn't have gotten into CD testing (or DVD testing) if it weren't for your efforts. CD Doctor changed the way I looked at blank media, and along with a small number of key people, was pivotal in the bringing of me into this industry

Cool. Thanks for the kind words, MediumRare and dolphinus_rex.

cfitz

MediumRare wrote:Back to scans of old discs:

Here are 2 scans of an old CD like I mentioned above.

Like expected.

The MCC layer is supposed to handle most hard treatment of ink. Infact it also handles quite violent behaviour. I once use a pencil and ballpoints on these ones and that media scores arround the same as above.
Only Lite On's occasionly bork on it because of variations in the AZO dye which don't seem to be good fine tuned with the Lite On burn strategies.