CDRLabs.com

Among all the various dvd +/- R, dvd +/- RW and DVD-RAM, which is the most robust medium for archiving purpose?

Thanks

Stay away from re-writable media if you want to archive.

For write once media, it's more important who made it, and how it was made, then whether it is DVD-R or DVD+R. It is also important that your burner supports the media well. It could be the best made media in the world, but if your drive can't burn it, it's worthless.

hmm, i've read many times that cd-rw media is better than cd-r for archiving, it isn't so for dvd?

Isn't dvd-ram more robust and better than dvd +/- r/rw for data storage n archiving?

dolphinius_rex wrote:Stay away from re-writable media if you want to archive.

don't you mean "stay away from DVD+/-RW media" ?
DVD-RAM is better for archiving, albeit slower.

wernehawen wrote:Isn't dvd-ram more robust and better than dvd +/- r/rw for data storage n archiving?

you got me! while i was typing.
=> YES!

wernehawen wrote:hmm, i've read many times that cd-rw media is better than cd-r for archiving, it isn't so for dvd?

i'm curious as to where you read that.
the only thing "better for archiving" about CD-RW media is the cost. it's cheaper since you can reuse the discs.

To be more precise, a few months or maybe a year ago, i read in an article stating that cd-r storage life is, in reality a lot shorter than what most manufacturers claimed and therefore isn't reliable as an archiving medium. And i have also read, in response to the above article, various articles n forums where ppl state that cd-rw is a better archiving medium bcos it uses a different type of layer to that of cd-r.

Ok back to my question.

If i would like to store n archive my critical works, would dvd-ram be a superior option than dvd +/- R? Or would dvd+/- R offer me better bang for the buck while at the same time be as robust n safe as dvd-ram?

At this moment, i am using dvd-ram but it is quite a bit more expensive than dvd +/-r.

wernehawen wrote:To be more precise, a few months or maybe a year ago, i read in an article stating that cd-r storage life is, in reality a lot shorter than what most manufacturers claimed and therefore isn't reliable as an archiving medium. And i have also read, in response to the above article, various articles n forums where ppl state that cd-rw is a better archiving medium bcos it uses a different type of layer to that of cd-r.

Well this ones really tricky.
CD-RW perform better under some conditions. But they also perform worse on others.
I would take cd-r's over cd-rw's because under my conditions cd-r's will have a better change of survival and I think it counts for most people.

For more info do your own research and dig up some actuall results or you can waite till I have much more time and could actually post some good info about it. Which is probally a long time !!!
Don't want to sound rude but my time is currently to limited to make stuff like this.

Hrm... since both Optodisc and Maxell have been *VERY* generous with their DVD-RAM media for me, and goodness knows I could never actually *USE* that much on my own, maybe I should do some sort of DVD-RAM abuse test to see how they handle various degrees damage from different things like heat and light.

But the best thing I have for testing their quality is a transfer rate test done on the LG 4163B or a Pioneer drive

DVD-RAM has a shorter estimated longevity than DVD-/+R due to the inherent chemical instability of phase change relative to dye-polymer recording ('Understanding Recordable and rewritable DVD - Disc Longevity', OSTA, 2004).

I would not store archival copies for longer storage on dvd+/rw, but I might consider DVD-RAM for shorter archival time storage where rewriting is used on the same discs. Here the defect management of dvd-ram could (at least in theory) offer some additional safety. However, it's still phase change and not recommended for longer "write once" archival.

Well same comments I posted do count for RAM. So under specific conditions (much sunlight !!) it probally will perform better are recodables but under normal conditions it will probally perform less good.

To put it simple: rewritables can't handle temperature changes. Don't like very low temperatures. Don't like humidity. But are much less problematic when it comes to UV.

From what you all have told me, i deduce that dvd +/- R would be the best medias for archival purposes as long as i keep them in dark storage i.e in a drawer and they certainly are a lot more economical.

I have read an article by an american chinese researcher on cd/dvd dye longevity/stability but he only stated the composition od the different dyes and not actual disc brands. Any way to find out what type of dyes the manufacturers r using?

Anyone able to direct me to articles that deal with these issues in real world terms (as in letting the reader know the brand and speed of the discs)?

Thanks

Don't forget it's not the dye only that makes a good disc's.
There are much more process conditions that have a even larger influence (bonding !)

About the article if it states the exact chemical compounds for the dye's I should be able to backtrack who owns which technology and could give you the names of who uses what. (Great resources thanks to university !) Note that the problem is that this will take much time. Untill know I didn't find it helpfull to look up every specific technology but I did a few so I know what's possible and not.
However if the article just states group classification such as azo,cyanine.
Well then your screwed. To much options are left unless it gives a few more hints.
If it states specific dye type names.Then it would be even more easy to track down the technology. However it does mean less good info in the end as the chemical compounds. Still it's much faster.
Sinc I don't know what article your talking about I don't know what the options are.

Don't forget it's not the dye only that makes a good disc's.
There are much more process conditions that have a even larger influence (bonding !)

About the article if it states the exact chemical compounds for the dye's I should be able to backtrack who owns which technology and could give you the names of who uses what. (Great resources thanks to university !) Note that the problem is that this will take much time. Untill know I didn't find it helpfull to look up every specific technology but I did a few so I know what's possible and not.
However if the article just states group classification such as azo,cyanine.
Well then your screwed. To much options are left unless it gives a few more hints.
If it states specific dye type names.Then it would be even more easy to track down the technology. However it does mean less good info in the end as the chemical compounds. Still it's much faster.
Sinc I don't know what article your talking about I can't tll.

RJW wrote:Don't forget it's not the dye only that makes a good disc's.
There are much more process conditions that have a even larger influence (bonding !)

About the article if it states the exact chemical compounds for the dye's I should be able to backtrack who owns which technology and could give you the names of who uses what. (Great resources thanks to university !) Note that the problem is that this will take much time. Untill know I didn't find it helpfull to look up every specific technology but I did a few so I know what's possible and not.
However if the article just states group classification such as azo,cyanine.
Well then your screwed. To much options are left unless it gives a few more hints.
If it states specific dye type names.Then it would be even more easy to track down the technology. However it does mean less good info in the end as the chemical compounds. Still it's much faster.
Sinc I don't know what article your talking about I don't know what the options are.

I'm sure he's talking about the NIST study