i’ve gotten very anal about what quality scans should look like cuz of this friggin site. i’ll post a scan and let me know if you think I should throw it away and burn another. Statistically it is a very good burn, but it has some pif spkes grouped together that bother me. What do you think?
Yes that would be anal to throw it out. It’s totally fine, I’ve kept discs with much “worse” results.
I think your scan is excellent and that you’re worrying far too much.
PIF clusters contain far more PIF than the tiny spikes in your scan - several hundred or thousand per cluster.
As always a quality scan doesn’t tell you the whole story, and you should also perform some sort of reading test such as e.g. a Read Transfer Test.
I’m currently using a batch of MCC004 media which has much worse PIF clumping than in your TYG02 scan and I consider them to be acceptable so yes, you are worrying much too much about your results.
Agree with the others
Only ~ 1 out of 5 of my discs have PIE/PIF figures as low as that. They all work great and the vast majority is totally stable (which is FAR more important than original very low PIE/PIF). Some have > 4000 PIF total, are flirting with max PIF values, yet in real-world they pose no problem.
You really should take a step back and re-assess this whole scanning thing. You’ve been caught in the nevrotic approach to scanning, wanting only hall-of-fame scans, which is IMO unsound and, dare I say, futile. Anyway, useless. Can’t blame you, it’s a CDFreak nevrosis, been caught in it as well at first. I got better.
Unless you have heavy PIF clusters ([B]DrageMester[/B] explained what actually are PIF clusters), out-of-specs values, or really wild scanning variations, a scan doesn’t tell you if the disc/burn is possibly bad. Scans tell you about the variation of the media, help you in choosing the best burning method, allow to compare different burners with the same MID…
Sorting out coasters/keepers with transfer rate tests is far more sound, and relies on actually observable facts, which is not the case with the PIE/PIF scans approach. PIE/PIF scans have a different purpose.
I’d advise you to scan a couple of commercial Video discs, or DVD-roms, that’s an eye-opener.
Even a tiny almost invisible bit of dust could cause that. I wish my scans were that good (they are close). Remember also that the BenQ drives show higher PIF rates than other drives because of the way it sums blocks, etc.
You should have seen some of my scans on DVD-R mate… This is a decent scan, and a keeper for sure.
Ok, thanks for the advice guys. I still have the cdfreaks scanning disease though. I threw out a dvd-r today that had 300 pif errors total cuz there were three “high” spikes together. Two were spikes of 7 and the third spike was an 8. I did it without hesitation either. Only after it was in the trash did I think to myself “What am i doing?” I think I need to see a doctor about my problem.
“High” spikes of 7 and 8? LOL
I think you would have a panic attack when seeing scans of some of the discs in my collection…
Seriously, on what basis do you declare such spikes as “high”, and on what basis do you think such scans can be a problem?
maxxjulie, hopefully you’re not directly comparing Liteon scans with Benq scans. A PIF spike of 6,7, or 8 is not significant on a Benq. On a Liteon, a peak of 7 or 8 would be getting ‘up there’, although they would be tolerable if the media is otherwise stable and there probably would not be problems with a transfer rate test. But back to your scan, it’s very good all in all.
no, i understand the liteon scans are read differently. a spike of 2 on liteon is a spike of 8 on the benq in theory. i’ve just gotten a little too wrapped up into the scanning thing.
Lolz…thread starter…I was once like you…I only keep DVD which its PIF lower than 200.
But I realized that I wasted much money just to get a good burned DVD which I will just be using for about 6 months.
You can be crazy about it but try to reduce that crazyness
I used to be manic about it too but once I started experimenting with very cheap media I realized that even pretty bad scans were in most cases still fully playable and ripable without any problems. Dye deterioration a couple of years down the line is what the real problem was, so I ripped and transfered those bad ones that I wanted to keep to better media. We can all get a bit paranoid from time to time, just don’t let the ‘burning perfection impulse’ get the best of you.
Regarding dust particles on the media, I have to admit that I hate it when I look at the disc’s surface against the light and see all those dust specs that will eventually deteriorate the burn. Very cheap/budget media is worse for this kind of thing, some media is not only dirty with dust specs, you can also see bits off plastic hanging of the edge… I use a small bubble blower (the kind that is made for camera lenses) to clean such filthy media… But that’s nothing comared to what my very good friend Steve did. He has actually bought a mains-powered compressed air blower just to blow away any dust and other tiny particles from his media before burning. He also dismantles his burners periodically and uses the blower to clean the lens and other parts inside. Now, that IS paranoid. Your secret’s out mate!
Welcome to cdfreaking site.
Been there, done that, have posted the scans online to prove it. You are now officially a CDFREAK! I started to back off when I realized that I was buying Verbatim and TY to make DVD backups that my kids would trash within six months. The good rental DVD scores less than 50’s on a quality scan and I’ve never had one fail to read in either my player or PC. I now reserve the TY and Verbatim for making one copy each of truly irreplaceable and priceless Home Movies or Data. Everything else goes on whatever “decent” media I can get for less than $15/50 at the local Staples.