Archival media

I’m looking to archive family pictures and other documents that will be scanned in at as highest quality resolution I can (probably via a bureau or DIY) ; the original masters being put into secure storage.

From the last time I bought media, a while ago, TY appeared to be the best but from reading the forums it appears that quality had degraded; comments I’ve read suggest that the new 16x DVD media isn’t as good as their prior 8x.

From the initial research I’ve done I’m thinking about:-

[ul]
[li]Verbatim 8x DVD-R Archival[/li][li]Falcon 8x DVD-R Archival Gold[/li][li]Falcon 52x CD-R Archival Gold[/li][/ul]Additionally…

[ul]
[li]M-Disc. I haven’t got a compatible writer but given the technology is fairly new, compared with CD / DVD technology, I’m wondering if it’s worth holding off for now or not.[/li][li]I’m aware that Falcon had had their media tested by a French lab.[/li][li]It appears that CD-R media appears to have a longer livespan that DVD-R media[/li][/ul]Thoughts ?

The ideas of “archiving” and optical media may be mutually exclusive. Optical media is by nature unstable. That said, use 2 or 3 [I]different[/I] types of storage to back up the dame data, such as optical, HDD and flash drives. Only then will your stuff be safe.

What CDan said - use multiple media. :iagree:

@davemcwish: Welcome to the MyCE forums. :slight_smile:

[QUOTE=CDan;2703402]The ideas of “archiving” and optical media may be mutually exclusive. Optical media is by nature unstable. That said, use 2 or 3 [I]different[/I] types of storage to back up the dame data, such as optical, HDD and flash drives. Only then will your stuff be safe.[/QUOTE]

Interestingly that’s what I was planning to do to avoid a single point of failure; the external HDD being a ioSafe N2 NAS - as yet undecided if I should go for Raid 1. I had considered cloud storage but I’m not sure if I can trust the providers yet (with not losing).

Since this thread/post was about blank media I though that info was extraneous. So going back to the question, can I get an answer about optical media ?

I would use two brands of archival media. (and of course check MID etc to make sure they are not the same disc underneath :D)

Burn everything twice and store separately. If you are unsure of DVD or CD, then why not use both?

You will need to set up a system to periodically check the health of a representative sample of your media. This will help you to decide how often you need to refresh.

I would hope that any of the brands mentioned will be perfectly readable in 10 years. But I would still refresh the entire archive in maybe 5 years time. Obviously it depends how much data you have.

Also consider storing parity data across the discs.

[QUOTE=CDan;2703402]The ideas of “archiving” and optical media may be mutually exclusive. Optical media is by nature unstable. That said, use 2 or 3 [I]different[/I] types of storage to back up the dame data, such as optical, HDD and flash drives. Only then will your stuff be safe.[/QUOTE]Uh… Good archival optical media will outlast HDDs and flash drives. Consumer grade flash is most definitely not even close to being an archival medium.

[QUOTE=davemcwish;2703432]Since this thread/post was about blank media I though that info was extraneous. So going back to the question, can I get an answer about optical media ?[/QUOTE]What do you want to know? There are CD-R discs rated for 300 years. There are DVD-R discs rated for 100 year. Supposedly Panasonic has BD-R discs that will 100 years also. How big (MB) are the pictures you’re trying to archive? The archival DVDs and CDs cost about the same per disc, so you get more bang per buck with the DVDs.

I bought some of the Verbatim 52x UltraLife Gold CD-R discs recently. They’re really Falcon CD-R discs. They’re made in the UAE and have a TDK MID. Burn quality scans show they don’t start off with as low of errors as a top tier “normal” CD-R. You can see the scans here and in the following two posts. You can see how a “normal” Falcon 52x CD-R compares when burned in the same drives in posts #50-52.

What is your planned strategy? If you’re going to burn the discs and keep them in a safety deposit box forever, I’d likely recommend something different than if you plan to burn a fresh copy every 5 years.

[QUOTE=davemcwish;2703377]From the last time I bought media, a while ago, TY appeared to be the best but from reading the forums it appears that quality had degraded…[/QUOTE]I don’t think there’s any actual evidence of that. I have >10 year old TY CDs that were unused & sealed until a few weeks ago and brand new JVC/TY ones. The new ones are just as good if not slightly better than the old ones. I have some new unopened vintage TY DVD+R 8x media to compare to the new discs, but I haven’t gotten around to comparing it to the new ones since I got sidetracked on my CD burner comparison project, but it’s on my list.

Verbatim discs on the other hand seem to have gone downhill. There’s a fair bit of disc to disc variation now in the CDs and DVDs (even the AZO DataLifePlus discs). Not to mention they sell crap with their name on it like RITEK F16 and RITEKF1.

The technology may be new(er) but it can be read by other drives that are NOT M-Disc ready.

I suppose some people are ok with ideas like, “use multiple platforms, brands, etc, etc.”. I don’t have time for that. I don’t want to be a slave to transferring my media every 5, 10 . . . . ever. I just want to write it once and be done. Why should it be any other way?

Data rot is so prevalent that people have become conditioned to purchasing, repeatedly, new hard drives, new flash drives, more discs, discs, discs. The research is there about data rot, data degradation, data corruption.

The bottom line is, almost all optical media contains organic dyes. M-Disc does not. It has been ISO 10955 certified. The facts speak for themselves. Everything else is hyperbole.

As soon as the BR M-Disc comes out (not requiring a specific BR writer) I’ve got dozens of Mini DV taps and thousands of RAW images that will be permanently archived. Anything different than that is temporary, will require more time, and more money.

I’d like to hear what you decide on.

Thanks for the M-Disc commercial/spam, complete with some totally irrelevant nonsense about ISO 10955:rolleyes:

[QUOTE=Stereodude;2703684]Thanks for the M-Disc commercial/spam, complete with some totally irrelevant nonsense about ISO 10955:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

Was there something I said that you felt was insincere, inaccurate, or irrational?

[QUOTE=RCA;2703686]Was there something I said that you felt was insincere, inaccurate, or irrational?[/QUOTE]Is any of that necessary to make it a commercial/spam post?

Have you actually used the product you’re proselytizing? Can you provide quality scans of the discs?

[QUOTE=Stereodude;2703693]Is any of that necessary to make it a commercial/spam post?

Have you actually used the product you’re proselytizing? Can you provide quality scans of the discs?[/QUOTE]

Did you read my post? Did I say I have used the product? I wrote that when BR comes out that’s what I’ll be doing. BR was supposed to come out earlier in the year. Apparently it’s been delayed. That’s what I’m waiting for.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to want to use a technology that claims (and proves) to use a technology that addresses the shortcomings of traditional optical media.

Where have I gone wrong?

There are no better options on the market. Am I wrong?

[QUOTE=RCA;2703697]Did you read my post? Did I say I have used the product?[/quote]I read your post. I figured you hasn’t actually used M-Disc, but I was just confirming.

I wrote that when BR comes out that’s what I’ll be doing. BR was supposed to come out earlier in the year. Apparently it’s been delayed. That’s what I’m waiting for.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to want to use a technology that claims (and proves) to use a technology that addresses the shortcomings of traditional optical media.

Where have I gone wrong?
Around the time you decided to post what amounts to a commercial for something you haven’t used declaring it to be the superior choice.

There are no better options on the market. Am I wrong?
Oh, I’d say you’re wrong. Any blu-ray option on the market is better, because well… they’re on the market. Being able to burn something now counts for a lot more than hopes and dreams for what might be available in the future.

[QUOTE=Stereodude;2703699]I read your post. I figured you hasn’t actually used M-Disc, but I was just confirming.
Around the time you decided to post what amounts to a commercial for something you haven’t used declaring it to be the superior choice.

Oh, I’d say you’re wrong. Any blu-ray option on the market is better, because well… they’re on the market. Being able to burn something now counts for a lot more than hopes and dreams for what might be available in the future.[/QUOTE]

I’m not sure it’s fair to say something is better than something else when you can’t yet make that comparison.

I’m simply saying, as a consumer, the prospect of an optical solution that drastically reduces the amount of time and money I have to spend migrating my data from place to place is good.

Their web site says bluray exists. It’s just not to market yet.
The fact remains, non-mdisc optical contains organics in the write layer. If it’s organic, it’s susceptible to data rot, via light, heat, or, humidity.

You seem to be pretty oppositional to what seems a good idea. An idea that will save people money and time and secure their digital investments. I can leave my DV tapes sitting in that box forever. Maybe you enjoy migrating your archival data repeatedly? Maybe you enjoy buying new drives every few years? I don’t know. Most people anticipate newer better. I don’t think there is any proof mdisc is not better.

I use discs now that will last 100+ years. That’s good enough for me.

You keep waiting on that silver bullet. Maybe you can talk others into joining your wait.

[QUOTE=Stereodude;2703703]I use discs now that will last 100+ years. That’s good enough for me.

You keep waiting on that silver bullet. Maybe you can talk others into joining your wait.[/QUOTE]

What are you using? What facts do you have to support your claim? Maybe I missed something?

[QUOTE=RCA;2703705]What are you using? What facts do you have to support your claim? Maybe I missed something?[/QUOTE]Well, now we know you didn’t read the thread before posting you Lil’ M-Disc commercial.

[QUOTE=Stereodude;2703706]Well, now we know you didn’t read the thread before posting you Lil’ M-Disc commercial.[/QUOTE]

No. I didn’t. I only read the first post . . . which is what brought me here . . . which is what I was responding to. I didn’t know I was going to be attacked for a personal opinion, which is all you have done. You have not shown me or anyone else that what M-Disc is representing about their technology to be inaccurate or erroneous.

But now that I have read it…

Panasonic’s site does not mention any standards that were used to determine where they get 50 years and 100 years from. Has anyone with any degree of credibility reviewed their product?

[QUOTE=RCA;2703710]No. I didn’t. I only read the first post . . . which is what brought me here . . . which is what I was responding to. I didn’t know I was going to be attacked for a personal opinion, which is all you have done. You have not shown me or anyone else that what M-Disc is representing about their technology to be inaccurate or erroneous.[/quote]Your opinion is based on solely on marketing information and no actual product use. At least I’ve burned some of the archival CDs/DVDs being discussed.

Panasonic’s site does not mention any standards that were used to determine where they get 50 years and 100 years from. Has anyone with any degree of credibility reviewed their product?
Why would their claims of product lifetime be any more questionable than the claims of M-Disc?

[QUOTE=Stereodude;2703712]Your opinion is based on solely on marketing information and no actual product use. At least I’ve burned some of the archival CDs/DVDs being discussed.

Why would their claims of product lifetime be any more questionable than the claims of M-Disc?[/QUOTE]

Personal use, respectfully, proves nothing. If it did, marketing campaigns would be full of “we’ve used them, they work great.” Testing, using international standards, provides assurances that claims can be backed up. So, I’m not sure why you would mock use of ISO 10995 standards. Also, business week did a piece highlighting the DOD conducting tests. Mdisc was the only one to pass the tests. I think it’s logical to trust independent sources, more so than “some guy that actually used them”. Again, respectfully. Your use means nothing. I’m relying on facts, independently verified facts.

I didn’t see any of those assurances on the Panasonic site . . . Or from you.

It’s past my bed time. Good evening.