Are VERIFY and SCANDISK the same thing?

I tried the cloneDVD forum but no one answered overthere so thought maybe I’d hit the media guru’s. I want to verify my clonedvd burns like IMGburn does after it burns. From my understanding programs like IMGburn and NERO that “verify” a disc afterburning do the equivalent of a sector scan/“scandisk”.

Would that be the same as just running NERO SPEEDCD and running a scandisk that way?

I’ve given up on all the quality scans, if my DVD’s verify and have successful sector scans in scandisk then I’m satisified. The memorex’s have been doing well so I’m just going to finish them up and never get them again.

thanks guys

here’s a verbatum DVD+R SL I burned today with clonedvd and then used NERO CD-DVD speed 4.5 to scan in PI/PO + C1/2 scandisk results:

pretty nasty toward the end eh?

going to do some others now…

I ran a READ TEST ONLY on the same disc and here it is, so the question remains- how seriously do you take those PI/PO and such errors when the disc clearly reads fine? What would you all do/how would you interpret these results?

“Reads fine”… in this burner at that particular moment in time, and at an unspecified speed. A transfer rate test is actually the same test as a scandisc “reading” test, but shows you if the drive has to resort to slowdown to read the data, which is more interesting.

PIE/PIF testing is not a way to know if a disc is readable. That’s why you can have discrepancies between what a PIE/PIF test shows and what a reading test shows. PIE/PIF testing is a quality low-level testing (it shows how the drive has to resort to low-level error correction) to compare different burns, and decide for example which is the best burning speed for your media/burner combination, or what’s the best media for your burner. In your case above, I’d be tempted to think that you should lower the burning speed to get the best burns out of your discs.

Also PIE/PIF testing can give indications on what [I]could[/I] go wrong with the disc when played in a different drive, or what area(s) of the disc could fail faster due to degradation.

If your only concern is “does it work now in this drive”, forget about PIE/PIF scanning. Scandisc is fine. If you want indications about how the disc could behave in other drives, though, you have no way to tell from scandisc alone.

Now another thing to know is that not all drives/models report the same PIF/PIF plots with the same disc, and there is no way to tell if the “out-of-specs” error levels of this disc above (as indicated by the yellow and red areas) are due to the burning quality or to the way your drive reads this particular disc. Pioneer drives don’t have a great history as scanners.

Now to your original question: no, verify and scandisc are two totally different things. “Verify” checks that the source data and the data on the disc match perfectly. In theory, this implies that the disc is also fully readable, or the comparison would fail.
“Scandisc” (read test) only tells that the disc is readable, but of course can’t tell you if the data on the disc is 100% the same as the source data.

excellent reply, thank you for your time and clearing up my confusion…

the question still remains can cloneDVD do a data verification that I’m just not seeing in the preferences?

So basically if I “verify” and have a rather smooth “transfer rate” test result then the disc is good for now. If I want to know how long the disc will last, or if it’ll play in other drives- I need another (best scanner?) DVD burner to get PI- scans done.

Thanks again