BD archiving same longevity as DVDR?

Has the BD disc matured enough to say that backups made on a good BD will last as long in archival as a well recorded DVD+R by Taiyo Yuden or Verbatim?

If so, what combination drive/disc would be recommended for longest archival life?

Moomin

[QUOTE=Moomin;2241007]Has the BD disc matured enough to say that backups made on a good BD will last as long in archival as a well recorded DVD+R by Taiyo Yuden or Verbatim?

If so, what combination drive/disc would be recommended for longest archival life?

Moomin[/QUOTE]

We don’t know.
Theoretical anorganic Blu Ray might have a advantage over organic DVD recordables. However higher data capacity is more sensitive for errors.
THe format is to new to know.

About Drive/Disc combinations.
Media and Drive seem to be chosen correctly at this time.
Simpley said a disc of a good manufacturer can work very good at one drive but terrible on another.
Tricky stuff.

Any updates on BD longevity? And BD quality testing? I’m thinking of jumping to burning onto Blu-Ray discs, but comparative longevity and quality with high-quality DVDs are essential for me…

There are many factors to consider when making the jump to blu-ray for data storage… the most important being long-term data integrity of the media and recording process. The anecdotal evidence being discussed so far seems to indicate that even azo dye (LTH) media isn’t as good as azo based dvd products because bd-r’s are still a developing technology… ,

bd-r seems to be going through some manufacturing r&d which will hopefully make things better by the time the pricing matches the mass marke (somewhere under $100 for writers & less than $1 each for media). Most of us tech people will hold blu-ray writer & media companies to the same standard that’s been reached with cd-r & dvd-r drives & media… disc rot seems to be a problem with cd-r about 7 years and about 5 years for dvd-r (or at least the earliest possible time you should consider re-copying the data to new media as a backup when properly stored at optimal conditions). when discs aren’t stored in optimal conditions and/or have physical defects lifespans are greatly reduced. Following this trend, blu-ray media would be good for 2-4 years… and that’s not acceptable given the current pricing. So the hardware & media have to get better to be acceptable to the tech industry for wide-adoption. Otherwise, hard-drive/ssd arrays might end up being the better alternative for long-term data archiving.

there is also a commercial r&d going on for 4-layer bd-r discs totaling 128gb, however since the costs for making 2-layer (the htl process) is so expensive there is some doubt that these drives would end up in the mass market before something else in the terabyte range comes along. cheaper, faster & better.

I want to see the organic dye lth process get similar results to dvd media… and it’s just not there yet. Prices would need to be in the range of the most expensive Ty SL discs in volumes of 100pk. ($40-$50 per 100 pack for BD DL). Imagine 50tb of data archival for 5 years at $50? Crazy, but a goal I hope we reach in 2011.

What has been posted already here about the longevity of BD-R is quite interesting, but I think that is now time to add the results of the 1st scientific study I came across.

It is a study of “accelerated ageing” made on [B]pressed BDs [U]and[/U] burned BD-Rs[/B] that has been published in november 2009 in France.
This study has been made by a member of an official laboratory of CNRS (Centre National pour la Recherche Scientifique).
Here is the link to the PDF file: [by Jean Marc FONTAINE, published 2009]
[B][See pages 13 & 14] [/B]
http://www.lne.fr/fr/r_et_d/gis-don/journee-information/presentations/4-GIS-DON-degradations-disques-optiques.pdf
All the BD-Rs tested are of the classical HTL type (inorganic sensitive layer)
(« couche sensible inorganique » see page 14)

[B]The results are quite suprising [/B] but the author insists on the fact that it is a [B]preleminary[/B] study.

The experiment was conducted in exactly the same conditions as previous ones made on CDs & DVDs [80°C and 85% RH] and so it is possible
to compare the “summary-graphs” with the ones of the former test on CDs & DVDs that you can find here in this PDF file:
[B][See pages 11 & 12[/B]]
http://www.lne.fr/compteur/gis-don/download-journee09-gis-don-vieillissement.asp
(by Jacques PERDEREAU from the LNE laboratory, published 2008)

Because this study is written in french, I will probably get here some complains …
All I can do for the moment is to publish some of the pages I pointed to, so you can at least see here some of the “summary-graphs” of the accelerated ageing studies.

Page 13
All the BD-Rs tested are of the classical HTL type (inorganic sensitive layer)

I do not really understand why the choose on this page 13 to compare BD-R with DVD RW
and not with DVD R
.


Page 14
On this page the author (Jean Marc FONTAINE) insists on the fact that it is a preleminary study

and points out especially these 2 facts:

[B]1) The is a great disparity of behaviour between the different brands of BD-Rs (all of HTL inorganic type)

  1. The extremely modest performances of pressed (a level of sensitivity never seen in the former tests of CDs & DVDs) have focused our attention on the behaviour of the very thin transparent protective layer (only 100 microns) used in the blu-ray format …[/B]


On the positive side we can see that some BD-R’s seem to be quite nice lasting.

Comparing with DVD+RW is fair. Because from the technology point of view it’s more close.

The great disparity has allready been noticed in real life.

[QUOTE=dakhaas;2523015]On the positive side we can see that some BD-R’s seem to be quite nice lasting.[/QUOTE] According to the “summary-graph” 2 batches of pressed BDs and 4 batches of BD-Rs were tested.
The arrows for 2 first BD-Rs batches mean that these 2 tests are still running: « en cours »

So I have been thinking about the exact signification of the length of the first 2 arrows:
[B]why do the 2 arrows have [U]different[/U] lengths if both tests are not finished ?[/B]

There is no further explanation about this specific point in the text in french.
In an other PDF file I could find that a similar experiment was conducted with « steps of 250 hours »

In these publications dated november 2009 there is a promise [B]for further research [/B] on the blu-ray format.
So here is the link to the website of [B]the LNE laboratory[/B]:
http://www.lne.fr/fr/r_et_d/gis-don/journee-information/journee-archivage-numerique-cd-dvd.asp

In this post you will now find for comparison the “summary-graph” of the previous test on CDs & DVDs (by Jacques PERDEREAU from the LNE laboratory, published 2008)
as shown in this PDF file:
http://www.lne.fr/compteur/gis-don/download-journee09-gis-don-vieillissement.asp

Page 11
Archivage = archival grade
grand public = “consumer” grade


[QUOTE=franz99;2523030]According to the “summary-graph” 2 batches of pressed BDs and 4 batches of BD-Rs were tested.
The arrows for 2 first BD-Rs batches mean that these 2 tests are still running: « en cours »

So I have been thinking about the exact signification of the length of the first 2 arrows:
[B]why do the 2 arrows have [U]different[/U] lengths if both tests are not finished ?[/B] [/quote]

Because they started at different times and I interpretate this line as the time they allready lasted. Yes I’m a optimistic.

That’s why I say some good results.

inorganic BD-R’s are very complicated media from the processing point of view. Do it right and it will last long. Do it crap and all theorethical advantages are lost.

In these publications dated november 2009 there is a promise [B]for further research [/B] on the blu-ray format.
So here is the link to the website of [B]the LNE laboratory[/B]:
http://www.lne.fr/fr/r_et_d/gis-don/journee-information/journee-archivage-numerique-cd-dvd.asp[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=dakhaas;2523246]Because they started at different times and I interpretate this line as the time they allready lasted. Yes I’m a optimistic.

That’s why I say some good results.[/QUOTE]
You might be right about about the “time signification“ of the arrows on the “summary graphs” of page 14

Anyway at the beginning of his publication, Jean Marc FONTAINE has an e-mail: jean-marc.fontaine@umpc.fr
So I (or somebody sometimes) might ask him:

  • about the 1.000 hours and 500 hours pointed out by the 2 first arrows
  • and how these tests on BD-Rs ended since november 2009.

By the way for people who want to go deeply into the technical conditions of this test:

  • the experiment has been conducted in exactly the same conditions as the previous tests on CDs & DVDs (80°C and 85% RH)
  • with ‘torture steps’ of 250 hours
  • and all the discs were tested with [B]professional machines [/B]CATS & Clover.
    All the details can be found here (beginning on page 14):
    http://www.archivesdefrance.culture.gouv.fr/static/2140

Jean Marc FONTAINE insists (Page 14) on the fact that the results already published are preliminary and that the insufficient sorting does not allow a definite conclusion
but tells that anyway

there is a great disparity of behaviour between the different brands of BD-Rs (all of HTL inorganic type)

And you have added this:

[QUOTE=dakhaas;2523015]The great [COLOR=“red”]disparity[/COLOR] has already been noticed in real life.[/QUOTE]

So at this point there is one very important question that is arising:

[B]Do we have any chance to tell which brands and precise labels of BD-Rs[/B]:
1°) [B]belong to the 2 first batches[/B] (the ones lasting 1000 & 500 hours in this ageing test)
2°) and which other belong [B]for sure[/B] to the 2 last batches (lasting 250 hours & even less)

While trying to answer this we know that the market of BD-Rs has already changed since novembrer 2009 with more high speed 4x & 6x BD-Rs appearing.