Hello everyone, I would greatly appreciate your input on this matter:
For my bachelor thesis, I aim to explore the topic of long-term storage/archiving with a focus on optical storage media. I have spent the past few months conducting research on this subject and am convinced that Blu-ray Discs offer a meaningful solution. I am aware that this is a controversial statement, as many people harbor a strong aversion to optical media, but that is not my primary concern. What I need help with is the following issue:
Several scientific publications claim that the original burn quality has a certain impact on the medium’s subsequent lifespan. I want to investigate this assumption by examining the burn quality of blank discs available today. The inspiration for this thought experiment comes from a study on cdrinfo.com, titled “Blu-ray Writing Quality Tests Vol 2.” However, since this test took place in 2009, I believe it is appropriate to conduct a similar updated version. Test results from 2009 cannot be directly extrapolated to 2023, given the advancements in both drives and media.
Currently, I envision the following setup:
- Two identical drives will be used to burn the discs. The only difference between the drives will be their operating hours – one drive will be brand new, while the other will have accumulated several hundred, if not thousand, operating hours.
- Optical media from two different manufacturers will be examined.
- The optical drives will be connected to a PC dedicated solely to the burning and analysis of discs. Resources will be maximized for these tasks, and interference from other programs (mail, office, browser, etc.) will be minimized.
- The study will encompass not only Blu-rays but also CD-Rs and DVD-Rs.
- Various types of media will be tested, including consumer-grade, professional-grade, and “Archival-Discs.” Each type of disc will be represented by multiple samples to prevent statistical outliers (e.g., 5 discs/type).
- Tools such as ImgBurn, Nero Disc Speed, and DVDInfoPro will be utilized.
Through this setup, numerous aspects can be examined, such as differences between manufacturers, disc generations (CD vs. DVD vs. BD), and potential variations between drives. For instance, there might be more write errors on the drive with many operating hours, requiring subsequent correction.
I have created a sketch to illustrate my idea; hopefully, it is comprehensible.
What are your thoughts on these ideas? Is it all complete nonsense? Have I overlooked something fundamental? I truly rely on your experience and expertise, as I currently lack an external perspective.
I am at a point where I might either a) give up and look for another topic or b) delve deeper into the rabbit hole. I am in the very early stages of my research, and if the experiment proves sensible and relevant, it would be conducted no earlier than spring 2024. Additionally, I would need to check if I can secure the necessary funding – another potential obstacle.
P.S., this is not only my first post on r/datahoarder but also on Reddit as a whole. :3
After careful consideration, I come to the conclusion that it is best not to carry out the experiment. There are simply too many influencing factors and the results would not be as meaningful as I first imagined. I would like to take this opportunity to thank u/Far_Marsupial6303 and u/lordsmurf- for their input. Through their critical questioning, I was able to reveal several weaknesses.
Whatever you choose for a thesis, I wish you luck. What you did not want is a weak or spurious topic, nor a starting argument. That was my main fear here.
IMO, pointless as a potential white paper without much stricter controls than two drives and small media samples. May be enough for a undergraduate thesis, but hardly anything that would be worth any type of scrutiny or scientific value.
Blu-ray is not archival. The fatal flaw is in the construction, essentially an inverted CD with extra goo “protection” on bottom. And CD-R is not archival either. Sadly, HD-DVD had a sandwich platter construction like DVD, which could be considered the most archival of optical media to date.
“burn quality” is not some sort of singular measurement, but rather a simplistic (or simpleton) reference to multiple aspects. For example, how well the disc balance allowed burn accuracy without too much wobble. But also how properly “deep” the burn was in the dye, in conjunction with the reflectivity of the dye, thus affecting readability. Even something as overlooked as the temperature of the drive can affect burn quality, in subsequent burns in short time windows.
Optical media from two manufacturers? Uh, no. Not a relevant statistical sample.
Multiple optical drives must also be used, with multiple known-good software (Imgburn, etc).
Terms like “consumer grade” and “professional grade” are all nonsense in the realm of optical media. At best, it refers to the surface, like lacquer only (ie, intended for screen printing), or inkjet or laser. Any suggestion that some such “grade” refers to the burn quality is bullplop.
There is a LOT of media testing, vastly more than most people realize. It’s not about “batches” (which are 10k to 100k discs, not a dozen spindles), or misunderstood Datarius drives. cdfreaks/myce had a groupthink problem, and was the source of several myths (ie, “RitekG03 = best”, etc). Too much of that got parroted around online in the 2000s, so watch out for that. IBM also had anti-optical pro-HDD propaganda at the time, some 20 years ago.
I’ve helped students write optical media theses multiple times in the past 15+ years, though my available time is not what it used to be (health). At very least, I can wish you luck.
I do wonder, however, if your adviser will approve such a topic, since it tends to be more backward looking than forward. A thesis is generally intended to be current or forward looking, even a thesis in history or medicine. So you’d have to find a way to take optical media, and make it still revelant into the future, beyond just weak arguments. I’m not sure even I can do that.
Hello! Thank you for taking the time to read through this post and share your thoughts. I’d also like to share my thoughts with you:
Blu-ray is not archival. This is likely true, and I share skepticism about the claimed lifespans from manufacturers. Some producers have marketed Blu-rays as the ultimate medium, with Panasonic, for instance, promoting TÜV Rheinland-certified discs with a 50-year archive life. (Quoting marketing materials: “The test result shows that Panasonic Blu-ray Discs offer more than 50 years of expected archive life at a room temperature of 25˚C and a relative humidity of 80%”). I’ve previously discussed the “trickery” in this field in another comment. All statements, whether from manufacturers or scientific sources, should be approached with caution.
CD-R is not archival. Interestingly, in some studies, CD-Rs perform decently, sometimes even better than later generations (DVD, BR). Several manufacturers sell “Archival CD-Rs,” such as Mediarange with the product MRPL510 (gold-plated). The question is whether this is all just marketing or if these discs indeed have better properties. In my view, this question cannot be answered with a simple “yes” or “no,” which is why I want to examine different models.
Thank you for your comment on the term “burn quality.” I admit I need to be more precise in my wording. I also need to investigate which data I can truly capture and which I cannot. Temperature is an important and often overlooked factor. It seems that some drives can read internal temperatures, but I need to delve deeper into this. If I cannot measure internal temperature, I’ve considered measuring the temperature of the drive case to approximate a value.
Statistical relevance. You’re absolutely right; the sample size is small, and the significance is limited. The question, however, should be whether we want to satisfy statistics or generate data that can help people in the real world. I live in Austria, where manufacturers like Verbatim and Mediarange are popular. Does it make sense to examine Ritek storage media if they are not available here? I want my work to provide answers about the current quality of popular blanks for those who may undertake a project with optical media.
I appreciate your mention of IBM. It’s fascinating to see how strongly some companies take a position. Looking at marketing materials for Sony Everspan / Optical Archive products, one might believe optical storage is the answer to all questions. Cloud? Who needs it? But please, let’s not get started on IBM. Last year, I attended a presentation on quantum computers, and IBM presented itself as a cool, hip, almost-startup. As a Steve Jobs fanboy, I must adopt his view on IBM. Thinking about it, I shouldn’t like Blu-ray either, as Steve was not a big fan (“Blu-ray is a bag of hurt”).
Regarding your last point about approval: Nothing is finalized yet. I’ve discussed it with my supervisor, and he didn’t seem completely opposed. You’re right; I need strong arguments to justify the relevance of the topic. Do I have all the arguments ready today? Honestly, no. However, I am convinced that optical media will continue to play a role. The exact nature of this role depends on many factors.
I want to thank you again for your input; it has been very helpful, and I will definitely consider it. If you have any more approaches or thoughts, please let me know!
I lack time to comment further here, but you’re already making some bad conclusions, and that’s not your role right now. Question everything.
For example, it’s not really about temperature. The main enemy of optical media is air, especially moisture in the air. I can leave a CD-R in a car (properly stored) that is 160 F inside in the summer, 2 F in the winter, and then disc is still fine 10 years later. Or I can put it in the (non-food) freezer, thaw it back out, and it’s fine. The main issue with freezers is frozen moisture from food.
This is a great example of how easy it is to be wrong.
About forums, mentioned above, realize that some of us also had “day jobs” in media (not just our passion hobby), or contracts, some of which may include NDAs. So we don’t speak in some official capacity, because we can’t. However, we can give out info in these unofficial locations, in an unofficial capacity, often behind avatars / usernames. You just have to know how to find us, and know how to ignore mouthy pretenders (like The Digital Dolphin / Dolphinius_Rex was in the 2000s, the short-lived Naked Geek, and some others). But again, most of what you’ll see is old content, backward looking, because optical media is really replaced now, by a mix of SSD and cloud. Much of the crowd is gone now, to the point where I’ve now lost many of my contacts.
Not to give you ideas, but I think a better thesis would be to imagine new media, that looks at strengths and weaknesses of extant media. A wish list of sorts. And I doubt you’ll be the first to do it, so locate others doing the same. For example, optical media that spins sucks. Spinning sucks, period. Perhaps a sort of “optical SSD” for archival? Since you like Jobs, think different. ;)
Well, that reply was longer than I intended.
This looks like a great study! While there is less interest, optical storage is absolutely not dead.
-
You should quantify “used many hours”. It’s unlikely you will get meaningful results if you test a brand new drive, versus one used for 10 hours. However, brand new vs 1000 hours; now that would be meaningful.
-
How will you be storing the disks, and simulating accelerated aging? Poor quality burns or materials might degrade quicker, but not be different initially.
-
If there is an easy way for individuals like me to contribute funding, I’d happy chuck in a couple hundred bucks to support.
-