Posted by Peter D on 05/19/07 16:10

"Smarty" <nobody@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:UOqdnfhQiMzTZNPbnZ2dnUVZ_s-rnZ2d@adelphia.com...
> Peter,
>
> The newer DVD dyes may indeed be more stable, and only time will tell
> whether they deliver better longevity than the earlier disks. The
> definition of "archival" is not at all definitive, so the real issue is
> whether the desired "archival" storage period exceeds the time the dye
> remains stable. In my case, disks I made 4 years ago, claimed to have a 20
> year shelf life, were unplayable well before the "archival" period I was
> expecting. Certainly if Amy only wants to backup her archival materials
> for 2 years and the dyes remain stable for 3, then my concern in not
> applicable to her situation.

Did you consider the burner in your assessment? I have found that some
burners, especially some early burners, were a problem, not burning a deep
enough or strong enough signal. Also burn speeds are a factor. The
assumption has been to burn at a low speed (2x, 4x) to get a "longer" burn,
but evidence is mounting to indicate that DVDs designed for high-speed (8x,
16x) should not be burned at low speeds because it actually causes more
errors.

[Back to original message]