Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
CJ Kucera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: Then you try to revert what cdrecord does. And this will cause long fixating times Sorry, don't know what you mean here. I didn't notice any longer fixating time than I've usually seen. If the software from Thomas works for you although it does not set the layer break, it will need to fill up the _entire_ disk (both layers) completely. The actual complete writing time is the time needed to write the entire disk. If you write less, the difference adds up to tue fixation time. If you do not see an increased writing time, then there is something wrong with the software or the firmware of the drive. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
Hi, CJ Kucera wrote: I didn't notice any longer fixating time than I've usually seen. Joerg Schilling wrote: If the software from Thomas works for youi Probably CJ Kucera did not test cdrskin or xorriso yet. I assume he is happy with his cdrecord workaround. (Has it been verified that it is not just a deceiving coincidence of capricious drive+media compatibility effects ?) although it does not set the layer break, it will need to fill up the _entire_ disk (both layers) completely. I got other reports from the users who tested DVD+R DL with cdrskin. It is possible to leave out the layer break definition, you can leave outcommand 53h RESERVE TRACK, and then the media can be used with unpredicted image length (i.e. by the pseudo-tao usage model of libburn). There are no reports of lengthy afterwork. (I expect that most of the media were used quite up to their maximum capcity.) Multi-session capabilities of DVD+R DL have not been tested yet. But all other results so far indicate that DVD+R DL and DVD+R behave very similar. Have a nice day :) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
Thomas Schmitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Multi-session capabilities of DVD+R DL have not been tested yet. But all other results so far indicate that DVD+R DL and DVD+R behave very similar. DVD+R/DL does not support layer jump recording and thus does not support multi-border recording. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
Hi, Joerg Schilling wrote: DVD+R/DL does not support layer jump recording and thus does not support multi-border recording. In MMC-5 i read the DVD+R DL model description as an extension of the DVD+R description which in 4.3.6.2.2 The Hosts Perspective clearly describes sessions and fragments. The latter are logical tracks. No borders mentioned, btw. In 4.3.7 DVD+R Dual Layer i read: The DVD+R Dual Layer (DVD+R DL) medium is DVD+R medium with two recording layers [...] 4.3.7.5 Recording on DVD+R DL states: A DVD+R DL disc may contain multiple sessions, each consisting of one or more fragments. In 4.3.7.5.1.1 Sessions: The session structure is identical to that defined for DVD+R [...] Multi-session DVD+R does work. No doubt. And you rarely find clearer promises in MMC than the ones above for DVD+R DL. I make daily incremental ISO 9660 backups on multi-session DVD+R. 30 sessions per media, each virtually covering 1.4 GB of home directory. Each mountable to see the complete directory tree snapshot as it was at the day of the backup. Only my DVD-ROM drive is clueless about the TOC. xorriso has to help it finding the sbsector= values to mount younger ISO images. Young programs should help elderly hardware. Have a nice day :) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [cdwrite] Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
Thomas Schmitt wrote: Probably CJ Kucera did not test cdrskin or xorriso yet. I assume he is happy with his cdrecord workaround. Yeah, sorry - I've been meaning to, but I've been pretty busy. I figured I'd just wait until I had occasion to burn another DL disc before trying other things out, which doesn't come along too often. I'll definitely post to let you know what I find once I do, though. (Has it been verified that it is not just a deceiving coincidence of capricious drive+media compatibility effects ?) Nope; I've still got what's left of my current DL spindle to coasterize/burn first, then I'll go try a different brand. And, again, I'll be sure to let the list know. :) Thanks! -CJ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
Joerg Schilling wrote: CJ Kucera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please explain your problem! Cdrecord does the right thing with DVD+R without the need for a manual layer break. A manual layer break is only needed for DVD-Video. I thought that I had. DVD+R/DL discs burned without layerbreak=value on my box result in discs which are unreadable past the layer break (at least, I assume that's where it fails, since it's at just about half the size of the disc). Once I threw in a manual layerbreak, the discs that I burnt worked properly. I didn't mention this in the original email, but I haven't yet run any tests on a different batch of discs, to see if it was just the media requiring that flag for me. So you either have a problem with the medium or with the drives firmware. Cdrecord computes and uses the right value automatically. What value do you use for the layerbreak? It is a well known problem that some media is unreadable on the second layer. Since a manual layerbreak works, that seems unlikely. If certain media don't work in a burner, I'm never sure which should be called a media or firmware error, If a firmware change the problem, the media vendor will say it's a firmware fix, and the burner vendor will call it a work-around for media problems. In either case I'd try different media just for the data point, if another major brand fails, I'd blame the burner. -- Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Woe unto the statesman who makes war without a reason that will still be valid when the war is over... Otto von Bismark
Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
Just recently, I started having issues again, where the burning process (both with growisofs and cdrecord) would *seem* to burn fine, but there'd be an error during the layer flip which caused the disc to be unreadable at that point (ie: halfway through the disc). After a whole lot of investigation and coasters, I found out that I could make use of cdrecord's 'layerbreak' driveropt to result in a disc that was actually readable. So it sounds like your unit failed to record data at out-most edge? If it's really does not depend on media, then I'd say that your unit is deteriorating and you should consider replacing it... I've got two questions about this: 1) The cdrecord manpage mentions that using 'layerbreak' will cause the drive to burn using the 'layer jump' method, as opposed to 'sequential recording.' Is there a way to tell growisofs to do the same thing? 'Layer jump' is DVD-R/DL recording mode and it's not supported by growisofs for reasons discussed at http://fy.chalmers.se/~appro/linux/DVD+RW/-RW/. This however does *not* mean that growisofs can't control layer break position on DVD+R/DL. For example, if you specify -dvd-compat at growisofs command line, then it will automatically fold recording in the middle and record equal amount of data in both layers. You can also specify layer break position manually with -use-the-force-luke=break:NN, where N is amount of 2K blocks to layer break. Normally you'd use it when pinpointing layer break in DVD-Video recording in order to improve experience (commonly you'd want layer break on chapter point or dark and silent scene). But once again, I'd recommend to consider replacing unit. A. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
Andy Polyakov wrote: So it sounds like your unit failed to record data at out-most edge? If it's really does not depend on media, then I'd say that your unit is deteriorating and you should consider replacing it... That could be, of course... I burn DL media so infrequently that I really can't eliminate media as a possible factor. The media's still expensive enough that I tend to avoid it if possible. I'll wait until I've had a chance to get another batch of different media, but I'll certainly consider replacing the drive if I'm still having difficulty then. 'Layer jump' is DVD-R/DL recording mode and it's not supported by growisofs for reasons discussed at http://fy.chalmers.se/~appro/linux/DVD+RW/-RW/. Ah, interesting, thanks for the link, and for the other info. -CJ -- WOW: Flemmy| Happiness isn't good enough for me! I [EMAIL PROTECTED] | demand euphoria! 24.24.2.3171 | - Calvin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
Joerg Schilling wrote: Are you talking about DVD+ or DVD-? I was talking about my DVD+R/DL discs. It seems that you confused the cdrecord man page: - Layer jump is not available for DVD+ - Layer jump is not yet implemented for DVD- as the drive I owned did not like it when I tried to implement it. Here's the relevant bits from my cdrecord manpage on my current version (Cdrecord-ProDVD-ProBD-Clone 2.01.01a38) - I suppose I should have mentioned the version to begin with: layerbreak Switch a drive with DVD-R/DL medium into layer jump recording recording mode and use automatic layer break position set up. layerbreak=value Set up a manual layer break value for DVD-R/DL and DVD+R/DL. To me, that implies that layerbreak=value would work for a DVD+R/DL, and plain layerbreak would only work for DVD-R/DL. I had just been asking if that was actually the case, or just sort of a typo. Please explain your problem! Cdrecord does the right thing with DVD+R without the need for a manual layer break. A manual layer break is only needed for DVD-Video. I thought that I had. DVD+R/DL discs burned without layerbreak=value on my box result in discs which are unreadable past the layer break (at least, I assume that's where it fails, since it's at just about half the size of the disc). Once I threw in a manual layerbreak, the discs that I burnt worked properly. I didn't mention this in the original email, but I haven't yet run any tests on a different batch of discs, to see if it was just the media requiring that flag for me. -CJ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
CJ Kucera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello list - back in January I wrote in about some issues I was having with dual-layer DVD burning, which ended up being solved by a firmware update on my burner. [1] Just recently, I started having issues again, where the burning process (both with growisofs and cdrecord) would *seem* to burn fine, but there'd be an error during the layer flip which caused the disc to be unreadable at that point (ie: halfway through the disc). After a whole lot of investigation and coasters, I found out that I could make use of cdrecord's 'layerbreak' driveropt to result in a disc that was actually readable. I've got two questions about this: 1) The cdrecord manpage mentions that using 'layerbreak' will cause the drive to burn using the 'layer jump' method, as opposed to 'sequential recording.' Is there a way to tell growisofs to do the same thing? I'd rather use growisofs, simply because it avoids the need to create a .iso first, though of course if that's impossible then I'll just use cdrecord. Are you talking about DVD+ or DVD-? It seems that you confused the cdrecord man page: - Layer jump is not available for DVD+ - Layer jump is not yet implemented for DVD- as the drive I owned did not like it when I tried to implement it. 2) I originally tried using 'layerbreak' without specifying the actual break point, which just resulted in the message cdrecord: Bad layer break value '' - I had to manually supply the break point, at which time it burnt properly. The manpage only mentions DVD-R/DL in the section that deals with 'layerbreak' without a specified breakpoint. Does that mean that DVD+R/DL just doesn't support having the breakpoint automatically detected? Please explain your problem! Cdrecord does the right thing with DVD+R without the need for a manual layer break. A manual layer break is only needed for DVD-Video. Layer jump recording is only available for DVD- and may only work if in multi-border mode. I currently do not see the need for it. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
CJ Kucera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please explain your problem! Cdrecord does the right thing with DVD+R without the need for a manual layer break. A manual layer break is only needed for DVD-Video. I thought that I had. DVD+R/DL discs burned without layerbreak=value on my box result in discs which are unreadable past the layer break (at least, I assume that's where it fails, since it's at just about half the size of the disc). Once I threw in a manual layerbreak, the discs that I burnt worked properly. I didn't mention this in the original email, but I haven't yet run any tests on a different batch of discs, to see if it was just the media requiring that flag for me. So you either have a problem with the medium or with the drives firmware. Cdrecord computes and uses the right value automatically. What value do you use for the layerbreak? It is a well known problem that some media is unreadable on the second layer. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: More Dual-Layer burning oddities
CJ Kucera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: So you either have a problem with the medium or with the drives firmware. Cdrecord computes and uses the right value automatically. Yeah, could be. For now I'm just going to content myself with setting the layer break manually. Clearly you know more about cdrecord internals than I do - I had just assumed from the manpage that using the manual 'layerbreak' option caused the drive to burn in a different mode, which happens to work for me. What value do you use for the layerbreak? I actually used the value given to me by either cdrecord or growisofs (I forget which one had told me what value it had been using), which was just half of the disc in 2k blocks. In this particular case it was 2035696. Then you try to revert what cdrecord does. And this will cause long fixating times Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
