[chasg]

Hi All,

I'm looking to get into dual layer DVD burning. I'm a photographer and designer, and my larger projects regularly top 20Gb or so when complete, and it'd be great to have fewer discs to deal with when archiving (even though I know that DL burners only burn at 2.4x at the moment).

My machine is a desktop G5, and I have no problem pulling the existing superdrive out and replacing it.

So, can anyone point out an existing DL DVD burner as standing above the rest?

TIA for any help,

Chas

[iMacfan]

Hi,

If you really want to archive stuff, you should consider how long your discs will last. On a couple of photography forums and lists that I'm on, people have been reporting that many CD-Rs start to fade in the 5-10 year range. Compare that with film, which take at least 20 yrs to degrade that much, with many being fine after many decades. DL drives are fairly new, so you might want to check just how archival the tech and media is.

David

[chasg]

Hi David,

Woah, fast reply (I just posted my original question a few minutes ago :-)

You make some good points. I wish that MO discs were of a size sufficient to make them useful, but it's DVDs until something more spacious and reliable comes along.

I have a few ancient CD-Rs stored somewhere around (long enough ago for them to cost $50 each!). I'm going to have to check them out and see how they perform (now where the heck did I put them??)

Thanks again for your reply,

Chas

[Luca Rescigno]

Assuming you do decide to go with dual layer DVDs, you will probably want to look into the Pioneer DVR-108. Apple has always supported Pioneer's DVD burners, and the DVR-108 is one of the new burners that will write DVD-R and DVD+R at 16x and dual layer DVD+R at 4x (not 2.4x). It'll still take half an hour to write a full dual layer disc... and in fact, dual layer discs right now are so much more expensive than regular DVD-Rs that they're probably not worth it.

It's frustrating because by the time one standard becomes inexpensive and practical, a new one has come along and is still a bit expensive. Now that DVD-R has reached 16x and it only costs $70 or $80 for a drive, it's practical. But dual layer is there, and it's enticing. Once dual layer DVD-R/+R becomes inexpensive and practical, you'll see some new format come along, something like Blu-Ray or whatever. And then you'll want that.

You could always approach it by going for DVD-Rs now, and then in a couple years you can convert everything to dual layer (and give your backups a new lease on life in the process). DVDs are a lot cheaper than hard drives if you're going to be archiving tons of data. It's 50 cents or less for a 4.4 GB disc, versus 60 or 70 cents per 1 GB of data on a hard drive.

[iMacfan]

I think that this is an interesting topic, as ones horizon must be much longer-term than the 2yr or so cycles that we use for our computers. I thought that I'd add a couple more points so that you would know where I am coming from.

1. I'm typing on a new model PB12", only because my revA one would not burn DVD-Rs, and even after a couple of services, it still got too hot to burn two in a row (among other problems)- so Apple kindly replaced the machine, however I have experienced revA syndrome, so am a bit wary about things like that.

2. After thinking hard for years, I still believe that there is a while to go before I am tempted to do most of my (mostly pathetic) photography on digital. My film scanner gives a 41Mpx output, and allows me to use a huge variety of films and film cameras. Only if I were a pro, taking many, many pics would it be cheaper to 'go Digital'.

David

[chasg]

Luca and David, thanks for your replies.

Luca, Pioneer is certainly at the top of my "possibles" list. My DVD-R retailer (I buy in bulk online at http://ukdvdr.co.uk) sells a bunch of drives, one of which is the Pioneer 108. It was the fact that there were several more that made me ask my original question.

By the way, I stumbled upon this thread today, which points out that some G5's have a Pioneer "117D" drive, which is actually a crippled 108. If you flash the drive with the right firmware, it becomes a full 108 (including dual layer burning). I was excited for a short time, because I mis-read the model of my burner (my G5 only has a Pioneer 107D, which I misread as a 117D :-(

My rule, which has served me well over the years, is "buy the most advanced you can afford", as I've always grown into it, and I can at least lengthen the time between upgrades. This assumes that the technology in which I invest actually lasts and doesn't get blown away by some latecomer competitor. That said, DVD+R DL discs really _are_ expensive at the moment, expensive enough that I might wait a little bit (not so long that something new comes out...I've been reading about short wavelength lasers for years, and Blu-ray is now just around the corner. I wish holographic memory modules would hurry up and come out (they're real, promise :-)

Your suggestion to go with DVD-R now is a good one. I can hardly disagree, and the 180 or so DVD-R discs I burned over the last two years agree with you too :-). I am interested in dual layer technology so that over the next two years I produce only 90 discs (well, to be honest, it's still going to be way more than that, as I'm upgrading from a 6Mpix camera to a 12Mpix camera in the spring. More data, more discs!).

David,

I hear you on the the need to keep your eyes towards the horizon (and your ears to the ground). I waited as long as I could to buy my own 12" powerbook, and I'm glad I did (burner works ok, though I tend to do the big burns on the G5, which I also bought as late as possible). Hey, don't get me wrong, I'll risk a "revision 1.0" product (as I basically am with looking at DL DVD burners), but there has to be a strong reason (besides the often overwhelming "I WANT it!" urge :-)

I doubt your photography is pathetic (I feel that way about mine sometimes, and I'm supposedly a "professional" :-), you must get some joy out of it to have been doing it for so long. We're a long way away from a 48Mpix SLR, and until then, there will be no "technical" reason to declare film dead (I predict that it'll never go away. Many will always love the quality of a silver-based image, just like black and white is still around and much beloved!).

Thanks again to you both for the information and an interesting discussion.

Chas