Jump to content

ImgBurn Support Forum uses cookies. Read the Privacy Policy for more info. To remove this message, please click the button to the right:    I accept the use of cookies

Photo

BD-RE virgin disc write pre-erasure


Forum Rules

Read the Guides forum if you don't know how to do something. :readbook:
If you have a question or a problem, check the FAQ and use the Search to see if you can find the answer for yourself. :lightbulb:
If you're having trouble burning double layer media, read Here.
Still stuck? Create a new thread and describe your issue in detail.
Make sure you include a copy of the program's log in your post. No log = :chair:


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#21 discuser

discuser

    ISF Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2018 - 11:37 PM

I used to use Taiyo Yuden CD-R all the time.  Had to switch to Verbatim DataLifePlus after they closed up shop.  Under the JVC/TY merger, JVC released some BD-RE with the TY name, even though TY never released any BD media itself.  Guess who actually made them?  Yep!  CMC!  :rolleyes:

With JVC/TY gone, have you had any experience with Verbatim / Mitsubishi's archival grade gold CD-R with hard coating (which seems to be something applied from BD hard coating)? Any idea what the MID is on those CD-R discs as well as Verbatim's CD-RW discs?



#22 dbminter

dbminter

    ISF God

  • Beta Team Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,835 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2018 - 11:52 PM

No, I've never had any of the gold based (Actually, they're silver based.  Gold branded surface, but the recordable layer is made of silver.) CD-R's.  The only experience I've had is with TY, Verbatim, and various companies releasing CMC, which I don't do business with anymore.  Well, I do business with Verbatim, even though their Life CD-R are CMC junk.

 

 

I don't think I ever used a Verbatim CD-RW, so I can't say.  My CD-RW are Memorex, but since they're 24x, Mitsubishi made them instead of the usual CMC Memorex CD junk.  My first CD-RW were also Memorex, back when Memorex made a quality product, circa 2002.



#23 discuser

discuser

    ISF Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 April 2018 - 06:46 AM

Going back to the original discussion of this thread, I was wondering, is there a facility within Imgburn where the user could manually specify how many LBAs logical data blocks to be erase-formatted and perhaps certify? If this is possible, I'd like to learn how to do it. For example, if I had a BD-RE dual layer disc and only the first layer (Layer zero) is useable, I was wondering if it would be possible to manually specify the LBA range for erasure-formatting. I noticed that the program itself knows how many LBAs there are in each layer and this information is specified in the disc information displayed in Imgburn.



#24 LIGHTNING UK!

LIGHTNING UK!

    Author of ImgBurn

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,552 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 10 April 2018 - 07:09 AM

Sorry, no.

The drive formats as a whole.

As you’ve got pioneer drives, I should mention those 2 errors you get are basically because it doesn’t support certification as part of the format process.

The only verification you’ll get will be from where the program takes over and zero fills each sector.

If you’ve formatted with spare areas, the drive will be performing automatic write verification (and mapping out defective blocks) as it does that. If you haven’t, it won’t be. The best you can hope for there (in terms of detecting problem areas) is the drive returning a Write error.

You don’t need to erase a bdre disc you’ve written to, just write straight over the top of it. Quick erase just attempts to zero fill a chuck at the start of the disc. You can instead save yourself a write cycle and just write meaningful data to it.
Please don't PM me with questions that should be posted in the forum. I won't reply - Especially if you have post count of 0!!!

Replies to posts belong in the forum where everyone can read them. Please don't PM them.

In fact, don't PM me at all unless it's something I've asked to be told about!

Before asking questions, search the forum to see if someone else already has.

Use the FAQ and Guides forums to your advantage. I don't want to have to tell you to read them!

#25 discuser

discuser

    ISF Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 April 2018 - 09:10 AM

Sorry, no. The drive formats as a whole. As you’ve got pioneer drives, I should mention those 2 errors you get are basically because it doesn’t support certification as part of the format process. The only verification you’ll get will be from where the program takes over and zero fills each sector.

If you’ve formatted with spare areas, the drive will be performing automatic write verification (and mapping out defective blocks) as it does that. If you haven’t, it won’t be. The best you can hope for there (in terms of detecting problem areas) is the drive returning a Write error.

You don’t need to erase a bdre disc you’ve written to, just write straight over the top of it. Quick erase just attempts to zero fill a chuck at the start of the disc. You can instead save yourself a write cycle and just write meaningful data to it.


Thanks for the additional information on the Imgburn formatting error messages. So let me recap and see if I understand this correctly:

1. Originally you said that the options PREFER FORMAT WITH FULL CERTIFICATION need to be ticked and PREFER FORMAT WITHOUT SPARE AREAS to be unticked (i.e. spare area becomes available). With that combination, defect management can be realized during the disc's virgin state erase-formatting. However, since in this case the Pioneer drives show that certification-formatting is not supported, is there still any point ticking the option for PREFER FORMAT WITH FULL CERTIFICATION, even though all that does would seem to just generate a format error message on an ODD that doesn't support that type of formatting? Or is is still necessary to to tick the certification box so that defect mapping would be performed during erasure-formatting? What is the different between certified and non-certified? It would seem that even if the Pioneer drives are incapable of certification, the user could still get defect mapping out of Imgburn, so I'm unclear about the difference between drives that can and cannot perform disc certification during formatting under Imgburn.

2. I understand that defect mapping is possible during erasure-formatting when the correct options are set up. But what about during subsequent data-writes and verification? I know that during write verification, Imgburn will display error messages of areas that failed verification, but does the verification process also RELOCATE data from bad spots to spare areas during WRITE-VERIFICATION? In other words, does DEFECT GROWTH on the disc becomes detectable by the verification process, or does defect mapping occur only during erasure-formatting but not in subsequent write and verify operations?

3. Regarding full pre-erasure of a BD-RE disc that already has data and is to be overwritten, I think it would probably be a good practice if I previously had other data on the disc and wanted to ensure that all existing data is wiped out before rewriting a new DAO session on it, to ensure that no previously written data could be accessible. I think this would be the only reason to perform a full pre-erasure in preparation for BD-RE overwrite (as well as other rewritable media including DVD / CD). I was unsure over the many years of using rewritable media whether a direct overwrite would produce a less clean readable signal off the disc as compared to a pre-erasure disc first. In some cases in the past I've had odd cases where DVD+RW discs produced a better error rate quality when pre-erased for overwritting, as opposed to being directly overwritten in the same pass. So I don't mind continuing that practice but I can imagine that it depends on the media type and its quality as well as the drive used.



#26 LIGHTNING UK!

LIGHTNING UK!

    Author of ImgBurn

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,552 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 10 April 2018 - 10:29 AM

If the drive supports formatting with certification, I'd expect this bit to read differently once a full format (with certification) has been completed...

Disc Definition Structure:
Certified: No
Scanned: No


^ Is as it reads after a full erase (format) in a Pioneer 209.

The 'Prefer Format With Full Certification' option within ImgBurn only causes it to ask the drive to do a full format with full certification. If that fails, it asks it to do a full format with quick certification. If that fails, it asks it to do a full format with no certification.
So if that option isn't checked, it skips the full cert request and goes straight for the quick cert one.

Hardware defect management is activated when a disc has been formatted with spare areas. Nothing else should influence that (in terms of formatting options) and it's handled entirely by the drive.

It's possible to bypass defect management and the automatic write-verification that goes with it by setting the appropriate flag in every 'Write' command sent to the drive. For BD-R, that's the 'BD-R Verify Not Required' option and for BD-RE it's the 'BD-RE FastWrite' option. Generally speaking, it would be pointless to format with spare areas enabled and have either of those option enabled.

So assuming you've formatted with spare areas enabled and aren't trying to bypass the auto write-verification, the drive should remap bad blocks as it attempts to write to them. I doubt anything happens when you're just reading the disc and come across something unreadable.

The whole reason for ImgBurn performing the 'zeroing sectors' stage as part of a full format is that the format process itself doesn't appear to do it. So you can issue a 'full format with full cert' command to the drive and it'll finish after x hours with disc still containing data. Now... don't quote me on that as it could be that when I noticed that happening (it not zeroing the sectors), I was full formatting in a Pioneer and so the full cert part wasn't happening anyway. Maybe I'll test it out again and compare the results of LG drives against Pioneer ones.
Please don't PM me with questions that should be posted in the forum. I won't reply - Especially if you have post count of 0!!!

Replies to posts belong in the forum where everyone can read them. Please don't PM them.

In fact, don't PM me at all unless it's something I've asked to be told about!

Before asking questions, search the forum to see if someone else already has.

Use the FAQ and Guides forums to your advantage. I don't want to have to tell you to read them!

#27 discuser

discuser

    ISF Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 April 2018 - 11:43 AM

Thanks for the additional clarifications. It gives me a pretty good sense / grasp of how to use Imgburn with those concerns. I have the same DISC DEFINITION STRUCTURE values after erasure-formatting on both the Pioneer 06 and 09 series BD writers as you mentioned.

As for Pioneer drives, they do have the industrial grade BDR-PR1M series BD-XL writers released a few years back, which they want to charge over US$300 for the drives. They were specifically designed for archival and error / defect management and does come with proprietary Pioneer disc defect management software. The C suffix drive appears to be for the purpose of defect management whereas the A suffix drive is mainly for writing. Both drives primarily designed for Mitsubishi/MKM archival grade 200 year life BD-R media. Though, if M-Disc has an archival life approaching 1000 years, I don't see the point. If you get your hands on these Pioneer ODDs, it would be interesting to know how you find the defect manangement fairs.



#28 discuser

discuser

    ISF Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 April 2018 - 02:16 AM

I finally completed a first-time formatting of Sony BD-XL-RE-TL 100 GB discs (MID: SONY-ET2-002) successfully and it went without a hitch on the Pioneer 09-series ODD the first time. I actually did two passes of erasure formatting because on the first pass I forgot to enable spare sectors area even though I already disabled the certification write-option. With spare sectors disabled, Imgburn erase-formatted at 2X speed and completed the disc in approximately 3 hours and 9 minutes. During the second pass to reformat the same disc with spare sectors made available, the procedure was reported in the log as having an average speed of 0.9X (with this particular ODD anyway) which required approximately 6 hours and 44 minutes to complete, actually quite a bit shorter than the 10 hours I had expected as I had read another user on the forum here found the defect managed formatting for BD-XL-RE-TL was proceeding at 0.6X speed instead. The effective available space after the formatting is about 90.23 GB for a 100 GB disc. I was wondering if L-UK or anyone else in the know could enlighten me on a few technical points:

--------------------------
1. With certification mode disabled in write-options, I only got one format-error message this time (instead of the two messages I used to get):

FormatDisc(FT: 0x30, FST: 0x03) Not Supported!

I'm not sure which function this error refers to that indicates the Pioneer drive doesn't support.

--------------------------
2. In the device details, it says that:

Layer Information:
Layer 0 Sectors: 242,783,376 (513.2%)
Layer 1 Sectors: 655,660,176 (1386%)
Layer 2 Sectors: 3,443,829,472 (7280%)

I wanted to learn and understand what this sector count reported for each layer meant. I thought on a BD-RE-TL or BD-R-TL disc that each layer was 33 GB capacity so I'm unsure why layers 0 to 2 has such a different sector count from each other, and what the percentage value included means, and whether these figures hint of anything regarding quality / defects as discovered by the erasure-formatting process with spare sectors made available.

--------------------------
3. In the BD disc information listed for each layer, there are a few parameters:
BCA Present: Yes
First PAA of Data Zone: 2,702,409,216
Last PAA of Data Zone: 48,391,268

I was interested to know what BCA and PAA stood for. If you think this would be explained better in any of the BDA's BD general white paper (which is currently on its 5th edition released in 2018.01), I would be happy to read up on it there if you have any pointers or referrals to any sections in the white paper.

--------------------------

I would be great to get a better grasp on these details, it helps me to feel more conversant with Imgburn and its advanced functions / features and a better usage experience to be more informed. Thanks.

 



#29 LIGHTNING UK!

LIGHTNING UK!

    Author of ImgBurn

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,552 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 13 April 2018 - 05:57 AM

1. Quick certification.

You disabled (made it skip) full certification, so as per a previous reply, it’s requesting quick cert before falling back to no cert.

2. That looks like a bug to me. TL media barely existed back in 2013, and I’m pretty sure I’ve never looked at BDRE TL media at all.

3. Burst Cutting Area
Physical ADIP Address
Please don't PM me with questions that should be posted in the forum. I won't reply - Especially if you have post count of 0!!!

Replies to posts belong in the forum where everyone can read them. Please don't PM them.

In fact, don't PM me at all unless it's something I've asked to be told about!

Before asking questions, search the forum to see if someone else already has.

Use the FAQ and Guides forums to your advantage. I don't want to have to tell you to read them!

#30 discuser

discuser

    ISF Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 April 2018 - 06:37 AM

1. Quick certification. You disabled (made it skip) full certification, so as per a previous reply, it’s requesting quick cert before falling back to no cert.
2. That looks like a bug to me. TL media barely existed back in 2013, and I’m pretty sure I’ve never looked at BDRE TL media at all.
3. I’ll have to look it up when I’m at my pc.

Regarding:

1. OK, so previously one format error message was failure to perform full certification, and the other format error message was failure to perform quick certification. Got it.

2. Interesting to know. Hopefully it's not an "overflow" type of bug that caused meaningless numbers like this. I have no idea what happens within Imgburn, just visualizing what could be going on. Please keep us informed if you uncover the cause. So are you saying that the percentage value displayed for each layer should be say, 100% for a defect free layer (i.e. all clusters available) and less than 100% for a layer that has defects (provided that spare sectors are made available during format)?

Sony BD-RE-TL media is quite cheap now, though the only available inventory are all designated as domestic Japanese inventory, though Verbatim does have BD-XL-R-TL write once media now sold globally. I'll be continuing the Sony BD-RE-TL media formatting as I have a stack of these virgin discs to go through and due to the nearly 7 hours format / verify time required, I will usually try start formatting very late night and by early morning, the process will be completed for one disc.

3. Thanks for the acronym explanations. I'll look them up further.

 


Edited by discuser, 13 April 2018 - 06:41 AM.


#31 discuser

discuser

    ISF Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 April 2018 - 07:05 AM

2. That looks like a bug to me. TL media barely existed back in 2013, and I’m pretty sure I’ve never looked at BDRE TL media at all.

I've reviewed the DEVICE INFO pane data again and am posting the full details here as it appears there are also other odd looking numbers which may be related to suspected bugs of Imgburn 2.58 handling triple layer media. I've compared it to a BD-RE-DL and I noticed that the DISC INFO section's percentage value is the percentage of the entire disc and not just the layer in question, so presumably it should read around 33.33% for all 3 layers if I understand its intention correctly? Also, under the DISC DEFINITION STRUCTURE section, shouldn't CLUSTORS be spelt CLUSTERS instead?


Current Profile: BD-RE

Disc Information:
Status: Complete
State of Last Session: Complete
Erasable: Yes
Sessions: 1
Sectors: 47,305,728
Size: 96,882,130,944 bytes
Time: 10512:25:03 (MM:SS:FF)
MID: SONY-ET2-002
Supported Write Speeds: 2x

TOC Information:
Session 1... (LBA: 0)
-> Track 01  (Mode 1, LBA: 0 - 47305727)
-> LeadOut  (LBA: 47305728)

Disc Definition Structure:
ISA0 Size: 8,192 clustors - Full: No
OSA0 Size: 8,192 clustors - Full: No
ISA1 Size: 8,192 clustors - Full: No
OSA1 Size: 8,192 clustors - Full: No
Certified: No
Scanned: No

BD Disc Information (L0):
Disc ID: SONY-ET2-002
Disc Type: BD-RE
Disc Size: 120 mm
Disc Class: 1
Disc Version: 3
Number of Layers: 3
Layer Type: Rewritable
DVD Layer Present: No
CD Layer Present: No
Channel Bit Length: 55.87 nm (33 GB Per Layer)
BCA Present: Yes
Maximum Transfer Rate: Not Specified
First PAA of Data Zone: 554,925,568
Last PAA of Data Zone: 48,402,576

BD Disc Information (L1):
Disc ID: SONY-ET2-002
Disc Type: BD-RE
Disc Size: 120 mm
Disc Class: 1
Disc Version: 3
Number of Layers: 3
Layer Type: Rewritable
DVD Layer Present: No
CD Layer Present: No
Channel Bit Length: 55.87 nm (33 GB Per Layer)
BCA Present: Yes
Maximum Transfer Rate: Not Specified
First PAA of Data Zone: 2,113,928,704
Last PAA of Data Zone: 48,402,576

BD Disc Information (L2):
Disc ID: SONY-ET2-002
Disc Type: BD-RE
Disc Size: 120 mm
Disc Class: 1
Disc Version: 3
Number of Layers: 3
Layer Type: Rewritable
DVD Layer Present: No
CD Layer Present: No
Channel Bit Length: 55.87 nm (33 GB Per Layer)
BCA Present: Yes
Maximum Transfer Rate: Not Specified
First PAA of Data Zone: 2,702,409,216
Last PAA of Data Zone: 48,391,268

Layer Information:
Layer 0 Sectors: 242,783,376 (513.2%)
Layer 1 Sectors: 655,660,176 (1386%)
Layer 2 Sectors: 3,443,829,472 (7280%)

Format Capacities:
DT: 0x02 - NB: 47305728 (0x02D1D400) - TDP: 49152
FT: 0x00 - NB: 47305728 (0x02D1D400) - TDP: 49152
FT: 0x30 - NB: 47305728 (0x02D1D400) - TDP: 49152
FT: 0x30 - NB: 46781440 (0x02C9D400) - TDP: 65536
FT: 0x30 - NB: 48854016 (0x02E97400) - TDP: 768
FT: 0x31 - NB: 48878592 (0x02E9D400) - TDP: 2048

Performance (Write Speed):
Descriptor 1...
-> B0: 0x00, B1: 0x00, B2: 0x00, B3: 0x00
-> EL: 47305727 (0x02D1D3FF)
-> RS: 8,990 KB/s (2x) - WS: 8,990 KB/s (2x)

 



#32 LIGHTNING UK!

LIGHTNING UK!

    Author of ImgBurn

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,552 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 13 April 2018 - 07:25 AM

I assume you're talking about the PAA numbers?

They're a straight dump of what's recorded in those bytes within the DI Unit.

The 'Layer Information' is calculated from those values, but because they don't remotely match up with what's recorded for SL/DL media (and I only have the specs for those), it's garbage.

There will be no fix for that until I can find out the specs of the DI Unit used on the TL/QL BD-XL media. I've been unable to get anything back from a Google search.

Don't worry though, they aren't something the software has to use.

Yes, clustor(s) should of course be cluster(s). I've corrected the 2 instances where it was spelt incorrectly.
Please don't PM me with questions that should be posted in the forum. I won't reply - Especially if you have post count of 0!!!

Replies to posts belong in the forum where everyone can read them. Please don't PM them.

In fact, don't PM me at all unless it's something I've asked to be told about!

Before asking questions, search the forum to see if someone else already has.

Use the FAQ and Guides forums to your advantage. I don't want to have to tell you to read them!

#33 discuser

discuser

    ISF Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 April 2018 - 07:56 AM

I assume you're talking about the PAA numbers? They're a straight dump of what's recorded in those bytes within the DI Unit.

The 'Layer Information' is calculated from those values, but because they don't remotely match up with what's recorded for SL/DL media (and I only have the specs for those), it's garbage. There will be no fix for that until I can find out the specs of the DI Unit used on the TL/QL BD-XL media. I've been unable to get anything back from a Google search. Don't worry though, they aren't something the software has to use. Yes, clustor(s) should of course be cluster(s). I've corrected the 2 instances where it was spelt incorrectly.

Yes, I was referring to the odd looking PAA values. But as long as they don't affect the actual disc formatting / defect management and user data writing / verification, I won't worry too much about it. Just thought I would point it out in case it would help you uncover a few more possible bugs if so.

About the spare sectors reservation / allocation (if that option is set to make spare sectors so available):

1. Is that part of the original BD-R/RE spec or it is something allocated through some sort of determination by Imgburn?

2. What percentage or capacity of an entire BD-RE disc is allocated to spare sectors and if so, is the logical capacity of the spare sectors indicated anywhere in the disc information that Imgburn displays in the DEVICE pane?

3. Are spare sectors allocated separately for each individual LAYER on a multi-layer disc (DL/TL/QL), i.e. each layer has its own individual spare sector area, or is the spare sector area reserved in a single area that might depend entirely on the integrity of the particular disc layer it resides on? (Or perhaps this is dictated by BD specs) Some removeable media can be checked for remaining available spare sectors / clusters reported either in capacity / clusters / sectors or in percentage of remaining spare area. I'm not sure if BD-R/RE media (formatted by Imgburn) can be checked that way or reported by any ODD software.


Interestingly, a fully formatted BDXL-RE-TL disc, when loaded into the Pioneer 09-series ODD, was actually correctly detected in capacity by an older version of Nero which was released well before triple and quad layer BD media specs was announced or designed. Perhaps the ODD is simply reporting logical capacity. But I haven't tried writing to triple layer media with that older version of Nero to see if it does it successfully, and don't see the need to test that at this time.

 



#34 LIGHTNING UK!

LIGHTNING UK!

    Author of ImgBurn

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,552 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 13 April 2018 - 08:35 AM

The size of the spare area gets set when you issue the format command... and the available sizes come from what's reported in the 'Format Capacities' section of the disc info.

So basically, you query the drive to get a list of sizes and then pick from the list.

Looking at the info posted above, you've got 3 options.
 

FT: 0x30 - NB: 47305728 (0x02D1D400) - TDP: 49152
FT: 0x30 - NB: 46781440 (0x02C9D400) - TDP: 65536
FT: 0x30 - NB: 48854016 (0x02E97400) - TDP: 768


So your disc is left with 46781440, 47305728 or 48854016 usable sectors. The size of the spare area of course decreases as usable sectors increases.

Your disc is currently formatted with the middle one and would be considered the 'normal' one to go for if you want spare areas.
 

Sectors: 47,305,728


You can expand the spare area region(s), but that's not something ImgBurn allows for.

The ISA / OSA values in the 'Disc Definition Structure' are to do with spare areas. They correspond to the number of clusters that have been allocated for spare areas in those regions.

8192 clusters = 8192 * 32 sectors = 8192 * 32 * 2048 = 536,870,912 bytes = 512 MiB

Spare areas are per layer. There's an inner area and an outer area, per layer. (Hence ISA and OSA. The user data sectors are in the middle)

I expect there would also be a value available for ISA2, ISA3 etc on your TL/QL discs, but again, that's not covered by the specs I have.

I cannot tell you how much of each has been used, there's only a flag set when it's full. This is already displayed.

Yes, ODD software works at quite a high level really. Larger disc sizes etc shouldn't cause much of an issue, if any issue at all. It's only a problem when the format of a certain structure changes that you'll come unstuck. Luckily, that would mainly cause cosmetic issues.

You issue a 'READ CAPACITY' command to the drive and it returns the size. It's as simple as that.
Please don't PM me with questions that should be posted in the forum. I won't reply - Especially if you have post count of 0!!!

Replies to posts belong in the forum where everyone can read them. Please don't PM them.

In fact, don't PM me at all unless it's something I've asked to be told about!

Before asking questions, search the forum to see if someone else already has.

Use the FAQ and Guides forums to your advantage. I don't want to have to tell you to read them!

#35 discuser

discuser

    ISF Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 April 2018 - 01:32 PM

Thanks. Very useful information to understand the spare sector areas. So if I understand your calculation correctly, the minimum allocation unit which is one cluster, consumes 64 KiB (i.e. 32 sectors * 2048 bytes per sector) on the optical disc. If so, I can see how a large number of small files (each 64 KiB or smaller) can quickly hog large amounts of disc space.

Based on your explanation, it seems that the allocation to each of the inner and outer spare areas is 0.5 GB and therefore the total allocation is 1 GB per layer (and is the available disc space per layer that would have been gained had spare sectors been disabled via Imgburn WRITE options), though as you say, spare area information isn't displayed beyond the second layer (Layer-1) in the DEVICE pane details of Imgburn. But - in fact, these spare area allocations are still occuring during erasure-format for Layer-2 (third layer) and higher, yes?

It's safer to have spare sectors available for each individual layer since in some cases an entire layer may be unuseable / inaccessible due to various physical reasons such as manufacturing defects. So I'm glad to hear that spare areas are a per-layer arrangement. There's a lot of data on a multi-layered disc and it gives me a feel of how much protection against relatively minor disc defects the user gets as I start moving into higher BD capacities.

As far as I'm aware, BDXL-QL media isn't really currently available standalone and I'm not aware of any current BD-XL drive's media ROM-table support BDXL-QL media. The only way I'm aware that one could obtain BDXL-R-QL discs is to disassemble a Sony archival disc cartridge which internally houses a stack of write-once discs. But even then, I'm not sure how even a premium grade BDXL drive like a Pioneer would handle QL discs. I don't expect BDXL-RE media to be available beyond triple layer. It seems that BD-RE technology will pretty much be limited to 2X speed (which in BD data rates is transferring at a decent speed nearly 9 MB per second) and triple layer capacity.

 

 

The ISA / OSA values in the 'Disc Definition Structure' are to do with spare areas. They correspond to the number of clusters that have been allocated for spare areas in those regions.

8192 clusters = 8192 * 32 sectors = 8192 * 32 * 2048 = 536,870,912 bytes = 512 MiB

Spare areas are per layer. There's an inner area and an outer area, per layer. (Hence ISA and OSA. The user data sectors are in the middle)

I expect there would also be a value available for ISA2, ISA3 etc on your TL/QL discs, but again, that's not covered by the specs I have.


#36 dbminter

dbminter

    ISF God

  • Beta Team Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,835 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 April 2018 - 04:01 PM

Yeah, the optical disc market is pretty much dying.  So, I also doubt we'll ever see a development of BD-RE discs so they write faster than 2x.  It's been like 10 years since the introduction of recordable BD, and we're still only at 2x for BD-RE.  But, it does beat 1x. 

 

 

Man, I can remember the days of DVD writing at 1x back in 2002.  You'd spend 59 minutes of your 1 hour write time, only to get a buffer underrun error at the very end and lose all that time and a disc.  Buffer underrun protection was one of the best technologies ever put into optical burners.



#37 LIGHTNING UK!

LIGHTNING UK!

    Author of ImgBurn

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,552 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 13 April 2018 - 06:02 PM

I found a TL disc and managed to figure out the format of the newer DI Unit used on BD-XL media, so the first and last PAA values / layer stuff should be ok now. :)

PIONEER BD-RW   BDR-209M 1.50 (ATAPI)
Current Profile: BD-RE

Disc Information:
Status: Complete
State of Last Session: Complete
Erasable: Yes
Sessions: 1
Sectors: 47,305,728
Size: 96,882,130,944 bytes
Time: 10512:25:03 (MM:SS:FF)
MID: PAN-EC2-001
Supported Write Speeds: 2x

TOC Information:
Session 1... (LBA: 0)
-> Track 01  (Mode 1, LBA: 0 - 47305727)
-> LeadOut  (LBA: 47305728)

Disc Definition Structure:
ISA0 Size: 8,192 clusters - Full: No
OSA0 Size: 8,192 clusters - Full: No
ISA1 Size: 8,192 clusters - Full: No
OSA1 Size: 8,192 clusters - Full: No
Certified: No
Scanned: No

BD Disc Information (L0):
DI Format Number: 5
Disc ID: PAN-EC2-001
Disc Type: BD-RE
Disc Size: 120 mm
Disc Class: 1
Disc Version: 3
Disc Time Stamp: 06/2010
Number of Layers: 3
Layer Type: Rewritable
DVD Layer Present: No
CD Layer Present: No
Channel Bit Length: 55.87 nm (33 GB Per Layer)
BCA Present: Yes
Maximum Transfer Rate: Not Specified
First PAA of Data Zone: 131,072 (0x00020000)
Last PAA of Data Zone: 2,167,678 (0x0021137E)

BD Disc Information (L1):
DI Format Number: 5
Disc ID: PAN-EC2-001
Disc Type: BD-RE
Disc Size: 120 mm
Disc Class: 1
Disc Version: 3
Disc Time Stamp: 06/2010
Number of Layers: 3
Layer Type: Rewritable
DVD Layer Present: No
CD Layer Present: No
Channel Bit Length: 55.87 nm (33 GB Per Layer)
BCA Present: Yes
Maximum Transfer Rate: Not Specified
First PAA of Data Zone: 6,220,928 (0x005EEC80)
Last PAA of Data Zone: 8,257,534 (0x007DFFFE)

BD Disc Information (L2):
DI Format Number: 5
Disc ID: PAN-EC2-001
Disc Type: BD-RE
Disc Size: 120 mm
Disc Class: 1
Disc Version: 3
Disc Time Stamp: 06/2010
Number of Layers: 3
Layer Type: Rewritable
DVD Layer Present: No
CD Layer Present: No
Channel Bit Length: 55.87 nm (33 GB Per Layer)
BCA Present: Yes
Maximum Transfer Rate: Not Specified
First PAA of Data Zone: 8,519,680 (0x00820000)
Last PAA of Data Zone: 10,556,286 (0x00A1137E)

Layer Information:
Layer 0 Sectors: 16,292,864 (34.44%)
Layer 1 Sectors: 16,292,864 (34.44%)
Layer 2 Sectors: 14,720,000 (31.12%)

Format Capacities:
DT: 0x02 - NB: 47305728 (0x02D1D400) - TDP: 49152
FT: 0x00 - NB: 47305728 (0x02D1D400) - TDP: 49152
FT: 0x30 - NB: 47305728 (0x02D1D400) - TDP: 49152
FT: 0x30 - NB: 46781440 (0x02C9D400) - TDP: 65536
FT: 0x30 - NB: 48854016 (0x02E97400) - TDP: 768
FT: 0x31 - NB: 48878592 (0x02E9D400) - TDP: 2048

Performance (Write Speed):
Descriptor 1...
-> B0: 0x00, B1: 0x00, B2: 0x00, B3: 0x00
-> EL: 47305727 (0x02D1D3FF)
-> RS: 8,990 KB/s (2x) - WS: 8,990 KB/s (2x)

Please don't PM me with questions that should be posted in the forum. I won't reply - Especially if you have post count of 0!!!

Replies to posts belong in the forum where everyone can read them. Please don't PM them.

In fact, don't PM me at all unless it's something I've asked to be told about!

Before asking questions, search the forum to see if someone else already has.

Use the FAQ and Guides forums to your advantage. I don't want to have to tell you to read them!

#38 discuser

discuser

    ISF Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 April 2018 - 06:28 PM

Yeah, the optical disc market is pretty much dying.  So, I also doubt we'll ever see a development of BD-RE discs so they write faster than 2x.  It's been like 10 years since the introduction of recordable BD, and we're still only at 2x for BD-RE.  But, it does beat 1x. 

 

 

Man, I can remember the days of DVD writing at 1x back in 2002.  You'd spend 59 minutes of your 1 hour write time, only to get a buffer underrun error at the very end and lose all that time and a disc.  Buffer underrun protection was one of the best technologies ever put into optical burners.


Yes, but I think that people focus on the SPEED MULTIPLE value too much. BD at 2X or DVD at 4X doesn't sound like much, until you look further into the actual data transfer rate. For example, CD at 52X read/write speed is about 7.8 MB/sec but BD at 2X is about 8.5 MB/sec (due to the much higher native (1X) data rate of the BD format), about similar to DVD at 4X speed which I recall is also around 8 to 9 MB per second or thereabouts. So most users / consumers looking at the multiple value will get a deceiving value of the actual data transfer rate. I'm more concerned with actual data transfer rate, because that tells me how quickly I'm writing data to the media and how long that could take to write and verify, and also how much demand it places on the hard disc head-seek / thrashing while I might be doing other low demand tasks on the computer during ODD writing that could potentially cause a drop in both the ODD software or the ODD's write-buffer level.

So I think BD-RE at 2X is tolerable. Not great, but tolerable. I wouldn't mind BD-RE at 4X but even at 2X it is tolerable to use triple layer media during an overnight format with verify, or write with verify job.

If I'm not in a rush, I still prefer to write to quality CD-R media at 4X though I have gone as high as 16X with quality CD-R media and have found no real increase in C1 and C2 error rates. CD-RW was basically stuck at 4X write speed until CD-RW-High-Speed media was launched, but CD at 4X took about 15 minutes of write time. Same thing for DVD at 4X, though verification for CD and DVD will usually read much faster than 4X so verification read time is somewhat reduced.

As for optical discs being disused, the relatively new M-Disc development ensures that there's no other medium including flash drives, SSD and hard discs could possibly come close to the archival life of the newer BD-M-Discs. The great thing about optical discs is that there are no electronics it it whatsoever, which is the whole point of increasing data safety and archival life. All other alternative storage formats, other than tape cartridge (a more fragile medium) involves on-board electronics with the medium.

 



#39 discuser

discuser

    ISF Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 April 2018 - 06:53 PM

I found a TL disc and managed to figure out the format of the newer DI Unit used on BD-XL media, so the first and last PAA values / layer stuff should be ok now. :)

Thanks, that's great to hear and I look forward to the updated Imgburn release following the current 2.58, whenever that is slated to be. In the disc information you posted for the Panasonic BDXL-RE-TL disc, a few other points I noticed:

 

1. The DISC DEFINITION STRUCTURE section seems to list only layer 0 and 1 for ISA and OSA only. So would this list be expanded in the newer Imgburn version to include layers beyond layer-1?

ISA0 Size: 8,192 clusters - Full: No
OSA0 Size: 8,192 clusters - Full: No
ISA1 Size: 8,192 clusters - Full: No
OSA1 Size: 8,192 clusters - Full: No



2. A rather huge value gap between the Layer-0 LAST PAA value and the Layer-1 FIRST PAA value. This gap is much larger than the value gap between Layer-1 LAST PAA and Layer-2 FIRST PAA.

3. Why is the layer-2 sector count lower than layers 0 and 1? Would that be due to reserved sectors or other system-use sectors allocation?

 

Layer 0 Sectors: 16,292,864 (34.44%)
Layer 1 Sectors: 16,292,864 (34.44%)
Layer 2 Sectors: 14,720,000 (31.12%)

 


Edited by discuser, 13 April 2018 - 06:54 PM.


#40 LIGHTNING UK!

LIGHTNING UK!

    Author of ImgBurn

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,552 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 13 April 2018 - 07:25 PM

1. Only if I can find the right info on the BD-XL format discs. I looked at what the drive returns for the Disc Definition Structure when a BD-XL disc is present and nothing jumped out at me as being values for ISA2/OSA2.

2. That must just be due to how the discs are designed and manufactured.

3. As above.
Please don't PM me with questions that should be posted in the forum. I won't reply - Especially if you have post count of 0!!!

Replies to posts belong in the forum where everyone can read them. Please don't PM them.

In fact, don't PM me at all unless it's something I've asked to be told about!

Before asking questions, search the forum to see if someone else already has.

Use the FAQ and Guides forums to your advantage. I don't want to have to tell you to read them!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users