AlbertEinstein

This is the 2nd failed burn log file: My 3rd attempt using a brand new virgin BD-R disc was successful.

I had just started burning a new project onto a single-sided 25GB BD-R disc. The next to last log message in the "live" log window was "Filling Buffer ... (80 MiB)" followed by "Failed to open file: XXX". The software paused and I know why it couldn't find the file. I moved it into a sub-folder on my hard drive at the last minute like I do sometimes and forget to move it in your disc layout editor so that it was valid. This caused the error. I thought it would be safe to simply cancel the entire operation and start over versus seeing more of these errors if I had moved any other files into different folders. So, I cancelled the first burn. But on my second attempt to burn the project to the same disc I got even more bad news: I thought for sure that cancelling a burn during the buffer filling stage would not permanently damage the BD-R since not even the lead-in had been written from what I can tell. The writing lead-in occurs right after the filling buffer step, so why is my BD-R disc permanently damaged? Is it possible the BD-R disc was bad already and I just didn't realize it? Or does your software verify the BD-R media is good from the very beginning?

This software is one of the best for burning optical media. I've always liked it. But I have to ask the question. The last official version was released almost 5 years ago. Will it ever be updated to address bugs or add features? A feature request I would like to see is something along the lines of statistics. Like showing how many of the last burns were successful and without issue. And the media brand used could be added as well. "21 of the last 25 burns were successful. Media used: 8x - RiData, 15x - Verbatim, 2x - Optical Quantumm". "4 of the last failed burned were for the following reasons: 2x - Program Memory Area Update Failure, 2x - Whatever and Whatever". EDIT: Now that I think about it though, if ImgBurn doesn't flush the log output window data to text log files on a failure this won't work. I can figure out all this myself so it's not a big deal but I just thought I would throw it out there. Over the lifetime of my BD-R burns (probably around 100 now) the majority have been pretty successful. I hate it when one fails!

First post in 2008, last post before mine in 2012. So, I'm gonna bump it again. I just got the same type of error message today. And in my personal opinion this has: absolutely nothing to do with bad media. It is just my opinion, however, based upon the ratio of good burns to bad burns I get with most of the media (RiData) and the burner I use them with (LG-WH10LS30). This has to be one of the most disappointing errors to ever receive. The entire disc was burned successfully, brimming with 25+ GB of data. The only thing that failed is the closing process. Or, at least that's my perception of things. So, I have 25+ GB of data but a "ghost" TOC. Wonderful. Now, I'm learning something brand new from just reading this 10 year old thread (thank God the Internet is forever). Even though burn failures do not always (ever?) produce textual data in .log file, there is always the fall back to the actual output window itself, as shown by laurik in the screenshot above. I questioned/complained about this many times and no one ever thought to mention capturing the actual log window??? Anyhow, Here's a screen capture of the error message window and my log output window: Okay, The website keeps saying, "You are not allowed to use that image exension on this community." ???? It's a simple .png file extension. Are we erroneously detecting profanity in imgur's randonmly generated URLs?? I'll tinker with this but the link is there. I just can't show it inline with the post. https://imgur.com/wrPVBHq The first error message (before the burn) was followed up with a successful finish on retry #1 of 20. The failed attempts after the burn only tried 8x...why not 20? Were all attempts after 3 on my command? I can't remember but that would answer my question if so. The last 3 or 4 burns (from the same media spindle, 25-pack) I've done were without issues.

Well, that sounds like a bug to me. I just finished burning another BD-R disc and Windows 10 immediately recognized both 1)the UDF volume label in the Windows File Explorer and 2) the file system as being "UDF" in the properties dialog box of the BD-R drive. I used UDF 1.02 this time instead of UDF version 2.50. So, I would personally phrase Windows 10 support of all UDF file systems versions as less than perfect. Rebooting to see a volume label after each burn is not something I want to do. Especially, since 1) your software has no problem with UDF 2.50 labels nor does 2) diskmgmt.msc. 100's of programmers working on different applications on Windows 10 so this isn't a big deal for me. There are lots of easy work arounds. I guess the title of my thread should have been, more concisely, "Windows 10 File Explorer Chokes on UDF 2.50 Labels!".

Hi, I just successfully burned a BD-R 25GB disc with your software. After the burn was finished I went to look at the BD-R label in the Windows 10 File Explorer and it wasn't showing. So, I went back to your program and into "Read" mode to see if it could read the label without any issues and it did. I'm not sure what's up with Windows File Explorer choking on the display of labels. Maybe it's the version of the UDF file systems that I'm using? I closed and reopened File Explorer. That didn't fix the label not being displayed. Maybe a restart of Windows 10 will fix the issue? I can explore the disc just fine though. ***EDIT***: On a more positive note, I just launched diskmgmt.msc and it does successfully show the label in that software package. So, by my observations, File Explorer sucks, that's all it is. ***EDIT***: I just checked the properties of my optical device in File Explorer again. It shows the "File System" as: "Unknown". I put all 3 file systems on the BD-R. I think it's okay with reading UDF 1.02 but not UDF 2.50. I'm gonna back away from using 2.50 and just use UDF 1.02 on my next burn since I don't see much benefit for me personally anyways.

@dbminter, It's all pretty complicated. I guess experience is the best teacher. I just burned another disc moments ago on the same burner and media I've been using. But this time I explicitly capped the burn rate at 4x in ImgBurns "Write Speed" settings. And I got a 100% successful burn. Knock on wood. The "Write Speed" might be what was causing the problem but it may have also been that some other 3rd party software on my PC was putting "Read Locks" on files that I had selected for burning in my project. I was using "MediaInfo" to pull up metadata on .MKV files that I was throwing into the project just because I could. I don't know for sure. I'll keep burning at 4x I guess unless I start having more failures. That's what the media were rated for anyway. I guess I just got lucky with the earlier burns.

I thought the File Systems and the TOC were the same thing. Thank you for the clarification on that.

What do you mean by "it's really down to simply what the drive does"? Aren't there many factors that determine the burn speed? Isn't the rated burn speed hardcoded into the media itself? Of course, since there are varying reports on this, as revealed in the BurnPlot images below, it seems it is somewhat dynamic which is good for the consumer in the event that 8x doesn't seem appropriate. I have a stellar burn history using my LG burner and RiTek data discs as shown in the custom image I created using multiple windows from BurnPlot: The last plot showing the "Speed End" @ 2x was, I believe, due to high CPU usage activity on my system. You know the nature of Windows 10 these days is to constantly be updating itself. I tried, yet another burn, last evening and it failed at 98%. These failures near the end are just weird, abnormal, and not in line with past burn performances. I honestly think there's something else that has changed. I've added an old USB Lexmark printer and I've updated Windows 10 twice under the Insiders program. My burn success rate has only gone down most recently, over the last 3 or 4 burns. I honestly don't think there's anything wrong with my burner or the quality of my media. I will keep searching for answers. I will solve this riddle, I hope. The first error was a "Loss of streaming error" and then they're all this one: The disc is mostly still good as in the past. I successfully sha-1 verified the biggest 5 files over 20+ GB...again.

So your saying there is a pre-allocated finite amount of physical disc space set aside for the TOC, i.e., the file system information? The number of files/folders in each individual project doesn't have a direct impact on the final physical disc space required to store this information relative to the number of folders/files? That may be true when 1 file system is burned to a BD-R disc. I don't know for sure. But what I do know by experience is that even when the "free space bar" has been in "the green", your project will warn about not having enough disc space when multiple file systems are included for backwards compatibility. I've had to remove these 1 at a time, starting with the most horrendous "Joliet" file system and then "ISO-9660". This may be a special case because it's burning multiple file systems to the disc. None the less, it raises my eyebrows, each time this happens. Although, I'm getting to the point where I care less and less about backwards compatibility. This quest is all about understanding though.

I'll definitely be watching my P's and Q's when I execute my next burn. I still have about 10 blank RiData discs left on the spindle. I'm taking everything in I can to make sure the next burn doesn't fail, if that's possible. Another issue for me that has been completely unpredictable is the max burn speed of these discs. Looking back over some recent graphs in DVDInfoPro and just generally watching the ImgBurn software as it actually burns, I've noticed some burns reach a max speed of 8x which is twice the rated speed of these BD-R discs. But I also noticed, a recent burn which was successful, prior to this last (failed) burn, burned all the way through at only 2x. I didn't have any say in the burn speed as I always just leave "max" selected. Maybe I'll try restricting the rest of these BD-R's to 2x burn speeds. And examining the bottom surface for any visible issues prior to the burns. ***EDIT***: I'm noticing in these 2 graphs that the "Capacity" differs in sectors between discs by about 32 sectors. That's very interesting. The bottom image shows no sector was left unburned while the top one had 3000+ unused sectors. Or is that difference in "Capacity" sectors the difference representing the sectors used for the TOC? Nope, scratch that theory. The Capacity/Data numbers in the bottom graph are the same which would mean, by my theory, no space was used for TOC and that's not logical. Shouldn't that "Capacity" value in sectors be the "exact same value" on every disc in a spindle? God, not even the same in a spindle but consistently the same across discs and even spindles as a media standard? If it's true that each disc varies in it's quality near the edge, even in a given spindle, then my filling these discs to capacity is exactly what's causing these bad burns. These 2 images represent successful burns but they still seem to provide some valuable insight about the inconsistencies between discs If I'm reading the graphs right. *****EDIT*****: So the first image shows the burn failed @ sector 12,190,752 out of a total of 12,219,392 sectors which means there was about 59 MB's of available physical disc space left it could have burned. Is the TOC written at the end of the disc and is it written at the end of the burn process or at the beginning of the burn process? What about the lead-out which is nothing but empty space/sectors, how much space does that require? I'd like to eliminate the possibility that ImgBurn is not fully accounting for all the space that may be required to fully process a disc being burnt to full capacity.

@dbminter, The disc burned successfully up to 99% completion. If a scratch caused the burn failure at 99% completion it would be visible at the extreme outer edges of the disc. From what I can see on the disc, the physical location of this scratch looks like it would be encountered at about 75-80% through the burn process if it were already on there. The picture shows the largest portion of the circular scratches. There is a second smaller one also. As you can see, the scratch lines up perfectly with the natural spiral track of the disc as well. I honestly wonder if the disc is getting scratched up, post burn, from all the bumping and grinding that the drive engages in because of the disc not being in a perfect state of completion with an accepted optical disc file system standard. The drive tries really, really hard to read the disc when I go into ImgBurn's "Read Mode" and it does it successfully after a lot of bumping and grinding. This seems the more likely cause of the scratches I see on the disc. Maybe the spindle motor is getting so old that it's wobbling and rubbing the disc the wrong way. Or, what looks like a scratch is where the laser was positioned when the software attempted to close the disc session and that's where the laser has written twice over itself? I'm just guessing. Nah, the scratch would be more uniform through 360 degrees of the disc.

Then be surprised my friend. I state again that I successfully sha-1 verified over 20+GB of data across 5 .ISO files...on this disc. I will say this. The drive makes a lot of noise when it's being read by your software. It's obviously messed up and I'll probably just end up recycling this one with all my other older DVDs and bad BD-R burns. In fact, I took the disc out and visually examined it under a desk lamp. You can see what appears to be scratches on the disc. But they must be laser scratches of some sort because I never scratched the disc. The whole experience is bizarre. I guess I should take more notice when people recommend a certain brand of media. I don't know though. Some burns are perfect, some aren't. It's just the nature of the beast I guess.

@LIGHTNING UK! It took me awhile to figure out that you meant to go into "Read Mode" in ImgBurn. I never could find it in DVDInfoPro. I captured the topmost portion of the Window in ImgBurn but it wouldn't all fit. Here's a little bit more just in text form that got cut off from the image: File System Information: Sectors: 12,218,810 Size: 25,024,122,880 bytes Time: 2715:19:35 (MM:SS:FF) TOC Information: Session 1... (LBA: 0) -> Track 01 (Mode 1, LBA: 0 - 5898559) -> LeadOut (LBA: 5898560) It "looks like" the ImgBurn software misread the size of the disc when it attempted to write the lead-out and so the lead-out was written at the wrong LBA making the disc look like half it's actual size. It does show that the size is only half of what it actually is in the top portion of the image. But on bottom it shows double. So, the metadata about the disc is a little off but I did successfully read 20+ GB of data. So, DVDInfoPro cannot be held completely responsible for the erroneous information on the total amount of data on the disc. @dbminter, I've been very happy with my LG drive. The bad burns have been at a very low percentage and when they occurred I almost feel like the blame lies on me. For trying to fill discs to capacity or letting screen savers kick in while AFK making coffee. Or just weird stuff. So, my experience with this LG burner has been nothing but positive. Even the bad burn today isn't a total waste. It's just not up to specs but that doesn't affect (most of) the data at all. I have yet to purchase any DL media. I've been waiting and waiting for the prices to get as low as they can. I'll probably buy some soon when I catch a good sale. I will let you in on a little secret though. After checking my purchase date on this drive it's going on 7+ years of age. I bought it at the end of 2010. I think the spindle motor may fail soon but who knows for sure. It makes some really weird sounds sometimes. Weird sounds but, in reality, "normal" for an optical disc drive.

LG drives are rotten? I'm sorry but I don't think so. This is certainly an issue I'd like to resolve but I think your jumping to the wrong conclusions. Like I said, I've burned...oh wow...I don't know...50-75 BD-R and most are without issues. But out of those 50-75 burns only about 25 were customized by me. Being filled to capacity as much as possible. I'm not that worried about getting an extra 1% of disc space if I have to pay a hefty premium on a better brand BD-R disc. Now, if I see some Verbatim on a good sale price, after I burn out all my current stock, I might give it a shot. This isn't the biggest issue in the world because I can simply dial back my neurotic tendencies a bit and stop filling the disc so full. But from a technical standpoint I would like to know what's wrong. I tend to agree with you, it's probably my current media being a bit cheap. I wouldn't be so quick to blame the burner itself. I think LG is a good brand! On another side note, what's up with the DVDInfoPro software? Not so pro thinking there's only 11.25GB of data on the disc. I sha-1 verified 5 files having over 20GB+ of combined data on the disc with "Hash Check Shell Extension" in Windows 10. So, I'm pretty sure the DVDInfoPro is wrong. Theres 1 movie clip at the end of the disc that won't play around 10 minutes near the end which matches up pretty closely with the 99% burn completion on the screenshot I took. Edit: Come to think of it though. Those first 50 BD-R discs I burned may have been Optical Quantum brand discs. So many possible factors, so little time.

I've burned a lot of BD-R discs successfully. Now, I'm not monitoring the situation that closely to know how much space I'm leaving free on each disc. But this is really only my second bad burn at 99% in the burn process that I can recall in my most recent disc burns. I've burned 2 discs prior to this one at 100% success rate. I'll check the free space on those to see what I left open. If I have to I'll just start leaving a little more free space in my burn projects.

Since you cannot get log files when the software doesn't complete a burn successfully I've resorted to screen captures. Here they are: Of course, the software is not able to successfully close the disc and the infinite grinding loop continues until I reboot the PC. As far as I can tell there are no errors on the disc itself. I've taken the liberty of writing .sha-1 hash files for all of the biggest files burned so I will check those. While this looks pretty bad and it's no fun having to jump through all the hoops by "attempting" to close the session and actually having to reboot the PC, the burn still seems to be okay. I left about 1 megabyte of free space on the BD-R in the project editor window. So, I am filling these discs to capacity. I think there may be an issue somewhere in that regard. Maybe the discs I'm using are about 200 sectors shy of meeting the official BD-R requirements? To fill my discs full, I am burning some small files in the name of redundancy. How can I control what folders/files would literally be burned near the end of the discs where this type of failure is most likely to occur? I want to engage in this practice. Okay, I just tested a small video file near the end of the disc. It does appear to be messed up near the end of the video. So, it looks like the files are written to disc in the order of the actual folder/file structure used to master the disc. No worries. 99% good, I'll burn the bad file to another disc. Still, what's causing this? DVDInfoPro thinks the disc is only half full:

Yep, it's amazing how much data you can collect over the years. I'm a bit of a digital hoarder. That's probably putting it a bit mildly. Lots of images, text files, programming projects from Visual Studio over several years, scanned documents, etc, etc. Yes, I have almost always used the "Advanced" input mode. I switched it to "Standard" just now to see what that even looks like. My first impression was that I've gone blind and have to navigate everywhere now blindly. It just looked scary to me. But, I might play with it a bit and see if I can get used to it. Okay, I played with it. So, I tried "Standard" input. Not being able to see how much space I have left as I go? Yeah....ummm......no. Hehehehe. That mode looks so very primitive when compared to the "Advanced" input mode. Honestly, I think the modes are named backwards. The advanced mode, to me, seems 10x harder to use. I fill my discs up as full as possible and that requires a lot of adding/removing files to get things just right. If I'm not using at least 99% of the full capacity I'm not happy. The issue with your software isn't such a big deal now that I understand it. But I honestly thought it would be easier than you make it sound. I thought as the programmer you could work on a large task in chunks and then tell Windows, "Okay, I'm done for a bit but I'm going to give control back to you just long enough for you to hand it back to me again". I've also thought about zipping a lot of my smaller files, like images, and programming documents, into single files. The sound the optical drive makes when reading/copying lots of really small files off an optical disc is just horrible. It's like the optical laser is just bouncing around looking for stuff more than it is actually reading data. So, at the end of the day, there's always a solution to the problem. Just an FYI for you if you can come up with anything. Maybe a simple check that looks at how many files are in a users project and throws up a warning dialog before it's starts grinding away? "****WARNING**** Your project contains a ridiculously large amount of files. You've been flagged as a digital hoarder. This software may appear as though it's not responding. So, patience is a virtue!".

I am working on a project right now with 74k+ files and 13k+ folders. When I load the project the CPU usage goes sky high and Windows 10 reports the application as not responding. I closed your application 2 or 3 times thinking it was crashed before I realized that if I waited long enough that it would eventually begin responding again. I'm guessing at least 60 seconds (I counted a second time at about 72 seconds) passed before your application responded again. Can you release control of your application to Windows 10 on a more regular basis "or" provide visual feedback to the user that shows progress is being made and ask for patience? The waiting and not knowing if anything is happening combination is what makes the situation more frustrating than it needs to be, I think. On top the fact that Windows 10 actually shows "Not Responding" in the title of your application also.

I'm sorry I don't see any data related to the failed burn in the log. I think you've stated in the past when the application exits the wrong way that the log data is not written? Your application tried to "close the session", I think, and the drive tried but never would stop growling. So, I had to do things the hard way. So, that's what happened. I'm going to wise up and start using my screen capturing utilities like GreenShot and ShareX or even just the Windows print screen function. Because there are Windows that pop up with the specific error messages in them. I just never can remember exactly what they say. The last one was something about a stream or streaming error. There was no power loss. New question for you: I'm working on a new project to burn and your software complained about filenames being the same in a folder on my hard drive. And they actually are the same, except for casing in the file extension. I have a lot of images that have the same filenames but the extensions are .jpg and .JPG. That is enough for Windows 10 NTFS to "allow" the duplicate filenames I guess. Since they exists that way. Your application detects them as the same and offers to rename them. Your hands may be tied on this issue but I was just curious if this is something you could fix in a future version. No big deal for me to just give each set of files their own folder to avoid all of the brouhaha.

I just burned a 25GB BD-R. I went to make a cup of coffee while I let the BD-R finish burning. I came back and my screen had gone black. I have my screen set to turn off after 10 minutes. The system is set to go to sleep in 30 minutes. But I know I wasn't away from my computer that long. I had to enter my password to get back to the Windows desktop. It looks like the burn was 98% finished. The software put up some weird error on the screen about a streaming error or something. It asked me if I wanted it to try and close the session. So, I said yes. The BD-R drive moaned and groaned for a good 3 or 4 minutes before I got tired of it and just rebooted Windows to save the BD-R motor from burning up. When I got back into Windows 10 I checked the disc and it is readable so it's not a complete loss. I think at the moment my screen turned off the burn got messed up somehow. Or it got messed up from me just hitting "enter" on the keyboard to wake up the screen and enter my Windows log on pasword. Can you please confirm anything I have said here? I honestly think this messed up burn @ 99% finish is wholly related to the screen shutting down and then being woken back up by me. Maybe if I had just waited until I heard my BD-R drive stop spinning everything would have been okay? Obviously, in the future, I'm going to try and not be away from the keyboard so long so I don't take any chances. But what are you thoughts on this issue? Thanks for reading!

Can you please explain this message (link below) in a bit more detail? Does this mean the same thing as just burning a disc without having done any tests? If that's the case then there's no more chance of ruining a good disc opting into "Test Mode" then having skipped the test. https://imgur.com/ftsXnFN The way you word the message in the dialog makes me pause and ask myself, "My God. What am I doing. Do I really want to test this disc?" Also, can you please explain what the test would actually reveal? Is "Test Mode" good to find bad sectors in advance that might be a result of a finger/thumb print smudge or dust particle that could be wiped clean and then pass? Thanks for reading!

Again to be clear, I'm talking about ejecting the disc while the software is frozen, that is waiting, for a response from the user. Not just ejecting the disc willy nilly while it's writing data. I appreciate your comments but you sound like your guessing as much as I am. My impression was that since the software is basically at a stand still, waiting for you to answer, "Yes, please retry" or "No, just close the disc" and there is no timer as to how soon you need to respond, that at this point, the process is basically frozen until you respond. Like I said, thank you for your input but I hope to get a more definitive answer soon that tells me what I want to hear. "Yes, you can take the disc out and try to clean it without harming the current process. Good day to you sir. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year as well!!!'. That's what I want to hear.

About a week ago I was burning a single-layer BD-R disc. And shortly after I began the burn process I got a warning window that popped up. I don't remember the exact error message. But to the best of my recollection it was something like "Cannot interpet" or "Bad interpretation". I just don't know. Anyway, the software kept asking me if I would like to re-try (re-reading the bad sector I'm guessing) so I kept hitting re-try a few times. But after several re-try attempts I just said, "fuh-get-about-it" and had the ImgBurn software close the disc so I would have a successful yet very small partially burned BD-R. I wanted to take the disc completely out of the burner in between these re-try requests and see if I could spot check the disc for stray dust particles and wipe it clean if necessary. But I was also afraid that the software might abort the burn completely and I would have nothing but a completely worthless BD-R. So, my question is, can I physically eject a BD-R disc mid-burn (obviously during these pop-up window messages) and check it for stray dust particles and wipe it clean if necessary and re-insert the BD-R disc without causing the software to abort the current burn process? I've burned so many single-layer BD-R discs successfully from Optical Quantum that I tend to believe this was my fault more than a defective disc. So, this is why I ask. Thanks for reading!

Yes, from an ISO standards perspective, I have no argument with you about that. But don't be so little-minded. Of course, a person could use those good sectors if he really wanted too. In a non-standard way. Acknowledge that now or look like a fool for life. In fact, I want you to be the person that writes the software that does this for me so that I can use those good sectors. I know you can do this. You have the knowledge to do this for me, for us all. Make it so!