Writing files/folders to Verbatim BD-R XL TL Blu-ray Discs

[NelsonDog]

Hello,

I have approx 1.3TB worth of DVD remux files stored on an external portable hard drive. 

I plan on creating a back up of the files onto Verbatim BD-R XL TL Blu-ray Discs for long term storage as the DVD’s are now discontinued and virtually impossible to find.

I would like the files to be stored on the discs ‘as is’ (MPEG-2/EAC3 stored in a .MKV container) and will not be creating an image or zipping the files beforehand. 

Is it necessary to verify the burn and do I need to deselect the option ‘verify from image’ beforehand?

The write speed on the discs are advertised as 4x maximum but according the manufacture of my drive (Pioneer) 6x speed is supported for the specification of the discs I am using. 

To increase the probability that the burn is successful, should I set the speed at 4x instead of leaving it on AWS?

Is there anything else I need to know about the process or settings to increase the chances that the burns are successful?

Thanks for your help 
 

 

Edited June 5, 2020 by NelsonDog

[dbminter]

You can always disable the verify process but you run the risk of getting bad discs, regardless of the speed you set.  A burn can complete but it doesn't mean it completed correctly.  I always enable verify because you never know when some gremlin might sneak in.

 

[NelsonDog]

If I’m just writing files, do I need to deselect ‘verify from image’ in the verify settings?

 

What’s your opinion on burning to BD-R SL, DL, TL, QL?

 

Are successful burns more likely with SL as opposed to TL?

[dbminter]

Unless you're writing on the fly, you're always writing to an image file first, even if you're just writing files.  You're writing files to the ISO first, unless you're using the Write files/folders to disc option from the Picker.  That is writing on the fly, which doesn't write to an image file first.  And if you're using that option, Verify from image won't apply.  What that option does is it verifies the contents written to the disc against the contents in the image file.  While this takes longer, it's more likely to find write errors than not using it.  Not using it just performs a read test, meaning to see if the data can be read from the disc.  Doesn't mean the data was written correctly to the disc to begin with.  I always enable Verify from image.  I also rarely use the writing on the fly option.  In fact, I've only used it a few times for testing purposes for someone else's issue.

 

BD SL I use primarily even when it will fit on a DVD/CD.  Unless it's an Audio CD or a DVD Video, which require CD/DVD media in order to properly playback, I make all my archives to BD SL HTL.  HTL BD will last longer than the CD/DVD because those use organic dyes which deteriorate faster.  BD uses metal oxides which last longer.  And BD SL are only $1 for the good stuff.  Even though I may waste some (Or a lot.) of available space, I prefer the longevity BD SL provides for my archives.

 

I used to use BD-RE DL for making system images, but due to the high failure rate of those, I moved to flash drives.  Plus, flash drives are faster.  And since flash drives, I've moved to portable SSD's, which have higher capacities (Well, they do make high capacity flash drives, but they're all junk that I've tested out.) and are faster than flash drives.

 

Never burned TL or QL, but as you go beyond one layer of DVD or BD media, you increase the likelihood of errors exponentially, particularly at the layer changes.  So, you're less likely to get errors writing to BD SL than you would a TL because of the increase from 1 layer to 3.

[NelsonDog]

Firstly I apologise in advanced if I have misunderstood anything you have said, I want to make sure I understand the process properly. 

At first I was going to perform this back up onto BDXL 100GB discs because I wanted as fewer discs as possible + they come in full size jewel cases which supposedly protects the discs? 
 

Do you store your 25GB discs on spindles?

 

Are the examples below correct?

 

Steps for ‘writing on the fly’:

1. Select ‘write files/folders’ to disc

2. Copy and paste the required amount of episodes to fill the capacity of the disc 

3. Select ‘verify’ and deselect ‘verify from image’

4. Click burn 

Results:

SL - verification success likely.
TL - verification success unlikely due to the layer break 

Steps for writing image to disc:

1. Create image from files or folders 

2.  Select write image to disc

3. Choose .ISO file 

3a. (Select layer break if using TL disc)

4. Select ‘verify’ and make sure ‘verify from image’ is selected 

5. Click burn 

Results:

SL - verification success likely 

TL -verification success likely due to preselecting the layer break 

 

 

Edited June 5, 2020 by NelsonDog

[dbminter]

You can buy jewel cases separately. 

 

I store my discs in CD/DVD carrying "books."  They store like 320 (I have some more, some less.) discs/CD booklets.

 

I don't see where you're getting Verify against image from in Write files/folders to disc.  I just went into that function and found the Verify checkbox but not one you describe.  And, there shouldn't be such an option in that function as there's no image file being written to in Write files/folders to disc function. 

 

Oh, I see where you're at now.  You're in the Verify function itself.  I rarely use that manually as I have the automatic Verify turned on after each write.  There is a Verify against image file.  If you didn't create an image file, that option doesn't apply.  You'll be asked to select an image file, which you won't have.  You'll just be doing a Verify, which as I said, just makes sure the disc can be read.  It performs a create image from disc function without actually creating the image file itself.  I prefer the Build mode (Create image file from files/folders), where you create an image file first.  That way, you can compare contents written to the disc against the contents in the image file.

 

Write files/folders to disc will write the files/folders to disc without writing to an image file first.  The Build mode will write the files/folders you tell it to to an image file first.

 

It's not that TL has a likelihood of failing.  It just has a higher likelihood of failing versus a SL one.  For instance, you may not experience a problem writing a TL disc.  But, for a variety of reasons, you might.  And, for a variety of reasons, you might experience a problem writing to BD SL discs, too.  Unfortunately, until you actually write a disc and experience an error, I can't tell you what you might be wrong until I see the error.  However, you will have less likelihood of failure with SL discs; doesn't mean you won't though.  Even though it increases the number of discs used, I use SL media.  In fact, I've never written a BD-R DL disc before.  Just BD-RE DL.  And I've never written a TL or QL disc of any kind, even though I have burners that support them.

[NelsonDog]

I’m going to do a test tomorrow with a TL disc for the first time and see if it passes verification.

I upgraded my drive last week to a Pioneer BDR-212EBK, because my old drive didn’t support BDXL TL/QL. 

I’m thinking now that even if that disc passes verification, from what you’ve said, I’d be better off backing up onto SL discs. 

At least then I can buy more discs than I need, which will allow some margin of error aka the dreaded coasters!

Let’s say I burned the data onto SL, that’s going to be somewhere in the count of 50-60 discs. 

Will it be okay to store them on the spindles as long as they are away from direct sunlight and in the back of a cupboard or drawer for example?

 

 

Edited June 5, 2020 by NelsonDog

[LIGHTNING UK!]

If it wasn't clear before, you do not need to do anything with 'Verify' mode.

There's an option called 'Verify' when you're in Build mode with 'output' set to 'device' (i.e. you're burning on the fly). That's the only option you need to enable (which is default anyway) in order to verify the disc once it has been written. As dbminter said earlier, it's worth leaving that enabled.

[dbminter]

About the spindles, it's hard to say.  For instance, discs were never intended to be stored long term that way because they don't sell spindles except when you buy blanks.  However, they're good enough to ship the blank discs in without too much damage to them.  If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say there's no real downside to using them except when you need one from the bottom of the stack, you have to take out all the rest of them.

[NelsonDog]

Update:

The Verbatim BD-R XL (TL) [100GB] disc burned 88GB worth of data (files/folders) and passed verification at 6x speed using a Pioneer BDR-212EBK.

It took approximately 2 hours 30 minutes. 

[dbminter]

By comparison, in terms of time taken, a BD-R burns a full disc and Verifies at nearly 25 minutes at maximum speed (12x) on the LG WH16NS60.  4 BD-R is 100 GB, so that's 25 minutes times 4 to complete a 100 GB backup.  That time, of course, does not take into account creating the actual file sets or ISO's if you're writing to image file first.  Plus additional time loading each new disc.  So, that's 100 minutes of burn and Verify time alone.  That's 1 hour and 40 minutes.  Considerably shorter than 2 and a half hours.

 

So, using BD-R SL is also less time consuming.  Of course, that time payoff does equal you're having to store fewer discs if you're using TL media, so it may be worth the trade off.

[NelsonDog]

@dbminter the discs I’m using have the MABL branding on the package and on the back it says Made in Taiwan.

 

IMGBurn says the MID is: VERBAT-IMe-000
 

Do you know if these are the discs manufactured by Verbatim themselves which are of higher quality?

 

Cheers 

 

 

[dbminter]

Are those the MID for the BD-R SL's?  If so, they're the same ones I have from Verbatim that I've rarely had an issue with that wasn't the result of a failing drive's fault.  However, that MID, I believe, is also used on the BD-RE DL's I have, too, also from Verbatim.  So, it's slightly confusing.

 

I've never heard of MABL branding, to my knowledge.

 

Actually, just checked the ones I used and the package does say M-A-B-L on it.  I had never noticed that before.  Wonder what it means.  Anyway, just ordered a stack of these today:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00GSQ4DBM/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

Those are the ones I always use and they have that MID you mentioned on them.  They're good ones I've been using for years.

[NelsonDog]

Just now, dbminter said:

Are those the MID for the BD-R SL's?  If so, they're the same ones I have from Verbatim that I've rarely had an issue with that wasn't the result of a failing drive's fault.  However, that MID, I believe, is also used on the BD-RE DL's I have, too, also from Verbatim.  So, it's slightly confusing.

 

I've never heard of MABL branding, to my knowledge.

 

Actually, just checked the ones I used and the package does say M-A-B-L on it.  I had never noticed that before.  Wonder what it means.  Anyway, just ordered a stack of these today:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00GSQ4DBM/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

Those are the ones I always use and they have that MID you mentioned on them.  They're good ones I've been using for years.

The ones I’m using and referring to are BDXL TL (Not the M-Disc). I think MABL is another way of saying ‘HTL’ aka inorganic recording layer. 

 

 

[dbminter]

Yeah, like I said, as far as Verbatim and BD media go, they apparently use the same MID across different kinds of BD-R and BD-RE media.

 

Those I linked to are HTL, so you're probably right.  MABL is a way to indicate they're metallic oxide layers and not organic dye ones.  Although why they didn't just say HTL on them is beyond me.

 

Looked it up.  MABL is short for Metal Ablative Recording Layer.  And it is the inorganic, metallic oxide layer of HTL BD-R.

[NelsonDog]

I was going to back up my data onto SL but I noticed that the 25GB, 50 pack spindle on Amazon (U.K.), does not have  the MABL branding like it does on your version of the discs.

Reading through some of the recent reviews, it suggests to me that something is awry and that perhaps the quality of the newer discs are of lower quality. 

From what I can gather it has something to with Verbatim no longer producing the discs and handing over full production to CMC Magnetics who have a reputation for poor quality control.
 

Anyways, I noticed the 100GB BDXL discs on Amazon U.K. also didn’t have the MABL branding which made me hesitant  so after some further research, I found German seller that had the ones with MABL so had them imported. All of them have burned and verified successfully albeit incredibly slow. 
 

I wonder if I can find out the manufacture date of these discs?

Edited June 11, 2020 by NelsonDog

[dbminter]

CMC has already changed the manufacturing process of some quality Verbatim discs to save money.  They altered the DataLife Plus DVD-R and DVD+R so that they're useless in the LG WH16NS60 now.  Had to switch to Taiyo Yuden TYG MID discs.