Verify Failed

[oscar13sd]

Hello,

 

I just upgraded to the Imgburn 2.4.0.0 and seem to be getting verify failures when I wasn't getting them on version 2.3.2.0. I am using AnyDVD 6.3.1.2, making a image, and then verifying the image with the original before I burn it. I don't know if it was ever supposed to pass since they aren't identical due to missing copy protection, but like I said, it passed on the previous version, and yes I tried it with AnyDVD enabled and disabled. Is anyone else having this problem? Thanks.

 

I 07:58:49 Source Device: [1:1:0] SONY DVD-ROM DDU1615 GYS4 (E:) (ATA)

I 07:58:49 Source Media Type: DVD-ROM (Book Type: DVD-ROM)

I 07:58:49 Image File: C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\Desktop\THE_REEF.iso

I 07:58:49 Image File Sectors: 1,911,551 (MODE1/2048)

I 07:58:49 Image File Size: 3,914,856,448 bytes

I 07:58:49 Image File Volume Identifier: THE_REEF

I 07:58:49 Image File Volume Set Identifier: 36f81d93

I 07:58:49 Image File Implementation Identifier: Daikin U.S. Comtec Lab

I 07:58:49 Image File File System(s): ISO9660, UDF (1.02)

I 07:58:49 Read Speed (Data/Audio): MAX / MAX

I 07:58:50 Verifying Session 1 of 1... (1 Track, LBA: 0 - 1911550)

I 07:58:50 Verifying Track 1 of 1... (MODE1/2048, LBA: 0 - 1911550)

E 07:59:05 Miscompare at LBA: 261, Offset: 128

E 07:59:05 Device: 0xB0

E 07:59:05 Image File: 0x00

E 07:59:05 Total Errors in Sector: 45

E 07:59:05 Failed to Verify Sectors!

E 07:59:05 Operation Failed! - Duration: 00:00:15

I 07:59:05 Average Verify Rate: 37 KB/s (0.0x) - Maximum Verify Rate: 37 KB/s (0.0x)

[spinningwheel]

Could you maybe post the entire logfile?

[LIGHTNING UK!]

Verifying an image file... that's a novel idea!

 

You're doing something ImgBurn is not to be used for and it cannot be discussed on this forum. Sorry.

 

For your own peace of mind though, if a drive doesn't report any errors during a read then it's safe to assume it's fine and all data is present and correct (drives provide ample error checking).

 

Verifying burns is a good idea, verifying reads is pretty pointless.

[oscar13sd]

@spinningwheel

 

That was pretty much it, the verify had errors within 3 seconds and I cancelled it from there.

 

 

@Lightening UK!

 

I don't mean to sound like an idiot, but why can't it be discussed here? And why is it pointless to verify an image? I could have sworn that I've found a bad image by verifying it before, but I could be wrong. Isn't it possible to have a bad read, or is the possibility so minute that it is a waste of time? Thanks.

[Jill]

Hello,

 

they aren't identical due to missing copy protection

 

Anything to do with either copying and burning downloaded from the net movies or even the ones you own personally is not discussed on this forum, sorry

[oscar13sd]

Ok, I did some more "testing." I went back and reinstalled 2.3.2.0, made another image, did some verifies, reinstalled 2.4.0.0, did some more verifies, and here are my results:

 

With version 2.4.0.0 installed

AnyDVD enabled

Version 2.3.2.0 image passes verification against the original disc

Version 2.4.0.0 image has errors immediately against the original disc

AnyDVD disabled

Version 2.3.2.0 image has errors immediately against the original disc

Version 2.4.0.0 image has errors immediately against the original disc

 

With version 2.3.2.0 installed

AnyDVD enabled

Version 2.3.2.0 image passes verification against the original disc

Version 2.4.0.0 image has errors immediately against the original disc

AnyDVD disabled

Version 2.3.2.0 image has errors immediately against the original disc

Version 2.4.0.0 image has errors immediately against the original disc

 

I have not burned a version 2.4.0.0 image so I know that this "test" may not mean anything. But this still seems odd to me. Something is obviously being imaged differently on the new version, not saying incorrect, just different. I looked through the change log, but with my technical inexpertise, I did not see anything that would explain this. Thanks.

[LIGHTNING UK!]

Isn't it possible to have a bad read, or is the possibility so minute that it is a waste of time?

 

IMO, it's a waste of time. You are of course free to do whatever you like though!

 

Something is obviously being imaged differently on the new version, not saying incorrect, just different.

 

There was a bug in 2.3.2.0 in the ISO9660 file system code that prevented DVD Video images working on some players. This was fixed in 2.4.0.0.