/odg/ - Optical Disc General

bump

optical media up to 3.3TB already exists and 5.5tb is set for gen 3.

>optical media up to 3.3TB already exists
Woot O_o
Were did yu buy it?

Attached: images (7).jpg (225x225, 6K)

It's 1.5 Tb
It's real? ^^

Mostly ripping music CDs to .flac archives.

Do you all not have a portable CD player?

Attached: 41oHWNqAGnL.jpg (401x500, 23K)

Real man do cassette lmao

Attached: IMG_20190522_175453.jpg (4160x3120, 2.51M)

Based. But do you also have the CD ones?

Does optical disc are cheaper than hard drive for mass/cold storage.
I plan to backup data ( 3to) I don't often use.

I have one yes, but it's on the dust
I normally do mp4. Hate music on the phone

Pics?

It's in my other house, beside the portable DVD player lmao.

I personally left in the dust optical media for Music, if physical i prefer vynil. For video i still prefer DVD & bluray since streaming suck

Archiving data to M-Disc, some other purposes I suppose but archival use it the #1 priority anymore, has been for a few years now.

Besides, they're nearly transparent which makes 'em fucking cool too.

Attached: M-Disc_Translucent.jpg (2328x1746, 2.47M)

Music recording.

Are those white spots on the lower half of the disc there holes?

It's gonna be cheaper a 1 or 2 tb hard drive than the same space in optical

100 dvds is 25 dollar, You'll need two packs to reach a tb. 1 tb hdd is 45 dollar. 2tb in dvds would be 100 dollar while hdd is 65 dollar

If the reflection of the window behind me off the surface of the front of the disc.

Ah, ok.

>Pirated?
Not that user, but pirates are busy robbing jachts in India ocean, they don't have time for computers. What chances are that HD/4K disc is from actual pirate?
Very low, user, stop being dumb.

Attached: 1541291206153.gif (640x480, 1.26M)

While people always tend to look at cost vs storage space, my concern has always been archiving and data retention which means this:

If I have data, any data at all, that I consider worthy of archiving and keeping around for a long period of time, I'm going to choose the archive strategy that lasts the longest. Considering that hard drives, and even SSDs, can simply fucking DIE in a split second and you can literally lose terabytes of data in that split second then nope, I'll never ever EVER fucking put any trust into hard drives/mechanical storage/tape drives/etc and not SSD/solid state technology of any kind either.

Optical media, even though it's slow, is long term reliable, not subject to massive magnetic field issues (hard drives/tape), can't really suffer from electrical/electronic failure (hard drive/SSD), and optical drives will be around for a long long time to come while remaining backwards compatible.

Yes, I know I'm rather limited to 4.7GB of storage per disc with these M-Disc media I use, and I do know that there are Blu-ray M-Disc media as well but, again, for me it's a reliability thing.

Also, I can never *ever* lose more than about 4GB of data because of my backup strategy: I make backup sets that span 10 DVD5 M-Disc media, using PAR files and checksums at about 22% recovery.

I can literally make a backup set, then take 2 of the discs and destroy them and still be able to recover 100% of the data 100% of the time, and after 15+ years of this strategy I have never lost a single byte of data that I've archived.

Contrast that with people buying 4, 8, 10, 12, and soon 16TB capacity hard drives and using them for long term storage and suddenly when some electrical or electronic failure occurs, poof, that huge fucking gigantic amount of data, gone like a fart in the wind.

And SSDs can and do fail just as easily, and will continue to do so.

So while optical media is slower, it's vastly more reliable for long term storage.

What i do is backup a Hard drive in other two Hard drives, so the possibility of loosing everything is minimal (even if all 3 hdd failed at the same time, you can bring them to service)

Anyways i find m-disc to be a great option too. I often do regular DVD backup because i already have three hdd copies of the same so spending extra in m-disc gets a bit expensive

Based. I have a BDXL M-DISC. Picrel - scan of it.
Well-said.

Attached: IMG_comp.jpg (1000x853, 622K)

I lucked out a few months ago and was paying attention too: Amazon had the Verbatim M-Disc media I use (in the pic I posted) listed for $17 for a 25 pack and I saw it and thought "There's no way that's accurate, no way, they'll cancel my order and tell me it's a mistake and I'll get pissed but that'll be that..."

So I ordered 10 packs of the stuff.

I had 10 cakeboxes of Verbatim M-Disc media delivered to my door just about 48 hours later and was stunned. I wanted to buy more, really, but I just didn't have the funds to do it.

The next day the price went back to the normal amount which is as of today $35.91 for the same item, just over twice what I paid for mine:

amazon.com/Verbatim-M-Disc-DVD-R-Branded-Surface/dp/B011PZA68Y/

I've only used about 65 of 'em so far, and again the stuff I choose to back up is worth it for the long run. I don't really have any files larger than about 4GB in size - I only *cough* acquire *cough* 720p encodes of movies/TV shows, so I don't have any seriously large files. Don't give a shit about 1080p or 4K content so there's no use for me to have huge capacity storage media, 4.7GB discs with no more than about 4GB of actual data (my stuff) on them leaves plenty of space for the PAR files for recovery just in case of damage.

So far so good...

I freely admit I am quite jelly seeing that, but even with M-Disc technology I'm not sure I could put serious confidence in the reliability of so much data potentially being lost at one single time if the disc was damaged beyond the ability to read it.

Sure, I'd love to have a truly fail-proof form of archival media, we all would, but so far that just doesn't exist and more than likely never will.

But 100GB at a time, wow, that would be nice, indeed, if it never fails in terms of reliable reads after the burn is done.

Single layer is more durable

anything you want to keep after an emp.

>I had 10 cakeboxes of Verbatim M-Disc media delivered to my door
Truly /ourguy/

Source?

good quality cassettes are bit hard to find nowadays. i don't dare to buy chink shit and ruin my deck.

Lol how Lucky, desu 17 bucks for 25 m-disc is a good deal. I still find m-disc expensive and that's what takes me away from buying them. Maybe in a future it gets cheaper then the extra cost may be worth. I'll still use regular dvds because i find the average lifespan enough for me (15 years maybe 20). I mean data would be accesible for 14 years, then in the 15th year you can re-Burn more dvds if you feel like needing it.

Has anyone tested does those M-Disc BD-R discs last for millennium?

Attached: vhslaptop.jpg (800x760, 137K)

They were tested for durability and it is supposedly so.

Chrome ones are still common. Just get the ones from tdk or Sony. Chinese ones stink, they got stuck on my deck too lol

I got mines from a local shop in my village. It were more less 1.50 bucks each

Attached: IMG_20190522_194247.jpg (4160x3120, 2.65M)

Shit i put /b/ XD

>Don't give a shit about 1080p or 4K content
Why? While having any amount of archival is better than none, and there's an argument to be had about some modern films and TV shows that don't render their assets beyond 2K anyway, making 4K somewhat pointless in those instances, isn't it worth trying to keep the best versions of whatever it is you're trying to archive? I could even see the argument that in certain instances 4K is a bit redundant generally, but 1080p is too much?
Frankly I can't stand 720p because it feels way too low to even be considered "HD", and 1080p is in a weird spot where it really isn't that high rez either, but is barely acceptable enough in certain instances. Personally 1440p is the sweet spot between highest quality without being absurd, but you don't see media being released in 1440p so it's either too low with 1080p, or overcompensating with 4K.

Can you downgrade Blu Ray drive firmware from within a usb to sata enclosure?

I watch my kinos on Laserdisc because it’s the very best home format by any objective, scientific measure.

Attached: 65FBA819-2191-4910-9239-BCE34595C1BE.jpg (3264x2448, 3.04M)

That's why the /odg/ logo ver2 is a modified LD logo.

Bump.

The 200 Huawei threads are getting too much action.

Bump.

how to a dvd with some episodes to mkv on gnu+linux?

Attached: 1549989112623.jpg (946x1078, 184K)

MakeMKV + Wine. Did this whenever I was on a linux machine for BD movies and it worked just fine, though given things break and stop being broken with Wine all the time, your mileage may vary.

MakeMKV supports Linux natively.

Oh, well ignore what I have to say then. There you go.

thanks
its working
i have some pretty funny dvd series from my country that i've been meaning to rip for a few years

Attached: 1547351480748.png (475x604, 311K)

I PIRATE CHIPSTEP AND GLITCH FUNK MP3S OFF YOUTUBE
I BURN THEM TO DISCS AND LISTEN TO THEM IN MY 2006 4RUNNER
I DONT GIVE A FUCK

Attached: 1558373575541.gif (500x333, 447K)

The DVDs were professionally tested by the US Navy, the BD-Rs were never tested.

>2006 4RUNNER
So you're a dog mom?

I use them to burn PS1/ Dreamcast games, loading old backups for nostalgia reasons and general legacy needs

Whether something benefits from a 4K scan or not depends a lot on how well the film they're scanning has been preserved. Towards the end of film (About 1980's on) your standard 35mm academy had about equivalent to 5mp of resolving power @ 100 ISO or so, aka a bit betweek 1080p and 4k, although how much you got out of that depends on the glass used on the camera, and of course some movies were mainly shot in higher ISOs (which is where you can see the grain a lot in 4K releases).
8K is going to be the interesting one. Since we do have movies shot partially or basically completely on 65mm/70mm of some form which can benefit from it. Anything shot in imax film cameras for example. Or a lot of the works of Kubrick and Scott, they often had at least 65mm segments (The cityscape scenes in bladerunner were shot in 65mm for example). So, as long as you have the proper film and not just a 35mm transfer preserved, you can justify a 8K re-release with those but the vast majority of historical shit has been capped by 4K.
8K content is going to be 'fun' to watch as it ever so slowly trickles in.

At this point in our technology advance, there is no reason for me (or most folks) to actually buy physical media anymore when the movies and TV shows can be readily streamed to our devices in a much more efficient manner.

As for the resolution argument, I don't give a fuck, I don't need to see fucking hairs on the skin or poking out of an actor's nose, I don't need to see flakes of dandruff or anything else to such incredibly fine detail.

I need to be able to watch movies and TV shows and that's about it. I have a phone with a 2880x1440 OLED display panel in it and I keep it set at 1440x720 'cause it looks the same, it saves battery to various degrees (on top of all the dark themed apps I use because of the OLED display), and it's much snappier because the GPU doesn't have to push 4x as many pixels - the scaling aspect that happens because of the lowered resolution uses basically no power at all really.

I've got a few thousand nicely encoded MKV files with captions/subs/multiple audio tracks/etc, all at ~720p resolution, no issues, small h.265 10-bit files that play beautifully on my smartphone, my laptop, whatever.

If I want higher resolution I'd rather pay Netflix $12 a month and stream a whole bunch of 4K movies and TV shows instead of spending $20 for ONE fucking movie or ONE season of a TV show which also require more money invested in a big HDTV, all sorts of extra items required.

Not worth it, not necessary, useless, inefficient, and basically a waste of money I can use for other things.

>muh streaming
what can be given can be taken away when it comes to streaming, with physical media you actually own your movies, except with Blu-Rays which can be revoked in the player

bump

Optical media is still alive and well here in the military.
We buy CD-Rs in bulk because that's the only way we are allowed to physically move data between computers.
That is especially true for air-gapped systems.

Attached: welfare warriors lol.jpg (623x531, 98K)

Good to hear, I heard even floppies are still used by the military sometimes.

What is the cheapest ratio $/Gb to buy?
Dvd, bd, bd xl
Mdisc ?

The military is a welfare program, but it's the kind of welfare that you want. People are given jobs that set them in the middle class, are made to adhere to some standards of conduct and living, and that money goes right back into the local economy. It allows people to escape the cycle of poverty and make themselves better... instead of just giving money to ghetto fucks to spend on fast food and drugs.

Getting buttbongled at uniformed personnel is the wrong target though... most of the money spent on the military gets funneled right into the pockets of military contractors, like Boeing, General Dynamics, etc.

I know that some massive floppies are still used in special systems. The ICBM launch facilities/computers are a famous example. It's a completely airgapped system that has been in use since the 70s and had all the kinks worked out... no reason to upgrade to an interactive webapp with node.js and all sorts of bullshit when it literally just needs to work.

>instead of just giving money to ghetto fucks to spend on fast food and drugs.
Rural folks consume more food stamps than inner cities. The more you know.

Attached: selleai7liv21.jpg (960x954, 153K)

Vobcopy then ffmpeg.

That's interesting... I guess instead of crack, it's hillbilly meth.
A lot of country boys join the military, because the top career in their hometown is being the general manager of a Burger King.

Pretty much, the richest people in my town of 1,000 is probably the Funeral Home owners, the Gun Stock maker guy, the bank owners, and the guy who sells prom dresses. Everyone else has to go elsewhere for work/money.

>If I want higher resolution I'd rather pay Netflix $12 a month and stream a whole bunch of 4K movies and TV shows instead of spending $20 for ONE fucking movie or ONE season of a TV show which also require more money invested in a big HDTV
It's pretty well established streaming anything is guaranteed to be shit because bandwidth is always gonna be a hard limiting factor. Streaming isn't an advance, it's a regression in pretty every way aside from convenience, which that's negated by the fact you're at the whim of the studios as to what you can or can't watch, and the need for internet.
Are you on the older end by chance? I seem to see this sentiment from people farther away from the average 20/30 something the average user is when it comes to increases of resolution, "Higher resolutions are shit!, I don't need more than x lower resolution!" I do believe that you may genuinely don't see the difference in resolution for one reason or another, but there is a difference, and personally it's night and day, even at physically smaller sizes (to a point, beyond 4k and things start to become a touch redundant).
If you don't care for "fucking hairs on the skin or poking out of an actor's nose" then that's fine, others want the highest quality they can get, because they want to see everything intended to be seen by the production. Anything less seems like a disservice to the hard work it took to make the original masters, and frankly anything ≤720p looks like a muddy mess beyond reasonable consideration personally, especially on higher resolution displays, unless that was genuinely what it was mastered for.

In the enthusiast space, I don't see whatever comes after what's after UHD catching on, as you said we start to get to the point having content at those resolutions becomes harder to come by. I personally don't see myself going beyond 4K for movies as it gets a bit silly with 8K and beyond, and driving those resolutions gets to be a bit of a challenge as well. Hardware advances all the time, but even for gaming, I'm pretty happy at ultrawide 1440p and with just a GTX 980 I infrequently have a issue pushing the 60fps the monitors capped at.
That says nothing for newer films though, who knows if productions will be into going stupid hardcore into pushing pixels like the gaming space is. They're, or rather normies are, unwilling to push framerates if the Hobbit is any indication.

>you actually own your movies

Except that you legally don't, you fucking dumbass.

>yep, this is where you're headed

Attached: Yep Gay Street Is Where You're Headed.png (397x581, 394K)

Not him, but it gets a bit messy.
The writing on the disc is mostly to say "Buying Jurassic Park on Blu-ray doesn't mean you own the franchise now.", it means you have a license to play the movie Jurassic Park from that disc as you please. Anything beyond that is vapid overreaching legalese written to fuck with people just because they can. I doubt even paid-by-the-studio judges on any legal case could say that a end user doing nothing but watching the content they paid to see from the disc they bought could make a reasonable argument that's unlawful, and they'd agree remotely restricting users ability to do so is A grade bullshit.
>But muh writing and technical ability saying they can
There's also writing frequently in many EULA's straight up saying "You can't sue us", which is literally illegal and would be completely thrown out the window by any amount of legal proceeding.

bump