Re: filmscanners: Burning CD's

["Michael Moore" <miguelmas@qwest.net>]

Art: You have apparently read more about CD-RW than I have... I agree that the
phase change method of recording has a potentially longer life than the dye
based CD-R media... However, what I have read is that the best practise for
making long lived discs for use in different CD readers is to use the CD-R
gold (or now gold/silver) and record it slowly, only filling up about 550Mb...
Who the devil knows what the truth is... We will  (or our kids will) know in
20,30 and 100 years from now how well this whole move to digital from silver
holds up... I am sure that there will be a lot of silver based negs and slides
that will reside in museums, etc. that will have stood the test of time... CD
media are a different game entirely...

Mike M.

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> Just wondering if you have heard anything that makes CD-RW less archival
> than CD-R, if one is using it as an internal media (not for supplying to
> others).  I suspect it might be more stable than CD-R dyes, but haven't
> read anything definitive.  Have you?
>
> Art
>
> Michael Moore wrote:
>
> > ReWritable is NOT preferable... CD-R media is cheap enought that you
> > don't need to mess with all the variables of trying to rewrite a CD
> > file... What I and lot of other folks on this list do is to use the best
> > CD-R (not CD-RW) discs we can get ahold of (Kodaks Optima Gold or
> > Gold-Silver are great) to archive our images... what counts is 1. The
> > ability of your disc to be read by multiple users (in other words your
> > clients or lab) 2. Archival and Information quality... If you want to
> > work on a file, you pull it up off your Master Files (the ones that
> > include your original scans, pre-manipulation, as well as the Master
> > manipulated files) CD, do whatever tweaks are necessary, then save it as
> > a separate file... And burn it onto a new CD-R... costs about a buck for
> > a new disc...
> >
> > Mike M.
> >