LG Writers Capabilities and DVD Fake media and ways of find their fakeness.

[Aeolis]

Hi folks,

1. I would like to know if mine DVD writers (LG 4167b and LG 4160b) are capable of doing PI/PO scans because I’ve seen a lot of people an sites about media quality and fake and true media so I would like to test my burns like they do to check if my media is fake or not.

2. Well, so far the only error check I could do was DVDInfoPro CRC Read Errors check after burn with ImgBurn 1.2.0.0 and verified with it. Is this a good error check to predict media quality or at least to predict if I have a good burned disc doesn’t matter the origin of it?

3. I would like to give a suggestion of a pool: It would be interesting to create a pool for fake media and how to differentiate it from the original ones. There we should post pictures (front and back) of the discs if possible, media codes (in fakes ages doesn’t matter a lot) and especially the inner ring codes (good to find fakes) and of course other ways of find clues of faked or true media that I’ve not mentioned here. It could be a section as well. Here we have DVD Media Section, we could add this information to that section. Today is very important to find if you are buying fake or true media as we have seen a lot of reports in the internet talking about faked Mitsubishi and Tayo Yuden media and what’s worse: some good stores are selling them.

I’ve personally gone thru one of a situation when buying “true” Tayo Yuden media I looked in the inner ring code and figured out it was a REAL FAKE Tayo Yuden media, so think on it. Let’s help our community.

See you later,

Aeolis

[OneSickPup]

1. I am not aware of any LG burner capable of quality scanning (PIE/PIF, PI/PO). I know for a fact the 4167B cannot.

2. Beneficial for sure - how definitive is a different matter. I honestly don't think you could draw much as far as the media quality in general. All that scan does is prove it's readability at that given time on that given reader. Obviously a good thing to do but inconclusive as far as the longevity or the overall media quality. This is purely my opinion here.

3. I would have no objection even though I have no firsthand experience with fake media. Never purchased any. I know this varies around the world but you almost have to go out of your way to get fake media here in the US. I guess it also depends on your definition of fake media. Anyway, people like LordSmurf and others with better knowledge of the media industry hopefully will jump in here shortly on this point.

[Aeolis]

Hi folks,

Nobody came up with suggestions and ideas? Please come with them. Share your experience. Lordsmurf where are you?

See you later,

Aeolis

[Aeolis]

Hi folks,

Men, I still wait for an answer. Come on with ideas and suggestions. Lordsmurf where are you?

See you later,

Aeolis

[ROF]

MY first suggestion would be to never and I mean NEVER rely on any scanning software to determine whether media is fake or whether a burn is a quality burn. Relying on such software is completely inadequate. The only true test of a burn or quality of media is to burn a disc completely full of information and then use the output device or software of choice to retrieve all information in the way you would normally use a disc. I can't begin to tell you the amount of times I would get quality scans only to find that certain data was unretrievable resulting in skipping video, unretreievable data files, pixetlation, and more. I will never use a scanner to tell me my burns are correct. I will replay/retrieve all burnt data in the way I want to use it in order to determine quality, fake media or not.

[hech54]

Scanning is a waste of time.

[OneSickPup]

Scanning is a waste of time.

It depends on how you approach scanning and what you attempt to do with the data collected from the process. Quality scanning in general is much closer to an Art form than a Science. It is a comparison tool and not a definitive/conclusive process. Most people want to throw a DVD into a QS capable burner - fire up CD-DVD Speed - run the Quality Scan - and then draw a conclusion. You can't do that. No two burners will scan a dvd identically. What it is valuable for is establishing trends of burner/firmware behavior with media tested - but only after comparing several burns on a given burner with a certain media. I use quality scanning for basically three reasons: 1)Trying to determine the best burner/firmware combination based on the burners I own for the media being tested. 2)Testing for early indications of burn degradation ( Was a victim of Ritek G05 rapid degradation). Quality scans showed tendencies of degrading long before transfer rate tests or even playing the DVD videos encountered problems. 3)It's a hobby for me.

All that said, it is time-consuming, subject to mis-interpretation and definitely at risk for being a waste of time. As are most things in life, it just depends on how you chose to use the tools you are provided with.

The only true test of a burn or quality of media is to burn a disc completely full of information and then use the output device or software of choice to retrieve all information in the way you would normally use a disc.

The ultimate test will always be playability of the media for dvd video or successful retrieval of data for dvd data media. No way to refute that fact.

[oldandinthe way]

Optical disks are a trash technology and have been for 30 years. Accepting risk is necessary to make any use of the optical media.

If there was a universal way to test, there would be software to do it. There isn't any. If there was a single standard for optical media and how to write it at the physical level, someone might be able to write some software, there isn't any.

If it meets your needs for use, it is good, until it fails. When will it fail, a debate that I am not getting sucked into.

[OneSickPup]

For the most part I agree with your comments.

Optical disks are a trash technology and have been for 30 years. Accepting risk is necessary to make any use of the optical media.

I don't understand the "trash technology" reference but I agree that one must accept the limitations of optical technology in comparison to (let's say) magnetic medium technology.

If it meets your needs for use, it is good, until it fails. When will it fail, a debate that I am not getting sucked into.

I agree there is no finite way to reliably predict optical media failure. But then again I never stated there was a way. All you can hope for is to analyze data and plot trends that may give early indications of a degrading media. We both know that due to the nature of the media - it will degrade - the question becomes when and how rapidly it will occur.

[ROF]

Since your LG doesn't perform scans debates about it are pointless. As to your suggestions of a section for listing fakes you may want to check the DVD media section you referenced. Find the media you thought you purchased and post a comment about the fake media you received when you bought it. Include media code of the fake media for a reference. If it's available find the media code of this fake media and post another comment telling others that when you thought you were purchasing X media you instead got Y media.

[OneSickPup]

Let's think about this a minute - on Mar 24, 2006 06:19

MY first suggestion would be to never and I mean NEVER rely on any scanning software to determine whether media is fake or whether a burn is a quality burn. Relying on such software is completely inadequate...

...I can't begin to tell you the amount of times I would get quality scans only to find that certain data was unretrievable resulting in skipping video, unretreievable data files, pixetlation, and more. I will never use a scanner to tell me my burns are correct. I will replay/retrieve all burnt data in the way I want to use it in order to determine quality, fake media or not.

but on Mar 24, 2006 12:21

Since your LG doesn't perform scans debates about it are pointless.

Funny how a few contradictory posts renders the discussion pointless. Especially in light of the numbers of views of the thread. Time for me to move elsewhere.

[ROF]

It's not contradictory unless you include you irrelevant posting and quoting.

It just seemed everyone was debating one part of a three part post without even discussing the other two parts. Since the debating part is irrelevant to the OP because the drive is incapable of performing such actions I was merely trying to draw attention to the other relevant portions of the OP questions. It's definitely time for you to move along unless you have something relevant to the original posters queries.

[oldandinthe way]

Thirty years ago optical disks were slow, expensive, small and unreliable - trash.

Today optical disks are bigger faster, cheaper and still unreliable. Becuase there has been little change in the underlying technology. In my opinion still trash.

The point I am trying to make is do not expect any optical media to be capable of mantaing an archive. No amount of testing can provide security. If reliable storage is required, redundancy is the solution, multiple copies on multiple media. Our important data is being saved in multiple copies on magnetic media, optical media and where feasible flash memory.

The drugstore is selling 32mb flash modules for $6.00 suitable for many of our areas of critical data. This week we bought 512mb of PNY flash for $10 after rebate. Lookout falling prices.

[OneSickPup]

It's not contradictory unless you include you irrelevant posting and quoting.

Obviously irony isn't your strong suit. My point was that in the span of 6 hours time you went from discussing and bashing the merits of scanning to the point of scolding other posters as to the pointless nature of the discussion. Then pass judgement on the relevance of others posts. Highly hypocritical if you ask me! Well, don't worry! You won't have to read anymore of my irrelevant posts on this forum.

[ark]

How do you define what is fake??
Afterall most of the disks are being manufactured by a few companies - only branded differently.
Then comes the compatibility factor. While some disks do very well on some writers, with others they fail.
+ When we are talking about billions of disks being produced at about 30cents a piece - how can the quality be assured?
We should be thankful that inspite of the complex technology and the extremely low price hurdle, the technology is working and that is the reason we have this forum. I have not seen any forum like this for VHS recording.

[TBoneit]

Fake would be a disk with for example a TDk media code that was not made by TDk and is nowhere near the quality

Buy brand name from medai from big chains and you will avoid fakes. Doesn't mean you can't get cheap media under for example the Maxell label as they use more than one manufacturer.

For me I've had consistent good burns from Sony & Verbatim and Made in Japan Fuji discs. = Grade A

HP seems to uses CMC for example, Local office store near me has Optodisc & Princo under their house label... = Grade B or mostly Ok depending on the burner and how full even. Expect some coasters