CD or DVD?

[Ama]

When giving a "disc" of images to a client, do you give them a CD or a DVD?
--
http://www.photographybylisaamato.com
E-500, 17.5-45 & 45-150 lens
C-5500 (great for macros)

http://lisaamato.fotopic.net

 

[dad_of_four]

If the disc contents are

 

[Jon Stewart]

Why not DVD-R?
--
Jon Stewart

 

[John-G]

If the disc contents are
--

I agree... only if > 700MB I use DVD-R. I've had virtually no -R vs. +R issues when giving folks data DVD's. It's video-compliant DVD's that seem to have all the -R vs. +R issues because of set-top players.

 

[JimBtoo]

Why not DVD-R?

Speaking only for myself, DVD+R has some technological advantages over DVD-R, as described in this article...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD%2BR

Loosely quoted from that article...

1. The ADIP system of tracking and speed control as used by DVD+R is less susceptible to interference and error than the LPP system used by DVD-R, which makes the ADIP system more accurate at higher speeds.

2. DVD+R(W) has a more robust error management system than DVD-R(W), allowing for more accurate burning to media, independent of the quality of the media.

3. Additional session linking methods are more accurate with DVD+R(W) versus DVD-R(W), resulting in fewer damaged or unusable discs due to buffer under-run and multi-session disks with fewer PI/PO errors.

However, DVD drives/players from about 2004 and older, and "bottom-end" (low cost/economy) DVD drives might not recognize the DVD+R format.

Technologically, DVD+R is the better format. But to ensure widest compatibility with all DVD drives, DVD-R might be the better choice.

Can anyone say: "VHS or BETA"?

--
Jim B. :> )

 

[dad_of_four]

As I understand it:
DVD+R is better for disc that contain Data files (vs. strictly video)
DVD-R is better for disc with movies, because of previous compatability issues.

With Data files, you want absolute error-correction, because a few bad bytes can ruin your whole file. With Video files, if a few bytes are bad, you loose a frame or two, who cares?

That's my story, I'm sticking with it.

 

[John-G]

As I understand it:
DVD+R is better for disc that contain Data files (vs. strictly video)
DVD-R is better for disc with movies, because of previous
compatability issues.

With Data files, you want absolute error-correction, because a few
bad bytes can ruin your whole file. With Video files, if a few
bytes are bad, you loose a frame or two, who cares?

That's my story, I'm sticking with it.

I've been producing videos and distributing DVD-R for several years. I've distributed many hundreds of discs - all on DVD-R. In all the time I've been distributing DVDs I've only encountered 2-3 people that could not read them. When we researched their players we found they were models with known DVD-R compatibility issues. I reburned their copies on +R and had no further problems.

I view video as just as important as data. Video issues can freeze the player, cause the video to skip, etc. Both of which will result in a very unhappy customer.

Both formats are very similar. I guess it's just a matter of what you got started with. I use -R for both data and video and have been quite happy with the compatibility.

More important than format is the use of high quality media and slow burn speeds. These two factors will contribute more to set-top player compatibility than anything.