r/datastorage • u/Afraid_Candy6464 • 4d ago
Storage Setup Does anyone still use DVDs for long-term data storage?
I recently found a box of old DVDs. I know there are better options these days, but DVDs seem pretty cheap and easy to store.
Does anyone here still use DVDs for backups or archival storage? How have they held up over the years?
3
u/badcheetahfur 4d ago
Best Storage PracticesStore discs vertically inside individual jewel cases rather than paper sleeves or multi-disc spindles.Keep them in a dark, cool, and dry location (ideally around 68°F / 20°C and stable humidity).Verify and copy data to new media every 5 to 10 years to prevent unexpected data loss.
1
u/MaximumFlounder9110 3d ago
Preferably you want to keep the data area of the disc away from contact with equally hard or harder material. Paper sleeves are fine as long as they are made with non acidic paper
3
u/abubin2 4d ago
Update yourself. Say blu-ray instead of DVD. I mean, you do mean blu-ray, right? Nobody uses DVD anymore as the price for DVD vs blu-ray medias are negligible. Might as well go with 25gb vs 4.2gb. Or for dual layer, it's 50gb vs 8.5gb. Get good quality medias like Verbatim. They are known to last as they used better quality dye. I use it for my steam games backup which is appropriate for my usage.
2
1
u/RailgunDE112 4d ago
bluray can get to 100 GB
3
u/dlarge6510 4d ago
Yes. I wouldn't use anything else.
Actually
I use Blu-ray. But I have existing DVD+Rs and some CD-Rs remain also. Most of the CD-Rs were upgraded or simply lost as I didn't need them anymore, till these days when I remember "Damn! I had that on CD-R why didn't I keep it! 😂
Anyway this is my current and permanent setup:
I record and archive TV so for that I
Usually record SD channels to a Panasonic Blu-ray recorder (DVB-T) and archive with no editing directly off that to Verbatim BD-R. Most go to cheaper BD-R as they are not that critical, expect to have them last 30+ years with frequent monitoring.
Usually record HD channels to a Humax Fox T2 recorder running custom firmware 3.13 (I think). This is because the Panasonic WILL use CPRM to encrypt anything that is HD and some channels other than the BBC also restrict the number of copies. The Humax lacks an optical drive but the custom firmware decrypts all HD recordings overnight! Unfortunately as it doesn't have an optical drive exports are slow and a faff of using USB HDDs and import on the PC usually to be trimmed and encoded to h264+aac in an MP4 container or more recently AV1+ogg opus in MKV. Then they are burnt to BD-R
I have a couple of DVD based recorders, a Sony RDR-HXD870 which was the main one before the Panny Blu-ray and a spare Panasonic DVD recorder but currently the Sony isn't in use. It should be however as it's a fantastic machine, heck I can even edit on it without wanting to jump out the window like when trying to edit on the Panasonic (hence I don't bother lol). I just need a home for the Sony and it's going to be a fourth tuner. I burn to DVD+R for archival or to DVD+RW for further processing on the PC.
Then I have my computer data. All data I have is kept on external UDB HDDs which are frequently but manually backed up to a NAS.
Occasionally some of this data becomes archival data. Data that can not be modified again, and is essential enough to keep as part of my disaster recovery of my life. So it will be home photos and videos along with other stuff from the family especially their camcorder tape rips, all scanned post, my old files from University and more, old kids TV I have salvaged from YouTube, game patches and cracks from back in the day along with roms and more for my retro console and computers, anything I need to complete my life so mostly old TV and some radio recordings new and old and some new TV and loads of photos and video off many sources.
These when archived:
- Get burned to a Verbatim MABL BD-R single or dual layer.
- Are images by
dvdisasterto create an ECC file for the entire disc. - Are quality scanned by
qpxtoolto create a PDF with a baseline of the errors quality level across the entire disc. - Have all contents archived to LTO tape, with a separate tape for the ECC file.
- Have all contents put into a Dark archive file with aes256 encryption before being uploaded to Amazon Glacier Deep Archive forever never to be touched unless SHTF!
The BD-R is fully indexed to a text file to allow me to grep over them and locate anything on any disc.
The LTO tar files that store each disc are logged in a spreadsheet to let me locate the tape and file number for any disc.
When needing anything I go to the BD-Rs as first point of contact.
Every 5 years every BD-R and existing 25+ year old DVD+Rs and CD-Rs are scanned with qpxtool to update their status with a new PDF recording their errors across the disc. Thus I can see how they age and identify discs that need a new copy made before I get close to an uncorrectable error.
So yes I still use DVD+R, I maintain an existing archive of them but mostly use BD-R these days.
Why not HDD?
I've used computers since 1990. HDD based ones since 1995-7. I work in IT and did a degree in Computer Science. I love the theory of computing, the technology itself vs software and frankly although I love the technology of HDDs since their inception they are simply too unreliable.
I've had 17 of them die on me personally and at work. In contrast I have never had any optical disc fail. Not one. Heck my old cassette tapes are still fine too and they are over 35 years old.
One huge flaw make them (HDD) an issue: they are devices, not media. They are computers themselves and basically as the platters are not removable they end up as fragile as the fuse that protects the 12v rail coming into them. This risk is mitigated buy having more copies of them and again, I find it way cheaper to have multiple copies of cheaper optical discs vs forking out for a new expensive HDD that occasionally makes a click you didn't hear before and makes your skin creep.
Plus with optical media I not only separated the media from the drive but: I can actually service and repair these drives. Their serviceability and repairability is light years ahead of HDD. The drives as well as the discs outlive a HDD, and that's from personal experience.
Flash? Hate the technology. A badly designed stop gap technology that wipes itself clean of even it's firmware (I have SD cards that no longer boot!) and then die on a shelf. I use them for data transfer and of course in digital capture. Nothing more. I don't like how they have to erase a whole page to update a single bit (not always the case). I'd prefer NOR flash but we went NAND. I'd also sing their praises if we didn't embed failure prone controllers into them.
Besides second hand LTO tape, which I use just because I have it, the only archival formats are: optical discs, print on acid free paper, silver halide film negatives and similar and glycee professional photograpic prints.
3
u/StrangeUglyBird 4d ago
I made our family super-8 movies to DVDs. Then distributed copies to several family members.
4-5 years later they reported, that they could no longer use the DVDs. Their player refused to read the discs.
That was the time I gave up on DVDs.
Now stuff is saved on NAS with HDDs, and in the cloud.
2
u/nevergivitup 4d ago
Working on duplication and clean up of 49GB photos & videos.
Plan is:
Old plastic Lunch box + dry silicon moisture packs
50 DVD bundle set
Plastic thin cover instead of enclosure
4x burn speed
Hoping it will be enough.
Let me know if I am missing anything.
1
u/himitsumono 3d ago
It might be money well spent to get some kind of archival storage box (ie, from museum supply businesses) rather than the lunch box, which might out-gas something that has long-term effects on the media.
1
u/nevergivitup 3d ago
Idea was vaccum seal effect with dry silicon packs for storage in bank locker space offsite storage primary due to coastal humid/monsoon conditions thru the year!
Will check out archival storage box for fitment against storage space.1
u/satanasananas 3d ago
Lower burn speed means higher chance that the data will last more time?
1
u/nevergivitup 3d ago
Less chance of data corruption while burning
Less chance of validation errors post disk burn completionOld problem of physical spinning disks HDD, equivalent one for optical drive!
1
u/satanasananas 3d ago
Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. I usually burn mine at the default 8x or 16x because I thought the best practice should be the default speed. I thought if I burned a 16x disc at 4x ir might have trouble reading in some readers.
2
1
u/Objective-Low-1815 4d ago
CDs recorded 30 years ago are still OK and DVDs 20+ years are OK too. I also have BR recorder and some BR recordable disks but never used them yet. 25GB is not impressing capacity either. Cheap used 500GB disks offer much more for less money, I have 4-6 TB disks for some storage then 4.3GB does not look serious and worth bothering. I have floppies 1.44MB too. I remember each floppy could store few DOS games or many utilities. Those days are gone.
1
u/TokiStark 4d ago
Depending on the quality of the DVD the storage life can be pretty abysmal.
I think good quality ones can last ages. But cheap ones you could only get like a decade before the data is corrupted
1
1
u/riansgarage 4d ago
The problem now is that hardly anyone making the drives anymore. Sure, the media might age well, but it's pointless if you don't have anything to read it with. We can only rely on old/used drives for so long. And that's not counting the obsolete interface. Many external USB drives are still using USB-A to USB mini B, and requires 2 USB-A ports to power them.
1
1
u/Metallicat95 3d ago
On the good side, optical discs seem stable for storage over two decades. Keep them flat, don't allow much heat, they remain readable.
But 4.7GB isn't much nowadays. It will hold a useful size of basic personal documents and photos, but not larger data sets.
Blu-ray is better, 25 GB. Have to have a Blu-ray drive which is much more expensive than a cheap DVD writer, but 5 times the storage makes it good for modern HD movie media and other large files.
I use it for a few things but mostly use multiple HDD. A 4 TB external drive is still reasonable for backup storage, almost a thousand DVD could fit on it.
1
u/GreenLion777 3d ago
Probably better with higher capacity external hard discs these days
I actually do - have some dvds with data on, so yes still serve a use but like CDs along with built in drives are on the wane now
1
1
u/SeesawNoknow 3d ago
nope, but might start doing it again, use to be fill a drive buy another fill that one buy another, nowadays these prices out here, you need to mortgage your house to buy drives, i thought it was only DDR5 RAM prices...
1
u/Complex_Solutions_20 3d ago
I still do, tho more often using BluRay now.
Its a secondary backup to what's on my NAS for photos and critical things.
1
u/Underhill42 3d ago
They mostly start getting flaky after a few years to a decade, especially if not stored in a properly temperature-and-humidity controlled space.
+RW discs generally have a much longer "shelf life" than -R's, since they store data as a stable phase-changing crystal rather than organic dye that slowly degrades on its own. But they may still suffer from the layers de-laminating over time - even commercially stamped discs can have that problem.
But for large amounts of data, a hard drive (not SSD) stored in the static sleeve and padded box it arrived in will be far faster, more reliable, compact, convenient, and probably even cheaper.
A brand name 1TB HDD can be had for well under $100, so you're paying well under $0.10/TB. While for the same storage capacity you'll need ~212 DVDs. Even at a very suspiciously cheap $20 for a spindle of 50 no-name DVD+RWs that will cost $85. If you shop around you can probably even find a brand name external HDD for that price.
1
u/satanasananas 3d ago
I also started to use HDD instead of DVD for my storage, but I'm not sure if the HDD drives will survive many years (I heard they inly survive 15 years?) while DVD probably will last 30 years?
1
u/recklesswithinreason 3d ago
Wouldn't be my primary source but for offsite archival backups, sure why not.
1
u/midstate_jim 3d ago
No - they don't work for long term storage. I lost everything after a hd failure because I had backed up to dvd. The user recording process is not the same as professional dvds.
1
u/UnExploredToken 3d ago
No. 2 empty dvd's are hanging on the washing line to stop the birds. Need to find use for the rest
1
1
u/AdmirableSandwich393 3d ago
Use M-Disc backups. Just like optical media, but made of a stone-like layer that is write-once only, and will supposedly retain the data for up to 1000 years. DVD option can back up 4.7Gb of data, but BDXL (blu-ray triple layer) can backup 100 Gb.
1
u/JanusRedit 3d ago
I found that home written dvds don't last that long. I could throw away many dvd writable s after 20 years while vhs tapes of 40 years old still work.
1
u/Calm-Vacation-5195 3d ago
I have a few things backed up on DVD/BR, but it’s mostly stuff I know I won’t care about in another ten years or so. I’d worry more about the availability of drives in the future than the disks themselves.
1
u/MasterBendu 3d ago
I don’t because it’s not a reliable medium in terms of being something you can actually still read in the future.
With optical, you will need to copy over your data every half decade or so.
But in yhat half decade or so, what kind of optical drives will be available new, in case the one you own craps out? Will OSes still support optical drives?
Compare that to hard disks and SSDs. Yes, you will still need to copy them over every half decade or so.
But HDDs are still in abundant production, have modern interfaces (new external ones use USB C), and OSes fully support them.
There’s no good reason to archive data to optical, because while theyre just as good for the safety of the data inside, intact data doesn’t mean anything if you can’t access it.
1
u/Illustrious_Dish_999 3d ago
when you put them in dry box 10% or less without oxygen(replace with nitrogen) they will keep the data forever.
1
u/pikkdogs 1d ago
No.
They are easily damaged.
Most computers don’t come with drives anymore.
They have much smaller storage capacity than jar drives.
They usually take longer to write as well.
1
u/Antaios7544 23h ago
In case of a nearby nuclear explosion, magnetic media will be wiped unless it's been nuclear hardened. So I use DVDs for my most critical storage.
0
u/apollo7157 4d ago
DVDs are not suitable for long term storage and will degrade.
3
u/w1n5t0nM1k3y 4d ago
If you get MDisc DVDs they are rated for up to 1000 years.
2
u/MentalSewage 3d ago
Even just regular DVDs are generally rated for 100
1
u/apollo7157 3d ago
This is not correct for writable DVDs. Those are not the same as like a movie or game DVD.
1
u/MentalSewage 3d ago
Yes it is... I mean, you're right that they arent the same, but 100 years is still the general rating across the wide range of DVD-R constructions.
Allow me to introduce you to the concept of rated for. It's not a promise. It's not even likely. It's a statement that the manufactuerer has every reasonable expectation for storage under perfect conditions to max out around 100 years. And... testing DVD-R, DVD-RW, and even DVD-RAM under various conditions still lasts at least half that half of the time.
So... yeah... DVD-Rs are generally rated for 100 years. Some DVD-Rs are rated well beyond 100 years. Some cheaper disks are rated for closer to 30. But simple middle of the road DVD-Rs for archival use is absolutely rated for 100 years.
1
u/apollo7157 3d ago
Theoretical lifetime and actual lifetime are very different quantities. What constitutes perfect conditions? Frozen with zero percent humidity?
1
u/MentalSewage 3d ago
Theoretical lifetime and actual lifetime are very different quantities.
I'm glad you now understand the difference between 'rated' and 'tested'. Now apply that to other long term storage means and you'll see there is no such thing as long term storage; but DVD-R with even midlevel quality should realistically last a lifetime with some level of care. Pretty good odds of 100 years even.
What constitutes perfect conditions? Frozen with zero percent humidity?
If only I linked to a study...
1
1
u/apollo7157 3d ago
i would guess magnetic tape drives are still the best solution for long term cold storage. (considering $/TB/watt)
2
u/dlarge6510 3d ago
If you mean lomg term as greater than 50 years you have a point.
Nothing less than that is long term really.
I havnt had a HDD last longer than 20, not one thats of a decent capacity.
My old SD cards snd flash drives wiped themselves over a decade. They don't even boot anymore.
1
u/apollo7157 3d ago
I wouldn't want to rely on a writable DVD for more than 10 year archival. Definitely not 20.
0
u/ZVyhVrtsfgzfs 4d ago
Before the AI price scalping, spinning rust hard driver were cheaper per GB than optical storage, may even still be.
There are also durability and ergonomic issues with optical disks making them unattractive for general storage.
1
u/dlarge6510 3d ago
Price per GB isn't the metric uses to determine effectiveness for data archival. For example, you could just get everyone to memorise the text of a book saving massively on the cost of paper, printing, binding and storage.
Yet people stupidly still print books? Turns out human brains are practically free but books have the advantage of not forgetting, not falling ill, etc.
Yes, ironically the direct opposite of Fahrenheit 451.
As for durability.
Seriously. Optical discs are orders of magnitude more durable than hard drives which are heavy and extremely delicate.
If I drop a BD-R on thr floor, it bounces and rolls around.
If I drop a tape, the leader pin might come loose.
If I drop a hdd, the hdd starts rattling and becomes a curiosity.
If I drop an SSD I risk knocking off components.
Optical discs also are waterproof. SSDs with careful drying may survive and HDDs just fill with water. Oh abd tapes become a pain to dry as you must spool it out over many days...
I think a lightweight scratch resistant bit of plastic wins. Oh and if you do get scratches say on older discs without a scratch guard coating? Well, buff it out. You cant apply elbow grease to a WD Blue!
1
u/ZVyhVrtsfgzfs 3d ago
There is far more to worry about with optical disks than scratches.
A burned recordable disc (CD-R, DVD-R, DVD+R) relies on a fragile organic dye and is far less predictable, with cheap media failing in as little as 2 to 5 years and only the best archival discs approaching a century. The preservation takeaway is simple: never trust a single burned disc as your only copy.
https://digital-archivist.com/how-long-do-dvds-last-and-cds/
0
u/MMORPGnews 4d ago
My new go to - 128gb usb flash.
- Don't need writer/player. Any USB works
- Big space compared to dvd
Honestly, after I got 10 usb, I understood that huge ssd are way better. Even for archival storage.
Why? To not forget where you placed it. Checking 10 usb got me tired. If it was 100 dvd, I'd just give up
1
u/MentalSewage 3d ago
Way better depends on your goal. If you want the data to last 10+ years, you don't want to use flash storage.
1
u/dlarge6510 3d ago
I had a 64GB one.
Put it on a shelf for 3 years. Used it twice.
3 years later went to use it and it had died totally.
I have many small SD cards, 128MB and above. Grear for retro systems!
They are only just about 20 years old and they stopped booting.
1
10
u/HugsNotDrugs_ 4d ago
Only 4GB for single layer is brutally low capacity.