Looking for high end DVD recovery software

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:27 AM

I have here some pesky movie DVDs i'm trying to salvage.

All the recovery solution i tryed so far, try to read the DVD in one pass, which resulted in a whopping additional 25MB after 12 hours.

I'm looking for a solution which allows a multo pass approach.

1st pass just copy the sectors, which are fine and log all damaged sectors.
n pass try to copy just the damaged, not yet copied sectors.

This would not only improve speed but would allow to combine the results from different drives.

Has anyone run into a program like that?

• Back to top

Posted 10 October 2012 - 01:03 PM

• Back to top

Posted 10 October 2012 - 01:22 PM

• Back to top

Posted 10 October 2012 - 02:01 PM

Under windows the "correspondent" being bbcopy:
http://alter.org.ua/...win/bb_recover/
though I never tried it on CD/DVD's.


This:
http://sourceforge.n...jects/defraser/
may be useful as a "post-processor".

A commonly used tool (Commercial) is CDroller:
http://www.cdroller.com/

The "professional" reference is Infinadyne:
http://www.infinadyne.com/


Wonko

• Back to top

Posted 10 October 2012 - 02:24 PM

Thanks a lot!

bbcopy sounds good.

• Back to top

Posted 10 October 2012 - 03:53 PM

We have a first winner!

Roadkils UnstoppableCopier was thus far the only program, which was able to move past the defect and copy the readable part behind it. And that in a total copy time of just 4 minutes!!!

Now i know, that DVD 1 vob 1 has 100MB good - then 200MB bad - and then 700MB good sectors. Which equals 7 minutes missing from the movie.

Why is non of the recovery programs able to give me such an overview of the defects in a similar time?


On the 200MB of bad sectors, i have bbcopy working at the moment, but it doesn't seem to do any better than all the other programs i tested, that part of the DVD seems to be dead for good.

• Back to top

Posted 10 October 2012 - 04:08 PM

• Back to top

Posted 10 October 2012 - 04:26 PM

I can see no damage on either side.
btw. It's a burned -, not a pressed DVD.

• Back to top

Posted 10 October 2012 - 04:57 PM

Oh - OK, if it is a burned DVD then don't touch it with toothpaste ! That is only for pressed CDs/DVDs!

• Back to top

Posted 10 October 2012 - 06:41 PM

• Back to top

Posted 10 October 2012 - 07:18 PM

Oh - OK, if it is a burned DVD then don't touch it with toothpaste ! That is only for pressed CDs/DVDs!

Not really. it is for scratches. (on both types of media)

Compare also with the "car wax" (and with the Vodka trick ):
http://www.msfn.org/...r-scratched-cd/


Just for the record (talking of CD's and not DVD's) you'll have to pry my old SCSI 1x CD drive (with caddy ) from my dead hands.

Dvddisaster (see this):
http://reboot.pro/2172/
may be useful to "map" the part of the disk where the issue is (if the issue is actually some scratches)


Wonko

• Back to top

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:11 PM

Roadkil uses a trick in his copy program, which should be explained somewhere, imo.
The Unstoppable Copier uses a slide control. Better recovery - faster recovery.
I assumed that this would set, how often reading is retried before the program moves on. It does not!
The slider controls the read cache of the program.

The cache is always comitted as a whole or discarded as a whole. Depending on where your problem is, it is possible and happend to me, that a "better" recovery settings actually recovers less.

On the end of 'fast recovery' the cache is a bit over 100MB.

• Back to top

Posted 11 October 2012 - 10:40 AM

• Back to top

Posted 11 October 2012 - 11:46 AM

Mm, I wish I had a DVD to test.
These soft I will try when I have a similar problem:
http://superuser.com...r-windows-vista

my old SCSI 1x CD drive

Time you ugraded!

• Back to top

Posted 11 October 2012 - 12:11 PM

That sort of cleaner is not new. It's around for at least 2 decades!

If the program doesn't read more often, how is the size difference explained?
Would "better recovery" only keep readable data, and faster keep all?

Unstoppable Copier uses a read-cache which size can be costumized by a slider.
It reads data until the cache is full, then checks if the whole cache is without error.
If not, it tries a few more times before moving on.

Let's say you have 1GB file with 100MB readable, unreadable 190MB, rest readable agin.
Setting the cache to 100MB will give you the fastest recovery time and only not recover 200MB.
Setting the cache to 60MB will give you a slower recovery and will not recover 240MB.
A setting of 4MB will already take a lot, lot, lot longer to run it's curse.
Disabling the cache will give you the most recovered data, but recovery will take several days/weeks.

Since for movies, as in my case, recovery of single sectors or small fragments in the middle of the unrecoverable part leads only to strange sounds and weird pictures, it is better to work with a bigger cache of around 10MB, what's the minimum of usable stream, imo.

• Back to top

Posted 11 October 2012 - 12:19 PM

Time you ugraded!

I have read media on that drive that you people wouldn't believe....
http://www.imdb.com/...es?qt=qt0378266

Now, of course large mass production cuts costs, but do you really believe that a drive that originally costed in the several hundreds US$ range can be compared (when it comes to quality of materials used and "precision" of mechanical parts) with a drive that offers 48x or 52x the speed and costs some 20 bucks?

Have you ever disassembled (and repaired) a CD-ROM drive?
(the above is a rethorical question, if you had, you would have known the answer to the previous question and wouldn't have posted that suggestion)


Wonko

• Back to top

Posted 11 October 2012 - 12:32 PM

Have some old Compaq and IBM desktop computers. They're pretty much useless these days, but just opening them up is a delight.
Back in the day, the casings were actually engineered! With clearly defined air streams and hinged parts for fast and easy access. Like we have today only in profession grade equipment.

The casing of one computer can be locked from the BIOS! Making it the only computer, i know of, where access to hardware can be protected by a password.

• Back to top

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:26 PM

Now, of course large mass production cuts costs, but do you really believe that a drive that originally costed in the several hundreds US$ range can be compared (when it comes to quality of materials used and "precision" of mechanical parts) with a drive that offers 48x or 52x the speed and costs some 20 bucks?

Oh I agree. What about a nowadays expensive Dvd drive which they put a lot of care into? Same. Or an expensive pendrive, which (could) last longer than a cheap one. Actually I mistrust that: If one spent 100Euros for a 4 Gb, would it last longer?

I have read media on that drive that you people wouldn't believe.... http://www.imdb.com/...es?qt=qt0378266

Hehe. Good for you. (and the drive).
I was picturing you with the drive on some newish computer, with no other dvd (cd) drive. Now if you don't have another drive,
that's cool! Still, I am surprised it would can play at an ok rate.

That sort of cleaner is not new. It's around for at least 2 decades!

Yeah, fair enough, I know. (hadn't read the infrasound bit) No, I was imagining a more normal vibration, rather than infrasound. So, it's still to be invented!
Or use a mobile to vibrate the dirt off. or the coating .

access to hardware can be protected by a password.

Have you tried with an axe or brute force, see if the HD afterwards would also be locked?

• Back to top

Posted 11 October 2012 - 02:08 PM

You seem to be too young to remember, how computer casings use to be build. Not like today, where one can make a dent with a fingernail.
Those things used to be build to survive a direct hit by a missile.
Short of an angle grinder there's no chance to get those suckkers open, brute force, without destroying the whole content in the process.

btw. Those cleaners use ultrasound not infrasound.

• Back to top

Posted 11 October 2012 - 02:30 PM

Yeah. Typo. To comfort this, I was imagining a plane.

Edit
No, a plane aint ultrasound. It would do a high shrill eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.
Which would sound naff.

Woow, a Virgin copter just flew by where I am!!
What next? an electric-sheep?

On these words,

• Back to top

Posted 12 October 2012 - 12:52 AM

I would also echo the comments on using something to re-polish the outer layer. I have seen simple $15-$20 "tools" that spin a large mildly abrasive wheel in a radial pattern while the disc slowly rotates. made for game disk recovery, etc. Had to help my "grandson" - yes, I am another "old fart" and didn't think there were any scratches - but this thing did the trick.

Glad to hear that some of the SW solutions are helping...and yes, given the way video is stored (with key frames and "delta" information), a lot of small sections of the file won't really help in getting usable video.


Scott

• Back to top

Posted 12 October 2012 - 01:05 PM

yes, I am another "old fart"

I think there are enough of us here to start a petition to rename this board into Jurassic Park!

yes, given the way video is stored (with key frames and "delta" information), a lot of small sections of the file won't really help in getting usable video.

Not only that. It takes a player also a lot longer to move/skip across an area, where bits and pieces exist, than when the whole thing is zeroed out.

• Back to top