Archive to disc, XDCAM same as BluRay?
 

Do yall think the XDCAM drive has any advantage over a BluRay burner?
I am looking at the PDWU1

http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/searchResul...e=PFD-50DLA%29

And wonder perhaps if I should just get a bluray burner. I am setting up an HDV studio and need to archive my production but the media for one isn't any less costly than the other.
Anybody useing the PDWU1 see great advantages to useing it?

Having a U1 will allow you to import XDCAM HD footage. The discs are more robust than regular Blu-ray discs. You would also be able to write out your finished programmes as 4:2:2 50Mb MXF's complete with proxies if you needed too.

I posed this exact question to the Sony staff at NAB. Archive to Blu-Ray data disc or XDCAM data disc? They really didn't have a recommendation either way. In fact, there appears to be a very distinct demarkation line between the consumer Sony team (Blu-Ray) and the broadcast Sony team (XDCAM). Neither seems too concerned with the other from my discussions.

In any event, our production team is wrestling with same archiving workflow issues. As mentioned previously in this forum, currently we are archiving to HDCAM tape for the time being. I suspect we will end up with Blu-Ray data disc as the archive format of choice though. It's going to be far more of a ubiquitous format than XDCAM disc.

SG

Well, there are differences Steve. Let's hope that your material archived to Blu-Ray disc is still accessible several years from now.

Just a couple of thoughts for ponder.

Blu-Ray discs are not in a protective shell as XDCAM discs are which reduces the likelihood of dust and fingerprints on the surface of the disc.

Single layer Blu-Ray holds 50GB of data, whereas XDCAM single layer is 23.5 GB. Why the difference? Because XDCAM disc writes larger areas per byte, helping to insure that the data remains readable... just like running a tape faster puts more magnetic particles under the record head for data integrity while sacrificing capacity.

Naturally, the costs for XDCAM discs are higher, but then again how much will that savings be worth if your data is gone when you need it later.

respectfully,

-gb-

Actually single layer Blu-ray discs are 25GB and dual layer are 50GB. Check Blu-ray standards at Wikipedia or manufacture's Blu-ray specs. At least that is how my Blu-ray Sony BWU-200S burner works for data and video. It's also how my Sony BDP-S300 home theatre plays Blu-ray video, either 25 or 50GB.

Quite right, I stand corrected on that point. Even more embarrassing is the fact that I have 4 boxes of single layer Blu-Ray discs just a few feet away.

-gb-

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I remember we can't use the U1 unit to copy XDCAM-EX footage until a long-promised future when Sony will do some sort of firmware update.

Is this right? Or are people already using the U1 to copy full-raster XDCAM-EX footage onto the professional discs?

Thanks in advance.

You are correct that right now the U1 does not handle EX1 video @ full raster. A firmware update is promised.

I'm in the middle of this same struggle myself.

Sony announced the U1 update at NAB but I think it may be be available until sometime in Q3. What they're doing is allowing the U1/XDCAM Disc to be used as a data device for full size of the disc, so it's not "codec" support per se. In fact you'd be able to use U1/XDCAM discs to store anything include P2 (perish the thought).

I was under the impression that XDCAM disks have a much longer life than Blue ray. XDCAM - 50 years and Blue Ray the same as DVD's.
That's hearsay though and I don't know for sure.

The other consideration in all of this is burn time when archiving...

I understand a single-layer (25GB) Blu-Ray takes about 25 minutes to burn at 4x. This is probably almost an hour for a 50GB dual layer (if available).

Presumably the PMW-U1 will burn at the same 4x but that is only a guess.

So doing the rough math:

8GB SxS card = 30 minutes of HQ video.

90minutes of HQ Video = 1 Single Layer Blu-Ray = 25 minutes to burn.

VERSUS

DVD+R DL which takes approximately 15 minutes to do 8GB at 8x.



Very Approx. Pricing
25GB Blu-Ray disc = $15
8GB DVD+R DL disc = $1


90mins. of HQ Video on 1 Blu-Ray disc = $25 and takes 25 minutes to burn
90mins. of HQ Video on 3 DVD+R DL discs = $3 and takes 45 minutes to burn


Pondering...

SG

I guess the question to ask would be is the only difference the "case" or is the disc surface media and burn method "better."

Steve, good useful numbers there.

2.4x DL-DVD are burning at 4x for me and taking close to 30 minutes (double your listed 8x time which makes sense). If you're dealing with archival, the 2.4x discs are supposedly the best way to go. I'm using
Verbatim DataLifePlus
Inkjet Printable DVD+R DL
DVInfo sponsor B&H sells them. Inkjet printable is great for labeling on surface.

And another consideration regarding pricing is that Blu-Ray disc will probably fall "towards" DVD levels eventually.

On the other hand, XDCAM-HD disc is a pro niche product and will likely always be priced higher.

Just a thought...

SG

I was archiving all my stills photographs to MO disks, as I was informed at the time these would keep the data safe for over 100 years. No doubt the pictures will be safe, the only problem is that my drive has given up on me and I can't buy a replacement.

I suspect the Sony UI is the more desireable drive to own, but will this be the new Betamax, Memory Stick, Super8 audio, Quad Stereo LP or other odd format, from Sony in years to come?

BlueRay disks would on the face of it be the better option. No doubt handling may present it's own set of problems over the years, but hey, I have a few tapes which have snarled up on me after a couple of play throughs

While you have responded to a thread that is nearly 2.5 years old, the content is interesting to read. I chose BluRay as my archive around the same time this thread started. The progression has been quite interesting. My 25GB BluRay disks now cost about $1.50, and the slimline protective casing to put them in raises the price to about $1.75 or slightly less. One of our forum sponsors lists 25GB XDCam disks at about $22. Still. So I can back up 250GB and store those disks in protective cases for the cost of a single XDCam disk. I can purchase a BluRay reader at any local electronics store.

B&H Photo shows the current price of the PDW-U1 unit at $3199.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/502450-REG/Sony_PDW_U1.html


I recently purchased a 4x burner for less than $200. And it came with 10 25GB BluRay disks.

Videoguys.com - Pioneer BDR-206 Mega Bundle with Media and External USB Enclosure


I feel very comfortable with my choice.

I know the thread is an old one, but perhaps just as relevant today as it was 2.5 years ago.

I am tempted to buy the Pioneer 205 BlueRay/DVD/CD burner as this seems like a good long term storage solution. At the moment I am using hard drives, and I know these will all fail at some time in the future. Storing a 16gb data card on one BlueRay Disk does seem like a good option and from what I am reading, they are more robust than DVD disks.

Thanks for your input Perrone

Vincent and Perrone, I am glad you revitalized this thread as you are a testament to my sentiments as well.

As someone who has been in video for 30 years I've seen 2", 1", D2, BetaSX and a host of other playback device dependent formats come and go. So many talk about the longevity of the media but not of the reader.

We've seen CD to DVD to Blu-ray disk progression and Blu-ray drives play the older formats. I'm going to bet that Blu-ray drives will be easier to locate 10 years from now the XDCAM disc readers. Generally I think not codec specific storage devices will be more widely available that proprietary readers.

I suspect Sony is trying to make XDCAM a storage standard as the new much larger 128GB discs but I don't see that as moving to widespread use.

Blu-ray is in a "funny" place though. Whereas CD and DVD drives are in every computer, this is not the case with Blu-ray. Yet I still believe the reader is more of a standard than other formats.

We are at a strange point in storage history given speculation what media might replace Blu-ray (if anything). Some speculate archival flash type media for example. If optical disks come to an end will player be easily available 10 years from now?

When we talk about long term storage we must consider available playback in the future.

I guess the solution is to use what is currently the flavour of the day and then be prepared to transfer data to a new media type as and when it becomes available. Long winded I know :-(

As for BlueRay, well it does look very attractive today, but with 3D tv heading our way, maybe there will yet another standard to accomodate the extra data needed.

I may just treat myself to the Pioneer 205 as a Christmas present from me to me - it will make a change from the usual socks and jumpers.

I bought the Pioneer 205 a couple of months ago, to replace my early Lacie unit. I am very happy with it so far.

I have never been a fan or proprietary anything. And optical has ALWAYS been a good idea where it makes sense. Some companies have pushed multi-layer BluRay to 300GB and beyond, but of course this would require new readers which would be rather pricey. Solid state hasn't proven itself to me yet as an archival medium. I can drop my BluRay disks in a bucket of water, take them out, wipe them off, and play them. They can get dusty and be cleaned. They deal with static discharge just fine. They can be x-ray'd, etc.

If something comes along and replaced BluRay, in the next few years, I'm ok with that. I would NOT be ok with it had I sunk $5k into it. But for a few hundred dollars in players and disks... not that big a deal.

You have convinced me Perrone, I will tell Mrs Oliver that you encouraged me to buy it :-)