![]() ![]() But why wasn't the disc rejected by Nero when we burned our data on it, after we had printed the image? What we believe happened, is that when data is written on a DVD, it has to follow a particular format, including IDs, error correction, etc, much in the same way a hard disc is formatted by an operating system before any data can be written to it or read from it. Not that we were terribly disappointed because the label image quality was hardly worth the effort in the first place. ![]() With the merging of what the label's image and then the data had burned on the disk, it appeared like a corrupt or badly damaged disk. Double clicking on a VOB file, in many cases actually played for a fraction of a second and then stopped. Interestingly enough though, with Windows Explorer, we could explore the disk's contents and list the video files that are normally present on a DVD movie compilation. We tried playing the DVD with Power DVD but to no avail. Was this disc a working disc? Would our drive read it? Alas, no. There was no noticeable difference in the label quality other than perhaps that it was a shade darker. Lo and behold, Nero correctly identified the media and proceeded to burn our project (a DVD movie), completing successfully. Despite this, we took our experiment a step further and tried to write actual data on the disc. All in all, if you didn't know that an image had been printed, you wouldn't have noticed it. The resulting label was barely visible (the contrast between light and dark areas is minimal), and in fact, you can only discern an image if you look very hard at the disk and without reflections. We printed an image on the data side of the disc that took up the entire surface area on the disk. We also experimented with non-LabelFlash certified DVD-R and DVD+R media to see what the results would be. The labels have a consistent look while the protective layer on the disc provides some degree of protection and durability. The disks have a very shiny surface, due to the protection surface on the dye, which cannot be portrayed in our two images. What was the result? Check below:ĭespite our attempts to provide as realistic photos as possible, the effect is nowhere near as impressive as seeing the actual disk itself. In our case, the time needed was 27:13 minutes, while the program's estimated time at the start was 26:49 minutes, a negligible difference. When the printing process is finished, you'll get an appropriate message. There are also some extra settings regarding the print quality that you can change:Īs soon as you are ready, press "Burn" to start the printing procedure. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |