CD Labels...

<p>Has anyone had any experience or may have heard that applying self-adhesive printable CD labels to a CD (such as Avery #5692) could cause read problems either immediately or at a later time due to any imbalance the paper and/or ink may add to the disc?</p>

<p>Yes, the adhesive can seep into the plastic over time. Best to avoid and just use a pen on the write surface. Some CDs have a printed surface to write or print on using a printer.</p>

<p>If you do choose to use adhesive labels, buy a tool that applies them perfectly centered. They are included in some label starter kits.</p>

<p>a small non cd label can cause the cd to be out of balance<br>

You I think are talking about a full label the size of the cd.<br>

and as said there are holders to place the lebel on the cd properly<br>

that is not my issue<br>

I used to eb;le to get cd=r<br>

s with a white surface so I could write on them with a sharpie marker<br>

some comne with a very shiny surface. I cannot see what is written.<br>

today most of the cd-=r and dvd-r have a silver frosted surface.<br>

easier for me to tell one side from another .<br>

but not ideal for writing.<br>

thing is you cannot tell, in the store, what the actual cd looks like.<br>

the packaging HIDES the writing surface.<br>

My cd/dvd drive HAD Lightscribe capability. but the disks cost more, not sensible for ordinary use.<br>

Besides, sometimes I cannot read my own writing after the tracks get cold.<br>

It would not cause any pain for the disk manufacturers to let buyers know what the bare disk looks like.<br>

Once you buy the package and open it up it may be too late to take it back.</p>

<p>The best answer is to NOT use adhesive labels. Period. Frankly, I am amazed they are still made. First, it is true that a label, no matter how well placed on the disc, can cause an imbalance. This imbalance can cause issues. In general terms, most of this issues will be with video DVDs you might try to play or audio CDs (if anyone still uses them!). A paper label can also give problems to slot loading optical drives, such as the ones used in car stereos or something like an iMac. Additionally, over time you have two more issues. The first is as Dave points out: the adhesive is corrosive and will eventually eat away at the top layer and could compromise the data integrity of the disc. The 2nd, the adhesive could warp, again no matter how well applied, and this can imbalance the disc and render it useless. In the end, nothing good can come from paper labels.</p>

<p>This can all be solved by simply using inkjet printable media. And then either writing on the disc or using a compatible inkjet disc printer.</p>

<p>Aside from all the other issues, the adhesive fails on many of them over time and can come loose in slot loaded drives to create a mess you wouldn't believe.</p>

<p>I need to add, since I see this is under "archiving"... optical media isn't really the best way to "archive" data. For starters, compared to using hard drives, optical media is slower and more expensive. So that right there gives optical media 2 strikes. Finally, over time, <em>any</em> media will fail. And I mean any. I have optical discs, properly burned, verified and stored from 5-years ago that will have a 20% fail rate. It could be that my newer computers don't like discs from the older computers... I don't know. I don't care because it doesn't solve the issue of actually having a 20% fail rate. You are much better off using multiple hard drives to archive and/or back up your data. They are cheaper and faster and will still fail over time! However, <em>knowing </em>that they will fail over time just means you plan for this: have two copies. When one fails, make a new one. I suppose you could make two discs... but then that becomes twice as expensive and twice as slow (you now need to go through all of the motions with a 2nd disc_.</p>

<p>I archive on optical media. Gold discs that are designed for it. Make 2 copies and store them in different locations. I have CD-R media I burned in 1999 that is still readable because it was made on gold discs.<br>

CD-RW media is the best for backup, because it uses metal crystals rather than a chemical dye, which fades over time.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Gold discs that are designed for it</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>And yet that is even <em>more</em> expensive. And still slower.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Make 2 copies and store them in different locations</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>And now double the cost and double the time. But of course different locations is a good idea. It is just a matter of how much precaution you want to take. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I have CD-R media I burned in 1999 that is still readable because it was made on gold discs</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>This implies you have checked them all. I can't even begin to imagine how much time it would take to check 100GB of data burned to optical discs. Versus how much time it would take to check 100GB of data on a hard drive? Now in 1999, we had very limited options and optical media was about our only cost effective means of storing data. But with the price of hard drives in todays market, that is no longer the case.</p>

<p>Believe me, I have been through it all. Hard drives are simply faster and cheaper than optical media. Given that any media will fail over time, it just makes sense to use multiple hard drives.</p>

<p>I agree that adhesive labels can be a problem, even hazardous over time; but I'm surprised no one has mentioned Lightscribe disks as a solution. Of course, you do need to have a Lightscribe-capable drive installed, but many new computers already have them, or you can install one yourself in an expansion bay. You simply turn the disk upside down in the drive, set up your label in the free Lightscribe software, and burn away. The downside is that the labels are monochrome; but if your labeling process is for archive documentation and not marketing a product, that's not a problem...</p>

<p>The best way to label discs is with an inkjet printer. Discs are available with white and silver (transparent) inkjet coatings, but white is the best option for text and graphics. If you don't have many discs to label, there are several low end printers that will handle one disc at a time. The cost of inkjet coated discs is quite reasonable - about $0.30 in stacks of 100. The coating is substantial, so that Sharpie marking pens can be used without bleeding through to the silver layer or scratching it.</p>

<p>Lightscribe discs are probably safe enough, but the media are very expensive and the process is excruciatingly slow. Brown on brown is not particularly attractive, especially compared to photo quality inkjet printing.</p>

<p>Hard drives are the best media for backups, but optical media are best for archiving. A disk drive can be erased in an instant, but CDs and DVDs recorded properly will last many decades (if anyone cares). I have recorded tens of thousands of these discs, and the only failures have been due to mechanical damage, defective media (tracking errors) or poor recording. It may be hard to find a CD/DVD reader in another 10 years, so if you want something truly archival, print it.</p>

<p>I used circular paper labels for years without any longevity issues. The labels do tend to wrinkle if exposed to changes in humidity. For that reason they cause problems in automobiles, where they can jam the mechanism when you try to eject the discs. It's not hard to affix these labels perfectly using fixtures from Avery and other label manufacturers. I don't recommend this method.</p>

<p>The best way to label discs is with an inkjet printer. Discs are available with white and silver (transparent) inkjet coatings, but white is the best option for text and graphics. If you don't have many discs to label, there are several low end printers that will handle one disc at a time. The cost of inkjet coated discs is quite reasonable - about $0.30 in stacks of 100. The coating is substantial, so that Sharpie marking pens can be used without bleeding through to the silver layer or scratching it.</p>

<p>Lightscribe discs are probably safe enough, but the media are very expensive and the process is excruciatingly slow. Brown on brown is not particularly attractive, especially compared to photo quality inkjet printing.</p>

<p>Hard drives are the best media for backups, but optical media are best for archiving. A disk drive can be erased in an instant, but CDs and DVDs recorded properly will last many decades (if anyone cares). I have recorded tens of thousands of these discs, and the only failures have been due to mechanical damage, defective media or poor recording. It may be hard to find a CD/DVD reader in another 10 years, so if you want something truly archival, print it.</p>

<p>I used circular paper labels for years without any longevity issues. The labels do tend to wrinkle if exposed to changes in humidity. For that reason they cause problems in automobiles, where they can jam the mechanism when you try to eject the discs. It's not hard to affix these labels perfectly using fixtures from Avery and other label manufacturers. I don't recommend this method.</p>

<p>I agree with Edward. I use Taio Yuden ink jet printable CDs and DVDs with a printer that uses archival ink. I never write on the data recordable area of any optical media, with any sort of pen.</p>

<p>While archiving on CD/DVD is slow both in creation and accessing, it is oblivious to power surges and the mechanical failures that are assured with a spinning platter hard drive. I use both hard drives and opticals as redundant systems.</p>

<p>Solid state drives may be the most stable media around these days and prices should be comparable to spinning HDs in the next couple of years. My first CF card was a 96 MEGAbyte that cost me $328. I expect to be using 1T solid state drives at around 10 cents a GB within two or three years... t</p>

<blockquote>

<p>While archiving on CD/DVD is slow both in creation and accessing</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Very slow is more accurate. I suppose it depends on how much money your time is worth.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>it is oblivious to power surges and the mechanical failures that are assured with a spinning platter hard drive</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Only insomuch as the surge occurs outside the burning process! However, CD/DVD Rot is real as well. Or the <em>ability</em> of a future drive to <em>read </em>the media (data integrity not being limited to <em>just</em> the disc alone). And lets not forget the first point about how slow the process is. In 5 years, or some point in the future, optical media will fall out of favor. How much more time will it take to move the media from optical to whatever you new form of storage is? This is a very real issue I am now facing. Moving data off of optical media is more than a chore. An archive that can't be read isn't much of an archive. And then again, there go your costs.</p>

<p>I use both hard drives and opticals as redundant systems.</p>

<p>And therein lies the <em>key. </em>Any system can be compromised. <em>Knowing</em> that a hard drive <em>will</em> fail over time just means you need to maintain more than one. <em>Knowing</em> that an optical disc may or may not work in the future means you need to maintain more than one. Simply trusting one optical disc as your sole method of archiving is inviting trouble. Armed with this knowledge, why use optical media when it isn't as cost effective and to create and/or recover from it would take days, not hours? And, when hard drive "fall out of favor", it will still be far faster transferring you old archives to whatever the new system is. And I doubt hard drives fall out of favor any time soon. Even as solid state drives continue to drop in price, they will still be more per GB than hard drives for the foreseeable future. But even then, solid state drives aren't immune to problems so again, the first line of defense is multiple copies.</p>