Does DVD-R hold more data then DVD+R?

[geepondy]

They both advertise 4.7G recording space which in reality is more like 4.4 something gigabytes. Tonight I was attempting to copy a DVD-R to a DVD+R and the blank DVD+R got spit back at me saying there wasn't enough space on it. The amount of available space vs. required space was close, only being off by about 5 megabytes. However when I inserted a blank DVD-R, it was able to copy fine.

I can't seem to find exact recording capabilities down to the byte between the formats by doing research on the Internet and wondered if somebody knows if there is difference in recording capacity between the two.

 

[Datasaurusrex]

Some of the data on DVD-R is recorded differently than on a DVD+R, that may account for the discrepancy. Specifically, information about ATIP/pre-pit/ADIP.

But afaik the 2 discs are the same size.

From what I've read, +R is the way to go. More stable in the long run.

 

[knot]

The industry is sloppy at declaring disk capacity. Some are better than others.

 

[eluminator]

Interesting. If you run the CDspeed program and look at the info tab, you will see the capacity in bytes.

I looked at two brands of DVD+R and one of DVD+RW.
All showed 4,700,375,040 bytes.

I looked at one DVD-R
It showed 4,707,319,808 bytes.

So the -R has almost 7 million bytes more.

I wonder how many at CDfreaks.com know that?


I suppose you are doing a disc to disc copy, where the entire disc is being copied. I'm guessing the whole disc isn't being used, so if you copied file by file, it might fit.

 

[James S]

that final byte count seems to be different based on manufacturers as well and even just manufacture date. Some burners will also allow what is called an "overburn" where they try to use some of the dye that is technically outside the standard limit of the tracks for storing a bit more data. And that is especially random from disk to disk even.

The only "real" reason between the +/- is supposed to be the error checking methods and checksums added. + has more of them and can better recover from slight disk imperfections like scratches and such. But - has better compatibility with older DVD players. I've pretty much switched completely to + now for the enhanced error correction but I've never noticed that there was any difference in the amount of data stored, at least not so much as to be noticeable.

 

[eluminator]

I wouldn't worry about copying it to another -R disc. They do just fine. Any alleged advantages of +R are minor compared to the quality of the disc and the quality of the burn.

As far as disc quality, Verbatim discs are usually among the best. Discs I avoid are Memorex and Ridata.

If you are concerned about the burn quality, you can get a pretty good idea by checking it with Nero's CDspeed program, also called CD-DVD speed. It's included in Nero's toolkit, but you can also download it free of charge from CDspeed's own website:
http://www.cdspeed2000.com/

 

[Datasaurusrex]

I wouldn't worry about copying it to another -R disc. They do just fine. Any alleged advantages of +R are minor compared to the quality of the disc and the quality of the burn.

As far as disc quality, Verbatim discs are usually among the best. Discs I avoid are Memorex and Ridata. [/url]

I've researched this recently, before starting a DVD project.

From what I've read there is a distinct advantage to +R over -R.

Taiyo Yurden is pretty much the best brand. The jury's still out on gold DVDs, theoretically better but Taiyo's have a proven track record.

This article sums it up http://adterrasperaspera.com/blog/2006/10/30/how-to-choose-cddvd-archival-media/ and I've found the same info, in bits and pieces, from many other sources.

A good place to purchase from is www.supermediastore.com