"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
oups.com...

So have you answered your own question yet? When you feel that you have
a workable solution, why not post a summary message explaining what you
found, how good your results are, what failures you encountered, and so
on. I'm sure there's a way to make your own printable disks at home.
While it's not something that a lot of others will do, it would be
interesting to know that it's been studied out thoroughly with actual
trials rather than hashing over ideas on a newsgroup.

That's how Usenet used to work.

This seems to be a narrow concept of Usenet. You seem to be completely
disregarding one of the most valuable aspects, exchanging info or
suggestions. That's the whole point of asking about it. In this case, I've
done some experimenting, but that doesn't mean I have all the answers to all
aspects of the subject at hand. Others have raised questions on things
like - how will the paint behave and or affect the DVD/CD over time? Maybe
different paints might be more appropriate for the task than others, etc.

CWatters wrote:

"Doc" wrote in message
nk.net...
But I can't imagine why it would. It's paint, as such it sticks
like...um,

paint.


I believe CD are made from Polycarbonate. The model car racing boys use
special paint designed for their polycarbonate (Lexan) car bodies because
many other paints soften the surface or just don't stick very well....

snip

The Polycarb is the thick "play" side. The label side is covered by
something much less durable.
Allen

zakezuke wrote:

Looking back at the posts so far in this thread, it looks like nobody
has asked the obvious question: "Why would you want to do that?"
Printable discs seem to be priced relatively close to conventional ones,
plus the effort and expense of coating the conventional ones would drive
me up the wall.


Well.. I just went shopping for printable CDs... $20ish for a 50 pack
of Verbatium silvers and $10 for a 30 pack of the compusa brand... so
while non-printable would be a better deal without a doubt, and more
options... this is reasonable. It's shopping for printable DVD+/-Rs
that the price hike is terribly high localy at least for me... we are
talking on average 90+cents/disc vs mailorder of 25 to 50 cents/disc.
Ridata 16x or fuji 8x 40cents/per. So while I'll agree the mail order
price is similar... the local price is not.

But to answer your question... it wasn't so much about the price per
disc but rather, at least for me... it was the simple fact that I
bought a huge load when they were on sale at 10cents/per... brandnames
too... before I had a cd printer. While with the Epson I could "get
away" with printing on non-printables the Canon I could not. My
resolution was to do a batch in triplicate and give away discs to
friends done in a sharpy... problem solved. So your point is valid...
and I personaly agreee with you though I'm most empathic to those who
also have a bucket load of non-printables and would prefer to find a
means of using them vs a sharpy.


Thanks. The huge quantity on hand issue is just about the only valid
reason that I could think of.
Allen

"Doc" wrote ...
This seems to be a narrow concept of Usenet. You seem to be completely
disregarding one of the most valuable aspects, exchanging info or
suggestions. That's the whole point of asking about it. In this case,
I've
done some experimenting, but that doesn't mean I have all the answers
to all
aspects of the subject at hand. Others have raised questions on things
like - how will the paint behave and or affect the DVD/CD over time?

Even the people who spend millions of $$$ developing
the discs can't really answer that question. Claims of 50
or even 100 years archival lifetime approach absurdity
when you consider how they come up with those numbers.
Opinions on those sort of topics here aren't worth the
electrons it took to transmit them.

Maybe different paints might be more appropriate for the
task than others, etc.

True, but even if we knew exactly what brand and model number
your discs were(*), it would still be unlikely that we could come
up with a definitive answer that this particular kind of paint
is suitable for a particular disc. Especially for CDs where only
a thin screen-printed layer (of unknown composition) protects
the reflective layer (sputtered metal) and the photo-sensitive
dye layer, i.e. the very point where the data is recorded.

OTOH, DVDs are a sandwich of two thin discs with the critical
area safely embedded in the middle. They would be nearly
impervious to whatever you do to the "label-side".

Now I agree that Usenet is a valuable place to exchange ideas
and experiences, recommendations, etc. And I had exactly the
same original question as you had, and considered a similar
series of experiments. But when you can buy "printable" discs
for so cheap, it moves the project way down, off the top-50
list, at least IMHO.

(*) and even if we knew a brand name and model number,
many of the big-name vendors sell "pot-luck" discs from
whomever they got a good OEM deal that month. See...
http://www.digitalfaq.com/media/dvdmedia.htm
particularly: "Who makes the disc: Brand vs. Media ID"
After reading this page and the one on vendors...
http://www.digitalfaq.com/dvdguides/...s/buymedia.htm
I have been quite happy buying printable Taiyo-Yuden
discs from Supermediastore.com

But to answer your question... it wasn't so much about the price per
disc but rather, at least for me... it was the simple fact that I
bought a huge load when they were on sale at 10cents/per... brandnames
too... before I had a cd printer. While with the Epson I could "get
away" with printing on non-printables the Canon I could not. My
resolution was to do a batch in triplicate and give away discs to
friends done in a sharpy... problem solved. So your point is valid...
and I personaly agreee with you though I'm most empathic to those who
also have a bucket load of non-printables and would prefer to find a
means of using them vs a sharpy.

Adhesive paper labels would seem to be the conventional
solution. Likely lots of us have stacks of them sitting around
from before we switched to printable discs.

Well, Mr. Rivers, I have been on Usenet for about... 15 years I guess,
so, I may not be an much an "old timer" as you, but I seem to recall
Usenet being an open forum for people exchanging ideas, as well as
people reporting on their discoveries.

Seems to me the Jpeg development group did exactly what you claim we
didn't, as did the Unix to Linux developers.

I'm sorry if the exchange of ideas is bothersome to you, but then there
is that delete button on your news client that someone had a brainstorm
to include on every application, which doesn't cost you a dime to use.


Art

Mike Rivers wrote:

Doc wrote:


So, I wonder if there's a way to utilize the DVD's I already have without
having to reinvest in the much more expensive printables. Maybe someday
they'll be having $14/100 deals on them, but I haven't seen it yet.
Introducing a $1.50 can of spray paint into the equation so far seems to
provide a viable solution.


So have you answered your own question yet? When you feel that you have
a workable solution, why not post a summary message explaining what you
found, how good your results are, what failures you encountered, and so
on. I'm sure there's a way to make your own printable disks at home.
While it's not something that a lot of others will do, it would be
interesting to know that it's been studied out thoroughly with actual
trials rather than hashing over ideas on a newsgroup.

That's how Usenet used to work.

"Richard Crowley" wrote in message
...

"Doc" wrote ...

Others have raised questions on things
like - how will the paint behave and or affect the DVD/CD over time?

Even the people who spend millions of $$$ developing
the discs can't really answer that question. Claims of 50
or even 100 years archival lifetime approach absurdity
when you consider how they come up with those numbers.

Mmmm, okay. Let's say that's true... Now given your next statement -

Now I agree that Usenet is a valuable place to exchange ideas
and experiences, recommendations, etc. And I had exactly the
same original question as you had, and considered a similar
series of experiments. But when you can buy "printable" discs
for so cheap, it moves the project way down, off the top-50
list, at least IMHO.

Really? So, how does the material that's used on the printable discs last or
effect the disc over time? Do all manufacturers use the same material?

;-)

Wouldn't it be a hoot to find out that the material in a particular brand of
spray paint is actually less likely to cause damage and lasts longer?

"Doc" wrote ...
"Richard Crowley" wrote ...
"Doc" wrote ...

Others have raised questions on things
like - how will the paint behave and or affect the DVD/CD over
time?

Even the people who spend millions of $$$ developing
the discs can't really answer that question. Claims of 50
or even 100 years archival lifetime approach absurdity
when you consider how they come up with those numbers.

Mmmm, okay. Let's say that's true... Now given your next statement -

Now I agree that Usenet is a valuable place to exchange ideas
and experiences, recommendations, etc. And I had exactly the
same original question as you had, and considered a similar
series of experiments. But when you can buy "printable" discs
for so cheap, it moves the project way down, off the top-50
list, at least IMHO.

Really? So, how does the material that's used on the printable
discs last or effect the disc over time?

I'm reasonably confident of an average of 5-10 years of
usable life. I've already had to make replacement copies
of CDRs from several years ago.

Do all manufacturers use the same material?

No. And even the same manufacturer doesn't always use
the same material. Which renders any amateur, 3rd party
research highly questionable.

;-)

Wouldn't it be a hoot to find out that the material in a
particular brand of spray paint is actually less likely
to cause damage and lasts longer?

Absolutely. But I wouldn't invest a nickle or 5 minutes of
time to the research. Two reasons:

1) Impossible to really tell what the long-term effects of a
particular combination will be. By the time you find out, it
is too late for any number of reasons.

2) Even if you DID find a particular combination of "paint"
and CD discs, having no control over either, I'd bet money
that one or both will have changed within 6 months, which
would render all the research moot.

I am far more into DIY, etc. than most people here. I make
my own PC boards, have a milling machine in the garage,
etc. But this is one particular area where the return on the
investment in research is significantly negative, IMHO.

On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 03:57:04 -0800, William Sommerwerck
wrote in
:

the speeds are as follows IIRC
1x = 500rpm
52x = 27,500rpm

Actully, 52X would (probably) apply only to the outer edges of the disk --
more like 15,000 rpm. But that's still awfully fast.

The rotational speed (revolutions per minute) is the same in the centre of
the disk as it is at the outside edge.
However, the velocity at the centre of the disk at 27 500rpm (52x speed)
would be 57.6m/s (128mph) approximately, whereas the speed at the outer
edge would be in the order of 171m/s (382mph) - mach 0.501 - just over
half the speed of sound (761mph)!
This Kiwi would definitely NOT like to be around when something travelling
at THAT speed disintegrates!


--
Regards,
Nicolaas.


.... Is there another word for synonym?

"Richard Crowley" wrote in message
...

Wouldn't it be a hoot to find out that the material in a
particular brand of spray paint is actually less likely
to cause damage and lasts longer?

Absolutely. But I wouldn't invest a nickle or 5 minutes of
time to the research.

wondering if I should point out he's already invested more than that
engaging in naysaying

;-)

1) Impossible to really tell what the long-term effects of a
particular combination will be.

Hmmm. I wonder if chemistry folks would agree that there's "no way to tell".
In fact, I'll ask this same question in a chemistry/science group. Should
have included them to begin with.

Richard Crowley wrote:
2) Even if you DID find a particular combination of "paint"
and CD discs, having no control over either, I'd bet money
that one or both will have changed within 6 months, which
would render all the research moot.

This discussion is kind of like the futile "what's the best laptop
computer to go with the best Firewire/USB audio interface to go with
the best DAW program" question that pops up every few weeks. There are
so many variables, and once you find something that works, one of the
manufacturers changes something, and there you go, back to the lab.

I am far more into DIY, etc. than most people here. I make
my own PC boards, have a milling machine in the garage,
etc. But this is one particular area where the return on the
investment in research is significantly negative, IMHO.

Cool. I don't mind making or modifying something that I can understand,
or that I can understand the answers I'd get if I asked a reasonably
intelligent question. I made my own monitor switch for $20 rather than
pay $100 or more, but to someone who doesn't have a drill press, wants
to know if there's a web site where he can download a schematic, and
spells "solder" with two Ds probably would be wasting his time and not
learn anything in the process.

I'm interested in audio and electronics, not ink chemistry or the
disintegration of rapidly rotating objects.

"Allen" wrote in message
...
The Polycarb is the thick "play" side. The label side is covered by
something much less durable.
Allen

Shame. At least if we knew it was polycarb we would have a compatible paint.
I wonder what it is?

"Doc" wrote ...
"Allen" wrote ...
Looking back at the posts so far in this thread, it looks like nobody
has asked the obvious question: "Why would you want to do that?"

A combination of curiosity and utility. I already have a big stack of
$14/100 DVD's. As it so happens, I just scored a great deal on the demo
model of an inkjet printer that has CD/DVD printing capability at Circuit
City.

So, I wonder if there's a way to utilize the DVD's I already have without
having to reinvest in the much more expensive printables. Maybe someday
they'll be having $14/100 deals on them, but I haven't seen it yet.
Introducing a $1.50 can of spray paint into the equation so far seems to
provide a viable solution.

The regular price for Linkyo 52x or Ritek 48x white inkjet printable
CDRs is $13/100. at one of the most reliable dealers online today...
http://www.supermediastore.com/cdrblankmedia.html

Arthur Entlich wrote:
I'm sorry if the exchange of ideas is bothersome to you, but then there
is that delete button on your news client that someone had a brainstorm
to include on every application, which doesn't cost you a dime to use.

Exchanging ideas is fine, but I haven't seem much constructive in this
discusson except for Doc's experienents. He seems to be the only one
actually trying anything. There are things that wild ideas are good for
because they spur imagination and creativity, but this is just plain
science. Pretty boring, actually.

Doc wrote:

Hmmm. I wonder if chemistry folks would agree that there's "no way to tell".
In fact, I'll ask this same question in a chemistry/science group. Should
have included them to begin with.

Well, you might find someone in one of those newsgroups that has a
spectrograph like they have on the crime TV shows and can tell you
what's in the ink. Maybe that will give a clue. g

But I beg you - don't start cross-posting this discussion in a
chemistry newsgroup. Take it over there and then drop back here and let
is know what you find out if they can get you some facts.

"zakezuke" wrote ...
Looking back at the posts so far in this thread, it looks like nobody
has asked the obvious question: "Why would you want to do that?"
Printable discs seem to be priced relatively close to conventional ones,
plus the effort and expense of coating the conventional ones would drive
me up the wall.

Well.. I just went shopping for printable CDs... $20ish for a 50 pack
of Verbatium silvers and $10 for a 30 pack of the compusa brand... so
while non-printable would be a better deal without a doubt, and more
options... this is reasonable. It's shopping for printable DVD+/-Rs
that the price hike is terribly high localy at least for me... we are
talking on average 90+cents/disc vs mailorder of 25 to 50 cents/disc.
Ridata 16x or fuji 8x 40cents/per. So while I'll agree the mail order
price is similar... the local price is not.

The REGULAR price for Linkyo 52x or Ritek 48x white inkjet printable
CDRs is $13/100. at one of the most reliable dealers online today...
http://www.supermediastore.com/cdrblankmedia.html They are
cheap enough that I can afford to always keep them in stock at
home and buy more when I start to run low. Even my preferred
premium Taiyo-Yuden white inkjet 52x are only $31/100

But to answer your question... it wasn't so much about the price per
disc but rather, at least for me... it was the simple fact that I
bought a huge load when they were on sale at 10cents/per... brandnames
too... before I had a cd printer.

Donate them to a non-profit. You can even get a tax writeoff.

"Richard Crowley" wrote in message
...

The regular price for Linkyo 52x or Ritek 48x white inkjet printable
CDRs is $13/100. at one of the most reliable dealers online today...
http://www.supermediastore.com/cdrblankmedia.html

Plus shipping unless you buy a whole mess of 'em. If you buy 600 to get the
"free" shipping, you're paying 2 cents more apiece for CD-R's than I paid
for 100 DVD's off the shelf less than a mile from my front door.

DVD printable is somewhat more, plus shipping, unless you buy like 500 at a
crack.

Not saying it's a bad deal, but looking at the arithmetic more
realistically.

Yeah, yeah, I know, a few years ago DVD recordables were like $5 apiece. And
an 8-meg stick of ram was $300, and bread was .15 cents a loaf, a new
Model-T was $500 and....

William Sommerwerck wrote:
the speeds are as follows IIRC
1x = 500rpm
52x = 27,500rpm


Actully, 52X would (probably) apply only to the outer edges of the disk --
more like 15,000 rpm. But that's still awfully fast.


See my other post. Manufactures do no make
machines with a spindle speed of 15,000 rpm.

William Sommerwerck wrote:
Summary: your CDs never achieve speeds over 10,000
rpm in your CD ROM machines. They can break at that
speed.


And they don't break because they simply fall to pieces. Rather, the disk
develops a standing-wave warp, the stress of which cracks it.



Apparently they break only if they have
manufacturing or other defects or are unbalanced.

zakezuke wrote:
the speeds are as follows IIRC
1x = 500rpm
52x = 27,500rpm


Actully, 52X would (probably) apply only to the outer edges of the disk --
more like 15,000 rpm. But that's still awfully fast.


Someone else sugested that 10,000 is the max according to Teac which
i'll have to check with those guys. I freely admit to pulling numbers
off the web, numbers to my credit did at the very least add up. I'll
have to check up on that. And yes, while RPM is a constent thoughout
the disc... I know that my burner records 1/2 at 4x and the other at
8x.


Check he
http://www.liteonit.com/ODD/English/...m%20faq.asp#A8
http://www.teac.co.jp/dspd/product/optical/dv-516d.html

Nicolaas Hawkins wrote:
On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 03:57:04 -0800, William Sommerwerck
wrote in
:


the speeds are as follows IIRC
1x = 500rpm
52x = 27,500rpm

Actully, 52X would (probably) apply only to the outer edges of the disk --
more like 15,000 rpm. But that's still awfully fast.


The rotational speed (revolutions per minute) is the same in the centre of
the disk as it is at the outside edge.
However, the velocity at the centre of the disk at 27 500rpm (52x speed)
would be 57.6m/s (128mph) approximately, whereas the speed at the outer
edge would be in the order of 171m/s (382mph) - mach 0.501 - just over
half the speed of sound (761mph)!
This Kiwi would definitely NOT like to be around when something travelling
at THAT speed disintegrates!


Oh stop it. they don[t rotate at 27,500 rpm. Period!

Mike Rivers wrote:

Arthur Entlich wrote:


I'm sorry if the exchange of ideas is bothersome to you, but then there
is that delete button on your news client that someone had a brainstorm
to include on every application, which doesn't cost you a dime to use.



Exchanging ideas is fine, but I haven't seem much constructive in this
discusson except for Doc's experienents. He seems to be the only one
actually trying anything. There are things that wild ideas are good for
because they spur imagination and creativity, but this is just plain
science. Pretty boring, actually.


Absolutely Boring Crap

On 22 Dec 2005 13:29:35 -0800, Mike Rivers wrote in
roups.com:

Arthur Entlich wrote:
I'm sorry if the exchange of ideas is bothersome to you, but then there
is that delete button on your news client that someone had a brainstorm
to include on every application, which doesn't cost you a dime to use.

Exchanging ideas is fine, but I haven't seem much constructive in this
discusson except for Doc's experienents. He seems to be the only one
actually trying anything. There are things that wild ideas are good for
because they spur imagination and creativity, but this is just plain
science. Pretty boring, actually.

Nobody is holding a gun to your head, Mike, and forcing you to read that
which you find boring. You have a "next" button - learn how to use it!
Posters are in no way beholden to you for approval of what they post.

--
Nicolaas

"Mike Rivers" wrote:

It might be kind of artistic to print on a non-printable disk, then
spin it up and let the lettering spread out. Each one would be a
little different.



I did that by accident once. I wrote on the disc and popped it into the
drive. I guess the ink hadn't dried, because when the disc came out of
the drive the lettering had extra long "serifs!" It actually looked
pretty cool.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)

"Doc" wrote ...
"Richard Crowley" wrote ...
The regular price for Linkyo 52x or Ritek 48x white inkjet printable
CDRs is $13/100. at one of the most reliable dealers online today...
http://www.supermediastore.com/cdrblankmedia.html

Plus shipping unless you buy a whole mess of 'em. If you buy 600 to
get the
"free" shipping, you're paying 2 cents more apiece for CD-R's than I
paid
for 100 DVD's off the shelf less than a mile from my front door.

Remember that you are comparing guaranteed, name-brand
printable discs to "pot-luck", unknown, non-printable discs.
I used to buy discs at CompUSA until I realized what a
horrible deal I was getting, even when the shelf price was
lower.

http://www.digitalfaq.com/dvdguides/...s/buymedia.htm
"Warning! Not suggested!... CompUSA: This store (both online and
brick-n-mortar) has one of the worst return policies on the face of
the planet. Avoid them at all costs, no matter what you plan to buy.
Even if the media is bad, you're stuck with it."

Even the "name brand" discs (Apple, Verbatim, Memorex, Fuji,
Imation etc.) they sell are of unpredictable origin.
http://www.digitalfaq.com/media/dvdmedia.htm
See "Who makes the disc: Brand vs. Media ID"

I've found a reliable source and good prices and I'm not
going back. Good luck to you.

On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:15:09 GMT, "CWatters"
wrote:


"Doc" wrote in message
link.net...
In a quest to use gear in ways the manufacturer says you can't, anyone
know
of or tried some aerosol product you could lightly mist on the label side
of
a CD/DVD to allow printing on an inkjet printer with direct CD/DVD
printing
capability and that for sure won't cause any damage?

Damage to what? An out of balance CD going at 56x speed can do quite a lot.
Best avoid anything on your Cds.


If it is an audio cd it will only be going at 1X speed!

--
The Seabat

"The Seabat" wrote ...
If it is an audio cd it will only be going at 1X speed!

Richard Crowley wrote:
Maybe for playback. Nobody writes them at 1x anymore.

My TASCAM CD recorder runs at 1X speed. I've found a brand (52X rated)
of blanks that work with it (and yes, they're available with an inkjet
printable surface for about a penny more than the Sharpie-writable
silver surface) and I hope the source will continue to send me the same
thing for a while yet.

I don't do a business in deliverable CDs so I'm not really concerned
with nice printing. It takes far less time to just write on the disk.

I don't do a business in deliverable CDs so I'm not really concerned
with nice printing. It takes far less time to just write on the disk.

For me it isn't so much the deliverable CDs... and in fact with just
CDs I could probally get away with a fine tipped sharpy. But DVD...
forget it! I can't write at 5pt text. with a sharpy I can barely do
14 point.

While in many cases a sharpy is faster... for anything above and beyond
3 lines of text.... I gotta say disc printing is a tad faster and
almost always legible.

This thread should probably not be crossposted to rec.audio.pro. That
may be the problem. I'll no longer (after this posting) crosspost to
that group, since it is OT to it.

Art

Mike Rivers wrote:


I'm interested in audio and electronics, not ink chemistry or the
disintegration of rapidly rotating objects.

Some of the best scientific investigation and invention has come from
wild ideas. Like the earth rotating around the sun... who would have
thunk! A few heads rolled (or nearly so) over that one ;-)

I only post this to rec.audio.pro because I don't know which forum you
are reading from...

Art

Mike Rivers wrote:

Arthur Entlich wrote:

I'm sorry if the exchange of ideas is bothersome to you, but then there
is that delete button on your news client that someone had a brainstorm
to include on every application, which doesn't cost you a dime to use.


Exchanging ideas is fine, but I haven't seem much constructive in this
discusson except for Doc's experienents. He seems to be the only one
actually trying anything. There are things that wild ideas are good for
because they spur imagination and creativity, but this is just plain
science. Pretty boring, actually.

zakezuke wrote:
For me it isn't so much the deliverable CDs... and in fact with just
CDs I could probally get away with a fine tipped sharpy. But DVD...
forget it! I can't write at 5pt text. with a sharpy I can barely do
14 point.

What's different about a DVD? That's a real question, as I don't haven
anything around here that writes DVDs. I do have a couple of DVD
blanks, however, and they seem to have jsut as much writeable surface
as CDs, unless you're using the double-sided ones. Then I could see
that you have a problem.

Or is it that you're putting 80 files on a DVD where you might only put
half a dozen on a CD, and you want to write all the file names on the
disk?

For "archive" disks, I've been using the DVD two-disk cases for
storage. They have enough room to slip a slightly cut down 8-1/2 x 11"
sheet of paper into them so I can write a fair amount of information on
there. In fact, I often print that from the computer, leaving me with a
Word file that I can reproduce (if I can find it again) as well as a
neatly printed page. That way, all I need to write on the CD is enough
information to get it together with its case.

You think it's a problem to write on DVDs? How about flash memory
cards? I think that might be the only media that, with exception of
those wallet-like things designed to go into your camera bag, has no
commercially available storage system.

On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:06:42 -0800, "Richard Crowley"
wrote:

"The Seabat" wrote ...
If it is an audio cd it will only be going at 1X speed!

Maybe for playback. Nobody writes them at 1x anymore.

So ya burn the disc and then apply the label!

--
The Seabat

On 22-Dec-2005, "George E. Cawthon" wrote:

Oh stop it. they don[t rotate at 27,500 rpm. Period!

I tried drying it in the drive to even out the coating, but
now the tray is stuck, think the spray has got on the
slide. Any ideas how to fix it?

What's different about a DVD? That's a real question, as I don't haven
anything around here that writes DVDs

Oh, I should have been more clear. DVD single layer stores 4.7gigs or
roughly 6 times the amount of a CD. Assuming the filesize is the same
and you want to have an index of files on the disc it self... you gotta
write smaller. This is mostly an issue when storing pictures, or when
you covert your music over to .mp3 for playing on your DVD player.

For "archive" disks, I've been using the DVD two-disk cases for
storage. They have enough room to slip a slightly cut down 8-1/2 x 11"

I'm using 4cd jewels my self, not the quads but the 4 in a single jewel
case. Those have no room for paper inside so I use a sticky label on
the outside. To me it's more practical to have the file list on the
disc... as well as a total list on the outside. This way I can often
get away with 5pt outside and 8pt inside. Also cases can be seperated
from the disc... so I don't depend on the case to be an index, attached
to the disc there is no chance in hell I can lose it.

wrote:
On 22-Dec-2005, "George E. Cawthon" wrote:

Oh stop it. they don[t rotate at 27,500 rpm. Period!

I tried drying it in the drive to even out the coating, but
now the tray is stuck, think the spray has got on the
slide. Any ideas how to fix it?

Yup, easy.
Just spray large quantities of the strongest solvent you have into the drive
(Acetone would do a wonderful job, it will clean everything it touches
probably), preferably while it is spinning ;-)
You could then spray the inside of the PC to get rid of the melted plastics.
Then buy a new PC.
Seasons greetings.
Tony

The Seabat wrote in
:

If it is an audio cd it will only be going at 1X speed!

Most stationery players and all portables now buffer the signal. That
implies at least a 2X read speed.

wrote:
On 22-Dec-2005, "George E. Cawthon" wrote:


Oh stop it. they don[t rotate at 27,500 rpm. Period!


I tried drying it in the drive to even out the coating, but
now the tray is stuck, think the spray has got on the
slide. Any ideas how to fix it?

LOL

Nicolaas Hawkins wrote:

Must be flexo techique, a coating that dries up to a water
friendly surface is not likely to be printable by a
lithographic techique and the required coating thickness
also suggests it

Likely screen printing, but I can see flexo being used
(If It is what I think it is).

Kinda like using a rubber stamp, is used for plastic bags and
can also be used for printing on non-flat objects. I do not
know it for a fact, but it might allow a shorter duty cycle,
ototh screen printing as you suggest is eminent for the
layer-thickness involved.

Flexographic inks are alcohol based, IIRC. Might that
damage the substrate?

Wonderful question, which is to say that I plain do not know. Otoh
scrreen printing also tends to be based on rapidly evaporating solvents
......

Nicolaas.


Kind regards & _Seasons Greetings

Peter Larsen



--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

"Peter Larsen" wrote ...
Otoh scrreen printing also tends to be based on rapidly
evaporating solvents

And/or UV-cured coatings. Especially important when
doing multi-color to avoid contaminating the screen with
the previous color.

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
Since posting this I tried matte-white spray paint shot in several mist
coats from about 1 foot above the disc. The column of paint by the time
it
hits the disc is a bit larger than the disc and thereby seems to give
even
coverage. My guess is it won't affect the balance.

The mass of the paint is so small...

Haven't you seen the Mythbusters episode in which they spin CDs on a
high-speed drill? You have to reach thousands of RPMs before a normal
(uncracked) disk breaks.

I've had one CD-ROM shatter in my 48x drive. It was one of the kids' games,
so it was likely cracked by the kids since they tend to mishandle CD-ROM's.
After taking apart the drive and pulling the pieces out, the CD-ROM drive
still worked fine. ;-)

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.