O.T. Computer Cleaning Maintenance:

Mark Twain wrote:
I followed your instructions:

http://i60.tinypic.com/2ngcuph.jpg

http://i58.tinypic.com/m81xk0.jpg

http://i62.tinypic.com/30mrho9.jpg

http://i58.tinypic.com/33usbon.jpg

Now its set up for the 320GB HD and will let
you know when it arrives.

Thanks,
Robert

A couple of comments.

In the picture (33usbon.jpg), the destination filename
is set to D:\(IMAGEID)-00-00.mrimg.

That is basically the "tool default". The filename
that results is of the form.

FD9C634222529385-00-00.mrimg

I can tell by looking at the date of the file
(Aug1,2015) roughly when I made the backup. However,
if someday I mixed all the 8200 and 8500 backup files
together in a folder, I might have no other way to identify
them.

If instead, you define "Backup Filename" in the original
setup window (m81xk0.jpg), you can pick a name like
8200-C-Drive-Aug1-2015 and then the program will add
a few more digits to the end as it sees fit. This is
an example of one of my backup files. This gives me
some idea when and why.

win8P5E_before_defrag_July_2015-00-00.mrimg

A second option, is to use the Advanced Options button
at the bottom of the setup window. In there is defined a
"Comment Field". That allows you to add a lot more detail.
The "Comment Field" can only be reviewed on a machine
that has Macrium installed, but it does allow you to see
some comments about the backup you just made. It's my
"second favorite way" to label a backup. I use the
filename thing more often. And by using my filename thing,
I don't save the backup definition (.xml) file for a future
date. Each one of my backups is a one-shot thing, as each
one needs a custom filename.

*******

One other comment. The speed of your 8200 drive
is abysmally slow :-) Macrium rates backups in megabits
per second, and you must divide by 8 and use bytes,
to see it.

Transfer Rate: 106.4 Mbit/s == 106.4/8 = 13.3MB/sec

While the Macrium backup is not a contiguous transfer,
the head movement should be a linear progression of sorts,
so seek time between chunks should be minimal. I think my
best (for conventional storage) was around 100MB/sec or a bit
more. I also have a few bad drives, that go a lot slower.

One aspect that factors in, is the "compression" setting.
You left the compression at "Medium", the tool default.
I leave mine uncompressed and compress them later. The Macrium
compressor is pretty lightweight, something like an LZO
perhaps. It's not an arithmetic compressor like 7ZIP uses.
The compressor likely uses a lot of the CPU on the 8200,
but compressing the backup does save space. So perhaps
I'm being overly harsh on your 160GB hard drive, by
suggesting it is a slouch. It could be that the CPU is the
bottleneck, and the hard drive has it easy. You can
adjust these factors to suit your own needs (compression
or no compression if you're in a hurry).

When I compress files, I do them on my good machine. Your 8500
is such a machine. You could compress the files on the 8500 using
7ZIP if you wanted. Compression has pluses and minuses. In
a situation where a file is corrupted, compression causes error
multiplication. So if compression is involved, it makes it that
much harder to recover something. Now, you probably wouldn't
even attempt to recover the .mrimg file in any case, as the
format inside is "not useful". The stuff in there is not
like a TAR file - it's not necessarily sequential files all
neatly packed. And as a result, even without compression,
the .mrimg format would not be that pleasant to bolt back
together. So on the one hand, when Macrium makes the .mrimg
file, the disk drive heads are given a "smooth path" to
travel. The backup is very easy on the source drive. But
on the other hand, the clusters recorded can be in just
about any order as far as individual files are concerned.
Applying compression probably doesn't make the situation
all that much worse :-)

I've never had a .mrimg file corrupted, so like our
discussion about lithium coin cells, there isn't an
imminent risk here. You have plenty of latitude to
experiment with the settings, and find the best
space/time tradeoff for your own needs.

I like my backups to run fast (Macrium Compression: Off)
I like to compress things I know will be
on the disk for a couple years. I don't mind
moving my backup drive to the big machine,
which was bought just for strength while compressing (7ZIP).
On the other hand, if I need the file later, I have
to wait a while to decompress the 7ZIP file.

My good machine compresses the file seven times faster
than the machine I'm typing on. And that's why I got it.
The machine I type on, uses less electricity.

If I backup everything here, it takes the whole
day (24 hours) to compress the resulting .mrimg files.
Just to give you some idea how slow it is.

If you use the compression included inside Macrium,
that can be a bit slow on a slow computer. You would
not notice Macrium compression at all on the 8500, but
the 8200 just doesn't have the horsepower for that sort
of thing. The benefit of doing the compression of
backup data inside Macrium, is you don't have any additional
steps and there is nothing to worry about later. So that's
a benefit for sure. It's because I like to screw around
with stuff, that I do otherwise :-)

Paul

If you like, we can do it again and just walk
me through the steps of what to tick/un-tick
so that nothing impedes the 160 HD so we can
see how fast/slow it really is. Also you
can show me where I can label the file.

If there's anything I can do software wise or
otherwise to speed up the 8200 I'm all for it.

By the way, I assume it's OK now to copy/paste
files from the 8500 over to the 2TB HD 'My Documents'
partition?

Robert

Here's what on the T1 HD at present:

http://i60.tinypic.com/2hfj69h.jpg

Robert

Here what's on the 1TB HD at present:

http://i60.tinypic.com/2hfj69h.jpg

Robert

Mark Twain wrote:
If you like, we can do it again and just walk
me through the steps of what to tick/un-tick
so that nothing impedes the 160 HD so we can
see how fast/slow it really is. Also you
can show me where I can label the file.

If there's anything I can do software wise or
otherwise to speed up the 8200 I'm all for it.

By the way, I assume it's OK now to copy/paste
files from the 8500 over to the 2TB HD 'My Documents'
partition?

Robert


As far as I know, your 2TB external is ready for
moving files into the big partition.

Paul

Mark Twain wrote:
Here what's on the 1TB HD at present:

http://i60.tinypic.com/2hfj69h.jpg

Robert


OK, so how can you identify backups ?

1) Open Macrium program, and there should be an option
to "browse" restores. That allows you to do disk image
restores. But, it shows a Disk Management-like interface,
with a picture of the partitions captured.

Using that, you can kinda figure out what a Macrium image
is for.

2) When you create a backup, you can select a custom filename
for the destination file. Use any scheme for naming that
you like: 8200-Before-new-320GB-Aug2-2015

3) An alternative, is when doing the backup setup screen thing,
look for the "Advanced" button in the lower left corner. It
has three things that look like audio sliders as an icon for it.

In there, you will find a "Comment" field. That's for cases
where you want to add a description of the reason you are
making the backup.

You could use a previous backup template (stored as an XML
file), use the Advanced button, enter a comment and otherwise
use all the same parameters. I never reuse my backup definitions
here, instead choosing to make a custom backup each time.

Providing good identification ( more than the method in (1) ),
becomes more important the more drives you need to backup.

Now, my preference, is to make a descriptive file name.
As it requires the least additional work to figure out
what it's for. "Browsing" files for restoration purposes
allows you to confirm what it is. So if I use method (2),
I still have method (1) available to me, to prove the
partition alignment and setup is the same as the target
system.

Paul

Here is the Macrium screen but I see no browse
option?

http://i60.tinypic.com/2j5gadk.jpg

I noted all the updates on the 1TB HD had already had
creation dates but your speaking of adding a date/comment
as the backup file is created to tell one another apart,
correct?

Do you want to erase the entire 1TB HD and create a fresh
rescue disk and fresh Image selected with you walking me
through it so that the 160 is unhindered?

Robert

Mark Twain wrote:
Here is the Macrium screen but I see no browse
option?

http://i60.tinypic.com/2j5gadk.jpg





On the top row, you see...

File View Backup Restore ---
Browse for an image file to restore

So it's the first item underneath Restore
at the top of the screen.

It presents a Windows file dialog, and allows
you to select a .mrimg file for a look. You
select Cancel, and get out, before actually
restoring anything. I use the Browse all the
time, when sorting through some poorly named ones.

Paul

Mark Twain wrote:
I noted all the updates on the 1TB HD had already had
creation dates but your speaking of adding a date/comment
as the backup file is created to tell one another apart,
correct?

Do you want to erase the entire 1TB HD and create a fresh
rescue disk and fresh Image selected with you walking me
through it so that the 160 is unhindered?

Robert

You don't have to do that.

You can use the copy of Macrium in Windows or you
can use the Macrium on the Rescue CD. The performance
should be similar.

If you want to experiment, nothing gets hurt. For
example, right now, you could make another backup
of the 28GB C: on the 160GB IDE drive. And you
could turn the compression off, and make a
descriptive file name

8200-Test-With-No-Compression

And it will make

8200-Test-With-No-Compression-00-00.mrimg

as a result of doing the backup.

You can take that file and throw it into the
Trash, and empty the recycle bin. When you
are doing full backups (not incremental or
differential), you can just toss single files
as you see fit. I toss out single backups I
have made with Macrium 5 version here all the
time. Some of my backups only last long enough,
to safely test some software.

So if you want to make a test backup with the
compression turned off, you can, and just
remove the file later when it is finished.
It's not a big deal.

Paul

I found the browse feature.

Now we just wait for the pesky 320HD
and I'll mount the green rails.

Oh, didn't you say something about
setting both drives to C:?

Thanks,
Robert

I'm just trying to get through this
but if your ok with how things are
now then lets leave it as is.

Robert

O.T. this has nothing to do with either the
computers but again since the thread is open
I thought I would ask you a question.

I'm thinking of buying a converter to move my
family VHS tapes to disk(DVD-RW)? but I really don't
know how stable the format is? I tried looking
up some of the information:

http://hometheater.about.com/od/dvdh...rrecorders.htm

I was just curious if you have any thoughts on
this?

p.s. in passing, I mounted the Yamaha CRX TS10
slanted as it's usually shown. It was missing
one of the stands so I made a replacement out
of wood and a 'L' bracket and painted it flat
black to match the other stands. Also, I cut/placed
fat blue rubber bands as non-skid pads under the unit
and speakers and they work quite well.

Robert

Thanks,
Robert

Mark Twain wrote:
O.T. this has nothing to do with either the
computers but again since the thread is open
I thought I would ask you a question.

I'm thinking of buying a converter to move my
family VHS tapes to disk(DVD-RW)? but I really don't
know how stable the format is? I tried looking
up some of the information:

http://hometheater.about.com/od/dvdh...rrecorders.htm

I was just curious if you have any thoughts on
this?

p.s. in passing, I mounted the Yamaha CRX TS10
slanted as it's usually shown. It was missing
one of the stands so I made a replacement out
of wood and a 'L' bracket and painted it flat
black to match the other stands. Also, I cut/placed
fat blue rubber bands as non-skid pads under the unit
and speakers and they work quite well.

Robert

Thanks,
Robert

Converting VCR cassettes is a lot of work.

On the one hand, you can use an automated solution
(VCR to DVD), but then you are relying on the hardware
to do a good job of the conversion.

When a VCR plays a tape, there is a bit of head roll
noise along the bottom edge of the video. When I captured
tapes here, I had to clip a number of rows of pixels
off the bottom of the recording. Then resize the video
a little bit, to fit a standard aspect ratio. That was
part of my conversion and editing process. A fancy editor
program wasn't particularly needed (as I wasn't snipping
out sections I didn't like or anything).

I mastered the DVDs on the computer, using some WinDVD CD
that came in a motherboard box. And used Imgburn to make the
final DVD.

The VCR I got, the replacement for my good VCR, didn't have
exactly stellar heads in it. The quality of the playback
wasn't quite the same. But I got the job done. That's the problem
with modern VCRs you might find at the store now, is
zero attention to detail. No one is doing research any
more, on making exceptional playback hardware.

Now, if a machine does VCR cassette to DVD direct, there is
no opportunity to edit the content. And when the job is finished,
the output is a burned DVD. If you needed to edit that for any
reason, and remaster it, you have the extra delay of pulling
that into the computer, editing, and creating a final DVD.

Whether you store as DVDs is your business. You also have the
option of saving the collection as a bunch of ~8GB 2 hour ISO9660
files. Having physical DVDs is more convenient, but you
still have to store and index them somehow. Any DVDs I burn here,
I store them in slim jewel boxes, so I can write a label on the
jewel box. If a stack of those were to fall on the floor and
get all mixed together, there would be trouble :-) I do not
like putting sticky labels or Sharpie marker on the DVD itself.
Stickers can unbalance the disc.

When I converted VCR tapes, I would get a 100GB video file, and
after the MPEG2 compression, this would occupy 8GB of space on
the disk. So if you toss the initial large capture file and keep
the final MPEG2 output, that's the kind of space you'd need. You
could capture and keep 125 tapes in 1TB of space for example.
Converting all of the movie content to DVDs, there is the cost
of the DVD media (you would buy large spindles for best economy, rather
than tiny five-packs of media).

So my setup was a VCR, a connection to a capture card on the
computer, and plenty of disk space while editing. Your 8500 has
the horsepower for the editing job (making MPEG2). And the editing
doesn't have to be that picky. Just a matter of snipping the
playback noise off the edge of the tape image. Now, if a VCR to
DVD recorder does it, I presume it trims some noise off
the bottom of the image, but the recording machine would not
be able to discriminate whether the automatic head adjustment
worked well enough for the job. On some old tapes, you have
to adjust the tracking (two buttons for + and -) until you
get a flawless image on your TV output. One of the tapes I
did, I had to monitor the capture and adjust the tracking
about 2 minutes into the tape, which makes the conversion
extra-tricky. These are things that totally automated machines
just won't have the "brain" to handle.

I don't know how many tapes you have to convert, but you
won't lack for a hobby if you have a pile of them to do.
To do three tapes here, took around two weeks (most of it
spent fighting with free tools for editing). It might still
take an eight-hour day of work per tape, to get the results
you want. Somehow.

So if you go with the VCR to DVD recorder, you might or might
not be happy with the results. The box does the digitizing for you.
There might be tracking problems at the tape end. There might
be head roll noise along the bottom edge of the image. It takes
the two hours to burn the DVD in the machine. If you pull the
DVD and read it into the computer, the DVD drive has to have
rip-lock disabled, to read at slightly faster speed. It might
take 15 minutes best case, to read the DVD back into the computer.
Then you edit. And it might take an hour to burn the final DVD,
depending on whether you use single layer or dual layer media
and so on.

If somehow, the conversion machine was "magic" and every DVD
was a winner, this process would not be nearly as onerous. But
I am not that hopeful, after working with my gear here. It takes
lots of time to do such conversions. And get a result that
doesn't bother you while viewing it. I *hate* head roll noise
along the bottom of videos.

*******

These are some examples of hardware capture devices. For
usage with the computer.

Video only. Audio recorded by computer sound card (RCA Cinch to
1/8" converter cable needed if that is the case). $36. Assumes
you already own a VCR. Saves on the DVD recorder step, by
inputting the data into the computer.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16815158161

The software on devices like that is always awful (read the
comments). You have to collect a series of programs from the
Internet, to do all the work for you.

This one does video and sound. Reviews are 3 out of 5.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16815306013

This one does video and audio as well. Unlike the first one,
since MPEG is not mentioned nor compression, I have to assume
this captures at 20MB/sec uncompressed. Which is fine. That's
the way my ancient capture card does it. Once the editor is finished
editing and you compress to final DVD format, this is not a
problem. A 1TB internal drive would be recommended as a minimum
for tossing around copies of the VCR recording while you're editing.
After you finish making a DVD, you delete the original huge file,
making way for your next capture.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16815158282

The capture chip in that one is eMPIA EM2861. And the reason that
pointer is handy, is because it leads to a little description
of device limitations in this class of device.

http://linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/Easycap

"stereosound up to 48000 Hz sampling rate
(or only 8000 Hz mono on some models where the AC'97 chip is missing)

So on the above device that didn't have audio input cabling,
the reason is they stripped the AC'97 audio chip solution,
and if they had connected the remaining audio subsystem, it
would only give 8KHz mono sound. The dongle has to have
the full three chips, to work decently.

Paul

Mark Twain wrote:
I found the browse feature.

Now we just wait for the pesky 320HD
and I'll mount the green rails.

Oh, didn't you say something about
setting both drives to C:?

Thanks,
Robert

You don't have to worry about that.

Just remember the "boot by itself" rule
the first time the 320GB disk is booted.

Paul