VHS Tapes are on Magnetic Tape right? Does that mean they're

>>56186917

Any idea at what rate? I'd like to back mine up digitally if it's easy to do.

File: 8419563b1e9f9bedd25c06fdcfd21714.png (13KB, 588x100px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 588x100px

>>56186923
Google is your friend, m8

File: transfer.jpg (104KB, 1500x1500px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1500x1500px

>>56186949

So around 1% a year then? Damn, I better get cracking. Anyone have experience backing up tapes? Should I get a VCR with S-Video out? Right now I'm looking at one of these.

>>56186923
The same way we used to duplicate vhs.
Instead of a second vhs recorder use a digital recorder. And a digi recorder will be handy if you want to record something on tv, so you're not paying for something that'll only do vhs to digital.

>>56186923

In the late-90s, we were told 17 years from the date of production. This is for unused archival footage under good storage condition. I'm not sure if newer stock are different.

It depends on the condition in which they are kept. They can last anywhere from 10 to 40+ years. I've got tapes from the late 70s that are still watchable with minimal data loss.

>>56186967
like records, they degrade during playback as well
the playback system has the tape run taught around several rollers and the main read head spins /in contact/ with the tape
naturally, this can't last forever

and yes, pick yourself up a composite video capture device (no reason to use better than composite)
and a VCR, if you don't have one, ensure it has composite video out (unless it's like 30 years old it will)

Looking at my childhood VHS tapes from the 80's, they're in poor condition. The colors are blotchy, audio is terrible, VHS player is constantly attempting to adjust tracking. I can only imagine people are attracted to this because it's old and different, but this isn't like film or records. VHS, and audio cassette, are straight up garbage and should be forgotten about entirely.

>>56186911

>Aren't they slowly degrading over time?

Just like CDs BDs SSDs and HDDs.

>>56186923
Only about half of my collection of 30 year old floppies still read without any sector errors. I'd get started immediately if I were you.

>>56186967
S-video is better but rare on vcrs, you probably won't see a huge difference because VHS bandwidth is so bad.

>>56188693
records are garbage as well
film quality stood for much longer than the rest, but even that has been exceeded by digital systems

>>56186911
I loaned VHS-2-DVD-player from my uncle, used DVD-RWs as burning media. After one DVD-RW was full, I switched another one (since I had VHS from 3 - 4 hours, DVD-RW's only 2 hours ) while copying the freshly burned to hdd. Those VHS-2-DVD-players are / were expensive, not too common either. Many libraries have such.

$ dvdbackup -M -p

>>56188736
Are there any composite/rgb VCRs?

t. /vr/

>>56188725
Underrated post.

My SSDs were generally less durable than analog media, I've went through more dead SSDs than severely overplayed records.

>>56186911
they are analog so they don't 'fail' as they just slowly become unreadable

>>56186911
>Aren't they slowly degrading over time?
Everything is, more or less.

Btw, are you aware that if you unplug your SSD for a few moths then most if not all data will be gone? In terms of longevity, punched cards > tape > HDDs > Optical media > SSDs. Longevity of media has been going to shit steadily all the time.

>>56186967
When buying one of these buy a decent one.
I ordered one from chinkexpress and doesn't support my vcr video feed properly and only works well with a few devices

>>56193324
you're telling me that you think a stack of 8TB worth of punch cards is more reliable than a hard drive?

>>56193407
Platinum punch cards,
Stored inside a sealed titanium reinforced bunker
I suppose

>>56190913
been saying that for years

ssd just isn't there yet

>>56193407
if all you're doing is writing once and reading once with a large, unknown period of time between the two, then yes

it really depends on your definition of reliable

>>56193454
8TB of them would sink into the ground within a few years due to their weight.

>>56193460
Digital media is a lot more reliable as storage than anything else, but only if you maintain it (I.e. copy it over to a new storage medium regularly).

>>56193543
If I ever switch to SSD then I'm gonna have to write something to do that for me, I got too much shit.

>>56193573
SSD isn't for data, m8.

>>56193606
but everything is data

why do we call it a drive, anyways
there is no motor

File: 1471599545166.jpg (492KB, 1000x1777px) Image search: [Google]

492KB, 1000x1777px

Fuckers had me worried.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2925173/debunked-your-ssd-wont-lose-data-if-left-unplugged-after-all.html