Should we switch to CloneCD format?

[Nexy]

Just a poll to gauge what everyone else thinks. Lets try to keep the sarcasm out of the thread please 

Honest opinions and reasons for and against appreciated.


Should we switch to CloneCD?


41%
(9)

Yes


50%
(11)

No


9%
(2)

No Opinion

Votes: 22

[Nexy]

I vote yes for several reasons, sub code preservation (anomalies, flags). Wider range of type support (CD-Xtra, etc). Scrambled image support.

[javidelarosa]

My vote for no opinion because i dont know waht to say

[DJoneK]

Voted yes, but the question can be misleading.  It doesnt mean to switch to the tool clonecd and just dump everything with that tool.  It just means if we should use the .ccd/.img/.sub format for cd dumps instead of current .bin/.cue

Of course, I'd rather have a new format made where you can have split tracks + subs + cuelike thingy, but who will make that...

[ACiD]

Voted yes, but the question can be misleading.  It doesnt mean to switch to the tool clonecd and just dump everything with that tool.  It just means if we should use the .ccd/.img/.sub format for cd dumps instead of current .bin/.cue

Of course, I'd rather have a new format made where you can have split tracks + subs + cuelike thingy, but who will make that...

Have to agree with DJoneK, the way the question was layed out can stir up quite some confusion.

If we're talking about storing things more properly, that's great and all but it comes down to software that will properly write onto media and how dumping/converting into this format are the biggest questions.

I say, if everything can currently be preserved and written to media 1:1 why fix something that isnt broken?

Is something not being documented (dumped) properly or enough?

Edit: also wanted to add, proprietary formats scare me.

[Nexy]

We would still dump discs the way we do now, but also have .ccd (clonecd cue) file and .sub file.

The only issue is generating the .ccd file from TOC/subs, as well as dumping the subs with tool mentioned in the sub sticky topic.

It is simple enough to merge the split tracks into a single image for own use using cdmage or even just on command line with copy /b file1.bin+file2.bin outfile.img ...

:EDIT:

The format of clonecd is not exactly unknown or limited to one tool anymore. Most tools can read to/from and convert to/from as well as burn the format these days. It has been reverse engineered many times and all the fields are known. It is closer to the TOC format than cue is.

Is something not being documented (dumped) properly or enough?

Yes, flags are not preserved, anomalies in the sub code (securom+possibly other), subtitles (for ex karaoke discs) are not being preserved. In addition it is not possible to store cd-xtra/multi-session in bin/cue format.

[ACiD]

Is something not being documented (dumped) properly or enough?

Yes, flags are not preserved, anomalies in the sub code (securom+possibly other), subtitles (for ex karaoke discs) are not being preserved. In addition it is not possible to store cd-xtra/multi-session in bin/cue format.

We have a huge problem then that went unforeseen. This makes me a sad panda.

[Nexy]

This has been known for a long time now, but the idea hasn't been pushed much.

The bright side is, entire discs do NOT need to be redumped, only the sub code, and a .ccd file generated for that dump.

[ACiD]

This has been known for a long time now, but the idea hasn't been pushed much.

The bright side is, entire discs do NOT need to be redumped, only the sub code, and a .ccd file generated for that dump.

I would just start dumping things both ways then and eliminating unnecessary files then until peoples start to take action about revising dumping methods.

original dump method + ccd and subcode from clonecd

then to burn with subcode and ccd info with original dump = "copy /b file1.bin+file2.bin outfile.img ..."?

[FatArnold]

I'm very much for the switch. Actually, I'm very much for a switch to any kind of (documented) format, no matter if it is usable by current burning programs or not, if it helps to preserve the discs more accurately.

Granted I'm no expert on the subject, but sub-channel and scrambled support seems to me to be the only direction to go. Whether the data is relevant or necessary is one thing, but it is a part of the discs and IMO ought to be preserved. I've always thought cue-files seemed like a kind of a hack-job anyway.

As stated, I'm no expert, so I have a few dumb questions.

Nexy commented that there are limitations to the ccd format too. I'm not really read-up on the format. Could someone fill me in on what the actual limitations are?

And what about DVDs, BDs, GDs and such? Gigadiscs, as far as I understand it, is CD based and as such would have both subs and scrambled data. DVDs and such I have no idea as to how they're structured. Would the ccd format be used only for CDs or would GDs, DVDs, BDs etc. also use it?