#Single-session PhotoCD
5 messages in this thread
The CD-ROM article I wrote for Compuserve Magazine a couple of months ago
contained a piece of bad advice. I said that the only advantage to a
multisession drive was that you could send it back to the lab to add more
PhotoCD scans. In fact, it turns out that (at least at some labs) even the
scans from a single roll may result in a disc with more than one session.
Consequently, if you want to use PhotoCDs, you really need a multisession
drive.
Robert:
I have one of the single-session drives. What do the multi-session drives have
that mine doesn't that allows those to view CD-ROMs that have multiple sessions
on them?
Just curious. I always like to know about what I don't have. :>
Todd
The drive has the capability of returning the location of the last Primary
Volume Descriptor (PVD). On a single-session CD-ROM drive, it expects the PVD
at 2:10 for all data discs. A multi-session CD-ROM drive has the ability to
look for PVDs at locations other than 2:10. You can consider the PVD
equivalent to DOS' FAT. It tells MSCDEX where a particular file actually is on
the disc.
rp93
FAT is a good analogy. A multisession disc is sort of like a hard drive that's
been partitioned into multiple logical drives.
There's no mechanical difference between single-session and multisession CD-ROM
drives, just the software instructions necessary to handle Kodak's multisession
spec. That's why some drives can be upgraded to multisession compatibility via
a firmware ROM swap.
Hi Robert.
While it's true that scans from a single roll can lead to a multi-session disc
at some labs (as you correctly stated), it is also important to point out that
the customer *can* request a single session disc. We routinely get these
requests from people who have only a single session drive.
The downside is that if we make any "remakes" on the disc due to a poor scan,
dust, or other mistakes, the "remade" scan will only appear on a multi-session
drive. Customers using a single session drive will see the mistakes and not
the corrections.
Regards, Bob