The logic behind this is that readom was specifically designed for reading optical media, which makes it preferable over generic block device recovery tools such as Guymager, dd or ddrescue. For CD-ROMs and DVDs I recommended to first try imaging the disc with readom, and use ddrescue in case readom fails. In my 2015 blog post I reviewed a number of command-line imaging tools for optical media. In the the remainder of this blog post I will give an overview of omimgr. This prompted the development of the omimgr workflow tool. Nevertheless, it would be useful to have some degree of automation, especially for things like the addition and packaging of associated metadata.
For these cases a highly automated, iromlab-like workflow is unnecessary, and to some degree even impractical. These are typically small sets of recordable CD-ROMs that are often quite old, and such discs are highly likely to be in less than perfect condition. The materials that we are currently receiving as part of our web archaeology activities are a good example. Even though we now have a highly automated workflow in place for bulk processing optical media from our deposit collection, readom and ddrescue still prove to be useful for various special cases that don’t quite fit into this workflow. Among other things, it suggested a rudimentary workflow for imaging CD-ROMs and DVDs using the readom and ddrescue tools.
In 2015 I wrote a blog post on preserving optical media from the command-line.
0 kommentar(er)
