View Single Post
Old 06 August 2019, 11:31   #7
Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 76
@BarryB -- yes -i0 ... wished it would have an option to do less rotations... would make re-reading bad tracks a god send -- but its too slow for me when doing lots of disks.

I normally default to -i5 -- this is where I get ~2mins per disk. I wondered if anyone uses the same, and can do it faster.

@Chip -- depends on the disk I guess ... take a look at tmb's dumps... mostly using diskripper and only switching to kryoflux on PC, or kryoflux on Amiga depending on the disk complexities.

@dlfrsilver -- I wonder how the capturing works, because if I used i5 -- its format guided (from what I've read) and reads tracks? if it finds a bad track you can hear it, and it retries and retries and reties. The same bad disk, if I do a i0 -- I dont hear it having problems ... nothing, just the disk being read -- any bad tracks are recorded inside the flux data. So does i5 do a flux read / decode at each track position? or does it read the track directly?

Anyway, still interesting topic -- always wondering if its possible to speed up the imaging from the PC. Still interested in others i5 timings ... also, has there ever been a kryoflux version, which does a i0 -- but you can do less than 5 rotations? Ideally ... if I had too ... I would like the same speed of i5, but doing an i0 instead -- due to the ability to re-read individual tracks if it failed the first time.

Or maybe someone has a better workflow they can suggest to speed up the capture / ability to re-scan bad tracks when they fail and inject good data back into the image file?

Thanks for everyones input / replies etc.
sTe is offline  
Page generated in 0.05626 seconds with 11 queries