Quote:
|
THANK YOU for all of your advice so far.
|
Glad to assist.
Quote:
|
So far, I have spent way too much money buying slim and regular jewel cases.
|
It requires quite a bit of physical space, too. Between space requirements and costs, it's a terrible option for home use. I'd generally only suggest jewel cases for scenarios where multiple people are involved, and the discs get lots of traffic. Shelves of installation discs at a repair service, for example.
Quote:
|
Memorex and Verbatim are of poor quality - don't close securely, open on their own, break or come apart easily.
|
I think you just described every jewel case, period, regardless of brand. The few exceptions are the really nice DVD jewel cases that come with blank media, from Apple or Verbatim. Or at least "did come" with the discs, as it's been a few years since I bought cased versions of either one. Everything seems to be on a spindle now, even 10-disc packs.
Quote:
|
I understand that wallets, sleeves, slim jewel cases and spindles shouldn't be used. Is this correct?
|
Wallets can scratch media if there is a lot of traffic -- more than a few times per year of removal. There is also issues with the various plastics out there eating into the polycarbonates and lacquers of the disc, which will damage a DVD, and completely ruin a CD. The "rubbery" plastics are the issue -- not the cheap "plastic bag" type plastics.
Plastic sleeves are essentially the same as wallets, but without the binding.
Paper sleeves are (as the name suggests) paper, and paper has grains and fibers. Again, there is a scratch issue to worry about if there's a lot of traffic. Discs in paper sleeves, in a sturdy plastic or metal box, is one good archival solution. But it comes with an idea that you won't access the disc very often -- less than a few times per year.
Slim jewel cases often lack the hover distance as found on full jewel cases, so you can scratch a disc in a slim, too. It's not as easy to scratch in a slim case as it is in a wallet or sleeve, but the potential is still there if the discs get frequent traffic.
Spindles make for great storage, assuming you're not using hub-less style media (no raised bumps around the inner hole). The larger the spindle, the less traffic should be. For example, storing discs on a 100-disc spindle would mean you should almost never access the discs -- purely for backup archives. The 25 and 50 count spindles are better for discs you only access a few times per year.. And then 10-count spindles are great for frequently-accessed media. The only caveat to a spindle is that you'll handle other discs, when removing the one you truly want. Assuming you handle a disc properly (from edge, or finger loosely in a hole), then you're find. It's the people who handle a disc as if it were a ham sandwich that have troubles with this method.
For high-traffic media, nothing can really replace a
high-quality jewel case, DVD movie-style case or Blu-ray case. These were somewhat designed for lots of open/close + remove/reinsert type use in mind.
Quote:
|
That leaves regular jewel cases and DVD cases. Is there anything else?
|
As per the above, your conclusion is sound.
Quote:
|
Alfa Pak were recommended for single cases, but were rated cheap for multiple disks.
|
AlphaPak is pretty much gone at this point in time. These were pretty decent for single discs, but the multi-disc cases were extremely poor quality, often warping or cracking media because the plains were not flat as they should have been.
M-lock cases are generally really nice multi-disc cases, and work well for high traffic.
..... More suggestions? .....
Before I go into a full list of options, how often will you be accessing these discs?
