Brume's dumps

[Brume]

Need of clarity... I open here a small topic with the list of my dumps.
I'll try to keep it clean and add more links regularly. If you are looking for a dump, just ask.
Ahem, I don't own all games ever made on Atari ST, but I'll do my best to help

So here we go.

Star Trap
[CTR - RAW - STX]
https://mega.nz/#F!WEV3BQbJ!4Tb8ktxvmWLRP8ZHIg2zsg

STRAP_A_00001.png

Star Trap disk A.raw.disk.aufit.1.3.png

Star Trap disk B.raw.disk.aufit.1.3.png

Au Nom de l'Hermine
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.nz/#F!yNsV3bSY!7GAmvlE3bzK2Zq_MOw5fBw

Au_00001.png

Au Nom De L'Hermine.raw.disk.aufit.1.3.png

MoT
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX - ST]
https://mega.nz/#F!XY11kbRA!3PtL-il3-GQ2nf2AdSXAXw

MOT_00001.png

MOT disk A.scp.disk.aufit.1.3.png

MOT disk B.scp.disk.aufit.1.3.png

Back To The Golden Age [French]
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX - ST]
https://mega.nz/#F!aAtzFaBR!nndefIbMpIcB9r8jUpkxyw

BTTGA_00002.png

Back To The Golden Age.raw.disk.aufit.1.3.png

Rogue
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.nz/#F!OI0wBS6I!xsNMi3Lwftzxi_fp5y6VwA

Rogue_00001.png

Rogue.scp.disk.aufit.1.3.png

Turrican (Rainbow Arts)
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.nz/#F!vRcm2ABb!A0NpjO-LXy9S3osdXpCnxQ

Turrican_00001.png

Turrican.scp.disk.aufit.1.3.png

Turrican II (Rainbow Arts)
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.nz/#F!yIES1TRK!kSM_RXogm7yvdYprV9leNw

Turrican_00002.png

Turrican II.scp.disk.aufit.1.3.png

Albedo
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.co.nz/#F!XYkm0ZJR!lOoW3RHySXtKf1xjb5PMqg

Albedo_00001.png

G.Nius
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.co.nz/#F!CRVQTKbD!knROwfrjaPckqr3s-gRY2Q

G.Nius_00001.png

Leavin' Teramis
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.co.nz/#F!LRUwxAgS!TC8t0tTvmM175-1X43W1yg

Leavin'_00001.png

Les Aventures de Moktar
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.co.nz/#F!mctBgbAR!bO70Cvg03jo03a3nG8mTEw

Les_Aventures_de_Moktar_00001.png

Realms Of The Trolls
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.co.nz/#F!qMk0nZyT!Jll6az4Kl0Bon5wvAVoEwg

The_00001.png

Super Sprint
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX - ST]
https://mega.nz/#F!PNUUCKLT!Jz20oHGhFYGcnfBrIDebHQ

Super_00001.png

The Great Giana Sisters
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.co.nz/#F!2YcFgCwR!EoXPMTTEHgxkcCMBr3Ps3Q

Realm_00001.png

Hook
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX - ST]
https://mega.co.nz/#F!GFFkzTqT!YvEe3dKF2Ez8I26glXRrcg

Hook__00001.png

Prophecy I - The Viking Child
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.nz/#F!OUdFiLKL!pnx2Vhhn6e20g1NznG_gjQ

Prophecy_00001.png

Toki
[CTR - RAW - SCP - STX]
https://mega.co.nz/#F!3V9gGShT!u09hs3nGDxGxkqqe_HEueg

Toki_00001.png

[kodak80]

The link on Moktar seems to be the same as the Albedo link.

[Brume]

Corrected
Also added G.Nius to the list

[kodak80]

Thanks Brume, playing G.Nius right now in Steem. I look forward to the list growing longer.

[Brume]

Someone requested Hook, so it's added to the list now.

[dlfrsilver]

Thanks Brume for Hook. It works like a charm

About Moktar, i'm very pleased. So this game exists in 2 versions, the one like yours with big white energy bar, and mine which has the small pink
energy point

Great !

Check it here :

[Brume]

Thanks for Moktar. Does your dump come from the original boxed version, or is a re-released version (from a compilation, maybe)?

Toki added to the thread

Also I'm just coming to see I badly imaged Toki with SCP (was done last year, had a lot of disks to do... my room was a big miss full of boxed games). One track was badly read. I'll redo the dump asap.
Waiting for it, I just converted the RAW flux to SCP. So the SCP dump is 2 rev only at the moment, but it's clean.

[dlfrsilver]

my dump of moktar is coming from a retail release (original boxed).

But your version is clearly the revision 1

On amiga this means i have to find Moktar with the big white energy bars

[dlfrsilver]

my dump of moktar is coming from a retail release (original boxed).

But your version is clearly the revision 1

On amiga this means i have to find Moktar with the big white energy bars

EDIT : i have checked your dump of Toki as CTraw, the track 27 has an error. Can you clean side 1 of your Toki disk and redump it please ?

[kodak80]

my dump of moktar is coming from a retail release (original boxed).

But your version is clearly the revision 1

On amiga this means i have to find Moktar with the big white energy bars

EDIT : i have checked your dump of Toki as CTraw, the track 27 has an error. Can you clean side 1 of your Toki disk and redump it please ?

Try this one. I converted it using the Kryoflux dumping software from the RAW dump Brume provided:

https://mega.co.nz/#!AN1gEZbb!hwX0DAl_F ... dwEOon3hEQ

The Kryoflux RAW doesn't show any errors in AUFIT:

Toki.raw.disk_view.png

Interestingly, HxC Floppy Emulator shows my CTR created as having an error on track 27!:

Screenshot 2015-05-27 20.44.42.png

I created an STX from AUFIT using the Kryoflux RAW, then this STX shows no errors in HxC Floppy Emulator.

[Brume]

EDIT : i have checked your dump of Toki as CTraw, the track 27 has an error. Can you clean side 1 of your Toki disk and redump it please ?

This is strange. The RAW files doesn't have any error. At least, Aufit displays a valid disk. See kodak80's pictures.
Considering the CTR file was done at the same time as the RAW dump, I don't understand why the CTR image has a bad track

[dlfrsilver]

EDIT : i have checked your dump of Toki as CTraw, the track 27 has an error. Can you clean side 1 of your Toki disk and redump it please ?

This is strange. The RAW files doesn't have any error. At least, Aufit displays a valid disk. See kodak80's pictures.
Considering the CTR file was done at the same time as the RAW dump, I don't understand why the CTR image has a bad track

You know i am a member of SPS since a while now. I have the CTA tool, which means i can see any error on any dump.

On toki, it's very obvious. Your KFraw has already the error, which in turn can be found in the CTraw file.

I have looked at G.nius the same way, the floppy disk is also dirty (mould), the CTA tool shows it clearly.

In fact, aufit is very "tolerant", more than the SPS tool. It's easier in fact to produce an STX file from a KFraw dump or an SCP dump with aufit, than generating an IPF out of a dump which shows that the disk dumped has some mould problems.

The toki disk of Brume begins to show mould spreading on the side 1 of the disk. Jean's tool is really amazing for this, aufit is really is a great product.

It must be possible to get an error free dump, just by looking at disk side 1 magnetic surface and cleaning it with alcohol.

[kodak80]

So AUFIT is not suitable for checking how good a Kryoflux or SCP dump is then if it is not showing real errors! Great that it can recover from the errors but it would be nice to see the raw track information and any possible errors with my dumps.

I guess HxC Floppy Emulator provides a better image of the disk data and layout (once converted to CTR) as it doesn't correct the errors like AUFIT seems to be.

HxC also shows no errors with the Kryoflux raw dump which makes it very difficult to test how good a dump is. I guess we have to convert to CTRaw to test a Kryoflux dump as this shows the error on track 27?

[JimDrew]

If you want to know "how good" your original disk is, just image it and then look at the image with the flux display under SCP's analyzer. You can see tracks that are good, and those that have issues (like mold), pretty easily. I guess I could make some sort of warning in the SCP dump when tracks have flux that vary by a certain percentage. I already have the routine written to look at this because that is how the media integrity test works.

[dlfrsilver]

So AUFIT is not suitable for checking how good a Kryoflux or SCP dump is then if it is not showing real errors! Great that it can recover from the errors but it would be nice to see the raw track information and any possible errors with my dumps.

No. This is what i tried to explain above. Aufit is good for checking, it's just that it's more flexible about dumps. The SPS systems requires floppies in excellent working order. It has troubles with floppies that have some mould or that are degraded, or "tired".

The HxC showed the error. Think that we have the tools handy to check our dumps. Aufit and HxC tools are what you need to help

I guess HxC Floppy Emulator provides a better image of the disk data and layout (once converted to CTR) as it doesn't correct the errors like AUFIT seems to be.

Yes it is indeed possible

HxC also shows no errors with the Kryoflux raw dump which makes it very difficult to test how good a dump is. I guess we have to convert to CTRaw to test a Kryoflux dump as this shows the error on track 27?

what people can do is make CTraw, post them, and i will check them

[Brume]

So what's the best tool to check the integrity of a tool? CTA tool, Aufit, HxC, SCP Analyzer...? That's very confusing.

I imaged all my disks with SCP & KF (and Pasti, too), and I found Aufit very useful to check the dumps until now. Also DrCoolZic added recently a batch process, which is incredibly efficient.
Sorry to say, but I won't have the time to redo most the dumps again and again. I really need to know which software to use

[dlfrsilver]

So what's the best tool to check the integrity of a tool? CTA tool, Aufit, HxC, SCP Analyzer...? That's very confusing.

I imaged all my disks with SCP & KF (and Pasti, too), and I found Aufit very useful to check the dumps until now. Also DrCoolZic added recently a batch process, which is incredibly efficient.
Sorry to say, but I won't have the time to redo most the dumps again and again. I really need to know which software to use

I understand Aufit & HxC are the good ones, and SCP analyser if you do SCP dumps.

[kodak80]

I am confused. You say that the Kryoflux dump is bad and that the disk needs cleaning yet the tools that we use to examine the dump say that the dump is fine? I guess my question is: Can we duplicate this Kryoflux RAW dump back to disk and it will work without issue? AUFIT and HxC say it will work and has no errors. If there are errors in the dump and these tools are not showing them then checking is a waste of time and we really do not have any way to check Kryoflux RAW dumps.

Brume, I would be interested in an SCP dump (both before cleaning the disk and after disk has been cleaned) and get Jim's input on the non-cleaned dump's validity. I would also be interested to hear from DrCoolZic on why AUFIT is saying that the dump has no errors.

I understand that SPS needs dumps in prestine condition but the rest of us just want to know that we can re-create a disk in the event the original dies.

SCP has an anaylzer so we can check the flux dumps as the whole idea was end-user duplication but Kryoflux was intended for preservation and dumps to be sent off for analysis. It would be great if the SCP software could show the disk layout images (same as AUFIT) as this is the easiest (non-technical) way to identify issues or have some form of report on where the potential issues are in the dump.

[dlfrsilver]

I am confused. You say that the Kryoflux dump is bad and that the disk needs cleaning yet the tools that we use to examine the dump say that the dump is fine? I guess my question is: Can we duplicate this Kryoflux RAW dump back to disk and it will work without issue? AUFIT and HxC say it will work and has no errors. If there are errors in the dump and these tools are not showing them then checking is a waste of time and we really do not have any way to check Kryoflux RAW dumps.

Brume, I would be interested in an SCP dump (both before cleaning the disk and after disk has been cleaned) and get Jim's input on the non-cleaned dump's validity. I would also be interested to hear from DrCoolZic on why AUFIT is saying that the dump has no errors.

I understand that SPS needs dumps in prestine condition but the rest of us just want to know that we can re-create a disk in the event the original dies.

SCP has an anaylzer so we can check the flux dumps as the whole idea was end-user duplication but Kryoflux was intended for preservation and dumps to be sent off for analysis. It would be great if the SCP software could show the disk layout images (same as AUFIT) as this is the easiest (non-technical) way to identify issues or have some form of report on where the potential issues are in the dump.

Ok let's try to make it simple : Aufit seems to be able to recover data from a disk which is not is the best shape, Not the tool i use

[kodak80]

I am confused. You say that the Kryoflux dump is bad and that the disk needs cleaning yet the tools that we use to examine the dump say that the dump is fine? I guess my question is: Can we duplicate this Kryoflux RAW dump back to disk and it will work without issue? AUFIT and HxC say it will work and has no errors. If there are errors in the dump and these tools are not showing them then checking is a waste of time and we really do not have any way to check Kryoflux RAW dumps.

Brume, I would be interested in an SCP dump (both before cleaning the disk and after disk has been cleaned) and get Jim's input on the non-cleaned dump's validity. I would also be interested to hear from DrCoolZic on why AUFIT is saying that the dump has no errors.

I understand that SPS needs dumps in prestine condition but the rest of us just want to know that we can re-create a disk in the event the original dies.

SCP has an anaylzer so we can check the flux dumps as the whole idea was end-user duplication but Kryoflux was intended for preservation and dumps to be sent off for analysis. It would be great if the SCP software could show the disk layout images (same as AUFIT) as this is the easiest (non-technical) way to identify issues or have some form of report on where the potential issues are in the dump.

Ok let's try to make it simple : Aufit seems to be able to recover data from a disk which is not is the best shape, Not the tool i use

But I use Aufit to check for errors in my SCP and Kryoflux dumps and any issues with the original floppy disks. I do not recover the disks data with it. So for this it is not any good?

[JimDrew]

SCP has an anaylzer so we can check the flux dumps as the whole idea was end-user duplication but Kryoflux was intended for preservation and dumps to be sent off for analysis. It would be great if the SCP software could show the disk layout images (same as AUFIT) as this is the easiest (non-technical) way to identify issues or have some form of report on where the potential issues are in the dump.

Showing the disk layout is likely not going to help from a "preservation" stand point. Much like Aufit, I can pull good data from seemly bad data. The flux window is +/- 47% for my extractor for Amiga .ADF format. I have recovered disks that won't even show a directory. The flux window with a real FDC is typically 10%.

Running a SCP image through HxC or Aufit should give you a good idea of the quality. If you look at Aufit's analyzer, you can see the flux deviation as the 3 "mounds". You want those as skinny as possible (narrow width), which means very little deviation. The reality is that every bitcell should be either 4us, 6us, or 8us. The deviation you see should only come from transitions between different bitcells (4us->8us, 8us->6us, etc.). If you start seeing those mounds exceed 1us in width, then there is a problem with the flux being read. It should be easy enough for DrCoolZic to add a slider to set the DPLL window. This would let you adjust it, and then you would definitely be able to use Aufit for any purpose.

[kodak80]

Thanks for the information Jim. So Brume's Toki dump has some that are approaching 1us wide:

Screenshot 2015-05-28 17.29.39.png

and this indicates a possible problem.

[JimDrew]

Compare that histogram with others from "good" dumps and "bad" dumps and you will get an idea really quick of what to look for. To me, that is the MOST useful part of Aufit. I don't care about decoded data myself (I know you guys do), but I do care about what the flux is doing. I have done this for so long that I can look at SCP's flux display and immediately know if there is an issue with the flux based on how the graphical representation of the the flux looks. You can do the same with Aufit. Those three horizontal bands should be a narrow as possible. When the flux is bad, those bands are really wide (and the histogram will show wide mounds too). I think I will seriously look at adding some type of real time flux information during SCP dumps that provides at very least a simple histogram.

[DrCoolZic]

Hello sorry for the late reply I am travelling and it would have been tough to reply from the boat to Niagara Falls

Several replies explain exactly what's happening. Good or Bad depends on what you are trying to achieve and how you process the data.

If you take a tool like CTA, the goal is to produce an IPF file that contains the exact data that where used to originally create the floppy disk. In order to do that you better work from almost perfect dump data. By design CTA is not very tolerant, for example CTA detects if a disk has been "tempered" (modified on an Atari) and if this is the case it wont let you write the IPF file ...

Current Aufit main goal is to produce images (mainly stx) to be used for emulation. Therefore the only constrain is to verify that we are reading information correctly as this would be done on a real Atari (and even better than on a real Atari). For example on a real Atari the tolerance on MFM transitions is about 10% of the nominal values and there is also automatic read retries performed by the TOS (up to 5 times using so called shoe-shine technique). Without DPLL and retries a large percentage of your floppies wont be read correctly. Aufit has an even more tolerant DPLL and has automatic "read retries" equivalent by reading data from different revolution (one of the good reason o sample at least 5 revolutions -- means 5 retrys).
On top of this main goal Aufit produces different graphs and text outputs that allow to "visualize" the quality of the image, but this interpretation currently has to be done manually by interpreting the outputs (CRC, out of band transitions, histograms, etc...)

To summarize: Current Aufit privileged production of correct stx images rather than perform quality analysis like CTA.
If you want to play a game Aufit should be able to generate correct stx images of relatively bad dumps.
If you want to reproduce a perfect image of the original disk use CTA and produce IPF files but the input quality has to be good.
SCP is in the middle of this two solutions has it just records/writes transitions. So if input transitions are good it will produce a good image but if they are bad it will produce a "not so good" image.

I am thinking of modifying Aufit to try to generate good IPF file from bad input! This should be feasible in many cases has the "layout" for protected and non protected disks are known in most cases... but this is only plans

so good or bad only means something if you define your goal

[JimDrew]

Due to the fact that media is failing due to the passage of time, requiring a disk to be "good" (as viewed by CTA) instead of being "good" via by any means possible, is a disservice to those trying to preserve their collection for later use. There is a substantial difference in recovery when you have the luxury of using any type of data separator window and not being limited to the 10% tolerance of the original hardware.