slow or fast HDD format?

[wideangle]

Got myself a new 1TB HDD to move my years of photographs over too, but was wondering if I should do a fast or slow format of the new drive, taking into account it would take around 5 hours to format it slowly. If there is an advantage of doing a slow one then I will do it.

[joffa]

There's no difference mate, just do the quick one. It'll work fine.

[bigbikes]

I have always only ever done a fast format on my new h/drives and never had a problem. I have no idea what advantage doing a slow format has, but I'm sure there would be a reason for it.

[joffa]

All it does is erase all the data on your disk and replaces it with 0's. Whereas a quick format just writes a new File Allocation Table etc and doesn't do anything to the rest of the disk.

[wideangle]

All it does is erase all the data on your disk and replaces it with 0's. Whereas a quick format just writes a new File Allocation Table etc and doesn't do anything to the rest of the disk.

So that would mean you would probably be better off doing a slow format on a used HDD to totally clean the slate, whereas with a new drive that is brand spanking new then the quick format it the go.....

[joffa]

Well not really, it really doesn't make much difference I don't think. Unless you have something on there that you don't want to be recoverable by anyone.

If that's the case do a full format, but otherwise both give the same end result. You just save yourself a few hours of waiting.

[Kym]

Fast! It was done in test/burn in in the factory. Plus slow does not do any error checking.

[pgbphotographytas]

if the drive is brand new just do a fast and start using it

[Tannin]

Slow format is good where you have any reason to suspect the drive. Otherwise quick.