Search found 5 matches

by daniel3
14 Apr 2021, 17:15
Forum: File recovery
Topic: QPhotoRec stays reading sectors; is it done?
Replies: 7
Views: 26959

Re: QPhotoRec stays reading sectors; is it done?

Update 2: The problem was probably on my part on the second run. I changed the drive letter of the image file. After changing the drive letter back to the original position and starting it a third time the problem was fixed. The run was now finished within a day. Thanks for the help!
by daniel3
11 Apr 2021, 09:53
Forum: File recovery
Topic: QPhotoRec stays reading sectors; is it done?
Replies: 7
Views: 26959

Re: QPhotoRec stays reading sectors; is it done?

Update: It looks like PhotoRec started from the beginning although I ticked the option that it should continue. The photorec.ses file is now 1.2MB in size, where the old one was 33MB. When I scan the recovered files they look doubled from what was found earlier.
by daniel3
10 Apr 2021, 14:32
Forum: File recovery
Topic: QPhotoRec stays reading sectors; is it done?
Replies: 7
Views: 26959

Re: QPhotoRec stays reading sectors; is it done?

Thanks!

I downloaded the new version and it's resuming the previous recovery as we speak. I'll keep you posted :)!
by daniel3
09 Apr 2021, 11:03
Forum: File recovery
Topic: QPhotoRec stays reading sectors; is it done?
Replies: 7
Views: 26959

Re: QPhotoRec stays reading sectors; is it done?

recuperation wrote: 09 Apr 2021, 10:57 Have you enabled "brute force mode"?
Which version are you using?
I'm using QPhotoRec 7.2-WIP.

Is there a way to see if I used ''brute force mode"?
by daniel3
09 Apr 2021, 10:27
Forum: File recovery
Topic: QPhotoRec stays reading sectors; is it done?
Replies: 7
Views: 26959

QPhotoRec stays reading sectors; is it done?

Hi All,

I try to recover data from an 1TB HDD where someone accidentally deleted a huge load of photo's. I cloned the HDD and now I'm trying to restore the data using QPhotoRec 7.2. It's running for almost a month now and it found quite a lot of files: 224499 files to be exact. But that number was ...