Create Full backup not linked to previous backups

If you have manually deleted a backup file and then get a warning as in the attached pic then clicking Ignore This Version will delete it from the database and it won't appear again. If you have manually moved the file then use the Browse button to locate it.

When restoring disk or partition image files it is usually advisable to boot to the rescue disk and do it from there.

John,
Let's take a step backwards before we begin.

If you should need to restore your system to its old or a new disk, the recovery should be done when booted from the Recovery CD--either the same version which created the backup or a CD from a newer release.

Therefore, it is important that you test the CD to make sure your hardware and disks are recognized--now before there is a crisis.

Many user feel that a backup created when booted from the TI Recovery CD has a better chance or fewer issues as compared to one created within Windows.

Here is a link showing one method (many available) of creating the backup from either from within Windows or when booted from the CD.

True Image 2013 by Acronis Creating a Backup Without a Schedule--within Windows (Acronis KB bulletin)
http://kb.acronis.com/content/37574

Using the TI Recovery CD to make the backup--also applicable to 2010-2013 (One of my guides)
http://forum.acronis.com/sites/default/files/mvp/user285/guides/2010-ti…

Windows 7, Windows 8 (and Vista) now include hidden partitions which may be boot partitions or recovery partitions. As a result, if you backup only the Drive C, the backup may be incomplete and a restore to be not bootable.

For the best chance for a troublefree Recovey, many of us recommend that your backup should include All partitions including any hidden partitions. This is best accomplished by

A. If within Windows, check "disk mode" so it is the disk which includes all partions listed and all partitions will be included within the backup.

B. If booted within the TI CD, check mark the "disk" option which will cause all partitions to be also checked and all included within the backup. This is illustrated in the PDF link above.

I personally use both Windowws and the TI Recovery CD to make an assortment of backup and all my backups are "disk mode" or "disk image" backups so all my restores are capable of creating a replacement disk. I use both scheduled and non-scheduled backups to a variety of storage locations. All backups are validated as time of their creation (validation option checked).

Thanks so much for your responses.

was Earthling: I shall need to wait until the situation arises again, but my memory (such as it is) tells me that after "ignoring" a backup I have deleted the one I want to restore will not because Acronis says it is part of a set or series and without all of the backups, one cannot be used. Hence my objective to create a truly discrete backup file not in any way attached to any other.

GroverH: thanks for your cautious counsel. I did indicate I have a recovery disk; this was created only for the disaster situation of not being able to run Windows (8, 64 bit) and then Acronis. In the past, earlier versions perhaps, or by coincidence restoring a backup that was the only one created on those settings, I was able to initiate the restore simply and easily from the program and the CD was not needed. All of your other points have already been addressed or are part of my routine.
After creating and running a backup of my entire first disk, the backup is created. Later, using the entry for that backup in Acronis, I run it again. The setting is for a Full backup, but my current issue is that it gets linked as part of a series with the first one. As far as I can see, there is no option to delete a version of a full whole disk backup so that Acronis is happy that it no longer exists; there is such an option for differential (and probably incremental too) and I use that. The only option I can see for deleting a old unwanted full backup is to delete it using Windows Explorer - and that brings me back to the beginning.

Sorry John, I took "I create a full disk backup at least each month. Sometimes I want to keep one as a special reference point so I move it to another folder perhaps on another disk. If I have backups that I feel are no longer needed, I delete them." to mean that you were using the single version scheme. However it seems that you were actually using an incremental scheme.

All you need to do is to create your backup scheme defaults using Single Version Scheme. If you want more than a single backup (I do two a month) then you can add a suffix to the filename, A, B etc.

Whether you choose a full disk backup or partition backup is a matter of choice, heavily influenced by how you have arranged your partitions and what they contain. I use partition backups rather than full disk and have never had a failed boot after a restore of the OS.

John Smith wrote:

I would really appreciate help on this: how can I create a full disk backup, my whole C:\ drive in such a way that it is completely unconnected to any other backup? I want to be able to move it and restore it later from wherever it happens to be. I do not want it connected to any previous backup in any way.

First, the other fellows responding are much more experienced and way sharper than me. Both of them just finished shepherding me thru a failed recover and they were both very patient and helpful. However I have ran Acronis for quite a few years (off and on) but far as actually restoring from a disc backup, I've only done that a very few times (some long ago and one Most recently finally getting thru it only yesterday).

Back on your questions, here is how I keep a series of full backups... sounds like I have a sort of system much like yours... keep certain 'hallmark' backups longer than others for rollback.

I just make each backup to a different directory... not using any of the list ATI has created of my previous backups... in fact I prune that list when ever it gets more than a few on it.

Then when you tell ATI 'full' or 'incremental'... you will get a full backup. Since you've created a new directory and file name. It will not depend on any previous backups

(I was very discouraged; after long absence from ati use, I get 2013 and see how difficult it has become to do something as normal as naming the backup my way but still it can be done)

My system looks like:
S:\bak\acronis\host\sata1.0.1-C&BootPart_DATE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . \ [...] similar names for each disc
. . . . . . . . . . . .\host2\disc-whatever_DATE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\disc [...] bleh-DATE
[...] and so on, for the several hosts I run.
The bit with the numbers in naming discs works like this NAMEnum.num.num-Drive_DATE Where
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sata1.......0.......1-DRV_DATE
Sata1 (means first SATAdisc) .0 (first partition) .1 (second partition)-C drivename -DATE
So the name tells me it a combined backup of partion 0 and partion 1
Gack, I'm getting all tangled up in the naming.... all that is important is that it be a new clean directory
Again the big thing, of course, is not the naming, but starting a new backup in a new directory. That alone will make ATI give you a full backup each time.

I've never automated since seems there's always some reason to do it yourself.

was Earthling: At first sight the Single Version Scheme you mention is the way, but I cannot see it as an option in True Image 2013. I see only Full - which I am using - Incremental and Differential. I did a search and see that Single Version Scheme (if I could find it) overwrites the previous version. That's not what I am after; I want control over which images are kept and which are deleted. You are quite right about the disk/partition choice, it makes no difference to this particular issue. In fact I have used both where appropriate.

Harry: Thanks for the term "hallmark backup" - that is precisely my objective, spot on. Indeed your approach is very close to what I used to do. Your comments are encouraging when you say that 2013 has made life more difficult in some respects. I began to think I had lost it but I was sure I used to be able to do what I want.

Thanks for the information on your naming convention. This sort of thing is always useful - it sparks ideas that be can be adapted.

I was aware that I could achieve what I need by in effect creating each new image from scratch, in your case by manually specifying a new destination. When I open the program I see my full image backup listed and the tantalising button marked "Back up now". Why can't I just click that and get another image, without it being tied to the previous so called versions?

John, I've attached a pic of where you select the Single Version Scheme. When you create a backup task it defaults to Incremental, but clicking on the Incremental gives you the choice of Incremental, Full or Differential, and clicking Incremental Scheme in the dropdown at the top of box gives you the five schemes.

I just attach a suffix to the filename each time so each backup is standalone, can all be kept in the same folder, and any can be deleted at any time.

First of all, thanks for giving me another option! Please forgive me for not connecting with this; sometimes a concept just will not stick and I appear stupid.

I did as you suggest and created a whole new backup, specifying Single Version as the method. Then I changed the settings for that backup by adding a date to the end of the backup name. The new name appeared in the list of backups. When I ran it, however, it over-wrote the first one. I guess I am not correctly changing the filename; exactly where and how do you "attach a suffix" so that the backup is unique, stand alone and can be deleted later without causing this version missing error?

Sorry - just made another unsuccessful trial and thought I might be better off asking a slightly different question: when I have made a few full backups from one backup task, how can I delete some of the backup versions without causing a "version not found" error?

With a file backup set, it is possible to click Recover and then from the resulting box select and delete unwanted versions. There does not seem to be away to do the equivalent for disk or partition backups.

Found it at last! Thank you, was Earthling, for stimulating the few remaining brain cells and allowing me to get there in the end. The option to delete a version of a whole disk backup is there, but not where a normal person would look for it. In case anybody else would like to know, here's where to find it, but bear in mind the objective is to DELETE a version of the whole disk backup:

Against the backup listed in Backup and Recovery, click the cog wheel on the right, then select RECOVER FILES (that is doubly contrary to what you want to do: Delete not Recover and whole backup not Files, but go with it).

At the bottom is a bar showing the versions of the full backup.

Right click the one you want to delete and then, at last, is a sensible option with Delete in its name.

Now the backup is gone and you can later recover a whole image without Acrionis complaining that a version is missing. It does seem to be a rather scruffy bit of presentation instead of a simple elegant "Create Single Version - no strings attached" or having Acronis recognise that if one part of a chain is missing it should offer the next best thing (or version), not just give up in a sulk.

I have been looking at the free version of Macrium Reflect as a possible alternative and it doesn't sulk if a backup file has been deleted; it just lists what you have and allows you to use them as you wish - free as well...

Let's hope that this is read by someone who can make the simple improvement.

Thanks again for the positive feedback.

John, I've commented somewhere else here that the Acronis UI is confusing and that competing products are better designed, and to anyone who has tried other imaging programs that must be pretty obvious. I stay with Acronis only because in Lord knows how many years/recoveries it has never once failed me. But the UI is pretty dire and doesn't get any better from one version to the next. In fact imo it has got a lot worse in recent years.

Anyway, pleased you have found the solution now to your original question :-)

John, you might want to think about a rather less complicated way of creating and being able to selectively delete versions of disk and/or partition backups.

The default settings I use are for Single Version Scheme, validated when created, so each time a backup is run the previous version is automatically deleted, but in order to always have more than one version available I create three separate tasks, so Win_7_A, Win_7_B, and Win_7_C are separate but identical tasks. This way I always have three freestanding sequential validated versions of the backup which can all be kept in the same folder and don't require any thinking about at all. This is about as simple as it can get and works really well in practice.

How very kind of you to take this interest. I can see that the only way I can have a backup unconnected with others is to do as you suggest and set up and create one each time I want a "hallmark" backup (thanks to Harry for that name). This is irksome, taking up more time and effort than should be necessary.

The alternative is to let one become isolated such that Acronis won't restore it without booting from a CD - too uncertain given that the program regards it as incomplete and sneaking up behind a program when so much might be at stake does not sit comfortably with me.

As a result, I have decided to wait until the 2013 version is replaced and then I shall abandon Acronis; that will the signal to pay for the full version of Macrium Reflect. The free version already enables me to make a hallmark backup, or a monthly one or indeed any time I wish, with a simple double click on the definition file.

Thanks to you and Harry for your positive and ultimately helpful input.

All I would do if there is a particular backup I want to retain is copy it to a different folder and rename it. But old backups are worse than useless imo so the only times I have ever done that are just after installing and activating a new version of Windows.

I do not trust Macrium. I had a failed restore when I tested it and there are far too many reports of failure from others.

John Smith wrote:

The alternative is to let one become isolated such that Acronis won't restore it without booting from a CD

Avoidance of using the Rescue Media should not form the basis of your method. In fact, all restores should be performed from the bootable Rescue Media anyway.

You can easily create stand-alone backups that aren't in any chain with any other backups. Just create them in a separate folder from your regular scheduled backups. I keep many such stand-alone full disk backups. I create them at milestones such as after a clean install of Windows, after installing major software packages, prior to testing new software packages, etc. Such unscheduled backups may also be created by the Rescue Media.

tuttle: I disagree that using the rescue CD should be the preferred way to restore an image. For years I have been free to experiment with my computer knowing that I could simply open Acronis, select an image and click Restore (as I can with Reflect). I have successfully avoided the unnecessary use of the rescue disk except in the very rare case of not being able to run Windows (sometimes my experimentation is quite deep). This is the way that the program is designed to be used. Rescue disks are for emergency situations. Their use on a normal basis adds needless complication and is to be avoided.

I disagree that one can easily create stand-alone backups that aren't in a chain. Existing settings cannot be used, they have to be discarded and recreated all over again else the image will be linked to another. It used to be possible to store just one image, perhaps after a major installation or similar, and use it for restoration later.

The creation of a full disk or partition image should be a matter of no more than a couple of clicks, once the detailed settings have been created (as it is in Reflect and as it used to be in Acronis). Such an image should be created in the format that the customer chooses and not forcibly linked to others. If you think about it, this behaviour is bizarre; only incremental or differential backups need to be linked. The logic that a full ("complete in extent or degree and in every particular") image is somehow dependant on another is faulty; there can be no reason why such a backup is not always a unique, independent entity.

As others have indicated, Acronis is more and more displaying strange policies of how things should be and instead of them being offered as options are being foisted upon us as dogma. Again, why does a FULL image need any other image to support it?

John,

Where a disk contains the OS it is always preferable to restore that image 'off line' so to speak. Generally speaking there are two ways one is by using the Windows PE environment and the other is using a Linux based environment. Acronis default to a Linux based environment due to licensing restrictions in using Windows PE by a commercial company.

Booting from either a CD/USB external drive/flash stick and restoring from within that environment has the advantage that Windows itself has not locked disk access or memory locations, has no services running that on a warm reboot may still be held in RAM.

Restoring a non OS disk or partition can be done from within Windows with little likelihood of Windows interfering with the restore, as I said this may not be the case when trying to restore the OS partition(s).

With Acronis and similar products, even if you start in Windows they reboot into a Windows booted Linux environment, this is where potential problems occur.

John Smith wrote:

tuttle: I disagree that using the rescue CD should be the preferred way to restore an image.

Well, three MVPs and another user have all told you that the safest way is to use the Rescue Media. You requested advice and we've given you the best answer. You're free to do as you wish.

Please don't be so intent on changing my behaviour. The determination to persuade me to always restore from a CD makes me feel that those who postulate that approach are not confident in the product. Convince me that you have lobbied Acronis to have the option to restore from the program removed because it is unsafe.

I have not indicated that I want safety, but elegantly simple and effective operation. I am a user, not a technical advisor; our motivations are different.

I would appreciate your view on the logic regarding the enforced linking of full backups; you will have carefully read my question on the subject. It is at the heart of the original issue, of which I have not lost sight. I am optimistic that a solution will emerge from a discovery of an obscure route to an option to provide what is logical. I suspect the unwanted and unnecessary linking is an unchecked carry-over from some settings relating to other forms of backup and never intended to be there.

This will not be the first time that a minority voice might be correct. The fact that it is a minority has no bearing on its validity.

John Smith wrote:

Please don't be so intent on changing my behaviour.

I have no interest in changing your behaviour. I don't care what you do. You asked for advice, and I gave it, the same good advice that we give to all users. You're free to do as you choose, makes no difference to me.

Oh come now, you really do care or you would not have been so intent on changing my behaviour to match what you believe to be right.

You have forgotten to answer my request for your opinion on linking full backups. I meant it when I said I would appreciate your view.

John Smith wrote:

Oh come now, you really do care or you would not have been so intent on changing my behaviour to match what you believe to be right.

I've already said it doesn't matter to me. I often correct misinformation not to influence the poster but for benefit of other readers. If you choose to disbelieve my statements, there's no point in further discussion.

John Smith wrote:

You have forgotten to answer my request for your opinion on linking full backups. I meant it when I said I would appreciate your view.

You've made it clear you don't value my/our opinions, so I'll leave it there.

And, there's little point in me belabouring a discussion about functionality that I would like changed. I make my suggestions regarding product improvements directly to Acronis staff. My forum posts are focused on answering questions and assisting users with advice on how best to use the software in its current state.

I am sad that you can be so sensitive. I am hurt that you do not care and upset that my problem does not matter to you. I hope that others who may know of a simple and elegant way for me to make an unconnected image will not join you in shunning me.

I am now afraid to ask any other questions on this forum for fear of your response. I do hope that you have not frightened any other users away.

When you entered the discussion you instructed me to operate Acronis in a different way. You were quite assertive in your tone, almost to the point of pontification. That stimulated a touch of irony in the tone of my response which you unfortunately missed. It was meant to indicate "Whoa back, hang on, I have a point of view too, you know". I am sorry it led to your eventual sulk. Please compare my tone to you with my tone to others who tried to help; it should tell you something.

I shall understand that you will not reply any more.

Good lord, do you read your own posts? You admonish me for trying to change your behaviour, you continue to accuse me of such. When I say that you can do what you want, then you pretend to be hurt by that? Your passive-aggressiveness is bizarre, and probably just a ruse to get a rise out of me. You seem to be more interested in needling the helpers than having a genuine discussion.

You ascribe emotions to my discussion that are not present. I give best advice and hope that most users follow it so as to avoid problems, but why would it matter to me if you as a single user follow it or not? Keep restoring from within Windows - if it works for you, great. I recommend the Rescue Media because that will avoid issues caused by Windows, so is safest for most users.

The key statement from me that you seem to take most offence to was: "all restores should be performed from the bootable Rescue Media anyway". I stand by that. If you think that is preaching, so be it.

I have no doubt you have a point of view, as do other users, obviously they would. But when you ask for help here, naturally you'll receive our opinion. They are only our opinions, based on years of experience and assisting thousands of users. You're free to ignore them, but then to pretend to be offended by my disinterest in changing your behaviour is just churlish.

John, I thought we had dealt with this issue of backups being linked when we looked at using Single Version Scheme earlier. There is no linking of backup versions with that so all that is required is to set that as your default backup scheme.

I believe this whole debate can be safely ascribed to the badly designed user interface. The program itself is the best and the safest to use imo.

was Earthling: Yes indeed, you are quite right. I have followed your suggestion about a Single Version scheme, as I indicated on 22 August, and I have changed my routine to largely match what you said.

Initially I was confused by your comment regarding the message "Ignore this Warning" because it didn't work. What I discovered is that my installation of Acronis True Image must have been corrupted. I did a thorough uninstall using Revo Uninstaller and reinstalled it. After the fresh installation that option did work as it should and as you described. I must thank you again for your patient guidance.

A problem is bad enough and a bug is bad enough, but a bug inside a problem is too much! I also agree with your view about the badly designed user interface.

tuttle: I have taken your advice and read my posts again. I used a technique I learnt from my Total Quality days and isolated all the exchanges that did not include yours or my replies to you. What I was left with was a genuine discussion that was pleasant and ultimately helpful during which I learned a lot and after which I was better off than before. I would rate the total exchange as successful in addressing the original problem. Do please try that yourself and I feel sure you will agree.

Then I evaluated just those posts made by you and my replies to them. In my very first post I had said "I think I could restore from such a backup if I booted my PC from the recovery disk, but that's not really the point." But you decided that was the point that you wanted to deal with.

Other participants guided, you instructed. I did disagree with you a little but with tongue firmly in cheek, I chose to disagree with you adopting the dogmatic attitude that you yourself had used, hoping you might take the hint and consider my view a little. After your petulant reply yes, I confess, I did cast out the bait to see if you would rise to it. And you did.

I remember once, an age ago, playing a large pike on very light tackle that could never have landed it. To my relief, it closed its mouth on the line, severing it and ending the interaction. There is a lesson to be learned from that pike...