my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Freddy vs Jason Anti-Piracy Measures (Page 3)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Freddy vs Jason Anti-Piracy Measures John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 09-02-2003 01:36 PM                        The size of the tiny dots on the CAP Code Kodak developed in the early 1980's was only about 30 microns (0.03 millimeters) in diameter, and never in the same location in the image. You really had to be looking for them to see them on the screen, but our friends in the FBI and MPAA were pretty good at finding them in pirated videos, and verifying and decoding them.  |  IP: Logged Jim Leko Film Handler Posts: 90 From: Redondo Beach, CA, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 09-03-2003 06:06 PM                     I have seen the codes in a few prints, but nothing was as bad as Freddy vs Jason. I remember seeing it about 5 times in as many minutes. One time the dots appeared RIGHT ON FREDDY'S FACE. It wasn't a close up shot (his head was only taking up a small portion of the screen), and it was the one part of the screen that everybody was looking at. I understand the need for anti piracy measures, but this is just leading to poor presentation. I am hoping this will not ruin my upcoming LoTR Marathon experience. The Lord of the Rings Trilogy to be shown in theaters this December  |  IP: Logged Chris Hipp Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1462 From: Mesquite, Tx (east of Dallas) Registered: Jul 2003 posted 09-05-2003 03:14 AM                     I noticed it on reel 4 of Dickie Roberts tonight. I saw it about 12 times, but it was probably on there more that I didnt catch.  |  IP: Logged Jim Leko Film Handler Posts: 90 From: Redondo Beach, CA, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 09-05-2003 04:43 AM                     I saw it about 3 times on Dickie Roberts. It wasn't very obtrusive. Nothing like Freddy vs Jason.  |  IP: Logged Thomas Procyk Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1842 From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 09-05-2003 08:49 AM                     I noticed them pretty bad for the first time on X2. I believe it was Reel 2 or 4, and there was a lot of white area in many of the scenes. There they were, "bloop, bloop, bloop" If I didn't know they were CAP code, I would think there was something wrong with the print or it was dirty. The industry is shooting themselves in the foot. This logic of, "Let's mess up the print so that no one will want to copy it" is stupid. As if Digital and DVD needed one MORE thing going for them... "Yeah, but on FILM you see those little brown and red dots everywhere, and those big ones in the corner every 20 minutes, and those little black ones all over the place...." =TMP=  |  IP: Logged Jeff Klump Film Handler Posts: 22 From: Austin, Texas, USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 09-05-2003 04:29 PM                    The piracy measures are back again in "The Order". When will the insanity stop?  |  IP: Logged Jim Leko Film Handler Posts: 90 From: Redondo Beach, CA, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 09-06-2003 01:06 AM                     Where is the best place to fire off an email complaining about this? I know it won't do any good, but I am going to do it anyway.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 09-06-2003 04:35 AM                        Tom is right, quote: The industry is shooting themselves in the foot. This logic of, "Let's mess up the print so that no one will want to copy it" is stupid. As if Digital and DVD needed one MORE thing going for them... . It would be like the Movado watch company putting scratch patterns on their watches or Levi's putting a pattern of tears in their jeans to prevent knockoffs. It's a stupid idea and it's driven by a stupid compulsion that's perpetuated by 1) an old man who needs to prove to everyone that he is doing something to merit the money they pay him and the relevance of the organization he heads, namely the MPAA 2) this peculiar Hollywood ego thing where everyone there thinks the movie they just made is soooooo hot that all 50 million people who own camcorders will risk breaking federal law and FBI warnings plus incur a $100,000 fine/10 years in jail to steal movies....movies, one might point out, that before you can say, "Ahrrr, me mate-ies, 'tis a pirate's life," are out on DVD for $12.99....$9.99 in the bargain bin, which is less than the price of a ticket, coke and popcorn. 3) "movie pirate" stories are floated to the media over and over because it makes it seem like there is such an insatiable demand to see a movie that staggering numbers of people are willing to pay $10 to see a street copy made so poorly that it's akin to watching TV with bad rabbit ears in the midtown of Manhattan. Truth is, the studio people, because they are never quite sure what is reality and what is a movie script, have actually come to believe this myth that piracy will bring their industry to its knees, and like someone struck with a mental illness, cannot stop obsessing about this non-reality. It also is a convenient way of shifting blame away from some of the awful crap that's churned out of that town. This process allows everyone in the credit crawl to believe that the reason their picture, say one like GIGLI, did not make any money was....piracy -- not that the picture sucked, but PIRACY; all those people buying pirated copies instead of buying tickets. Ah, to be a shrink in that town. Frank  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 09-06-2003 06:31 AM                        Anti-piracy coding of prints has been very effective in tracking film piracy, often leading to the arrest and conviction of those involved. But I agree that the "watermarking" must be unobtrusive, and not obvious or easy to find.  |  IP: Logged Thomas Procyk Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1842 From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 09-08-2003 01:09 AM                     John, I'm just wondering to what degree these "very effective" methods have been in capturing the true film pirates. The ones with duplicating machines and printed boxes, ones that are selling the bootlegs to generate a profit. Not just the occasional "Bob with a videocamera" or "Jimmy downloading from KaZZa" people. You never hear about the big raids on the news. There aren't people with thousands of copies of Return Of The King waiting to be shipped. You just get the occasional guy selling the usual garbage on the street corner, and those dumb enough to buy it. Or some lonely teenager who took the time to obtain a copy, sit there and encode it on his computer, then compress it ten times over just to earn prestige in some chat network, and those dumb enough to download it. And what do these stupid little dots all over the picture do anyway? So the "authorities" obtain a bootleg copy of a movie and watch it for the CAP code. Okay, so now they know they are watching a bootleg from print 3699 from the Local Multiplex. Then what? Arrest the management? Attempt to track down the patron who taped the movie two weeks ago? Tie up the projectionist with polyestar film? I fail to see what exactly we're "tracking" here... At least the coded numbers that pop up on Studio Screener tapes mean something. (Hint Hint) Film piracy is as much of a threat now as software piracy was in the 80s and 90s. And the owner of a software company is now the richest man in the world. 'Nuff said. =TMP=  |  IP: Logged Dominic Case Expert Film Handler Posts: 131 From: Sydney NSW Australia Registered: Aug 2003 posted 09-08-2003 06:32 AM                       CAP coding is put on by the labs, at the studios' request. The different labs have various (more or less similar) techniques, but the main problem is to make uniquely recognisable patterns that are robust enough to survive poor video, and, more importantly, high levels of compression, and yet not too obtrusive to the viewing public. Oh - and fitting the process into the already hopelessly short time allowed to get all the prints made:-( Every single copy of a feature is coded - there are no exceptions for trial prints, check prints, show prints or any other prints - in particular it's those early prints that seem to be the subject of pirate copying, so it would defeat the object if they weren't coded. So, there's no point in sending coded reels back for replacement. If you don't like the coding, or don't think it has any purpose, don't complain to the lab - get on to the distributor or the studio.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 09-08-2003 10:30 AM                        quote: If you don't like the coding, or don't think it has any purpose, don't complain to the lab - get on to the distributor or the studio. YES YES, I blame the studio! Now we're talkin turkey! And Dominic also said: quote: but the main problem is to make uniquely recognisable patterns that are robust enough to survive poor video That's the point. This is sheer lunacy -- sheer,boadering on gossamer. They are ruining the presentation for ALL movie-goers based on the idea that a poor camcoder video copy is somehow going to bilk them of millions. It's a MYTH. Will a guy in a trech coat videotaping a movie in the theatre loose some money for them, possibly; will it be financially devestating to the profit line on that film? Come on. The bozos who will watch the result of that kind of copying probably so fringe that they wouldn't have payed to see it in the first place. And if the studios are claiming that the copying is being done in the theatre with more sophistocated equipment, then they are implying that a whole group of industry people have to be in on a conspiricy because you can't simply spirit away a 35mm telecine in your back pocket. It would be a piece of equipment that would be seen by lots of people, and most of them who are involved with the industry would have at least a marginal understanding of piracy....especially now with those very informative anti-piracy spots they play (there's no smiley face for sarcasm, or it would go here.) It's a LOT of trouble to make a good transfer and why would anyone do that? How much money could they possibly expect to return? I'll bet more money is lost by unscrupulous exhibitors who skim off the top. It's much less trouble to do that than set up a telecine and a distribution network to sell the stuff. Sorry, IMHO, the argument that big, fat, VISIBLE CAP codes placed 7 and 8 times in one reel of a film are necessary to stop piracy is unconvincing. The studio has every right to protect its property, but not at the expense of the movie-going public who are PAYING to see the film. They are not the theives -- they are the GOOD guys and they deserve better than to have there film experience marred by a badly conceived security system. The original idea may have been a good one and the miniscule 30 micron CAP that Kodak designed might very well have been practically invisible, but the thing on FREDDY is as big as a feakin SUV. I say, get 'em out of the prints! And last point. How serious can the industry be about anti-piracy when almost on a daily basis I see guys with suitecases of knockoff videos selling them on the street corner in Brooklyn? Go after THEM. Find out where they get their stuff and you'll find the priates. But don't ruin the theatrical presentation for the ticket buying public. BTW, does anyone know who you report those vendors to? I called the police once but they seemed to only be concerned with the fact that the guy didn't have a vendor license. They just shoed him away. Frank  |  IP: Logged Jim Leko Film Handler Posts: 90 From: Redondo Beach, CA, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 09-08-2003 04:20 PM                     I have already sent an email to webmaster@newline.com, explaining how bad my Freddy vs. Jason experience was. Now, I wonder if they will CAP code the two extended editions of Lord of The Rings, when they are released in theaters this Xmas. After all, at that time, they will both be available on DVD, and there will be no reason to copy them with a Video camera.  |  IP: Logged Thomas Procyk Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1842 From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 09-08-2003 11:37 PM                     There you go! They should release ALL movies on DVD first, before they go to theaters. That way, since they will already be on DVD, no one will want to copy them from the theater. Piracy will be stopped dead in its tracks! =TMP=  |  IP: Logged Jim Leko Film Handler Posts: 90 From: Redondo Beach, CA, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 09-09-2003 03:12 AM                     If you let congress decide, that might happen  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.