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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » MPAA, you suck! (Page 7)

This topic comprises 19 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  ...  17  18  19

Author Topic: MPAA, you suck! John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 10-06-2003 01:15 PM                     So, Ebert published Steve K.'s letter in the Sunday's Chicago Sun-Times, and it got slashdotted as MPAA Ruins Own Films as Anti-Piracy Measure this afternoon. 395 comments and following. --jhawk [ Edit: sun-times link removed, you can find it in the slashdot post.] [ 10-06-2003, 02:56 PM: Message edited by: John Hawkinson ]  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 10-06-2003 02:22 PM                     Provide the text to the news article with credit, John. Those news links do not last forever. Check the FAQ. (Slashdot is not included, as it is not a news site.)  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-06-2003 03:23 PM                        Here's the full text as published in Roger Ebert's Movie Answer Man, which is located at http://www.suntimes.com/index/ebert.html. Q. Have you been seeing spots when you go to the movies? It may not be your eyes! More than 20 years ago Kodak devised a system called "Cap Code" designed to uniquely mark film prints so that pirated copies could be traced to the source. Cap Code uses very tiny dots that flash occasionally but are so small that the average viewer almost never notices them. Well, something new and horrible has been introduced on some studios' prints. Sort of a giant picture-marring version of Cap Code dots: Very large reddish brown spots that flash in the middle of the picture, usually placed in a light area. They flash in various patterns throughout a given reel while other reels of the same film may have none at all. A Kodak spokesman who helped devise the original Cap Code says this is not the work of his company but theorizes that it may be intended to be more visible on the murky compressed copies that get posted to the Internet where the original, very subtle Cap Code may be difficult to discern. On one movie technical forum they are referring to this new system as "Crap Code" or "Cap Code on Steroids." There are reports coming in of viewers complaining of the spots on the pictures. While theaters strive to keep prints free of dirt and scratches, Hollywood starts sending out prints with built-in marring. Among the films known to be afflicted are "Ali," "Behind Enemy Lines," "28 Days Later" "Freddy vs. Jason" and "Underworld," probably many others as well. Steve Kraus, Chicago A. You're the expert projectionist at our Chicago critics' screening room, with a fierce love of high-quality film, so I can imagine how upset you are. What's amusing about Crap Code and the other efforts to catch pirates is that most of the thieves are apparently industry insiders. A recent news story says studios may even be discouraged from distributing advance DVDs of their Oscar contenders to academy members, because some of these movies quickly find their way to the Web.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 10-06-2003 04:11 PM                     quote: [ Edit: sun-times link removed, you can find it in the slashdot post.] [ 10-06-2003, 02:56 PM: Message edited by: John Hawkinson ] It is not acceptable to dodge the forum rules. While you could claim that you had not read the updated policy in the FAQ that was posted a few weeks ago in your initial post, your edited version (which was edited before Mike posted the article) was an intentional effort to disregard forum policies. Read the FAQ for your two options regarding news articles. Next offense will be your removal. No further discussion.  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 10-07-2003 09:35 AM                    Let us not fret the details. Crapcode has now acquired the permanence of ink & paper publication!  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-07-2003 12:47 PM                        Yes, and from Roger Ebert, no less. Can a mention on "Ebert and Roeper" be far behind? Somebody needs to get an image of a movie frame featuring Crap Code and get it to Ebert.  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 10-07-2003 06:22 PM                    He's seen the samples that have been posted on this site. In fact I have them posted outside the screening room.  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 10-07-2003 06:28 PM                     While those codes are very obvious, the truth is a lot of customers don't care about them. YOu know why. A lot of theater mess up the prints far worse than a couple of seconds of these spots. I had to watch Signs at a new Regal theater with a green line right down the middle. Incorrect framing, cheating on the aspect ratio, holes in the screens, improper focus are all higher priorities.  |  IP: Logged Jesse Skeen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1517 From: Sacramento, CA Registered: Aug 2000 posted 10-09-2003 12:12 AM                     A little off topic, but why aren't there this many complaints about how they now put logos on EVERY frame of TV shows? I quit watching TV when that practice started. I first noticed those dots on prints a couple years ago, and I thought they were due to a lab screw-up or something like that. I'd never have guessed that they were put there deliberately. Good thing some people are at least taking notice of this.  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 10-09-2003 12:38 AM                        Nobody complains about on screen logos, because (a) they're no worse than the crap that's on televison and (b) this isn't the TV watcher's forum. quote: I first noticed those dots on prints a couple years ago We're not talking about Kodak's CAP code, we're talking about Deluxe's new CRAP code.  |  IP: Logged Chris Hipp Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1462 From: Mesquite, Tx (east of Dallas) Registered: Jul 2003 posted 10-09-2003 01:08 AM                     I've never noticed the real CAP code, are there any pictures available?  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 10-09-2003 08:45 AM                        Chris Hipp wrote: quote: I've never noticed the real CAP code, are there any pictures available? In May 2000, "Carl Welles" started a thread with a photo of the original CAP Code developed by Kodak for the MPAA in 1982: Original CAP Code Developed by Kodak The speculation about the details of the coding method was incorrect, but the photo is an accurate representation of the original code when it is printed with the optional edge numbers. The position in each frame is deliberately random, and the very small dots allowed it to be repeated hundreds of times in a movie. It took almost twenty years for people like "Carl Welles" to actually find the CAP Code, although the MPAA had been using it to track down sources of film piracy since 1982.  |  IP: Logged Richard Fowler Film God Posts: 2392 From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA Registered: Jun 2001 posted 10-09-2003 09:36 AM                     I went to see Underworld last night. The CAP code was very obvious and distracting since the huge bright orange dots did not match the desaturated steel gray / blue color pallete of the cinematography. At first I thought my eyesight was acting up again but after more than 15 - 20 flashes it was killing the enjoyment of the storyline.  |  IP: Logged Chris Hipp Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1462 From: Mesquite, Tx (east of Dallas) Registered: Jul 2003 posted 10-10-2003 04:24 AM                     I thought it was magnificent planning on whoever's part to place these stupid dots in the black and white sequence in kill bill. But I guess that is the idea, make it as obvious as possible. Maybe this is in the thread somewhere but I havent had time to read it all, but d you guys think the directors/producers are aware of this? Tarrintino doesn't seem like someone that would appreciate this mutilation of his work. I'm sure George Lucas will be delighted to see it on Episode III.  |  IP: Logged Jarred Olsen Film Handler Posts: 19 From: Hanford, CA, USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 10-11-2003 04:24 AM                     I think the MPAA is on the right road to getting rid of piracy altogether. If they increase the number of Code dots, it would look so ugly nobody would want to pirate it!  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 19 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  ...  17  18  19

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.