Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: The Single Worst Use of CAP Code, Ever: A Rant

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » The Single Worst Use of CAP Code, Ever: A Rant (Page 3)

This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Author

Topic: The Single Worst Use of CAP Code, Ever: A Rant

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 08-06-2004 08:58 PM

How the hell did the crappy VHS camcorders of the 80s pick up the original CAP code dots that no one can see, and now all of a sudden with high end digital camcorders with variable shutter speeds and everything else, we need these gigantic orange dots that look like emulsion damage?

How did this work in the past, and now with better cameras, we need bigger dots?

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 08-06-2004 10:30 PM

My guess is that smarter people worked on the original CAP code. We know John is smart. But the people behind the current version simply cannot have an ounce of intelligence.

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 08-07-2004 07:54 AM

quote: Joe Redifer
My guess is that smarter people worked on the original CAP code. We know John is smart. But the people behind the current version simply cannot have an ounce of intelligence.

I sincerely believe they are trying to make the newer versions less visible. The newer versions allow more combinations of code, needed with larger print orders. The very tiny dots of the Kodak-developed code sometimes required many hours to decypher, and were not as robust for very low resolution, high-compression transmission found today with Internet file sharing piracy. I also suspect (but don't know) that multiple coding methods may be used on a given print.

For Digital Cinema, Kodak has developed digital watermarking techniques that are very robust and virtually invisible to the audience:

http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=1280&pq-locale=en_US

quote:
Despite extraordinary advances in technology, the motion picture industry has yet to eliminate a very costly problem – movie piracy. Those pirated films often are made by using a camcorder to record a movie as it is being projected in a theater. At Kodak, Emerging Technologies scientists developed a technology called digital watermarking that can be used to identify illicit copies of movies and help track down and put a stop to piracy.

For movies that are distributed electronically to theaters, a Kodak Digital Cinema projector can continuously embed a small amount of data into the movie when it is shown. Each showing of the movie is given a unique, invisible digital watermark identifying the date, time and theater of that particular showing. So if a camcorder is used to capture that movie, the videotape also records the watermark embedded throughout. As a result, a series of frames from a suspected bootleg copy of a movie can be examined to determine the time and place of theft, which can help with the apprehension of movies pirates.

Kodak recently demonstrated an industry milestone: the extraction of 16-bit digital watermark data from as few as 15 frames.

Kodak Digital Watermarking Animation

| IP: Logged

Dean Kollet
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 591
From: Florida State University
Registered: Jul 2003

posted 08-07-2004 11:57 AM

I have an Idea.....now it's a little different, but bear with me.

Give up on the Cap Code....just give up. Pay me a couple bucks more an hour. I guarentee if you offer me (I don't know about others, but I'll do it) more cash, I'll make sure that everyone in the auditorium doesn't record the movie. And like Thomas said, I've NEVER seen a Pirated movie with Cap Code; NEVER.

I look at it this way. I'm more of a sound fan; I'm still picky as hell about the picture, but there is nothing better in a film than a wonderfully mixed and presented sound track. If they started to put stuff in the soundtrack like they did in the picture, I would flip a shit. The same goes with the picture. Stop spending money to annoy people, when it's not working.

| IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000

posted 08-07-2004 12:46 PM

quote: Dean Kollet
If they started to put stuff in the soundtrack like they did in the picture, I would flip a shit.

Start flipping Dean. [Wink]

Haven't you been listening? The insertion of beep sequences into movie soundtracks (by DTS anyway) has been going on since at least December of 2003.

Old thread here

| IP: Logged

Thomas Procyk
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1842
From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 08-07-2004 01:44 PM

Regarding John's articles, do you happen to have the full versions somewhere? Or at least a bit more detail? Sorry for being skeptical, but I'm just curious how it all works. I know how it's supposed to work, but fail to see how it does.

("Says Joseph Moscaret, Security Vice President of Paramount Pictures: Using this technique, we caught a guy in 24 hours") -- Which guy? The guy selling the tapes, the guy who made the dupe, the guy who stole a print? How was he caught? Red handed selling the tapes, or traced back to his apartment and apprehended while sitting on the toilet? It doesn't explain how the CAP code DIRECTLY led to his arrest, just that "someone" (a male) was arrested. Additionally, this claim comes from someone who apparently had an investment in the technology.

Variety, 12/12/1984 ("...know precisely which print was transferred for each such cassette, to which theatre that print was delivered, and by whom.") -- Again, this leads me to the same old question, "Now what?" So they found what print was used to make the tape, and they know which theater that print was at. Whooptie-freaking-doo. Did they arrest the manager? The projectionist? Station a security guard in case a person tries to dupe another movie? What this shows is that a given copy can be traced back to a print, but then you hit a dead-end. You have evidence of a crime, and a scene, but no perpetrator.

Newsweek 7/27/1987 ("It was found that pirated tapes (of "Dune") found in 16 countries had been copied from just two prints", the article reported multiple arrests and seizures) -- Who was arrested? The original person who made the tape from the print, (which would make the CAP code successful in its purpose) or just "multiple" persons who were selling/distributing the copied tapes who were arrested in a "raid" or the such? (which would make it unsuccessful, as conventional methods were used in the apprehension). CAP code dancing around the screen is enough to give anyone "multiple seizures." (say, there's a lawsuit.)

I assume all of the other articles that cited titles were titles which were CAP coded under Kodak's system. Or were those related to arrests/successful apprehension of pirates as a result of the code?

Most pirated films from the internet are encoded with a "bug" or logo of the group who did the ripping/encoding/distributing anyway, so why not use that? Why mar the theatrical presentation? Most DVD or VHS dupes are made from screeners, anyway.

Perhaps the full articles would give more insight, and I'll try to find and read them, but thus far my questions have remained unanswered and the CAP code system has yet to proove itself as an effective means of tracking down the individual who made the transfer.

=TMP=

| IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 08-07-2004 03:18 PM

quote: Thomas Procyk
Regarding John's articles, do you happen to have the full versions somewhere? Or at least a bit more detail? Sorry for being skeptical, but I'm just curious how it all works. I know how it's supposed to work, but fail to see how it does.

This question has been asked before, to the point of outright DEMANDING how CAP coding works, but John wouldn't budge, claiming 'divulging trade secrets' and 'compromising CAP code's effectiveness'...

You can try again, but I don't see this going anywhere. [Frown]

-Aaron

| IP: Logged

Dennis M Dow Jr
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 141
From: Bloomfield NJ USA
Registered: Oct 2003

posted 08-07-2004 07:29 PM

As far as I know the Crap code on each print is an Identification marker that is used to determine where the print was copied.... And it was pretty bad on Catwoman, DreamCatcher, The Village and a few others..... wish they would find a way to make it more obscure than smack dab in the middle of the frames

| IP: Logged

Steven Jantzen
Film Handler

Posts: 30
From: goodwell, Oklahoma, USA
Registered: Jul 2004

posted 08-07-2004 07:52 PM

wow, i guess I am absolutly blind.

I have never even heard of CAP code, let alone seen it. I watched both the village and catwoman, and i never seen anything. Maybe if you could point out where in the movie they where, i could look for it. As far as an audience member, I cant say that i've seen a lot of CAP code in action, i guess you just have to know it's there.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 08-07-2004 08:43 PM

Steven, you are lucky. Once you see it, it will destroy your moviegoing experience forever.

If you are POSITIVE that you want to know, click here.

| IP: Logged

Matthew Jaro
Film Handler

Posts: 74
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Registered: Jul 2003

posted 08-07-2004 10:41 PM

In response to Jesse and Carl: Changeover cues are vital. I know there is some thought of removing them in release prints. Any current print is likely to be run in a changeover house after its first run, either at a second run house, or much later in an art house or a venue like the AFI.

Getting rid of the cue marks would be the worst possible idea. When people ask me how changeovers work, I tell them about the cue marks and they say they never noticed them. So how bad can that be? Temporary cue marks are an equally bad idea because people mark XXXs on the frames with sharp objects, and you don't know if this is a cue or a scratch. I've missed changeovers because of stuff like that.

| IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000

posted 08-08-2004 01:10 AM

Nah, visual c/o cues no longer need to be printed on a print. If one needs cues, one can just put clear splice tape on the print at the appropriate places and listen for the clicks when they run through the gates. I would think that this is all the visual or auditory cueing a competent c/o operator would need.

| IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 08-08-2004 02:24 AM

Steven, not every print has CAP code on it. The majority of them unfortunately do, but not all of the prints. You may have just got lucky [Smile]

-Aaron

| IP: Logged

Carl Martin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1424
From: Oakland, CA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 08-08-2004 03:02 AM

quote: Matthew Jaro
Changeover cues are vital. I know there is some thought of removing them in release prints. Any current print is likely to be run in a changeover house after its first run, either at a second run house, or much later in an art house or a venue like the AFI.

is it? i would think any given print would be unlikely to be run c/o before being destroyed (intentionally).

it's not at all unusual for a french print to be sans cue marks. i'm sure the french run changeover in some venues.

quote: Matthew Jaro
I tell them about the cue marks and they say they never noticed them. So how bad can that be? Temporary cue marks are an equally bad idea because people mark XXXs on the frames with sharp objects, and you don't know if this is a cue or a scratch.

i was never big into movies growing up, but i remember seeing the cues sometimes. it didn't occur to me that they were always in the same place and had a purpose; i just thought they were some sort of defect.

i certainly don't advocate scratching x's in the frame. but that happens even with cued prints once frames get chopped off and projectionists go blind. at least if there were no printed cues the projectionists would be forced to come up with a consistent system and would hopefully be conscientious enough to think of one that didn't damage the print.

heck, someone could make a buck selling 4-frame lengths of narrow clear tape with opaque dots correctly positioned. that would be very simple to apply and remove.

carl

| IP: Logged

Daniel Fuentz
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 230
From: Fresno, CA, USA
Registered: Apr 2003

posted 08-08-2004 05:38 AM

quote: Matthew Jaro
Getting rid of the cue marks would be the worst possible idea. When people ask me how changeovers work, I tell them about the cue marks and they say they never noticed them. So how bad can that be?

I noticed the changeover cues on the very first movie I saw in a theater, when I was all of 5 years old. I asked my mom what the holes in the movie were, but she had no idea. I didn't find out until much later what purpose they served.

I know the current cap code is getting pretty bad, becuase friends of mine that wouldn't know DTS from mono through a Radio Shack speaker are noticing the splotches in a lot of the current movies. [Frown]

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.