|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Hawkinson
Film God
Posts: 2273
From: Cambridge, MA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 08-10-2004 09:34 AM
I tried to keep my post last night from getting too long, but I guess I sacrificed too much clarity for brevity.
Carl Martin says, regarding the likelyhood of adjacent print numbers, "...doesn't seem to be the case at all when we get multiple prints (which isn't too often). they might as well have been picked out of a hat." I expect they are more likely to be similar to each other than any other predicable combination ![[Smile]](smile.gif) . There is certainly evidence that some people get related print numbers with multiple prints, but it doesn't happen all the time. But it's the simplest explanation I can see for similar CAP patterns.
Daryl asks: "Why would an automated process (the application of CAP, and other coding) have anything to do with the ability of an operator to splice two ends of raw stock together, in darkness, in a race against time (the accumulator running out of film)?"
Let me try to explain.
In my imagination, the CAP code printer is a third party device that is added to the film path between the printing head and the developing process. It's a device that can illuminate an array of points on a frame of film instantaneously, and for each reel it is programmed with some information to encode, presumably copy# and title#.
In this picture, the CAP code printer has no idea at what point on a reel it is, all it can know is how much film has passed through it. And if it's designed for minimum functionality, it may not even know how much film has passed through it, if it is designed to simply make a mark every time interval.
Now, if the contact printer is doing frame-count (or other) cueing, then of course it can send an event (pulse, contact closure, whatever) to the CAP code printer telling it "make a CAP code now."
(I was under the impression that cueing was essentially unnecessary for volume release printing, since fades and color timing information would all be done in advance on the internegative (or earlier)).
Anyhow, if the CAP code printer is a "dumb" device, then a human operator needs to signal it to change over to the next copy# and start printing the different code. One method might be for the human operator to press a button on the printer, and course that would not be precise in time (or film position).
The other idea I was thinking of, which in retrospect doesn't make sense, is that the CAP code printer might be synchronized with the physical end of the reel, thus the comment about the imprecision with which the ends of reels are cut. But as Daryl points out, the reel is probably not cut from the previous until it exits the dryer, long after the CAP code would be printed. So that idea was definitely half baked. ![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Aaron: TES includes the lab (Technicolor Release Print Services) and the exchange (Technicolor Cinema Distribution) both.
--jhawk
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Jaro
Film Handler
Posts: 74
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Registered: Jul 2003
|
posted 08-10-2004 11:20 AM
This thread is getting really silly. Everyone is just:
1) complaining to each other, with no one outside this forum listening,
2) figuring out how contact printers work
3) trying to analyze the psychology of the MPAA.
Calling them Crap Codes makes us look like a silly and childish group that can make no serious contributions to the industry.
The only concrete suggestion so far, was Brad's proposal for an experiment. We should really try to think about how to get such an experiment initiated, rather than just bitch about something we all acknowledge is obnoxious.
Perhaps a joint letter to the MPAA signed by some of the more influential members of the forum, voicing these concerns and proposing experimentation to measure the ability of the codes to track prints and the degree of audience annoyance generated by the codes. For example, annoyance can be measured by audience surveys asking them if the presentation was acceptable, and if they noticed red marks in the image.
If we don't do anything concrete, the forum just becomes a mutual admiration society (like AMPAS).
[ 08-10-2004, 12:26 PM: Message edited by: Matthew Jaro ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 08-10-2004 11:32 AM
MPAA Anti-Piracy Information:
http://www.mpaa.org/anti-piracy/
quote:
...Camcording: Pirates use hand-held video cameras to record motion picture films off of theater screens and then copy these films onto blank videocassettes and optical discs for illegal distribution. These illicit copies are not only distributed to pirates in the US, but also shipped overseas and distributed through illegal channels even before the film’s international theatrical release.
...Videocassettes can also be analyzed on special electronic equipment to determine if they are counterfeit as well as to identify the source of the piracy.
...THEATRICAL PRINT THEFT
Theft of a 35 or 16 mm film print from a theater, film depot, courier service or other industry-related facility for the purpose of making illegal copies is one of the most serious forms of piracy. This type of theft allows the pirate to make a relatively high quality videotape from the theatrical print, which then serves as the master for the duplication of unauthorized videocassettes. Fortunately, this type of theft is extremely rare due to the difficulty in obtaining the prints illegally and also in transferring the print to another format, such as videocassette.
...Many entertainment companies use copy protection technologies to protect their films against theft and some delivery systems for film content already use some form of copy protection
...The motion picture industry has pursued those who distribute devices that break copy protection in any format. While no technology has yet proven foolproof, the industry continues to implement protection technologies which raise the threshold of difficulty and expense for the pirate and therefore help reduce piracy.
...The MPAA maintains a toll-free anti-piracy Hotline number (1-800-NO-COPYS) in the U.S. for retailers and consumers to call if they suspect piracy. In addition, complaints can be directed to the MPAA email hotline at hotline@mpaa.org.
...The majority of camcording in theaters in the US is conducted out of the New York City area. In addition, this is where the majority of large-scale video laboratories are located.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|
Home
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Movie studios pay extra to "order" these to be printed onto their release prints. (That's why it was on the extended versions of LOTR. Perfect "marketing" opportunity)![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic