This is topic Video-camera monitoring of screens/equipment? in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000867
Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 04-14-2000, 02:46 PM:
Just wondering which states require a video camera at all tims monitoring the screen or equipment.Here in Connecticut, if there is more than one booth, you need video monitoring, ie: if there are two booths, you need a camera and monitor in each to see the other.
At first (from 1975 to about 1988) the camera had to be pointed at the screen.
After that they changed the law to say the camera must point at the projector/platter.
Does any other state require this?
Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 04-14-2000, 04:35 PM:
Utah, the great state of pointless godworship, we have many great laws, like you cant teach about birth control to children and anything other than the missionary position will land you in jail. But its ok if your mayor is a criminal who steals millions of dollars on an annual basis and gets re-elected for it.... Political rant over, but we here have no laws on security cameras...
------------------
"If it's not worth doing, I have allready been there and done it"
Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-14-2000, 05:55 PM:
Hey Dave.......Have you gone off the deep end? I'm originally from Chicago. If you think Utah has problems go live in Chicago. Things are way better here then they ever will be in Illinois. Perhaps some of the better out here is due to those god worshippers.
Com'mon This thread is about video cameras, not our ex-mayor or any religous beliefs.......
And for the record Utah, Colorado, Idaho, and Oregon don't require video cameras
Mark
Posted by Jason Burroughs (Member # 68) on 04-14-2000, 07:25 PM:
Here in Texas there's hardly any laws governing what's in the booth. Only one that I'm really aware of is the banning of non Saftey films (ie Nitrate).
Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 04-14-2000, 07:37 PM:
Utah, schmootah. (People in Utah always seem to attempt to turn every discussion into something about themselves.)What, exactly, is the point of having those video cameras in Connecticut? Where are the monitors supposed to be placed which allow you to watch the exciting images from those cameras? In a megaplex, do you need 17 cameras pointed at your 17 projectors?
And what incredible disaster in a booth moved the legislature to require these video cameras? (And... could such disasters ever happen here in Utah?)
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 04-15-2000, 05:27 AM:
Our dream at my theatre is to have a video camera aimed at each projector (in color and HDTV). The angle would be so that you could see the platter spinning, the soundrack and its status, and the reflection of the picture off of the port glass. This would all go to a massive videowall array installed by the world's greatest video tech, Ian Price. 
Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 04-15-2000, 06:12 AM:
The cinemas I'm at now used to have cameras in the booth looking at the plate and the projector. They were removed because the managers grew tired of watching the operators at that time scratching their er, heads. Now only the cameras pointing toward the screen remain. (That's all I need anyway)
------------------
"It's not the years honey, it's the mileage".
Indiana Jones.
Posted by Joseph Pandolfi (Member # 223) on 04-15-2000, 06:56 AM:
John: The eight screener where I mostly work at has a camera on each screen with a monitor in the small booth and a monitor at each end of the larger booth. I would only use this in case I am threading up one in one booth and I would have a projector start up at the far end of the other booth some hundred yards away. We have no cameras in our booths here. The other place where I work at is a four screener with no cameras at all except in the lobby area for the manager.
Posted by Stephen Jones (Member # 16) on 04-15-2000, 08:02 AM:
The only video monitors we have are for monitoring the screens in all 8 cinemas.There is a monitor in the booth,ticket box and the managers office.Thats all we need,as for the booth its all on one level and we can see all projectors and platters from the make up area. 
------------------
Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 04-15-2000, 08:55 AM:
I should clarify my first post a little:Currently, (in CT) you only need one camera and monitor per booth- not screen. So, if you had a 10-plex with 5 projectors in two booths, you only need two cameras/monitors.
I don't know of any disaster that started video monitoring. The state is pretty small, so I think I would have heard. Probably just an over-zealous state offical. Originally, it was one camera per screen, but that probably cost too much, so some offical had to be bribed to change the law. In CT, the state police have jursdiction over theaters.
Missionary position only? How dull....!
Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 04-15-2000, 08:47 PM:
The answer to your question Mark is NO! I was always in the deep end! Actually I find I just cant shut my yapper!!!I think it would be nice to have video survailence, just so that I can go back and see who left that spilled popcorn and drink mushie in aisle four.
------------------
"If it's not worth doing, I have allready been there and done it"
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-15-2000, 10:54 PM:
I've never heard of this, but I'm all for booth cameras for the projectionist. I wonder just how much the studios hate the idea of a videocamera pointed at the screen for potential bootlegging purposes though.
Posted by Andrew D'Vrey (Member # 285) on 04-16-2000, 12:20 AM:
Cameras in the booth??!!??!! My boss would see me stealing his Pepsi!------------------
"And the monkey flips the switch."
- Major Don West, "Lost In Space"
Andrew D'Vrey
IATSE Local 219
Posted by Joseph Pandolfi (Member # 223) on 04-16-2000, 05:51 AM:
Brad: I doubt if any bootleg copies are made here, ours cameras are all time lapse setup. Instead of the normal 30 frame rate per second for video ours is slowed down to 3-4 frames a second. For example if you seen the security video from The Thomas Crown Affair it is much like it.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-16-2000, 06:00 AM:
Yeah, I know...but we all know how paranoid the studios can be! After all, that is the main reason I keep getting told as to why Technicolor will not deliver prints on Wednesdays. Apparently no one would ever consider bootlegging a film on a Thursday night, whereas Wednesday night bootlegs would be commonplace. Yeah, right. That's how it works.
Posted by Chris Erwin (Member # 176) on 04-16-2000, 08:53 AM:
KY doesn't have such laws. As for bootlegging, this would require a tele-cine conventer that was common in tv stations when they used film. Some places had 35mm that could do the job,most with 16mm. Now it's all video. So are they still that afraid of a bootlegger? Deliver our prints earier please!Wait just a minute......didn't Kodak come up with an embedded "cap code" that could be embedded into a print to allow you to track pirates? (or which print the copy came from) John, could you field this one for Kodak?
--Chris
Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 04-16-2000, 09:20 AM:
Techincolor's bootlegging policy is a joke. Most of the bootlegs I've seen are nothing more that a guy with a video camera sitting in a front row; you see people walking by, talking, eating, etc. A real pro will just either 'borrow' the print and telecine it, or run the film at 2:00 am when no one's in the theater.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-16-2000, 05:10 PM:
That "cap code" is a joke! Notice how they refuse to demonstrate it's awesome detective power? And besides, once they use it to fight a case, the secret is out! To whoever is responsible for this ludicrous "cap code" threat, allow me to randomly pick one reel from a movie, point a camera at the screen (flicker and all) and have 10 other Film-Techers across the country to do the same thing to their copy of that selected reel. We will then send you our videotapes and YOU tell us which tape came from which print. Uh, huh...yeah I didn't think you could.
Anyway, I'm not a bootlegger so the whole threat is a non-issue, but I am annoyed at these sort of lame security threats...especially when it delays my prints from arriving until Thursday night when I find a defective reel!!!
Posted by Rob Brooks (Member # 186) on 04-16-2000, 08:42 PM:
Hey John,
No New York law. But in the late 80's my UA Theater had them aimed at the platter with the projector image on the port glass in view too. Like I really spent every free moment watching the most boring show on earth on my monitors of platters spinning. Finally after a few years they all kind of broke and no on cared anymore. The status boards brought in 1986 to be installed are still sitting there uninstalled though.------------------
Rob
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-17-2000, 07:35 AM:
Brad:
I worked on the Coded Anti-Piracy (CAP) project. The first picture coded was Disney's "Night Crossing" in 1982. Hundreds have been coded since. I can assure you the CAP code has been very useful in identifying theatres that had lax security measures, such that pirated copies (even those shot off the screen using camcorders) could be decoded by the FBI, pinpointing the source of the copy.------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-17-2000, 12:43 PM:
Sorry John, but I still ain't bitin'. I still maintain it is nothing but a scare tactic. Perhaps someone will take me up on my offer to prove this? If this is for real, it will clearly prove it works. If no one is willing to take me up on my test, then I think that's proof enough against it.
Posted by Bryan Redemske (Member # 354) on 04-17-2000, 01:11 PM:
what exactly would the 'cap code' or whatever look like? how would you be able to tell?
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-17-2000, 01:24 PM:
If memory serves (with the very vague details that have been released) it looks like positive dirt on the film. Of course, if this were really the case, then I would be screaming at the depot for another print constantly.Also, anything the video camera is going to pick up I guarantee you I will be able to see on screen.
Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 04-17-2000, 07:22 PM:
Brad-I think I remember some earlier code useage:
(1) "This newsstand is being watched." and
(2) "The speakers in this drive-in are high-voltage type and cannot be used at home."
Re: video camera useage:
Seems like I recall someone getting in hot water some time back, over having a video camera in their theatre. I don't think the film company cared though, since there weren't too many movies being shown in the ladies room!
------------------
Better Projection Pays!