This is topic The studios think people who run digital screens are morons in forum Digital Cinema 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=16;t=000474

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-15-2009, 12:50 PM:
 
Is anyone else getting annoyed at the way the studios are treating digital cinemas?

First off, I get spam notices about virtually every movie that are always the same thing. In slightly different wording they all say "Our new crappy movie requires extra-special treatment, blah, blah, blah. You must play at 7.0 on the volume and meet DCI brightness and cropping specs, blah, blah, blah."

No shit. Really? You mean you actually want us to run your movie AT DCI SPEC?? Wow. Isn't that the entire point of having a spec everyone follows??? With the studios "crying wolf" on each and every movie, people are learning to simply disregard those notices. Because of that when a movie actually comes along some day that IS NOT to DCI spec and requires some alteration, absolutely nobody will read it because we are being trained to just toss them in the trash due to being bombarded with them from every movie. We all know what the spec is, and any theater willing to abide by those specs will keep it in spec and any theater not willing to bother will not be convinced to do so because the studios sent out a corny letter from the director or a technical spec sheet.

But it doesn't stop there. Oh no they want you to clog up the internet sending an email every time you ingest a KDM successfully to each player. Ummm, no. If it doesn't ingest, I will contact you. All sending an email does is waste my time and your time.

The most annoying thing though is on screenings. (All of the people who have ran digital screenings that are reading this are now starting to get angry inside at the mere thought.) Yes, I am speaking of the barrage of harrassing phone calls worse than a telemarketer.

It starts with wanting to know if you have your KDMs and content loaded. "Yes it loaded fine. Had the hard drive not arrived or we had a problem loading the content, we would have called you, just like how we would have called you if we were missing a reel to a 35mm print. We are not morons."

Then they want to know if your check-screening went ok. My response: "no it didn't...because we don't pre-screen. Can you please make a note of that so you will stop calling me with every screening to ask that?" That is when I am told "the studio requires (translated: "pays") them to call and ask me each time." Lovely, just lovely.

But that's not enough. They then call an hour INTO THE MOVIE wanting to know if it is on screen! "No of course it is not on screen. You see we are such incompetent morons here we had a problem and DIDN'T THINK TO CALL YOU AND WE JUST CANCELED THE SHOW! Duh, YES it is running fine. We would have called otherwise."

And my personal favorite, at the end of some screenings they want their security goon (who often isn't even smart enough to operate a computer on his own) to "watch us delete the content".

Ok first off, the content is encrypted with a SUPPOSEDLY unbreakable code. If the code is unbreakable, then you have nothing to worry about.

Second, any actual pirate who has managed to crack your unbreakable code can EFFORTLESSLY copy your content! It can be done over the network to another server, to the library, even to a laptop or some other desktop computer on the same network. Even moreso the hard drive once ingested to the player could be plugged directly into a computer and the files copied. So why the sheer panic in having this guy "watch us delete" the content when that does absolutely nothing? I can delete the trailer to your movie and this goon wouldn't know any different.

To any studio person reading this, cut us some slack. You trust us with receiving the 35mm prints and making sure all of the reels are there, assembled correctly, etc. Why is there this COMPLETE lack of trust and faith in regards to digital cinema? Why are you paying these companies what is probably a ridiculous amount of money to have these people call the digital screens to perform a moron-check? Are you saying digital cinema has SO MANY PROBLEMS that you feel the need to do this?

Please knock it off. We are not the morons you think we are.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 12-15-2009, 01:40 PM:
 
What amazes me is how the obvious bits are left to the last minute.

We hit the screen with AVATAR to the general public in (glances at watch...) 10.5 hrs. I have the file...got that Monday. Last night I received the 35mm version. Yet as of right now, I still do not have the KDM. Will it come? Sure it will. But WHY oh why is it so darn late?

I already have the file so my copy number has been known at least since last Friday. The whole point of the KDM is that they can control when you can first play it and when you can last play it. If it's a security issue, then just set the dates. If it's a 'we're so busy and we're backed up' issue, hire some more damn people, people. What's the saturation level of Digital? 10%? What the hell's gonna happen when the other 90% are on board? Will we get the keys four days after the movie's opened?

It's an issue I just don't get. Even if I have the key and it's not set to go until 5 minutes before the movie, at least I have it and it's loaded ready to go. This way is just silly.
 

---

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 12-15-2009, 02:49 PM:
 
Two things come directly to mind regarding this.

The first is that as John says -:

quote:

---

What's the saturation level of Digital? 10%?

---

quote: John Wilson

---

(...) It's an issue I just don't get. Even if I have the key and it's not set to go until 5 minutes before the movie, at least I have it and it's loaded ready to go. (...)

---

Well, I guess it's a small world... I had the exact same problem in Italy with a distributor beginning with "S" and ending with "Y".
As it turned out, their resident D-Cinema "experts" had no idea you could check a KDM's timeframe *without* actually playing the movie. They know now... still, KDMs usually arrive three or four hours before the engagement... and of course, you have to ask them for new keys every time - god forbid - you try and move the movie between screens.

On the other way, Disney KDMs open three days before the first show, and are sent for every digital screen with up to 8 weeks of validity, even if the initial engagement is much shorter. Which is exactly how it should work.
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 12-15-2009, 04:27 PM:
 
What I especially love is when they call Wednesday afternoon to ask how your pre-screening went. I've given up telling them the keys they sent us aren't good until Thursday morning, so now I just say, 'Yes, it went fine.'
 

---

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 12-15-2009, 06:46 PM:
 
1. Set up an email filter and autoresponder that says "Fine, Thanks."

2. Stop answering the phone.


 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-15-2009, 08:06 PM:
 
Sounds like the studios are not confident at all with the reliability for this new cinema format they all pushed so hard.

But in their defense, most theaters ARE operated by morons. You are the exception. Isn't that annoying?
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 12-15-2009, 08:12 PM:
 
4 hrs to showtime.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-15-2009, 09:38 PM:
 
Solution: Caller ID
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 12-16-2009, 05:56 AM:
 
Finally got the key...75 minutes before the show.

Luckily, we had a pretty big gap in programming before AVATAR hit the screen so was able to test it and add cues etc. and more importantly add the key to the system. Our unit will not accept a key if a show is in progress so that gap was a very lucky thing to have...a luxury that usually is not ours.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Althaus (Member # 5042) on 12-16-2009, 02:51 PM:
 
I guess nobody cares about us. We havent been harassed one bit about digital screenings. Then again we are kinda lame, with our only 3D film being Meatballs and we got it 6 wks into release. (And no Avatar)
 

---

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 12-16-2009, 08:51 PM:
 
In germany, dozends if not hundreds of AVATAR 3D previews were canceled last night due to missing or wrong KDMs. They had to pay out audiences and sent them home. Some cinemas had been on the phone with Fox and Deluxe at London for hours without success.

Some houses received their working KDMs within normal timeframes the day before.

- Carsten
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 12-17-2009, 02:04 AM:
 
After 3 1/2 years of digital projection, at least 2 1/2 of those being an all digital complex (memory is a bit fuzzy) I can honestly say we've had almost zero key problems. Closest we ever came to missing a show because of a missing key was very shortly after our initial rollout. We ended up having the key (it was for Superman Returns) force ingested into the player while the previews were playing with about 5 minutes to spare.

Now that's pretty close, but other than that we've never had a problem that wasn't solved by a phone call the day before, and we haven't had to call to request a key for months now.
 

---

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 12-18-2009, 02:51 AM:
 
We now learned it was a pan-european issue. How many shows had been canceled is not yet known, and Fox will probably never publish it. They talk about a few hundreds all over europe.

Some cinemas with multiple 3D screens did show on some screens, but not on others.

Some people suggest that only new installations had this issue - which would mean there had been a communication problem with the server certificates to Deluxe at London (unconfirmed).

Like everywhere in the world I guess, a lot of new installations had been done just in time for the AVATAR release.

- Carsten
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 12-20-2009, 01:31 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

That is when I am told "the studio requires (translated: "pays") them to call and ask me each time."

---

Google Voice them. Problem solved.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-28-2010, 01:27 PM:
 
Grrrrrrrrr.

So here we have this "un-crackable" movie that requires a special KDM. I am tired of asking this question, but if it is "un-crackable", why the asinine security??? Obviously it IS crackable.

All of this security and MGM has now started a TERRIBLE trend with their Hot Tub Time Machine movie. Yes you guessed it, we now have FAKE FILE NAMES!!!

This is just begging for trouble. At least with a print you open the box and with only the exception of Lord of the Rings and Star Wars the leaders were real. Also with a print you could label the tail the real title, so every time you went to handle the film, you know damn well what it was.

There is no way to "rename" a bullshit filename in any server that I am aware of.

This will not end well. The wrong movies will end up being played or shows will be lost because someone thought "Booftaga" was the proper codename but it was really "Nanny Noo".

Studios, KNOCK IT OFF! You aren't stopping the real pirates out there with this nonsense. You are only making life hell for the honest people.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 02-28-2010, 02:48 PM:
 
Well said.

That's a really stupid thing to be doing.
 

---

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 02-28-2010, 04:17 PM:
 
Just another way for the studios to try and cut the exhibs from the loop?

The more they around with presentation, the more problems our patrons will have to endure- and they won't do that forever.

Does anyone know what the studios agenda is here?
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 02-28-2010, 05:06 PM:
 
It shows rather blatantly that the guys decreeing the fake naming of files have absolutely no idea about how things work in the exhibition side of things.

If this takes hold...
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 02-28-2010, 05:22 PM:
 
For extra security they should change the other information in the file name: call flat movies scope, change the langauge code, etc. Hey! I have an idea, I bet if they put the TRL code in the filmename instead of FTR that would really screw up the pirates.



Fake Edit:
To play Devil's advocate here you can name your show whatever you want, so once you have the file in the show unless it has to be rebuilt for some wierd reason there shouldn't be any missed shows due to naming errors.

Still idiotic.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 02-28-2010, 05:25 PM:
 

quote: Ian Parfrey

---

Does anyone know what the studios agenda is here?

---

Sometimes you just have to assume it is plain idiocy

Probably someone in studio security said it would be really cool, and someone else said, yeah, we'll get a bonus for creating an extra layer of security.
 

---

Posted by Manny Montes (Member # 5639) on 02-28-2010, 05:43 PM:
 
Renaming files now, awesome. So now we are going to need to have a sheet by our digitals that put the codename to the real name. Why even bother? the only people ever with access to the files are projectionists, and we will know the codename anyway, its just annoying.

And yes, they do treat us like children, email: SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT FROM 20TH CENTURY FOX: please play this movie at fader setting 7

really now? really?
 

---

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 02-28-2010, 05:54 PM:
 
I reckon the pirates are slow on the uptake here.

The $$$ aren't in the movies themselves, but in pirating KDM's.

One day it may just catch on.

But then no doubt some bored studio exec will just dream up an anti-piracy measure to stop pirating anti-pirating measures.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-28-2010, 06:29 PM:
 

quote:

---

we now have FAKE FILE NAMES!!!

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

There is no way to "rename" a bullshit filename in any server that I am aware of.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

The wrong movies will end up being played or shows will be lost because someone thought "Booftaga" was the proper codename but it was really "Nanny Noo".

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Section 5.4.3.1 of DCI spec v.1.2 requires that the content title be displayed in human-readable text in English.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

At least with a print you open the box and with only the exception of Lord of the Rings and Star Wars the leaders were real.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

Also with a print you could label the tail the real title, so every time you went to handle the film, you know damn well what it was.

---

quote: Jonathan Smith

---

They ought to have those cards with every film print, but instead of just a small booklet a rather, large manual fill of bold print with bullet points.

---

quote: Joe Elliott

---

Make sure your projector is putting out 128 ftL of light. Wow, you'd burn a hole through the screen. They did fax out a correction for that one.

---

quote: Chris Slycord

---

Brad was able to get 119 fL out of a Christie digital projector and I can safely say that the screen doesn't have a hole in the screen (since I work where he installed it).

---

Chris: Did patrons have to wear sun glasses instead of 3D glasses on that one?

If the screen didn't have a hole in it at the end of the show, I bet a $40,000 DLP chip did
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 03-01-2010, 01:14 PM:
 
I have to say that people who dump ALL of their 35mm equipment to install D-Crapema...well, they are morons.

Folks, the constant stupidity of the studios and the constant technical problems with WILL completely kill the exhibition industry within the next 5-10 years.

Unless someone with some common sense stops the madness.

Yeah right, and I'm gonna have a rich, hot young stud for my boyfriend.
 

---

Posted by Joe Elliott (Member # 4006) on 03-01-2010, 01:15 PM:
 
Well, I was kidding about the hole in the screen, but that brings up an interesting image.


AVATAR was Awesome!!!
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-01-2010, 02:08 PM:
 
Tony, from a reliability standpoint I'm going to have to disagree with you. It was a bit rocky at first, but for the last two years at least our digital projectors have been extremely reliable.

Now from a financing standpoint I can't comment either way; I don't know if digital has been cost effective for us the exhibitor or the studios; I don't have access to that kind of information.
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 03-01-2010, 02:16 PM:
 
Dustin, then your complex seems to be the exception to the rule. Be thankful you have had such good reliability so far. Bear in mind also that in terms of a cinema's operational life, two years is no time at all.

As for the financial impact, you'll find that out the hard way with your first bulb explosion or other equipment failure.

No matter how you slice it, 35mm is still far less costly to operate OVER THE LONG TERM that any DLP setup.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Smith (Member # 5609) on 03-01-2010, 02:23 PM:
 
Corrupt cues and files on a certain 2K DLP projector less than ONE YEAR after its installation (April 2009).

Don't get me started on video previews. I said something like this over the intercom yesterday "Unless you are a real idiot, there's no way 35mm slides and ads on film would be this much trouble, EVER."
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-01-2010, 03:00 PM:
 
Well, I can't comment on other equipement packages, but Christie projectors, Doremi servers, Cinedigm's LMS setup, and Technicolor's FREND (sp?) server have given us 0 problems. We have had 0 bulb explosions with Christie bulbs running them far past warranty. A certain other manufacturer's bulbs have had severe problems-company wide-with explosions. At least at my location all these other bulbs that have exploded have been under warranty so other than the annoyance of lost shows its been a 0 cost to us. The problem should go away now that they've switched back to Christie bulbs.
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-01-2010, 03:19 PM:
 

quote: Dustin Mitchell

---

running them far past warranty.

---

quote: Dustin Mitchell

---

so other than the annoyance of lost shows its been a 0 cost to us.

---

quote: Dustin Mitchell

---

all these other bulbs that have exploded

---

quote: Jonathan Smith

---

Both of those cases are obvious typos: 70dB instead of 7, 12.8fL instead of 128.

---

Maybe its not such an obvious typo. The standard is 85db, but what they meant to type was to run the fader at 7.

70db is way too low and 7db is inaudible.
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-01-2010, 05:30 PM:
 
Phil, the Christie's get changed when they need to be; that is when the image isn't acceptable anymore. Obviously we don't let our picture get dim.

I probably shouldnt' have mentioned Christie bulbs by name if I wasn't going to name and shame the sub-par bulbs, but rest assured this is a problem that has manifested itself company wide and we've stopped using these bulbs because of it. I do not know if the problem was soley the bulbs or a combination of the bulbs and projectors, all I know is that we have had no issues with Christie bulbs in our digital projectors, ever; not one explosion.
 

---

Posted by Jake Spell (Member # 5294) on 03-01-2010, 10:53 PM:
 
I know of someone who ran a Christie bulb in a Christie projector to over 3000 hours I believe. It was in a Cristie Projector. You really cant beat Chritie bulbs
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-01-2010, 11:59 PM:
 
Bah! I get 8000 hours on 6K lamps all the time. Its all about using CHRISTIE bulbs in CHRISTIE equipment with really good exhaust and automation controls to ensure proper cooling.

I've ran 4K lamps to 10,000 hours and 3K lamps to over 12,000 hours. That is an unobtainable feat in anything except Christie equipment. Oh yeah Strong may have been a thousand bucks cheaper to buy when the theater was new, but it isn't about the price...its about how much it costs.
 

---

Posted by Phil Ranucci (Member # 3820) on 03-02-2010, 12:06 AM:
 
Brad, I assume you're talking about film as opposed to Digital? The last thing that I want to do is lose a Barco reflector, but 1000 hours on a Ushio 4K gets expensive.
 

---

Posted by Michael Voiland (Member # 5386) on 03-02-2010, 12:52 AM:
 
I cant wait for the failure of digital. They are buying 4 silver screens, and "2" digital read d projectors. They will be mobile... Couple that with old general cinema belt driven roof top exhausts from the 1980s and we are good to go.
But we got a bunch of cool bunch of fluff and shit in the lobby.


 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-02-2010, 01:04 AM:
 
Those numbers were in film lamphouses, but I am also getting incredible hours on Christie digital SB and ZX units.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 03-02-2010, 04:11 AM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

Bah! I get 8000 hours on 6K lamps all the time. Its all about using CHRISTIE bulbs in CHRISTIE equipment with really good exhaust and automation controls to ensure proper cooling.

I've ran 4K lamps to 10,000 hours and 3K lamps to over 12,000 hours

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

but I am also getting incredible hours on Christie digital SB and ZX units.

---

No argument on Christie lamps! But I will argue on running them past warranty hours on digital equipment. Wait till you have one explode... and they do explode! Several Ushios here in SLC at other chains I don't service but hear about, one at about 300 hours. I had one 6kw go at 642 hours... The manager wasn't paying attention to the lamp change warning and could have changed the lamp out himself! It caused over 20K in damage to a CP-2000S... Reflector, Heat Filter, and of course the Blessed Dolby Color Wheel... as well as labor. It spared the integrator. The heat filter on the Christies is too thin to contain a lamp explosion from that size lamp.

NEC and BARCO certainly have an added safety margin built in for the Blessed Dolby Wheel with the right angle lamphouse. The misleading part is that they say right on Christie's web page that the average lamp life for the CDXL-60 is 1000 hours... that is way beyond misleading! Pull em when the warranty hours go ding!

I'm with Michael on waiting for digital to go kaput! I've gone back to mostly working on film projection systems and supporting them... they'll be around for a very long time to come and I will retire from doing that in a number of years. Unless there is some miracle there will not be an industry wide digital roll out as long as the economy is as bad as it is... and that may well take the next 10 years to turn around... I will retire before then anyway! Even once it's back in good order things will never be financially the same again for anyone.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-02-2010, 12:21 PM:
 
Mark, I am really in awe of you! That is quite a change of mind from where you were on digital in the past few years. It is a sign of an open and flexible mind, and a pleasant surprise. More power to you, my friend.

There was a time when I though we had lost you to becoming a totally myopic digevangelist. I assumed your mind had clamped shut on that issue; obviously that is not the case and I apologize for the assumption, even I was only thinking it to myself. So, if ever I am in your neck of the woods, I definitely would like to buy you a beer!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-02-2010, 12:40 PM:
 
Mark, we don't push the units with the Dolby color wheel in it. Its not financially worth risking it. The trick is in doing a regular inspection of the bulb and light on screen (throw up a white target pattern) and look for any instability.

Monte, unless you are using Christie equipment, you can pretty much kiss goodbye any chance of awesome bulb hours like that.
 

---

Posted by Matt Fields (Member # 3211) on 03-02-2010, 02:01 PM:
 
Brad-

What do you spec your exhausts for ZX's at?
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 03-02-2010, 03:01 PM:
 

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

I'm with Michael on waiting for digital to go kaput! I've gone back to mostly working on film projection systems and supporting them... they'll be around for a very long time to come and I will retire from doing that in a number of years.

---

I literally fell out of my chair when I read that..Mark, welcome back to the worlds of common sense!!
 

---

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 03-02-2010, 03:11 PM:
 
So does that mean that he's back to film because he made about all he could off digital?
 

---

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 03-02-2010, 03:15 PM:
 
Welcome back to the Dark Side, Mark.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-02-2010, 06:33 PM:
 
Matt, 1200-1500CFM
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 03-02-2010, 09:49 PM:
 
is it detrimental to run a lamp TOO cool?
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 03-02-2010, 10:10 PM:
 
Jhawk talks about that on page 3 of this thread ...
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-03-2010, 12:17 AM:
 
...and what he is quoting is not in the best interest of the bulb user, but in the best interest of the company trying to sell you more bulbs.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 03-03-2010, 01:21 PM:
 
..then I've seen consoles with muffin or squirrel cage fans installed internally by techs or booth personnel to blow directly on the bulb itself...
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 03-23-2010, 11:33 PM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Section 5.4.3.1 of DCI spec v.1.2 requires that the content title be displayed in human-readable text in English.

---

I wish someone would point that out to Paramount then. I just received the trailer for Street Dance. Here's the file name...

006_SD_3D_AU_T_TRL1-3D_F_EN-XX_UK_51_48_ST_20100312_FAC_i3D-ngb_OV

Now, how on earth am I supposed to know what that is when it comes to adding it to the playlist?
 

---

Posted by Elise Brandt (Member # 5552) on 03-23-2010, 11:43 PM:
 
006? It's clearly the new bond movie -and in 3D! Yup, there IS a "SD" for street dance there but damn if one would find it not knowing what to look for. The naming system is generally a good one but that is definitely a bad example.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 03-24-2010, 12:20 AM:
 
It's not such an issue, but imagine if they all started coming out like that?

Just dumb.
 

---

Posted by Jussi Siponen (Member # 5572) on 03-24-2010, 03:19 PM:
 
The names are supposed to have structure, this just somebody randomly banging the keyboard:

Film Title: 006
Content Type: SD
Projector Aspect Ratio: 3D
Language: AU
Territory and Rating: T
Audio Type & Narrative Description Track Language: TRL1
Resolution: 3D
Studio: F
Date: EN-XX
Facility: UK
3D Specs (optional field): 51
Package type: 48



But - bless their souls - they clearly did try: ST (for studio) and FAC (for the facility that made the DCP) are copied letter for letter from the spec.

Assuming there is english narrative, Paramount is the studio and let's say Dolby LA did the DCP mastering:

STREET-DANCE-3D_TRL1-3D_F_EN-XX_UK_51-EN_48_PC_20100312_DLB_i3D-ngb_OV

Now what is so hard about any of that, really?!?

(Edit: Fixed "51" to "51-EN". Apparently even *I* can't get this s**t right... )
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-25-2010, 12:10 AM:
 
Personally, I think each file should BEGIN with
3DN-FTR-MOVIE_TITLE (non ghostbusted)
or
3DG-FTR-MOVIE_TITLE (ghostbusted)
or
2D-FTR-MOVIE_TITLE

It would make sorting SO much easier, but whatever. At least Dolby's software permits quick and easy sorting.

 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-25-2010, 06:33 AM:
 
Quick question...1920 movies versus 2048 (EFIB vs FFIB projectors to get full-frame triple flash)....are the DCP different? One would think they would need to be...are they indicated in the file description?

Steve
 

---