Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Film codes

This is topic Film codes 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=001366

Posted by Chris Allen (Member # 7328) on 01-29-2013, 04:34 AM:

Last weekend we had an issue with the film Tinkerbell. The film was ingested as normal with the keys. Unfortunately the film played with subtitles. On further investigation we had two keys and two versions of the film but no indication of which film was subtitles.
Tinkerbell-SOTW_FTR_EN_EN_UK_51-EN_2K_DI_20121121_DGB_VF
and
Tinkerbell-SOTW_FTR_EN_XX_UK_51-EN_2K_DI_20121119_DGB_VF

Small variations in the codes but how are you supposed to know which is which. I had the same problem with the Hobbit but that was the wrong key sent which played the subtitled version, but until the movie had played there was no indication that the film would have subtitles.
Incidently the second code above played without subtitles.

Any help would be appreciated

Posted by Matthias Grausgruber (Member # 6884) on 01-29-2013, 04:39 AM:

http://digitalcinemanamingconvention.com/

EN-EN (english sound, english subtitles)
EN-XX (english sound, not subtitles)

Posted by Chris Allen (Member # 7328) on 01-29-2013, 05:00 AM:

Thank you
The fog has cleared and I can see clearly now. [Big Grin]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-29-2013, 12:20 PM:

There needs to be one more category added: "Sponsoring circuit." That way clips made specifically for Regal or Carmike or whatever could fall into their own folder and not clutter up the list of trailers.

(Is there any way to get this suggestion to the powers that be?)

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 01-29-2013, 03:08 PM:

I accidently ran a featurette of the "Making of Les Miserables" that was specifically made for Regal Entertainment. While the featurette was really cool, having it say at the end "Go see it at your local REG Theatre" wasn't.

One of the things that has really come up now that we are all going digital - is the verification of content that we are programming on our screens. We get trail mixes that has multiple versions of hundreds of trailers. Regal, Cinemark, and A.M.C. usually get their own versions of some trailers. Combine that with the fact that no one has time to actually check the trailers out (what the movies are about, genre, etc.)- you have a recipe for potential disaster. Then on top of all that, if you happen to be using Cinedigm's Theatre Command Center software, there are rules that can be set that automatically generate show playlists and trailers 'packs' based on ratings. This is very impersonal to me.

I am reminded of the time back in 1995 that Paramount wanted us to run the "Clueless" trailer with "Indian in the Cupboard". What a disaster that was.

Someone needs to come up with a way for the systems to be able to separate this stuff out, so that less mistakes are made.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-29-2013, 08:22 PM:

Automatically generating trailer playlists based on ratings? That is a supremely dumb idea (in an industry that specializes in dumb ideas).

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 01-29-2013, 10:42 PM:

Regal, AMC, IMAX locations (etc) should just get their own trailer drives. I mean, if they're THAT special to warrant unique versions of trailers, they ought to get special drives, too. This alone would weed out a lot of content.

Or, maybe the other way around, there should just be a "Basic" trailer drive -- We'll call it GORP since it's not a full-blown "Trail Mix" -- this would include only the most current generic trailer version of upcoming releases -- no "branded" stuff (including IMAX).

For non-preview trailers, they should be using the other tags:

policy
psa
short

Basically, if it's not an actual movie preview, it shouldn't be tagged as a "trailer."

Trailers that are tagged with a theatre brand (including IMAX) should perhaps get their own tag:

amc
regal
imax

and so on. Yes, I realize this is not DCI standard (presently) but the standard is young and evolving. It's possible.