Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: John P's CRAP-Coded Photo

This is topic John P's CRAP-Coded Photo in forum Film-Yak 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=8;t=002519

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-22-2003, 02:08 PM:

The revised CRAP-coded member photo of John Pytlak looks a little overcompressed, don't ya think?

I hate to be a stickler for quality presentations in a member photo but surely we could expect more from Film-Tech, right?

Or are y'all adding heavy compression to all member photos that originated on film in a sinister attempt to encourage more people to switch to digital cameras?

I want the real story!

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-22-2003, 02:18 PM:

If Film-Tech couldn't use the original CAP Code Kodak developed for the MPAA twenty years ago, maybe they should license the new Kodak Invisible Watermarking technology:

Kodak Invisible Watermarking

Kodak Data Embedding Technical Paper

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 09-22-2003, 04:14 PM:

John, I'm sorry for laughing at that, but I can't help it. It looks remarkably like what I've been seeing in some movies lately, whether it's real CAP Code, or some derivative...

-dave [uhoh]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-22-2003, 05:53 PM:

What the heck does "CAP" stand for anyway?

Code Against Piracy?

Crazy About Polkadots?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-22-2003, 06:08 PM:

Coded Anti-Piracy

It is quite interesting, but I just now noticed John's pic having a lack of colors. The CAP coded pic has been online for a few days and looked good until now. WTF? By the way, Adam exaggerated the CAP code dots just so they would be noticable.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 09-22-2003, 07:08 PM:

I did nothing of the sort. That's what this new shit looks like on screen, although I have it set for .1 seconds instead of 1/24. The frequency of its appearance is almost dead-on, though, at every four seconds.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-22-2003, 07:45 PM:

Brad told me that you exaggerated it. Even though you are the one who did the animation, I will take his word over yours. [Smile]

Anyone care to explain the sudden loss of colors in his pic? Manny is right, it does look unacceptably bad (looked great yesterday).

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-22-2003, 07:53 PM:

Nope, I said the original version of the pic was exaggerated. The one that is posted looks really close to the real CAP code.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 09-22-2003, 08:32 PM:

The color loss in John's photo is probably because it's a .gif file now for the animation. Or because it's gone through a few generations of compression/optimization. He needs a new one anyway. Someone take a photo of him at ShowEast.

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 09-22-2003, 09:31 PM:

OK Dammit! I've been looking at John's pic for 5 minutes and have yet to see any changes! I'm sick of looking at John!

What gives?

>>> Phil

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-22-2003, 09:48 PM:

The dots are waaaaay too big to look like the real CAP code. At least the original John Pytlak CAP code.

As far as GIF goes, it is capable of 256 colors simultaneously. What is there now looks like no more than 16. GIF is also lossless, so I don't see how saving it over and over again would decrease the colors. I swear it looked better yesterday.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-23-2003, 12:07 PM:

Joe - it's your Mac. Try looking at it on a Windows machine. [evil]

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 09-23-2003, 12:25 PM:

i can't see it either. i've seen the crap code in movies so why can't i see john's acne? steve's c/o animation worked. oh, now i get it. y'all are talking about the mustaches in phil's pic.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-23-2003, 01:22 PM:

I certainly can see those five huge "zits" on my face every four seconds! [Big Grin]

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 09-23-2003, 02:33 PM:

They look like the same damn dots that I keep seeing in EVERY damn film I have seen this year. It seems that they wait until a bright white seen to put those dots in and BAM there they are.

STOP IT DAMNIT STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [Mad]

Dave

Posted by Jim Leko (Member # 1287) on 09-23-2003, 04:36 PM:

quote:
As far as GIF goes, it is capable of 256 colors simultaneously. What is there now looks like no more than 16. GIF is also lossless, so I don't see how saving it over and over again would decrease the colors. I swear it looked better yesterday.

If it looks like 16 colors, there must be something wrong with your display. It looks like 256 to me, as 16 would make John's face unrecognizable. CAP code looks very realistic.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-23-2003, 05:33 PM:

Everyone else's pictures (even John Hawkinson's GIF picture and Bob Maar's GIF picture, as well as every other GIF I've come across on the internet) look fine. Not sure how something would be wrong with my display and only John's picture all of a sudden. Here's what it looks like for me:

That is definitely NOT 256 colors.

Film-Tech is running horrible for me lately. We're talking 10 minutes to load a single page. Every other site on the planet seems to go super fast. I have to agree with Scott that the site has had many more problems since the switch from UNIX to Windows. Maybe this is a result of FT's X-Treme slowness. But then again why ONLY this GIF? Is there something special about it?

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 09-23-2003, 07:39 PM:

Damn Joe, that really sux... you need to get a better computer, a better monitor, oh...and a better life! [evil]

>>> Phil

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-23-2003, 07:53 PM:

It's just you Joe. I know how you hate Windows, but UNIX vs. Windows is not the issue with the speed or John's picture. Besides we are not switching back to UNIX, so complaining will produce no positive results.

All you computer geeks out there, don't reply. Really, I don't want to hear the ridiculous babble about why the UNIX operating system is so superior and why you like VI.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-23-2003, 07:59 PM:

vi? Real men use ed! ed is the standard text editor!

Posted by Jim Leko (Member # 1287) on 09-24-2003, 03:31 AM:

I learned a (very) little of UNIX in a class that I took. We had some old version of SCO, and when I tried the VI editor, I was shocked. How anybody could prefer VI to the latest version of Word is beyond me (and I know people who swear by it). Whatever you are using now Brad seems to be working fine. I never have trouble with this site. I am still waiting for my member pic to get integrated though. [Wink]

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 09-24-2003, 11:14 AM:

Windows Rocks!

- Dave Stambaugh, MCSE/MCP

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-24-2003, 12:19 PM:

Windows Blows!

- Daryl C. W. O'Shea, MCSE/MCSA/MCP

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 09-24-2003, 03:13 PM:

Oops, typo, that's actually what I meant to say too. [beer]

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-24-2003, 03:19 PM:

I thought so. [beer]

Novell Rocks! [thumbsup]

Posted by Matt Hale (Member # 1518) on 09-24-2003, 05:08 PM:

If your monitor is set to 256 colours and those don't happen to be the same 256 colours as the gif uses then you will get something that looks like that. Set your monitor to Thousands or Millions if its not already, then re-launch your browser and it should map the colour palette correctly.

Some browsers will not loop animated gifs indefinitely, only a fixed number of times, so that may account for some not seeing the cap code in John's picture. I see it. Looks about right to me.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-24-2003, 05:13 PM:

My monitor is set to millions of colors. It turns out to be IE on the Mac. Any other browser, Mac or PC, seems to render the GIF fine. I don't know why this particular GIF doesn't agree with Mac IE, all the others do. Bizarre. Unfortunately IE is the best browser (though still not great) in Mac OS 9.2, which is primarily what I use until OS X gets its act together.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 09-24-2003, 05:35 PM:

I used Image Ready 3.0 to make all of the animated gifs for John, Steve and Bob all on the same computer. I don't know why this one would turn out any different.

Posted by William T. Parr (Member # 677) on 09-24-2003, 08:41 PM:

I have been seeing those damn aggrevating dots on the last 3 movies I have screened. I have not heard of any complaints from patrons as of yet, but I bet there coming.

William T. Parr MCSE\MCP+I

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-24-2003, 10:30 PM:

Adam's responsible for this mess. I get it now.

Manny Knowles, CCP/LB