my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » Re-Ingestion Question (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Re-Ingestion Question Jim Cassedy Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1661 From: San Francisco, CA Registered: Dec 2006 posted 11-11-2013 09:50 AM                     Every year between Oct-Feb, I'm involved an a wholebuncha screenings for the Motion Picture Academy & the Director's Guild, where members of each organizaion watch & vote on which movies will go on to win The Academy Awards. There are usually multiple screenings of each title during that time period so that everyone necessary has a chance to see & vote on everything. For some reason, instead of just sending me a new KDM for each screening, they'll send me a new hard drive for each one. So if I'm screening "BIG-MOVIE" five times during 'screening season', I'll wind up ingesting it 5 times over that 3 month time-span. Sometimes there's a difference in the "version" (BIG-MOVIE_FTR-1" & "BIG-MOVIE_FTR-2") Here's another example I ran into yesterday for a screening of SALINGER: This was the file previously ingested for a press screening several months ago: SALINGER_FTR_F_EN-XX_US-PG13_51_2K_TWC_20130918_TDC_OV This was the file name on the hard drive they sent me on Friday: SALINGER_FTR_F_EN-XX_US-PG13_51_2K_TWC_20130918_PW_OV As you can see, the only apparant difference is in the facility code, athough when I checked further, the UUID's were totally different, which is what I expected to find. ("PW" is "post-warehouse' which is a digital posting facility in NY owned by Technicolor) SO, MY QUESTION IS THIS: (you knew there was a question coming, didn't you?) > When I re-ingest a title that has a different version number or file name like above, does the server actually re-ingest ALL of the files from the new hard drive, or does it only copy and make the "changes" to the version already residing on the server?< (Which, in my case is a Dolbydigitalserverthingy) It does seem to take less time to re-ingest sometimes, but it still seems to have to 'verify' everyting, which makes sense to me. But I'm still curious about what happens.  |  IP: Logged Edward Havens Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 614 From: Los Angeles, CA Registered: Mar 2008 posted 11-11-2013 12:01 PM                     If it has a different file name, it most likely will be ingested as a separate file. At my theatre, we do a lot of advance WOM screenings, so I'll keep the file ingested and the hard drive on my shelf until the film opens. Most of the time, I do not get a new hard drive for the actual booking. When I do, it's often the same files. A few weeks ago, I got a hard drive for a WOM screening of a movie with a file date from May. When I got the final booking, I got a new hard drive with a file date in October. But damn if the movie had the exact same running time down to the second, with the same credit offset cue time. But just to be safe, I deleted the first file from my LMS before ingesting the second. If the second version is the version they want me to play, that's the one I play.  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 11-11-2013 01:55 PM                    Edward, I don't think you realize that the DCP actually consists of a whole collection of files representing individual "reels" of picture, sound, and a few control files which, among other things, control which files are used. You can see what is really there if you connect the DCP drive to a computer capable of reading a disk formatted in EXT2. If I ingest a 5.1 version, the files necessary for that show are transferred and verified. If I then ingest the 7.1 version, the server (at least on my DSS-200) knows that I have picture files and will only transfer the audio (and control files) and then verify the entire package. If I have ingested an uncaptioned version but now want the captioned version, it only ingests the captions which are text files, very small, and take mere seconds to transfer. Then there is a complete verification of the entire package. So the question at hand is a very good one and I don't know. But it's possible that the system will know the various reels that are common to both versions and not re-transfer them. But what if two movies have the same name of these internal reels? I suppose for starters one could start saving lists of files on a computer and compare file names if one later gets a different version. That's the minimum...that there are identical file names...and sizes...and though not obvious to us...the same CRC. If most of the files match (same name and same size means they are likely the same file) and maybe they only changed some end titles changing only the final reel, then to prove the theory you'd have to keep a note of ingest time under identical conditions, like for me, as I don't have a library system it would just be timing the ingest without a show running. A good question and an interesting one.  |  IP: Logged Edward Havens Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 614 From: Los Angeles, CA Registered: Mar 2008 posted 11-11-2013 06:57 PM                     Thanks, Steve, but after seven years of working with digital projection on a daily basis, I do understand how this all works. If I can be equally insulting to you as you were with me, perhaps you do not understand how this works. More often than not, one cannot play the 7.1 file and/or the OCAP version without the 5.1 CCAP file, but one can always play the 5.1 CCAP without the 7.1 and/or OCAP files. But this is not what Jim is asking about. The answer to Jim's question will lie in how the KDM he is sent is set up, and I suspect the new Salinger KDM will be directly tied to the contents of the second hard drive, even though they are the same version. To go back to my example, the KDMs for the movie I am now playing are directly tied to that "print" with the October 2013 date, and will not allow me to play the May 2013 "print." I also looked back and noticed another movie I am currently playing had different prints between the WOM screening I ran for it last month and the release version I am showing now. The dates are two weeks off, and after re-uploading the sneak files, the KDMs for the release print do not unlock the sneak print. I presume this is also done to make sure the "correct" versions are played. I also remember getting a flash drive for Movie 43 a day after it was released, that I needed to ingest and upload to the screen playing the film, because someone's name was misspelled in the credits or something like that. Seemed like a waste of time and money for that dead dog, but I guess it's better than needing to print up 2,023 new 20min 35mm reels over a simple typing error that's probably only on screen for six seconds.  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 11-11-2013 07:58 PM                        In the case of Salinger, there was a "special edition" release which was actually ~10 minutes shorter. In this case, I think you would have to ingest the entire package. If some of the files are reused, I would assume your LMS/Server would detect that particular file is already on your server. As for the issue with 5.1/7.1, CCAP, OCAP, and so forth, I think it comes down to whether the CPL has an "OV" or "VF" in the name. To the best of my understanding, "OV" means original version, meaning the contents of that CPL are unique from others - this would usually apply to the FTR or CCAP 5.1 version. "VF" means version file, and implies this is a partial package which uses picture and/or sound files from another package. This would usually be the case with the OCAP and 7.1 versions. Normally this appears at the end of the CPL, but I have seen it appear twice to indicate the picture files are OV while the sound files are VF, or some combination thereof.  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 11-11-2013 08:26 PM                     Even if the running time is exactly the same, the soundtrack could be different. It's not unheard-of for a mix to be revisited for minor tweaks, or to have a line of dialogue changed/removed/added to clarify a story point. Also, music cues have been known to change. Technically, though, this should result in a different file name, at least to update the packing date. Right?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 11-11-2013 11:29 PM                     Edward, what server do you have? With the Dolby like Steve has, you don't have to muck around with ingesting versions you don't want/need to get to the one you DO want. And if the uuid is different, then it WILL require a separate key, even if the name is exactly the same.  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 11-12-2013 08:48 AM                    One presumes that between an early screening version and the release version much of the contents will be in effect the same. But for those parts that are the effectively the same, are they in fact the very same files, same file name, same size, same modified date, same CRC or whatever else? Even if the same contents some of those things might be different. If between the two DCP's, nothing is the same then the question ends right there: Everything gets reingested. If, on the other hand, some of them ARE the same then there is the possibility that those things would not get reingested. In fact, how can they be if they have the same name and same everything else? What if I drag a movie onto my backup CRU drive, and weeks later drag a later version of the same title onto the drive? They should show up on the server's contents list as two different movies but I would bet that if I examined the file list, there'd only be one copy of certain files but two copies, with different characteristics of some others. If at this point neither was on the server any longer, and I selected one or the other to ingest I would presume it would take whichever files it needed for that version. But, as I said, this is all moot if it turns out that the none of the files are exactly the same in terms of name/size/date/CRC etc. Maybe the norm is that everything gets renamed between versions--I've never looked.  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 11-12-2013 11:04 AM                    For general information here are the directory listings for two DCPs. 10/18/2013 08:38 AM 3,726 ASSETMAP 10/18/2013 08:38 AM 155 VOLINDEX 10/18/2013 08:38 AM 11,119 PKL_a075b8b0-085c-4877-95ca-5d8ae7555bf9.xml 10/18/2013 08:38 AM 12,313 CPL_FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20131016_TDC.xml 10/18/2013 08:37 AM 9,825,757,134 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20130916_TDC_01.mxf 10/18/2013 08:25 AM 16,714,746,509 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20130916_TDC_02.mxf 10/18/2013 08:15 AM 17,179,141,916 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20130916_TDC_03.mxf 10/18/2013 08:09 AM 18,311,969,933 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20130916_TDC_04.mxf 10/18/2013 08:28 AM 16,698,055,084 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20130916_TDC_05.mxf 10/18/2013 08:31 AM 11,943,725,434 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20131016_TDC_06.mxf 10/18/2013 08:38 AM 694,541,174 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20130722_TDC_audio_01.mxf 10/18/2013 08:38 AM 1,047,956,054 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20130722_TDC_audio_02.mxf 10/18/2013 08:37 AM 1,085,921,462 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20130722_TDC_audio_03.mxf 10/18/2013 08:37 AM 1,159,572,182 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20130722_TDC_audio_04.mxf 10/18/2013 08:37 AM 1,062,903,350 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20130722_TDC_audio_05.mxf 10/18/2013 08:38 AM 924,287,990 FAKETITLE1_FTR_S_EN-XX_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20130722_TDC_audio_06.mxf ------------ 11/06/2013 10:15 AM 6,759 ASSETMAP 11/06/2013 10:15 AM 155 VOLINDEX 11/06/2013 10:15 AM 14,375 PKL_2e261000-a959-4c9c-8b6d-e6fa7c678714.xml 11/06/2013 10:15 AM 15,850 CPL_FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-EN_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20131106_TDC_IOP.xml 11/06/2013 10:12 AM 21,636,707,261 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_01.mxf 11/06/2013 09:58 AM 23,200,217,391 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_02.mxf 11/06/2013 10:08 AM 22,514,506,376 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_03.mxf 11/06/2013 09:53 AM 27,906,539,053 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_04.mxf 11/06/2013 09:43 AM 28,802,768,348 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_05.mxf 11/06/2013 09:48 AM 28,277,231,866 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_06.mxf 11/06/2013 09:37 AM 28,942,700,870 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_07.mxf 11/06/2013 10:03 AM 23,118,197,992 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_08.mxf 11/06/2013 10:15 AM 782,306,774 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_audio_01.mxf 11/06/2013 10:15 AM 821,321,750 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_audio_02.mxf 11/06/2013 10:15 AM 785,817,398 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_audio_03.mxf 11/06/2013 10:14 AM 1,001,630,294 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_audio_04.mxf 11/06/2013 10:14 AM 1,018,314,806 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_audio_05.mxf 11/06/2013 10:14 AM 956,716,022 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_audio_06.mxf 11/06/2013 10:15 AM 934,276,982 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_audio_07.mxf 11/06/2013 10:15 AM 752,231,222 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-XX_51_STUDIO_20131102_audio_08.mxf 11/06/2013 10:15 AM 598,125,686 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-EN_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20131106_TDC_IOP_audio_09.mxf 11/06/2013 10:14 AM 9,306,501,222 FAKETITLE2_FTR_S_EN-EN_OV_51_2K_STUDIO_20131106_TDC_IOP_09.mxf 11/06/2013 10:15 AM <DIR> ac989374-bec0-40bc-a5cd-c2d5bf2e0669 11/06/2013 10:15 AM <DIR> d803d590-da06-42f8-b0ea-4219c1958168 11/06/2013 10:15 AM <DIR> 7aea25e1-bfdf-446b-b1f0-0d11a7800a9e 11/06/2013 10:15 AM <DIR> 2454831a-6162-4f26-aca3-6f388e6cee32  |  IP: Logged Bill Gabel Film God Posts: 3873 From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 11-12-2013 11:16 AM                     quote: Jim Cassedy ("PW" is "post-warehouse' which is a digital posting facility in NY owned by Technicolor) Jim "PW" stands PostWorks  |  IP: Logged Tony Bandiera Jr Film God Posts: 3067 From: Moreland Idaho Registered: Apr 2004 posted 11-12-2013 11:55 AM                     quote: Edward Havens Thanks, Steve, but after seven years of working with digital projection on a daily basis, I do understand how this all works. If I can be equally insulting to you as you were with me, perhaps you do not understand how this works. Where was Steve being insulting? Please clarify it for the masses who also did not see any insult or attitude in Steve's reply.... What he said made perfect sense and matches what the post houses I have been to told me about how DCP's work.  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 11-12-2013 04:07 PM                    Thanks, Tony. There was certainly no intention to be condescending; I have no idea what people know or don't know. And if someone implied that I know next to nothing about DC, well, they'd probably be just about right! If someone were never told or actually examined the contents of a DCP themselves, even someone with computer knowledge, given what the server shows the projectionist (at least on a Dolby; I cannot speak about others), they could easily assume that a movie is one huge file.  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 11-19-2013 07:28 PM                    Here's what I have now observed on a DSS-200. I had an early version of a movie ingested of 122 GB. I now have a new version. Same running time, same 122 GB. Probably some trivial change or maybe it's just the encryption that's changed. Ingesting the new one without deleting the old one first had a copy phase of just 70 seconds. As the progress bar zipped across the amount copied indication only went up to 8GB. There was then a full verification step of maybe 12 minutes or so. I then deleted the old version. Available space went up only by 8 GB. It would have been scary if it had gone up 122! In an abundance of caution, I then deleted the new version and ingested it again. Deleting upped the space available by 123 GB. This time the copy phase took about 18 minutes followed by 12 minutes of verification. I presume the files are known by some sort of signature that goes beyond simply name and size or there'd be problems if those parameters matched despite there being differences. So yes, this could be a big time saver when there is a version change that leaves most of the files intact. Whether there is any danger of doing this I am not sure. I know I don't want to be the first to find out!  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 11-20-2013 03:32 AM                        I posted this in a new thread, but thought it would be relevant here as well.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-20-2013 06:36 AM                     A movie is (or any CPL) is made from component parts that are IDed by the UUID. Part of the CPL specifies the UUIDs that make up the whole CPL. So, when new content is ingested...the server (at least the Dolby server) will look at its assets and only ingest what it needs to complete the CPL. However, on the verify...it has to verify that unique CPL as a complete CPL. But there was no reason to re-ingest what it already had.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.