Live data from Hacker News

DRM in the cinema

astortheatreblog.wordpress.com

11–20 of 87 posts

Re: DRM in the cinema

#11

This is the part that made me cringe: The [DRM key] arrives as an email zip attachment that then needs to be unzipped, saved onto a memory stick and uploaded onto the server. Seriously? That's how we're delivering time-sensitive digital information? In 2012 ? Ugh, it makes my head spin. Is there some reason that the projector can't be connected to the network directly, so the vendor can push the key straight to it wi…

Live by the sword, die by the sword. If you ask a bunch of hackers how to make a mission-critical application secure, one of the top answers is going to be 'air gap.' In economic terms, security has greater value (to the publishers) than the mild inconvenience of a few shows starting late.

Re: DRM in the cinema

#12

This is the part that made me cringe: The [DRM key] arrives as an email zip attachment that then needs to be unzipped, saved onto a memory stick and uploaded onto the server. Seriously? That's how we're delivering time-sensitive digital information? In 2012 ? Ugh, it makes my head spin. Is there some reason that the projector can't be connected to the network directly, so the vendor can push the key straight to it wi…

[deleted]

Re: DRM in the cinema

#13
Ex-VFX guy here again. I feel like I have to comment on these threads because I'm thrilled to see 35mm film die.[1] The DRM sucks but....

> There are instances in the US already where some studios are refusing to freight 35mm film prints to cinemas.

Yeah, because it's crazy expensive. It costs ~$1500 to strike and ship a 35mm print[2]. Also, did you know that prints are delivered by some specialized delivery company? They're not just shipped around by FedEx. I can't remember the name of the company right now.

This incident sucks for them but I feel like this move to digital is great for the environment and a better moviegoing experience. I love the rock-solid picture with awesome contrast, and not to mention the lack of nasty chemical process in order to create it.

[1] - My original comment on "RIP Movie Camera": http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3114120

[2] - http://www.laweekly.com/2012-04-12/film-tv/35-mm-film-digita...

Re: DRM in the cinema

#14
The story links to an "https" URL, which is odd for several reasons,

1. Since when does a blog need to be secure?

2. The certificate is issued to "*.wordpress.com", which is useless. Each subdomain under wordpress.com should have a distinct certificate since they have a distinct author. The certificate should be specific to the author, not the host.

- I realize it is not realistic to assign unique IP addresses to each wordpress.com subdomain. I just don't like it.

3. The page loads insecure content from gravatar.com and googleservices.com, which throws up annoying errors.

Re: DRM in the cinema

#15

This is the part that made me cringe: The [DRM key] arrives as an email zip attachment that then needs to be unzipped, saved onto a memory stick and uploaded onto the server. Seriously? That's how we're delivering time-sensitive digital information? In 2012 ? Ugh, it makes my head spin. Is there some reason that the projector can't be connected to the network directly, so the vendor can push the key straight to it wi…

I worked with the Tech crew in my high school theater department for a couple of years. There we explicitly removed network connectivity from from the sound/lighting computer to increase stability.

Re: DRM in the cinema

#16

The story links to an "https" URL, which is odd for several reasons, 1. Since when does a blog need to be secure? 2. The certificate is issued to "*.wordpress.com", which is useless. Each subdomain under wordpress.com should have a distinct certificate since they have a distinct author. The certificate should be specific to the author, not the host. - I realize it is not realistic to assign unique IP addresses to eac…

Mixing insecure content makes it stupid, but as someone who uses https on my blog, it comes down to why not to use it. For the time being there's no reason, especially when Gandi give free certificates with a domain.

The one quirk is that I'll always have to have something to redirect to unsecured should traffic ever get so high it becomes an issue. Although I certainly don't expect that any time soon.

Re: DRM in the cinema

#17
> the projectionist can’t test to see if the KDM works or that the quality of the film is right before show time

This seems like a simple and critical feature. If the distributor wishes to impose these extreme constraints on the projectionist, then the projectionist needs to know its going to work well in advance. The projectionist shouldn't even need to be in the room when the movie starts.

I've run into this pattern a lot in web development. If you want a feature to go live at 6:00pm, you don't release it at 5:59pm and just hope it works. You program it to go automatically flip at 6:00pm and release the code early. The pre-programmed time can be overridden in the production environment, so you can easily test and know for sure (or as close as possible to sure) whether it will flip at 6:00pm or not.

(I'm not saying my solution is perfect, just better than the naive solution.)

Re: DRM in the cinema

#18
post #13

Ex-VFX guy here again. I feel like I have to comment on these threads because I'm thrilled to see 35mm film die.[1] The DRM sucks but.... > There are instances in the US already where some studios are refusing to freight 35mm film prints to cinemas. Yeah, because it's crazy expensive . It costs ~$1500 to strike and ship a 35mm print[2]. Also, did you know that prints are delivered by some specialized delivery company…

You don't think there's a place for it in smaller / specialized venues for some time? It makes sense for mainstream Hollywood not to bother with it anymore, but I for one would appreciate to be able to see Bela Tarr on 35mm or Antonioni on 70mm again. I know many of these older prints are passed around too rather than struck per showing.

Re: DRM in the cinema

#19

The story links to an "https" URL, which is odd for several reasons, 1. Since when does a blog need to be secure? 2. The certificate is issued to "*.wordpress.com", which is useless. Each subdomain under wordpress.com should have a distinct certificate since they have a distinct author. The certificate should be specific to the author, not the host. - I realize it is not realistic to assign unique IP addresses to eac…

Certificates don't go with "authors", they go with domains. They are only (!) a promise that some grown up at a cert factory decided that the admin of the host you are connecting to was the proper owner of that domain.

Now sure, there might be value in having per-subdomain certs in wordpress (though that would be rather complicated for wordpress to administer). But there's nothing wrong with that wildcard cert -- it provides proof that you've reached a blog hosted at wordpress, and not a MitM ready to lift your account password when you try to leave a comment.

Re: DRM in the cinema

#20
This is why I love analog, and not just in the sense of "I'm an old fart and old things are better" (though I'm sure there's a good dose of that), but because there's a whole spectrum between "working" and "not working".

(Environmental issues aside, that is -- I recognize that the chemicals needed to manufacture and develop traditional film are pretty nasty.)

With digital, if it works, it's 100%, which is great, but if it doesn't work, it's 0%, and that can make it hard to even get a grip on what the problem is or which direction to go to find a solution. (DRM just makes this worse.) I've got some weird routing to my TV because the obvious HDMI connection doesn't work, and how do you troubleshoot that?

I once went to a theatre where the projectionist came out and announced that they had just broken a lens (apparently they had the largest lenses in town at the time) and couldn't project the film as they wanted to. They offered a refund, but for those who stayed, let us vote on what to do: use a smaller lens and see the film normally but smaller, or use the proper size lens but put up with 3-4 minute pauses every 20 minutes. Everyone stayed, and we chose the latter (who wants to see a small movie in a theatre?), and I don't think it was the wrong choice, but I learned that changeovers are not like commercial breaks: some of them are in really inconvenient places in the film, plot-wise!

That's a situation that could never happen with a new digital projection system. The odd thing is that even though we groaned at how poorly-timed the changeovers were, in my mind the whole event is an overwhelmingly positive memory. I learned something about how projection systems work, and we got to interact with the projectionist, and it was a unique movie night we got to talk about, and I even enjoyed the movie still. We sometimes act as though the only goal of cinema is to reproduce every pixel and soundwave perfectly, but my most enjoyable movie experiences don't correlate to that, and in this case is almost the polar opposite.

I suppose I'm a bit weird like that.

Post reply on HN