Welcome to the new Film-Tech Forums!
The forum you are looking at is entirely new software. Because there was no good way to import all of the old archived data from the last 20 years on the old software, everyone will need to register for a new account to participate.
To access the original forums from 1999-2019 which are now a "read only" status, click on the "FORUM ARCHIVE" link above.
Please remember registering with your first and last REAL name is mandatory. This forum is for professionals and fake names are not permitted. To get to the registration page click here.
Once the registration has been approved, you will be able to login via the link in the upper right corner of this page.
Also, please remember while it is highly encouraged to upload an avatar image to your profile, is not a requirement. If you choose to upload an avatar image, please remember that it IS a requirement that the image must be a clear photo of your face.
Thank you!
It was interesting to see how the Bradford cinema has adapted the Cinerama process to use the platter system to exhibit Cinerama films. I don't think this was ever done for the Seattle Cinerama. I was wondering when the last new print of a Cinerama feature was made. This lead me to a page, "https://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/kimblepage8.htm" which states:
This fall, it happened at last. Made at the order of Michael Forman, head of Pacific Theaters, a new print of This Is Cinerama, struck from the original negative by Crest Lab, was shown on September 30th , the 50th anniversary of the original premier in New York.
Unfortunately, there is no date on the article.
Now that the Seattle Cinerama has been saved (again!), we will have the chance to see Cinerama again in the US.
Due to Canada's dairy cartel, prices for milk, ice cream, butter and the like are far above their actual market value, so I can understand why butter would be an attractive target for thieves.
I put real butter on the popcorn in my theatre and the current price for that butter is about $8 per pound, though I watch for sales and can occasionally get it for as low as $5.49. That's when I buy a bunch and freeze it.
I know that topping oil would be an order of magnitude cheaper than butter, but I don't want to do it that way.
When I opened my theatre I was paying about $1.00 per pound for the same butter that I'm buying today for $8.
Eternally in our hearts,
Until we meet again,
Cherished memories,
Known as
Our son, brother,
Father, papa, uncle,
Friend, and cousin.
And there are at least six more synonyms for "forever". Or you can keep the meaning while changes all the words:
Eternamente en nuestros corazones,
Hasta que nos encontremos de nuevo,
Recuerdos preciados,
Conocido como
Nuestro hijo, hermano,
Padre, papá, tío,
Amigo y primo.
Interesting topic. It reminded me of this:
List of Printers Which Do or Do Not Display Tracking Dots
Warning
(Added 2015) Some of the documents that we previously received through FOIA suggested that all major manufacturers of color laser printers entered a secret agreement with governments to ensure that the output of those printers is forensically traceable. Although we still don't know if this is correct, or how subsequent generations of forensic tracking technologies might work, it is probably safest to assume that all modern color laser printers do include some form of tracking information that associates documents with the printer's serial number. (If any manufacturer wishes to go on record with a statement to the contrary, we'll be happy to publish that here.)
The biggest problem with this scheme is that you need to change letters or words without changing the meaning of the text.
Invisibly marking a piece of text, especially a short one, is a pretty though problem, since text is inherently sparse. A lot of the underlying information of text is carried in the context and "subtext" of that text. Compare this to an image or video, where you often have millions of pixels to burry information.
The only reliable way I can think to watermark text is to hash the whole thing then, somehow, bury the hash into the text.
One could use whatever hash algorithm that's appropriate then convert the hexadecimal number to base-26, turning the code into the letters A through Z. Then, somehow change certain word or character positions to have that letter in them. Determining whether the text has been altered would require looking for those letters in the preassigned positions.
The problem with that scheme is that burying the hash into the text changes the hash. You'd have to be able to tell which letters were changed and what they should have been before the original hash was done.
Of course, this idea won't work for obvious reasons but it's a thought experiment.
I never really understood how these AI Large Language Models work but this guy gives a very understandable description of what they do and then he describes a very clever way to watermark text.
Watermark text? That sounds like a ridiculous concept on its face but there is a way.
This is the best short lecture I've seen in some time.
Regarding the watermarking of text via that method: There have since been other papers showing that this kind of watermarking is pretty ineffective, as it can easily be detected and be defeated. You could actually train another LLM to detect the watermarking and reliably remove it for you.
Leave a comment: