Just switch to digital, bro. It's easier than film, bro. It looks just as good, bro. What could go wrong, bro?
Just switch to digital, bro. It's easier than film, bro. It looks just as good, bro. What could go wrong, bro?
Just switch to digital, bro. It's easier than film, bro. It looks just as good, bro. What could go wrong, bro?
How could this even happen?
Saaaarrrr you hire me to maintain Netflix archives but I delete file mistake
Saaaarrrr don't be mad it just movie
Jeeting ain’t easy.
Try watching 28 Days Later
I don’t want to watch that movie.
That movie is absolute trash. Im asking how going digital is a problem
Not a problem, I own it on both DVD and Blu Ray, can watch it any time I want.
MY MEN NEED TO RAPE AFTER 2 WEEKS OF NO SEX
They definitely rushed the ending. Probably they didn't have one cus the movie is definitelt one of those concepts a stoner would make.
No problemo
Because of rotational velocidensity, of course. Don’t you know anything about how digital compression works?
No.
Competence crisis once again.
everything decays
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_degradation
Fug that's something I did not factor into my carcurations
>try to click on the link to the data degradation wiki page
>doesnt load right
bluray rot
Digital files lose a few megabytes of data every month due to climate change exciting the Earth's magnetosphere
?si=BAYR-BR-PS_SlDuD
tl;dr: competence crisis, The Old Ways were not passed on and if they are lost they have to be rediscovered by people who are dumber and less educated than the original creators.
The Old Ways were roundly rejected, you mean.
A RAID array is more expensive than just putting your files on one WD Blue hard drive your underpaid IT guy found in the back of the supply closet.
he who controls the past, controls the future
they want to rewrite our past. and that means rewriting our movies. our culture.
back to the future? always black
star wars? always black
jaws? the villain was the white man.
The true blackpill is that it will all eventually fail unless you constantly update it to the newer format. Analog probably has the shortest lifespan of all these mediums. It has to be kept absolutely pristine to still be usable. Sure hard drives fail and even dvd and blu ray discs suffer disc rot but they'll still last longer than if this was all on film.
But they still discover 100 year old reels of film that are usable
Nah, they are usually incredibly deteriorated and require AI remastering to even be viewable.
thats not true
What about mdiscs?
>What about mdiscs?
Apparently fake now. Supposedly the new ones put out by Verbatim just has the M-Disc label but they're still no different than the non-m-disc BD-R's.
PERSONALLY speaking, every BD-R spindle I've bought recently has bubbles noticeable from the side of the spindle. To me, this indicates trapped air, which could lead to layer separation which leads to disc rot. I mean, for the really important shit I might just make multiple backups of the same disc and just recheck them every 3 years or so, who knows?
>they're just getting away with lying about a product they charge that much for
somehow i doubt that would fly for very long
You're free to go look at the Amazon reviews. I despise plebbit, but they have a datahoarder section that's also up to date on the situation.Amazon has been selling fake batteries from china for years now, they aren't going to care about fake M-Discs.
M-Discs are inorganic. Verbatim clearly states they have an organic inner layer. You can literally tell the difference in color which is why the community is so aware of the issue.
If your entire basis for believing Verbatim is because you "doubt" they can get away with it for long, that is one incredibly gullible outlook bro.
so carts were the best media format this whole time? my snes carts will work for the next 100 years?
>Analog probably has the shortest lifespan of all these mediums
you know absolutely nothing about anything based gigamoron
Everything you said is completely wrong. Analog is far more stable and, more importantly, easier to restore, than digital.
t. editor / archivist.
Why can't they just make copies?
There are two things to that.
First, copies are NEVER truly perfect replicas. There will always be some non-zero number of errors introduced in the process unless you are running at a speed so slow it takes a year (exageration) to fully copy the file.
Second, related to that time part, it just takes too much time. We have billions of hours of recorded video at this point. It isnt feasible to be constantly copying all of it. By the time you got done it would be 30 years later and you would need to start again (another illustrative exageration).
So it isnt really a matter of we CANT. But at the end of the day if you are israeli exec do you actually care to put in the resources when only 1% of your media library is bringing in 99% of the revenue?
>There will always be some non-zero number of errors introduced in the process unless you are running at a speed so slow it takes a year (exageration) to fully copy the file.
There is no need to embarrass yourself with your ignorance.
Spoken like an anon that has never once in his life done more than click a download button.
You are an imbecile who doesn't know what checksums are or how file copying algorithms work.
you're the type of boomer moron who buys snake oil audiophile equipment that keeps the bit walls straight because you can't into basic TCP
you're the type of sirs who doesn't understand media preservation vs media consumption
>non-zero number of
why do people keep using this moronicly redundant phrase? just cut it out of the sentence and you're saying the exact same thing.
And this is without accounting for how the rotational velocidensity of the disk affects things
>We have billions of hours of recorded video at this point. It isnt feasible to be constantly copying all of it.
We don't currently need to copy ALL of it, just the available footage that's most at risk of decay, so film, VHS, etc.
implying there hasn't been an endless amount of film stock lost throughout the years
the question is who is responsible for it, and more importantly who is paying them?
we should copy the digital files of movies into metal plates and bury them in the moon
>Paramount senior vp asset management Andrea Kalas, who leads the SciTech Council’s preservation initiatives, emphasizes that the best practice for preserving a film that was shot digitally is to “have a copy of that final film in the best possible resolution, in the widest color gamut, so you have the most original materials associated with that film.” She adds, “If you are moving your files to an infrastructure of some sort, whether that’s a data center or a set of clouds, people are thinking about storage policies like keeping multiple copies. There are also people that choose to store things offline like on LTOs,” referring to a tape-based format that’s been utilized for decades. Good old-fashioned — and time tested — film also remains in use.
What he's saying is that the studios should have backup RAW files. There's also special film stocks designed for transferring digital to analog
Bloody bastards won't seed
That's funny because tape is still used for data backup
Tape is great for archival, it's just insanely slow so once you need to retrieve something from it, you pay for it in your time. They could easily create giant HDD/SSD arrays for backup, plus one on tape, and another off site for the perfect 3-2-1 system.
Yea and floppy disks are still used by the government, doesn't make them more efficient or easier to use than modern data storage.
Literally, just archive all the original shot footage. It's not that fricking hard. Film has even worse issues with archiving as it deteriorates if not stored perfectly. The only real problem with digital is the fixed resolution. We'll be on 4K for a very long time. Most movie theaters still use 2K projectors.
>nothing personnell kid
No longer in production and they don't hold much data.
Yes they are and they hold as much as a regular blu ray.
I might be wrong but I'm pretty sure the original company went under and the new one doesn't make any of the storage length guarantees as the old one; they're basically just marked up regular discs now. But if I'm wrong, that's great news.
I think you're wrong. Verbatim makes them and make the same claims.
>Verbatim makes them and make the same claims.
If you dig into that subject, it sounds like the users highly doubt Verbatim's claims, and they do use an organic dye whereas true M-Discs do not.
M-Disc and BD-R are a really interesting rabbit hole. The promises are very promising, the discussion is already interesting (anecdotes of 30+ year old CD-R's still running strong vs cd/dvd/bd-R's going bad in 3 years)
Everything is relative. I'd been buying new HD's every year and backing them up, but that does get expensive. I do LOVE the promise of BD-R, but M-Discs are ballpark $3 each and standard BD-R are about $1 (for 25gb, AVOID the higher ones as more layers = higher failure rates!)
My family photos don't take up more than a disc or two, so for those I've burned both M-Disc and standard BD-R's. For something that important it's no big deal to spend $10 and make ten copies. Not so easy for tb worth of stuff.
Best bet: don't go too long without checking the playability of your discs, check them yearly if possible. VSO Inspector was what was recommended to me to check disc health, unless someone has a better suggestion.
There's debate on reddit about it apparently but there are people on either side. It's not as simple as "users doubt verbatim's claims".
Thanks for the other tips though.
>It's not as simple as "users doubt verbatim's claims".
The entire thing is: M-Disc is inorganic, Verbatim's disc admittedly have an organic inner layer with a "MARBL" (marketing term) scratch proof surface layer. Nobody is an expert, nobody knows for sure, but I read a plebbit thread where they'd contacted Verbatim and the replies were very evasive.
I wish I had the answer, I'd go whole hog on it for backing up my shit. I'd save a fortune if I could just write once and file away for later.
I remember in high school burning copies of Tech N9ne CDs and Taylor Swift CDs and selling them for 5 bucks a pop. But they both had new albums coming out at the same time.
I'll buy digital copies of games, not movies.
I bought the entire series of Are You Afraid of the Dark on the ps4, but on the PS5 it's no where too be found, even though I'm on the same account. I learned my lesson
I have roughly 14 TB that is also backed up on two additional drives that are stored in temp regulated air tight containers in my closet.
Nothing of value will have been lost. Only dogshit slop was filmed on digital. Anything worth a damn was filmed on fricking film.
Why don't they just make backups?
>the Cinemaphile autist with several 8tb ssds full of rips is going to save Hollywood from archival stupidity
I kneel.
>Universal has a warehouse of hundreds of original film copies of movies from the early 20th century
>In order for it to be released it needs to be digitally remastered since the film has been degraded so badly it's unwatchable
>Movies like spanish Dracula have scenes that are so far gone that it's impossible to remaster
>All it takes is one lunatic or accident to lose all this in a fire
>It will be lost to time no matter what
Bros......I don't want to think about it.....
All things are ephemeral. I believe that almost everything digital from our era will be lost as digital is an even less robust means preservation than it predecessors. Film itself as a medium is only like 135 years old and none of it was made with long-term preservation in mind. Digital, at best, will allow for a few more decades of life before it joins the pantheon of lost works.
The best preservation system was discovered long ago which is having a bunch of autistic monks physically copy everything each generation.
>The best preservation system was discovered long ago which is having a bunch of autistic monks physically copy everything each generation.
How is this any better than having a bunch of NEETs copy everything each generation with zero effort with hundreds if not thousands of duplicates each generation? That's exactly what digital enables.
Digital relies on a series of technologies and expertise, e.g. electricity, computers, and a stable infrastructure that maintains it, as well as the technical knowledge to be able to convert it to or from a digital medium. With each added complexity, the more likely the system is to fail. Not today or tomorrow, but what about in 2075? Or 2150?
Let's take an extreme example and say a Carrington-like Event (massive geomagnetic storm from the sun) takes places and fries the grid, and all electronic devices stop functioning. The one recorded in 1859 was only really noticed because we had burgeoning electrical technology, so we have no idea how often these will occur. Even if it the event is more limited, it could still corrupt the data and the storage of countless devices. This is just one example that doesn't even take into account the competency crisis and the third worldification of the West.
Monk NEETech only requires writing literacy. But the real problem is mediums like film cannot simply be copied like texts. Technically, autistic artists could draw everything frame by frame from the negatives, but practically speaking, only the most treasured works would ever receive this treatment. But I agree the best we can do for now is to using our modern digital tech as the aforementioned NEETmonks and copy digital onto physical film every generation or so. But this requires time, money, and most importantly physical storage space. Hence, most works will be lost to time.
>mediums like film cannot simply be copied like texts
nonsense
this reeks of lack of understanding of several things
>Spanish Dracula
Hmm. I have it on Blu-ray and it actually looks okay.
like 98% of it is still good. The scenes where theyre traveling by boat and a little of outdoor london are smudged really bad.
>scan films (raw, unedited) to 12k resolution or whatever can possibly be achieved and store on both magnetic tape and HDD and also make a torrent available
>eventually enough people will have a copy that there's no risk of being lost anymore
it doesn't make studios money of course
In fact it costs them money.
I have a Dune II disc, Red Alert, and Doom disc that still work.
I thought they were supposed to not work now?
I've still got all my Dreamcast games from the late 90s and they all work.
Why don’t they just go torrent a blu ray copy?
Literally just keep backing up to new SSDs.
>oh no i wont be able to watch Black person heroes white people bad 3 ever again
frick off
The only movies in danger are unknown, arthouse shitflicks. And if you care about losing those, go cry about it in the /film/ containment thread.
>Oh no my 4k Lord of the Rings lost a few pixels after 10 years!
Just download a new remux from the thousand seeders.
Studios can spend $50B a year on DEI but can't spend $5M + $100K/yr maintenance on replicated digital storage arrays, one in L.A., one in New Jersey, another in San Antonio, TX?
Google is the world's largest client for magnetic tape for storage purposes. They were really angry at their supplier for making the public aware of that fact.
>Google is the world's largest client for magnetic tape for storage purposes. They were really angry at their supplier for making the public aware of that fact.
interesting
why the anger?
REVISING HISTORY!
nice cover story that you all are falling for btw.
Indiana Jones will be a blank man in your future video library and you'll be ostracized if you say you remember otherwise and put in a camp.
1984 just got a little closer!
WB does have a glass lasering technology that they backed up Superman (1978) on. I don't recall where exactly I saw it, but it was either the older Blu Ray release or the recent 4k Blu Ray that had the featurette. Looks promising, especially if we get it for home use for our own backups.
>ancestors make cave kinos that last tens of thousands of years
what went so wrong?
>the sun will explode in six billion years so nothing matters bro
I am getting way too old for this shithole.