Failed Tech QC

[peter]

Hi all,

anybody able to shed any light on this? We had a feature DCP checked by a distributor.. and they have 'failed' it.. or at least raised these QC issues. They said we were not using legitamate DCP mastering software. I have delivered DCPs using DOM before.. and I know it creates good and valid DCP's. This one does open and play. Seems like some obscure metadata issue?

Anybody know what these QC problems are and anyway we could fix it? I asked them about the bitrate violation but they didn't answer. I encoded the picture at 125Mb/sec. Seems that should be fine and within DCI spec. If you offer any help.. that would be great. Thanks much.


____________________________

From Clipster

Image tracks

Result: Failed

Composition Playlist(CPL): cpl_1f51b5ef-6a99-443d-b2d9-272c7f81fafe.xml Invalid Mxf Image-Trackfile j2c_43033daf-029f-4e19-881f-b4da03e1ddd1.mxf



Image tracks frame boundaries

Result: Failed



Image tracks datarate

Result: Failed

Composition Playlist(CPL): cpl_1f51b5ef-6a99-443d-b2d9-272c7f81fafe.xml. Could not extract image frame 0 from asset /Badland_FTR-24_S_EN-XX_US-NR_51_2K_NULL_20190909_GAR_IOP_OV/j2c_43033daf-029f-4e19-881f-b4da03e1ddd1.mxf





From Easy DCP - ERRORS

All JPEG 2000 code-streams in all picture track files are fully decoded and checked for maximum bit rate violations and the correct profile. / Maximum bitrate violation detected

________________________

[carl]

That's strange. I guess there's no easy way to make this DCP available to me?

[peter]

Would sending over the non-MXF files (AssetMap, XMLs, etc) be helpful at all? Or do you need everything to check it out? If you need all the files.. I could just make a short test using the same workflow I did for the full feature?

All our DCPs play fine at festivals and at theaters. These guys are just giving us a hard time due to some random QC flag that is being raised.

thanks.

[carl]

It sounds like something "wrong" with the JPEG2000 video stream (in the j2c_...mxf) rather than the metadata. Perhaps the most frustrating thing about all these QC checks is how they say there is a problem but never give enough details to investigate or fix it.

It might be interesting to look at a short test, though the problem may be related to to your source file.

[peter]

Hi Carl,

I did email you a short test. With my same workflow.. it's just the first 30 seconds of the movie. Maybe you can see why they reported these QC errors and 'failed' the DCP. I don't understand it for sure.

[carl]

Thanks for the test file. I can't see anything wrong with it, except for some odd reason the asset map is named ASSETMAP.xml instead of ASSETMAP.

The bit rate looks to be well under the maximum for all the frames in the video MXF.

I guess either they are complaining about a nonexistant problem or there is something different about your feature DCP. How did you send it to the QC guys?

[peter]

Thanks for checking it out. Seeing as how the bitrate should be around 125.. I don't understand that QC error. No idea what the others ones mean.

They sent us an Aspera link and we uploaded the DCP folder to their server. I wonder if the ASSETMAP thing might just be because it went through Google drive and maybe that changed something a little. Looking at the file on my Windows machine.. it just says ASSETMAP for the filename.

[carl]

How's your internet connection? Can you upload it again to me?

Your explanation for the ASSETMAP filename sounds plausible.

[carl]

(if so, I have a test upload site like YouTransfer that I can point you to).

[peter]

Hi Carl,

I'm not comfortable sending this feature over.. since it's not released yet. I could either send over a different feature we did previously... or make a new full DCP using the same workflow. I think this distributor was just being extra difficult as we have never had these issues before. So weird.