New naming convention

[liloneum]

Hints are present when using the new naming convention: http://www.digitalcinemanamingconvention.com/

[liloneum]

Some more details:

Hint: CPL 767037e5-8477-4f77-be91-e3705fb4bbc0: Naming convention: Part film_title "CompilJpYabous" of "CompilJpYabous_SHR_F_FR-ar_IL-AA_20_2K_20131020_LJM_SMPTE_OV" does not match strict form Hint: CPL 767037e5-8477-4f77-be91-e3705fb4bbc0: Naming convention: Part film_title "CompilJpYabous" contains lowercase letters It seems that title should not be separated with a dash but initial caps Hint: CPL 767037e5-8477-4f77-be91-e3705fb4bbc0: Naming convention: Part language "FR-ar" of "CompilJpYabous_SHR_F_FR-ar_IL-AA_20_2K_20131020_LJM_SMPTE_OV" does not match strict form Hint: CPL 767037e5-8477-4f77-be91-e3705fb4bbc0: Naming convention: Part language "FR-ar" contains lowercase letters As my subtitles are burnt-in, lowercase should be used Hint: CPL 767037e5-8477-4f77-be91-e3705fb4bbc0: Naming convention: Part studio "SMPTE" of "CompilJpYabous_SHR_F_FR-ar_IL-AA_20_2K_20131020_LJM_SMPTE_OV" does not match strict form Hint: CPL 767037e5-8477-4f77-be91-e3705fb4bbc0: Naming convention: Part studio "SMPTE" has 5 characters instead of 2-4 Kind of package should be present Hint: CPL 767037e5-8477-4f77-be91-e3705fb4bbc0: Naming convention: Expected number of parts present in "CompilJpYabous_SHR_F_FR-ar_IL-AA_20_2K_20131020_LJM_SMPTE_OV" Hint: CPL 767037e5-8477-4f77-be91-e3705fb4bbc0: Naming convention: 11 parts matching: facility:"LJM" film_title:"CompilJpYabous" content_kind:"SHR" aspect_ratio:"F" language:"FR-ar" territory_rating:"IL-AA" audio_type:"20" resolution:"2K" studio:"SMPTE" date:"20131020" package_type:"OV" Hint: CPL 767037e5-8477-4f77-be91-e3705fb4bbc0: Naming convention: Part audio type claims 20 but composition audio type is 51 It's embarrassing: I have two audio channels but did complete the audio mxf with empty tracks to match the recommendations of smpte standard...

[wolfgangw]

Yes, the naming checks need an overhaul -- currently (v1.2013.11.19) dcp_inspect is merely v6-aware. I'm actually quite surprised that people are picking up v9 so fast. Coming up (eh, l'horreur, having to support two naming versions won't be fun :)

Will you point me to the burn-in/lowercase thing? Can't seem to find it.

Thanks, Lilian and Jonathan, for the feedback.

[liloneum]

Courage! I feel so sorry every time I find a way to give you so much work...

You'll find the information about burn-in/lowercase thing here: http://digitalcinemanamingconvention.com/appendix_1.asp "Subtitles are either generated in the theatre by the Digital Cinema projector, or are burned into the image by the studio. If the Language Code is UPPER CASE, the sub-titles are generated in real time by the projector. If the Language Code is lower case, the subtitles are burned into the image already."

[wolfgangw]

Hey, it's not you, it's v9 :) And thanks, had missed that one.

[EliaOrselli]

Hello, is this issue planned to be solved? I think that now the v9 naming convention is really common. Anyway thanks for the great tool.

[wolfgangw]

Shall be fixed, embarassing omission through all those years -_-

Note: while at it, fix misleading "Naming convention: Part audio type claims 71 but composition audio type is 11.1"