Closed kieranjol closed 4 years ago
P.S - I also see that you have a multi-pkl (and multi-cpl) test in your test repo - I don't get why people would do this at all when they should probably just seperate these out into multiple packages?
Hey @kieranjol,
I don't think "multi CPL" is a standardised term, same for "OV" and "VF". This is mostly conventions used in the industry, ISDCF tends to manage those and has a page about Package Type.
From what I can tell, these kind of package are mostly used to facilite distribution workflows. Each provider / studio probably have it's own specifications on how to structure the packages, a common practice I saw indeed was to merge DCPs before delivery.
The SMPTE standards don't mention any of those package type in particular but show some example of package containing multiples PKL and/or CPL.
SMPTE 429-8-2007
SMPTE 429-9-2014
This is question that can only be best answered by people having practical experience in the field ;)
Thank you so much. Yeah I saw no mention of VF and OV in the DCI spec anyhow, I had seen thee ISDCF appendix which was helpful. I really like that you mentioned that this is more of a distribution thing. Anyhow I'll close this, thank you!
Hi - I'm trying to add better support in our systems for OV and VF, but I think I've found this other type which is flagged as 'multi-cpl' in clairmeta. This seems to be where you have more than one CPL within a DCP but all files are available to it so both CPLs are really OVs.. I was wondering where you got the term multi-cpl, is it your own or did you take it from some standard? From what I can see, OV, VF and this 'multi-cpl' are really important distinctions, even if i multi-cpl is kind of a subset of OV. Looks like Charbon-SMPTE-24 is an example of this - https://www.charbon-studio.com/resources An example of where I saw it used: