I downloaded the movie after seeing it in theatre to once again enjoy it from the comfort of my home. Seeing 2160p, I thought it's going to be a webcam rip but the title says webrip. Where is this leaked from that has Dolby Vision on a movie still in theatre?

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 101 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Its not unheard of for some scene peeps to get access to the raw digital files played in some theaters. It's uncommon because of the difficulty in acquisition and then sanitizing it so they can't figure out who ripped it, but does happen.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    I'm really curious about the sanitation process. About the methods used to identify each copy, it has to be one of those cases of security by obscurity. I think it is a fascinating topic that I know nothing about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 44 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    IIRC digital cinema files are usually DRM locked in a special format and are also imperceptibly watermarked somewhere throughout the video. They're distributed to cinemas usually on physical hard drives/SSD's. I don't know anything about the security details other than that, off to YouTube it is!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Same, it makes me think about Reality Winner being caught because they knew which printer the documents came from.

    The pages from the NSA's printers came with invisible tracking dots. This is a common feature in modern printers for forensics investigations

    https://www.cnet.com/news/privacy/reality-winner-nsa-leak-russian-hacking-printer-tracking-dots/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    It's basically impossible to detect well-designed steganography (invisible watermark) unless you have access to the algorithm that writes or reads it, or multiple comparable copies of the media.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    That is what makes it so fascinating to me. Do they work with the original files? Is it possible to capture the decoded data at some point before the projector?Is the watermark still present there?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 68 points 3 months ago

    comments for that torrent on ext.to include

    Quality is pretty bad, something off about it does not look right with Russian subs for visual words burned it

    Bad quality, not even FHD :(

    Not completely clean of burned in Russian subs. Otherwise quality looks good

    so good chance you got an ai upscaled russian camrip

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Back in the early DVD days the studios would hand out DVD "screener" copies to film critics and magazines for reviews. They were often ripped and passed around when films were still in theatres. Often they had a watermark or subtitles in a different language but were otherwise top quality.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Now it doesn’t work like that anymore. They have a site a special code to watch the movie

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    I'm currently helping organizing a film festival and it basically works like this. We got hundreds of password protected links to movies for screening, most of them on vimeo. I wouldn't hand them out though because these are all small productions.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Still happens for some cases like airplane movies. I know I've seen pirated movies that had the airline name pop up for a few seconds.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 3 months ago

    30 FPS would be a cam rip, no?

    Just because they put webrip in the title doesn't make it so.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I would be a bit sceptical

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Default audio is in Spanish although English is available. Some but not all on-screen text has non removable Russian subtitles baked into the video. Could be worse.

    The Spanish sub&dub with on screen Russian is confusing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

    if you have a good camera (2x number of pixels, and 2x colordepth than the movie), then you could make a camrip with perfect quality (assuming some calibration frames, and a cinema that gives no fuck). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampling_theorem

    though I guess that's still too much effort for most, and most early leaks are digital copies, as the other comments suggest.

    edit: newer comments suggest camrip with a bad camera

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Would that be like on a tripod in the audience area recording the screen? Seems lossy somehow so I figure I'm misunderstanding. I'm pretty ignorant (~fully ignorant lol) about this, apologies, ya just piqued my curiosity.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Would that be like on a tripod in the audience area recording the screen?

    yes.

    Seems lossy somehow

    it is! but that's where Shannon sampling theorem comes in. The sampling only needs to be twice as good as the source, and then you can reconstruct the source perfectly. (with some assumptions, e.g. correct color gamut, focal point, etc.).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Would that be like on a tripod in the audience area recording the screen?

    Fun fact: this is how films get digitized, they play the film in a tiny movie theater just big enough for the camera. The whole apperatus is about the size of a washing machine

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Wtf lol, that just seems so...low tech? I certainly can't think of a "better" way to do it, guess I imagined some fully enclosed (or maybe that's what you're describing).

    It's like finding out almost all power generation is really just different ways of boiling water lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    Scanner is technically the same, it just bounces light off the object, rather than shining through it.
    Hell 3D scanning is pretty cool and what I'd consider high tech, but it's still just bouncing waves off things and recording those!
    I guess there's no escaping the universal fundamentals, or the limits of our technology at least

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago

    Probably from an obscure overseas streaming service you've never heard of

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I'm more confused by the cam capture listings dated 2025

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    This version has hard coded Cyrillic overlay for written text. If you can put up with that, then yes, it's a great 2160p copy.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Is it the one with hard coded cyrillic letters for english writing? That would give a hint about its origin.

    Fetching the line audio from somewhere else could be much easier than the picture. Plus not all channels contain speech... so english 2ch could be sufficient if you got the other channels... elsewhere.

    TLDR :no idea. :)

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Probably telecine which is ripped right from the reel.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    On another related note, dude that movie is one of the best I've seen in a long time.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›