#Incat's Photo Theatre
16 messages in this thread
<<For two different languages?>>
Yup. You can use the same images over and over in different sequences,
attaching different sound clips if you like, without actually recording the
image more than once on disc — which allows you to maximize the number of
images per disc.
<<So all of these grandparents actually have PhotoCD players?>>
No, they all have PCs or Macs with CD-ROM drives. When you record a Portfolio
project to disc you can optionally include our Windows and Mac viewer software
(Magic Lantern), which also runs Portfolio discs.
<<Have you used your (older) portable player with a Portfolio presentation?>>
Yes, but it isn't that old; I think we got it last year.
<<Do the players actually run your software, or does your software just
assemble material into the Portfolio format, which is played by software or
firmware by Kodak?>>
The Kodak players are fairly "dumb," so the software has to organize all the
images and sound properly _and_ write all the micro-code which the player uses
to play the disc. This is part of the reason why you can't just record a bunch
of PCD images on a CD-ROM XA disc and call it a Photo CD — it won't work like
one.
You can also choose to include the CD-I viewer app so that the disc will run
on the smarter CD-I player.
Ciao,
D'
D'
> You can also choose to include the CD-I viewer app so that the disc will run
on the smarter CD-I player. <
I think in order to create a valid PhotoCD according to the standard you HAVE
to include the CD-i application as the standard requires the presence of a
directory named CDI containing a CD-i application capable of playing back the
data on the CD.
Sincerely Peter
As I said, you can include it at no extra cost (maybe I didn't mention the
latter point). Standards are always nice to stick to, and of course it makes
sense to maximize the number of platforms your disc will run on — I see the
multiplatform capability as one of Portfolio's major strengths.
However, people have gotten away with murder with regard to the Photo CD
standard. Last time I looked, Corel's Photo CD clip-art collections were all
Mode 1 ISO 9660 discs with PCD image pacs on them. Last time I looked, Kodak
wasn't prosecuting them for it.
Best,
D'
Deidre'
>> Last time I looked, Kodak wasn't prosecuting them for it.<<
Hey, that is a new aspect to look at standards. I always thought people who
agree let's say with ISO 9660 do so for good reasons not only because they are
afraid of beeing taken to court. <g>
Best regards,
Monika Lutkemeier
CeQuadrat
As Kathy says, Photo CD is a proprietary format, so it's up to Kodak to enforce
it. I was commenting on the fact that Kodak hasn't done anything to enforce it
in the case of the Corel discs (though my knowledge here may be out of date).
Make of it what you will…
Photo Theatre does everything according to the Photo CD/Portfolio format, and
therefore produces discs that run on Kodak Photo CD players as well as PCs and
CD-I players. It is in our interest to follow the format and ensure that
compatibility, so we do. Likewise, it is in our interest to make standard ISO
9660 discs with our other software, and we do. However, when customers demand
some departure from standards, for example the possiblity to make ISO discs
containing filenames which don't strictly adhere to the ISO filenaming
restrictions, we allow for that, while also giving them the possibility to make
discs that do adhere strictly to the standard. We also warn them that when they
depart from the standard they run the risk that their disc will not work on
some systems.
We all agree that standards are desirable and should be followed, and probably
if the entire industry adhered strictly to the Orange Book for recordable CDs
_and_ reading them back on CD-ROM drives, we wouldn't be seeing all the
troubles people are having. But nothing except market pressure can enforce a
standard, and when neither the manufacturers nor the consumers completely
understand the standards, that's not likely to happen.
Ciao,
D'
>>But nothing except market pressure can enforce a standard, and when neither
the manufacturers nor the consumers completely understand the standards, that's
not likely to happen.
That's one reason we're now calling the column "Standards Deviations". How
would you like to be a guest columnist sometime? <g>
Love to — I enjoy playing expert! <G> I'm pretty deviant myself, so I should
fit right in.
>>Last time I looked, Kodak wasn't prosecuting them for it.
I noticed that, a couple of years ago. Seems rather strange to me, too.
>> The Kodak players are fairly "dumb," <<
No no no. You've got it wrong. _KODAK_ is fairly "dumb".
The players are smart enough NOT to read a disc that doesn't have Kodak's
royalty generating microcode on a XA format disc.
>> This is part of the reason why you can't just record a bunch of PCD images
on a CD-ROM XA disc and call it a Photo CD — it won't work like one. <<
… Except on a PC, a MAC, or a CD-I player.
Jeff
>> This is part of the reason why you can't just record a bunch of PCD images
on a CD-ROM XA disc and call it a Photo CD — it won't work like one. <<
<< … Except on a PC, a MAC, or a CD-I player.>>
True, but then you lose that additional potential platform. The nice thing
about Kodak Photo CD players is they're cheap, so people can afford to set up
numbers of them, say, as point-of-sale displays. The portable one makes a nice
demo machine — all you have to carry around is the machine itself, assuming
that wherever you're going has a TV (and who doesn't, these days?). Plug and
play indeed!
As for Kodak's attempts to make money from Photo CD thus far, the less said the
better…
D'
>>As for Kodak's attempts to make money from Photo CD thus far, the less said
the better…<<
Ok, we won't say anything about it, in terms of "thus far". How about the
future? My main concern is that the *standard* is successful, and to a large
degree I think it is (thus far). That is, there does not seem to be a competing
standard for storing photographic or near-photographic images.
I would sure like to see them succeed with this new round of products. If they
can manage to get the word out this time, they might actually see consumer
acceptance of the PhotoCD concept. It would be nice to actually find their
players in the mainstream consumer electronics stores. We'll see.
At least Kodak has opened up the standard for other developers.
BB
>>At least Kodak has opened up the standard for other developers.
OK, gang, now's the time to discuss the difference between "standard" and
"proprietary format" <G>
Kathy
>>OK, gang, now's the time to discuss the difference between "standard" and
"proprietary format"
Been there, done that, took the bandages off already. <EG> I'm following this
with great interest, nonetheless.
>> True, but then you lose that additional potential platform.<<
What's the loss if no one has it? Corel had the right idea using standard
CD-ROM format for their non-compliant Photo CDs.
>>The nice thing about Kodak Photo CD players is they're cheap <<
They're cheap because you can only buy them as close-outs and clearances. If
you can find one, you can buy it for less than the price of a comparable CD
Player. Of course, you will be dealing with 2 to 3 year old technology since
you will be hard pressed to find anything manufactured in the past 2 years.
Jeff
Well, you've still got a few other platforms to choose from: PC, Mac, CD-I, and
(forgot to mention earlier) 3DO. Maybe some of the other game machines will
support it, too. And, as I said, the Kodak players are available in Europe as a
current item. Whether the technology has been touched in the last two years I
couldn't say, but if we want to point fingers in that direction we can open up
the CD-R discs in CD-ROM drives can of worms…
Ciao,
D'
Thanks for the info, sounds great!
Britt