- articleWhat do Xbox Accessibility Guideline 104 and the Game Accessibility Guidelines require for subtitles and captions in games beyond linear-video rules?
Xbox Accessibility Guideline 104 asks for subtitles for all spoken content with speaker identification and spatial cues, independent on/off toggles for caption types such as dialogue, background dialogue and ambient sounds, lines of no more than about 40 characters, at most two lines, and text scalable to at least 200% of the default; the Game Accessibility Guidelines give 40 characters per line, two lines (three exceptionally) and a 46px-at-1080p minimum size.
- articleAt the replacement Netflix Studio Partner page, how are VFX plates named, versioned and padded, and when is the plate number versus the plate version incremented?
Netflix's 'VFX Plate Naming Best Practices' page names plates as shot name + plate number + plate version, then frame number and extension (AGM_104_065_010_PL01_v001.[1001-1058].exr), with versions starting with v and typically 3-4 digits, legal characters limited to letters, digits, period, underscore and hyphen, optional typed or word plate codes, and two options for head/tail extensions.
- articleAt the replacement Netflix Studio Partner page, what fields, separators and padding does the VFX shot and version naming recommendation state?
Netflix's replacement 'VFX Shot and Version Naming Recommendations' page (fetched 22 Oct 2026) recommends underscore-separated fields in the order showID, episode, seq, scene, shotID#, task, vendorID, version (example AGM_104_TCC_067_0010_comp_NFX_v001), 3-4 digit shot IDs usually incremented by 10, versions beginning with v, and consistent field inclusion across vendors and shots within a project.
- articleWhat does the ASC Media Hash List v1.0 specification define for hashes, process types, chain of custody and verification when offloading and copying camera media, and what does it leave to tools?
ASC MHL v1.0 (15 Mar 2022) makes manifests immutable, labels each recorded hash original, verified or failed, allows only original or verified hashes for verification, records manifests as transfer, in-place or flatten processes, and defines a hash of hashes over same-algorithm child hashes sorted lexicographically; the ascmhl reference tool v1.2 defaults to xxh128 and prioritises md5 first for verification (tool constants, not specification text).
- articleHow were leaders (before-the-scene and cut-in) and inserts (letters, telegrams, news items) written into a 1913-era numbered continuity, when did the authors say to use them, and what cautions do they give?
The authors define a leader (sub-title before a scene), a cut-in (dialogue leader inside a scene) and an insert (letter, telegram, news item shown inside a scene), and give notation: a before-scene leader is written ahead of the numbered scene; a letter is flagged "On screen, letter", given in full, then closed with "Back to scene"; busts and close-ups get their own scene numbers. They say to use inserts only when action cannot make the point, to prefer a letter or news item over a plain leader, to avoid a leader straight after the title, and not to under-use leaders either. Label: 1913 practice. The pinned Gutenberg text is the Revised Edition (title page "Copyright 1913 / Copyright 1919"; it mentions 1918 releases and "February, 1919" postage), so some passages are 1919 revisions and are not 1913 practice. Excerpts drop Gutenberg italic underscores; line numbers are those of the CRLF file as pinned.
- articleDoes natural speech really have the picture (mouth movement) ahead of the sound by about 150 ms, and what offset range should a generated talking-head and its separately generated voice be expected to show?
Schwartz and Savariaux (PLoS Comput Biol 2014) dispute the "visual speech leads by 100-300 ms" claim: for chained syllables they measured audio-visual asynchrony between about 20 ms audio lead and 70 ms audio lag, and extrapolate 40 ms audio lead to 200 ms audio lag for richer speech. Large picture leads occur at utterance starts or isolated syllables (preparatory gestures). Their data come from a simple French /a/-context corpus filmed at 50 Hz, so timing precision is about 10-20 ms. Love et al. and others still cite the 100-300 ms figure as background, so the sources conflict on the natural lead.
- articleIf I put happy or sad music under a close-up of a neutral face, will viewers read the face differently, and what should I check first?
One experiment tests exactly this: in Baranowski's study (30 students, thesis chapter and journal abstract), happy music made actors look happier and sad music less happy, with the effect strongest when the face itself was neutral; sad music did not make faces significantly sadder than no music. A different open study (Ansani et al. 2020) found music changed empathy and impressions of a character but not the overall attributed emotional state. No independent replication with a neutral face was found in the open sources checked. So music can be expected to push reading in its own direction, modestly, and the no-music version is the baseline to compare against. The sources do not say who owns the music used, so clearance is a separate step.
- articleWhich title-safe and action-safe numbers do EBU, SMPTE (via secondary extracts), DPP/Channel 4, Netflix, BBC and ATSC documents give for HD and UHD, and where do they disagree?
Readable sources converge on a 90% title/text/graphics rectangle (5% inset per side) and a 93% action rectangle (3.5% inset): EBU R 95, SMPTE ST 2046-1 as quoted by NAB, Netflix (2026 snapshot), and the DPP/Channel 4 text-safe tables (90%) agree numerically. They differ in what they require: Netflix says it has no strict requirement and tolerates motion text leaving the box; DPP/Channel 4 make text safe mandatory and add a 4:3 text-safe box of 67.5% x 90%; ATSC maps ST 2046-1 onto IMSC1 subtitles as origin 5% 5%, extent 90% 90%. Older rules differ: BBC Technical Standards v1.3 (2002, third-party copy) gives caption safe 80% width and 90% height for 16:9 protected UK TX, and the CEA-708 caption window still uses the legacy 80% x 80% area per SMPTE. The ST 2046-1 text itself is paywalled; SMPTE reports in 2024 list an open project to add UHD safe areas.
- articleWhat do type-foundry and platform documents say about tracking and kerning at display sizes, and do any video specs address it?
Two readable type sources give size-dependent tracking, and they disagree on direction. Inter's archived Dynamic Metrics page gives tracking = a + b*e^(c*z) with a=-0.0223, b=0.185, c=-0.1745 (z = font size), which tightens monotonically towards -0.0223 em (own arithmetic: about -0.020 em at 24 px, -0.022 em from 48 px). Apple's HIG tables list SF Pro tracking in 1/1000 em that is not monotonic (+6 at 11 pt, -26 at 17, +13 at 32, 0 from 80 pt) while New York stays negative (-11 at 24 pt, -14 at 48, -18 at 260). CSS defines letter-spacing as tracking applied in addition to kerning and font-kerning auto at the user agent's discretion. The video specs read (EBU R 95, DPP/Channel 4, BBC subtitle guidelines, Netflix Titles & Graphics, ATSC) do not mention tracking or kerning (0 hits).
- articleFor moving-image stories, how does a viewer's running understanding of the plot relate to what they look at and to where they sense a new event beginning?
SPECT (Loschky, Larson, Smith & Magliano) is a framework with front-end processes (single-fixation attention and information extraction) and back-end processes (building a current event model, mapping coherent changes, shifting when mapping fails). Its authors' own studies, summarised in the paper, found in picture stories that a missing bridging image lengthened viewing time, and in an edited film clip (Jaws, N=98 think-aloud) that prior context changed whether viewers drew the predictive inference while gaze stayed strongly synchronised across conditions. The theory paper itself is a framework plus the authors' summary of their programme, not a single measured result.
- articleDo cuts make viewers perceive a new event, and which kinds of edit line up with perceived event boundaries?
The inspected open sources agree that a cut by itself is not a boundary: in The Red Balloon the cut-boundary association disappeared once character, space, goal and other changes were controlled (Zacks et al. 2010). In a seven-participant VR replication using the Magliano-Zacks edit taxonomy, action-discontinuous edits were the strongest predictors of marked boundaries and continuity edits preserved continuity of action. In an edited film clip, viewers lacking prior context marked cross-cut shots 4 and 6 as new events more often (N=88). Limits are one film, one clip, and a small VR sample; Magliano & Zacks 2011 itself is already in the catalogue and was not re-read.
- articleWhat do the Kuleshov papers state about where their face and context stimuli came from, whether the stimuli or data are public, and under what terms, so an agent knows what can be re-used?
Articles are mostly CC BY (Cao, Calbi, Mullennix, Szaszko & Loebus), but the stimuli are a different matter. Face sets named in the papers are KDEF (Calbi/Barratt, Mullennix) and NIM-STIM (Mobbs); context sets are IAPS (Mobbs, Mullennix) and OASIS (Szaszko & Loebus); Cao and Szaszko & Loebus filmed their own faces and Cao shot its scenes with actors who consented to publication. The one stimulus-set terms text read (KDEF's own page) allows only researchers, non-commercial use and forbids redistribution without written consent. No paper states a licence for its own clips; Cao's GitHub repository (no licence file, tree lists only spreadsheets and statistical maps) does not contain the video stimuli; Mullennix's data are on Dryad (metadata says CC0); Szaszko & Loebus provide data on request. Terms for IAPS, NIM-STIM and OASIS were not read.
- articleWhat techniques, signals and failure modes for flashbacks and cut-backs do early photoplay texts and the Living Handbook give, and what check can I run on a non-chronological outline?
Period manuals (1913-1919) give concrete rules: signal memories and dreams with a fade-out/fade-in sandwich written as three numbered scenes; show simultaneous action by cutting one scene into the other, not by fades; build time information into captions; use the return to heighten suspense but not to digress or pick up forgotten points; and prefer forward chronology (Phillips: "a now play"). The Living Handbook notes that flashbacks are conventionalised, and that a fabricated flashback was considered a failure by Hitchcock (Stage Fright). No source gives a numeric test; the one experiment found measures costs (evidence in candidate 06).
- articleWhat do "flashback", "analepsis", "anachrony" and the old film term "cut-back" mean, and why can the same word point at different things?
In narratology (Living Handbook of Narratology, "Time") a deviation between story order and telling order is an anachrony; Genette calls the backward kind analepsis (flashback) and the forward kind prolepsis (flash-forward). In 1913-1919 American photoplay manuals "cut-back" meant something else or more: returning to an earlier-shown scene (often intercutting parallel action), sometimes a memory insert, and in one manual a mere splitting of a long scene. A beginner must check which sense a source uses.
- articleWhat setup-and-payoff technique, limits and failure modes follow from the four Russian records of Chekhov's "gun" remark (letter, Gurlyand, Nemirovich-Danchenko, Shchukin)?
The four records point at four different jobs for the same image: policing a promise to the spectator (letter), keeping a first-act prop to the last act (Gurlyand), cashing an act-ending "loaded gun" in the next act instead of withdrawing it in the interval (Nemirovich-Danchenko on The Seagull), and ruthless editing of a beginner's story (Shchukin). Together they yield a promise audit and a hook-payoff check, with a narrow reading of the limit: they say planted things must be paid, and none of the passages read says every payoff needs a plant. Red herrings and over-signposting are not discussed in any passage read.
- articleWhat does openly readable empirical work show about viewers' comprehension, load and enjoyment of flashbacks in film, and how strong is it?
A CogSci 2011 paper (Sevenants & d'Ydewalle) compared a 14-minute student thriller with flashbacks against a re-edited chronological version: 30 students rated characters and ranked scenes; 8 students had pupil size recorded. Story order was easier to reconstruct (r = +.868 vs +.749), characters' acts more salient, and pupils larger in 5 of 7 flashback scenes, but aesthetic ratings did not differ. A 2025 open-access paper (Djonov & Tseng; abstract read, full text blocked) reports 28 children 7-10 on two Disney flashback scenes, with temporal comprehension supporting causal interpretation. Evidence is small-sample and mixed.
- articleWhat goes wrong with temp tracks ('temp love'), what mitigations do editors and composers describe, and where do sources disagree?
Practitioner sources agree temp music shapes the final score: Carlson hears 'the DNA of the temp' in many scores, and Harrison says composers end up with a 'sideways version'. They differ on remedy and value: Harrison treats temp love as a curse or a help (non-musical filmmakers can say what they love in the temp), while the Pluribus editors (Art of the Cut) avoid temp except for montages and one temp-scored first episode shown to the studio. A blog post under Randy Thom's name overstates the editors' own words ('the entire series without any temporary score'): the interview says exceptions existed, so the blog is a lead, not evidence of the claim.
- articleWhat is the Kuleshov effect, and what do the open-access experiments say an editor can and cannot rely on?
The 1920s footage is lost and the contemporary accounts conflict, so the classic claim rests on modern experiments. In the five open-access experiments read (Mobbs 2006, Calbi 2017, Mullennix 2019, Cao 2024, Szaszko & Loebus 2026) an emotional context shot shifted ratings of an unchanged neutral face, but the pattern is narrower than the folklore: valence shifts are the most repeated result, negative or fear contexts shift ratings more reliably than happy ones, forced emotion-label results are mixed, and the most tightly controlled recent study found only tiny valence shifts and no label shift. An editor can treat context as a modest, direction-of-valence bias to be tested with viewers, not as a guarantee that viewers will name a particular emotion. Barratt et al. 2016 (the best-known replication) is paywalled; only its abstract was read.
- articleWhat licences and documented limits apply to aeneas and Gentle for text-to-audio synchronisation, and what is not stated about Gentle's models?
aeneas is AGPL-3.0 code (README 1.7.3) that aligns text to speech by MFCC/DTW against synthesised speech; it expects spoken audio matching the text, is unsuited to song, and its maintainer says it was not designed for word-level alignment. Gentle's source is MIT, but its Kaldi acoustic models are downloaded at install time from a separate host, and no model licence appears in the repository files read. Neither README gives an accuracy figure.
- articleWhat do the Common LUT Format, the Adobe .cube specification and OCIO's .cube readers define for LUT size, ordering, domain, bit depth and interpolation?
ACES CLF v3.0 (aces-docs 7c34c210) requires linear interpolation for LUT1D (at most 65536 entries recommended), defaults LUT3D interpolation to trilinear (tetrahedral optional) and orders LUT3D entries with the third (blue) component fastest, whereas the Adobe Cube LUT Specification 1.0 (Sept 2013) orders red fastest, defines DOMAIN_MIN/MAX (default 0-1), and says table values are set for tetrahedral 3D interpolation. The Cube document's licence sentence names CC Attribution Non-Commercial 3.0 but links the by-nc-sa/3.0 (ShareAlike) URL.
- articleWhat files, metadata and HLS settings does Apple state for authoring and publishing Apple Immersive Video, and where do the stated bitrate tiers disagree?
Apple describes Apple Immersive Video as captured at 90 fps with more than 50 MP per eye, targeting 60 pixels per degree and up to 230 degrees field of view; WWDC25 session 403 recommends MV-HEVC 4320x4320 per eye at 90 fps in P3-D65-PQ for HLS, with the AIME VenueDescriptor and APAC audio referenced from the playlist. The session's spoken tiers (25-100 Mbps average, 50-150 Mbps peak) conflict with its own summary (25-150 Mbps average); the conflict is preserved.
- articleWhat does the W3C imsc-tests suite contain for bidi, ruby and vertical IMSC features, and does any public source give per-engine results for it?
The imsc-tests suite publishes stimuli and reference PNGs but no engine results (producer reading); per-engine evidence exists only as implementer-reported processor results in the TTML2 report.
- articleWhat does Apple publish about MV-HEVC stereo video files and the spatial metadata that turns a stereo MV-HEVC video into 'spatial video'?
Apple's HEVC Stereo Video Interoperability Profile is Version 0.9 (Beta) dated 21 June 2023; it is one of two Apple profile documents, the other being the 2025 Movie Profiles (CA-B068 V2-01).
- articleAt the mix-to-delivery handoff, which stem, M&E and track-layout rules do Netflix v1.4, EBU R 123 and AS-11 state, and what does the receiver still not get?
P2-04's statement that role labelling is positional (track number) holds for AS-11 UK DPP HD; for X-series files MCA labels carry roles (CA-B066 C2-03 reading).
- articleWhat does the public AS-11 UK DPP HD specification require for audio channels and track layout, and where does loudness appear?
AMWA AS-11 UK DPP HD requires one mono channel per track, 24-bit/48 kHz PCM and exactly 4 or 16 channels, and its text contains no loudness requirement; AS-11 X9 instead describes audio layout through MCA labelling (Audio Layout Mode 0).
- articleWhat do Kodak's Cineon/DPX documents and the ACES ADX transforms define for printing-density encoding (0.002 density per code value, D-min 95, LAD 685), and which number comes from which document?
Kodak H-387 (Digital LAD, 2011) defines printing density as 0.002 x 10-bit code value with the digital LAD patch at code value 685 = printing density 1.370, states those are printing (not Status M) densities, and also tabulates the corresponding Status M values for the recorded intermediate stock.
- articleWhat reading-speed, line-length and duration limits do Netflix, BBC and EBU-TT-D state, per language, and where do they disagree?
Line and speed limits are scoped by document and platform: Netflix English (USA) sets 42 characters per line with 20/17 cps adult/children; BBC sets 37 characters for broadcast (Teletext) and a percentage-of-width rule online, with a 160-180 wpm live word rate. These must be presented per source, not merged into one caption limit.
- articleWhat do the D-Cinema audio channel symbols VIN and HI (and the other common channel symbols) mean in SMPTE ST 428-12, and is the document public?
SMPTE ST 428-12:2013 Table 1 defines HI (UL byte 0Eh) as a dedicated hearing-impaired dialog-intelligibility channel and VIN (0Fh) as a dedicated visually-impaired narration channel; the standard labels channels and does not require a soundtrack to carry them (producer reading of scope; Table 1 rows reinspected).
- articleIs SMPTE ST 429-16 publicly readable at pub.smpte.org, and what does it define for audio channel labels such as VIN and HI?
ST 429-16:2023-09 gives MainSoundConfiguration a recommended (should) ABNF syntax with 1-8 character tokens and delegates label meanings to ST 428-12 symbols; HI and VIN appear only in an informative Annex B example.
- articleFor DCP picture and sound essence, which checks do libdcp's verifier and ClairMeta actually run (read from the check bodies), where do their limits disagree, and what is not checked by either?
RDD 52:2020 7.3 requires 48 kHz audio essence; libdcp (891facc8) flags any other sampling rate and any bit depth other than 24, while ClairMeta (b3b66a02) settings accept 48000 and 96000.
- articleWhat do FADGI video resources specify or compare for video reformatting targets (RDD 48 / AS-07, wrapper and encoding matrices)?
FADGI describes RDD 48 (from AS-07) as a vendor-neutral MXF archive/preservation subset with a Baseband Shim annex and lists the current version as dated 3 December 2018; IASA-TC 06 Part B (2019) says RDD 48 was published in 2019 and is largely derived from AS-07.
- articleTorchCodec documents 0.14-0.17 as requiring torch >= 2.11 (README table), but the 0.17.0 PyPI metadata declares no torch dependency (only requires_python >= 3.10), so pip will not enforce the documented torch pin (curator...
TorchCodec documents 0.14-0.17 as requiring torch >= 2.11 (README table), but the 0.17.0 PyPI metadata declares no torch dependency (only requires_python >= 3.10), so pip will not enforce the documented torch pin (curator addition).
- articleWhere is full vs limited range recorded in a file (MP4 nclx, MOV nclc, H.264/HEVC VUI, codec atoms), and what goes wrong when it is wrong?
Range can live in several places. In FFmpeg movenc.c (pin 9047fa1b) MP4/AVIF colr nclx has a range bit, while MOV colr nclc has none; the H.264/HEVC bitstream filters set video_full_range_flag in VUI; DNxHD in MOV gets a separate ACLR atom with a full/legal range marker. Filters (setparams, scale) can mark or convert range. A practitioner says Rec.709 should never be full range and reports crushed/clipped results when it is; BT.709-6 as read defines 219/224 quantisation but the word "full range" does not occur in its text (searched, two spellings).
- articleWhat do players assume when an MP4 has no colour tags (including files from video-generation tools), and what should an agent do about it?
Players assume different things for untagged video. Apple documented (2011) that untagged QuickTime media is treated as SMPTE-C; Chromium (commit 44e7da44) guesses BT.709 with limited range when nothing is set; a user report shows mpv showing bt.709 for a stream ffprobe called unknown. No inspected source says what any video-generation tool (e.g. Sora, Veo, Kling, Runway) writes: that part is a hypothesis and must be checked per file with ffprobe/mediainfo.
- articleWhy does the same Rec.709-tagged file look different in QuickTime/Safari, Chrome and VLC, and what are the numbers (1.96, 2.2/sRGB, 2.4)?
Rec.709 (BT.709-6) specifies the camera-side encoding function; the display-side reference is BT.1886 (gamma 2.404), and BT.709-6 says production judges the look on that reference. Players then differ in which display curve they apply to a 1-1-1 file: Chromium (commit 44e7da44) renders BT709-tagged video with the sRGB curve in its generic path and carries a separate Apple curve with exponent 1.961 for macOS decode; Apple documents ColorSync playback lowering contrast for brighter surround. Practitioner posts quote 1.95, 1.96, 1.976 and 2.4 for the "right" figure and disagree on which is the specification.
- articleWhat do the colour-tag numbers (primaries, transfer, matrix, range; e.g. 1-1-1 for Rec.709) mean, and which of them does a file really need?
A video colour tag is up to four independent facts: colour primaries, transfer characteristics, matrix coefficients (the three H.273 / ISO 23091-2 code points, which Apple writes as an nclc triple in that order, 1-1-1 for HD Rec.709) and a separate full/limited range flag. Code 2 means unspecified in each. The code values here are read from the FFmpeg header that says it matches H.273 and from Apple TN2227; the H.273 PDF itself was over the fetch cap, so the numbers are not compared to the standard text.
- articleDoes any video-generation work document explicit controls for over-the-shoulder shot/reverse-shot dialogue and the 180-degree rule, and what do its authors say still fails?
ShoulderShot (arXiv 2508.07597v2) documents a pipeline for OTS dialogue: a finetuned Flux-dev generates one dual-shot image in which character A is always on the left and B on the right (its implementation of the 180-degree rule), each crop is animated with a finetuned Wan I2V model as an 8-second looping video, and the loops are lip-synced and assembled. Training pairs were mined by detecting an A-B-A shot alternation in dialogue footage. The authors state precise eye contact is not solved. ShotDirector (arXiv 2512.10286v1) claims editing-pattern-aware prompting and camera pose control; only its abstract was read.
- articleWhat should a dialogue editor check on AI-cleaned dialogue before delivery, given the failure modes and behaviours that vendor pages, repositories and papers actually document?
No source read provides a delivery checklist for AI-cleaned dialogue, so this candidate assembles one from documented behaviours and labels each check as a proposal. The documented behaviours cover timing (STFT delay, chunk re-alignment, export drift, export parity), format (mono downmix, 44.1/48 kHz), level (normalisation, rescaling), over-processing (artifacts, silent waveforms, unprocessed syllables), breath leakage, word changes in generative enhancement, tool-version defects and where the audio is processed. Room tone and ADR conventions, and disclosure of AI use to a client, are covered by other batches.
- articleWhat do Netflix's public partner pages say about source quality, upscaled material and declaring AI processing?
Only one Netflix page was readable as raw bytes: the Preferred Fulfillment Partner (NPFP) program conditions (Last-Modified 2026-10-01). It says Netflix will not accept SD/HD if UHD/4K is available and that insufficient source is rejected and can be repaired or re-sourced; it requires an assistive QC tool plus manual QC. It does not mention upscaling or AI in the text searched. The Partner Help Center delivery-specification and generative-AI pages are JavaScript-only or API-401 to curl, so their text was not read; search-engine snippets about them are secondary leads and not used as evidence.
- articleWhat inputs, outputs, model families and settings does Topaz Video document for enhancement/upscaling and frame interpolation?
Vendor documentation describes Video Type (progressive, interlaced, interlaced-progressive) that gates which enhancement models appear, Automatic/Dynamic/Manual tuning with Recover Detail and Add Noise, and frame-interpolation models (Apollo, Apollo Fast, Chronos, Chronos Fast, Aion) with a slow-motion factor and duplicate-frame replacement. Interpolation output removes audio. Starlight diffusion models cap resolution and have hardware limits. These are vendor statements; no measured results were read.
- articleWhat are the documented media requirements, duration limits, unsupported features and cloud/credit conditions of Premiere's Generative Extend?
Adobe's help pages (updated Apr to Sep 2026) say Generative Extend is a cloud Firefly-model feature that sends a 1.5-3 second segment of the clip, adds up to 2 seconds of video or 10 seconds of audio to one side of a clip, never extends dialogue or music, and returns 8-bit SDR media at up to 30 fps. It is unavailable in some regions and plans and consumes generative credits. Two Adobe pages differ on the bit-depth and colour-space conditions, so the dated page matters.
- articleWhen an NLE's AI feature changes footage, what do the vendors' pages document about what is stored, what is lost on interchange, and what should an agent record in an EDL or project log (documented versus proposed)?
Adobe documents that Generative Extend output is a new clip file with an AI-generated label, zero-based timecode, no transferred logging metadata or markers, and incomplete support for XML/AAF/EDL/OMF/OTIO until each extension is baked with Render and Replace. Resolve 21's guide says Motion DeBlur renders new media and keeps the originals; Avid keeps the original AI transcript beside edits; Resolve IntelliScript puts alternates on disabled tracks. The recommended log fields below are a synthesis proposal assembled from those documented behaviours, not a vendor or standard requirement.
- articleWhat do Premiere (Scene Edit Detection, Auto Reframe) and DaVinci Resolve (Smart Reframe, scene cut detection, Magic Mask) say these AI editing tools do, which outputs they create, and what edition they need?
Premiere's Scene Edit Detection can apply cuts, create subclips in a bin, or only place markers for manual review; it also cuts linked audio unless separated first. Auto Reframe reframes clips or sequences to other aspect ratios and (Apr 2026 page) lets you set target resolution. Resolve lists Smart Reframe, Magic Mask and scene cut detection as Studio-edition DaVinci Neural Engine features. None of the inspected pages gives accuracy figures, supported-content limits or processing location for these tools.
- articleWhat do Adobe, Blackmagic and Avid publicly state about content credentials, usage terms and data handling for AI-generated or AI-processed material in the timeline?
Adobe states in its Premiere pages that Generative Extend media is not used to train Adobe's model, that feedback uploads include the generated media (and optionally a 3-second low-resolution reference snippet), and that Premiere includes Content Credentials on export when the sequence contains Adobe AI-generated assets. Adobe's Generative AI User Guidelines (updated May 2026) forbid removing or altering Content Credentials and say prompts, inputs and results may be reviewed. No inspected Adobe Generative Extend page states that its output specifically receives Content Credentials. No Blackmagic or Avid document inspected mentions Content Credentials, C2PA, provenance or watermarks.
- articleWhat video format, length and encoding limits do Apple app previews and Google Play preview videos impose, and how does hosting differ?
Apple app previews are uploaded files of 15-30 s and at most 500MB: H.264 (High Profile up to 4.0, 10-12 Mbps) or ProRes 422 HQ in .mov, at most 30 fps, with stereo 256 kbps AAC at 44.1 or 48 kHz, in the device resolutions Apple accepts (e.g. 886x1920 portrait). Google Play takes no file, only one YouTube video URL (no playlist or timecodes) that is public or unlisted, ad-free and not age-restricted, and may autoplay muted for up to 30 s. Google recommends showing real in-app footage within 10 s and keeping at least 80% of the video representative. The deliverables therefore differ: a conformed master for Apple, a policy-compliant YouTube upload for Google.
- articleWhat does the ACB text-to-speech guideline require when audio description is synthetic, and what do Netflix v2.5, ACB 2009 and the HTML spec say or leave unsaid about synthetic voices?
ACB's TTS guideline is a policy statement: human-voiced AD is preferred, TTS only when human narration is not feasible and never purely to save cost, with human review (including blind and low-vision professionals), audience disclosure and quality targets (48 kHz/24-bit preferred). The Netflix v2.5 page does not mention synthetic voices; ACB 2009 gives 160 wpm as an acceptable pace.
- articleWhat are SRT, WebVTT, TTML/IMSC and SCC, and which should an agent produce for which destination?
SRT is a simple, loosely standardised text format with no encoding standard (YouTube accepts basic SRT only as plain UTF-8, no styling); WebVTT is the W3C web text-track format and the HLS subtitle segment format; TTML is the W3C XML timed-text format and IMSC its subtitle/caption delivery profiles (1.2 text and image; Text Profile 1.3 REC 2026-05-21), with Netflix requiring a subset of IMSC 1.1 text for IMSC deliveries; SCC carries CEA-608 exactly, is YouTube's preferred broadcast caption file and drops CEA-708 data on conversion. Pick by destination spec: SRT for simple uploads, WebVTT for web/HLS, IMSC/TTML when the service specifies it, SCC for CEA-608 destinations (synthesis).
- articleWhat encoder settings (keyframe interval, rate control, audio) did Twitch ask streamers to use, per dated archived Twitch pages?
Twitch's 2018 and 2020 snapshots agree on CBR and a 2-second keyframe interval with H.264/AAC; 2018 recommends 3-6 Mbps and 2020 gives per-resolution figures (e.g. 1080p60 6000 kbps, 1080p30 4500 kbps). Neither snapshot documents audio sync.
- articleIs watch time a clean signal of viewer preference on YouTube Shorts? What do YouTube researchers report?
A Sept 2026 preprint by authors reporting online A/B tests on YouTube Shorts (Chang et al., arXiv 2609.32839v1; abstract read) states that watch-based signals are confounded by measurement factors: the same watch time implies different preference for videos of different lengths, ratio metrics (percentage watched) systematically favour short videos, and observed behaviour can reflect enjoyment, passive consumption or inattention. Their Factorized Latent Value Model separates confounders (duration, user propensity, session context) from preference and reportedly lifted a primary viewer-enjoyment metric by 2.67% in online A/B tests. Implication for creators reading retention reports (C3-B336-01): raw average view duration and percentage viewed are not directly comparable across lengths, and the recommender itself is being tuned to discount such artifacts; optimizing a short length only to inflate percentage watched is not supported by this work. A companion YouTube Music study (2607.23...
- articleWhat does the Mikkel Lassalle channel (rolling year to 2026-10-23) cover, and how should agents weigh it as a source?
Inventory: 96 long-form uploads on the /videos tab dated 2025-10-27 to 2026-10-22 (931K subscribers, 420 videos channel-wide at fetch). Nearly all are 4-10 minute tool walkthroughs of AI video (Seedance 2.0/2.5, Kling, Sora/Veo, Gemini Omni, PixVerse), AI image (Nano Banana, GPT Image), 3D generators (Meshy x6, Hyper3D Rodin, Tripo, VARCO, Hi3D), music/voice (Suno, Lyria, Mureka, ACE Studio, Fish S2) and all-in-one platforms (Artlist, OpenArt, CapCut/Pippit, Lumina, Freebeat), plus a few VFX projects and course promotions. 94/96 descriptions contain affiliate, sponsor, discount or partner wording (regex screen). 91 list English auto-captions; 5 list none. Shorts tab exists and is not yet inventoried. Weighting: treat as practitioner demonstrations and launch-week capability reports from a VFX artist; useful for workflows and UI-level tips, not for comparative quality, cost-efficiency or causal claims.