de-mystifying secure and validated copying of files

In the media industry we tend to spin a lot f myths and magic around what is in essence tech and science. That isn't strange.
At the heart of all we are artists, not scientists.

But when something as basic as validated copies gets confused by myths, you end up risking your files. Somethings can not be done faster than physically possible, and what "hash" you use isn't the key element.

Thus we did this writeup to de-confuse what is needed to do a verified copy, what it is and how you can test our and others software as to file-security. The matter has become so confused that we clearly cannot trust "approved by" statements.

Yup it is a bit technical, but the point is important.

I hope this is OK to post, as what is in the article can be used to test any software, including our own.

https://www.quine.no/news/de-mystefying-secure-and-validated-copy-processes

Gunleik

[Peter Chamberlain]

And thank you Quine for supporting Resolve using our workflow integration interface

Thanks Peter!

That integration is ever-evolving with QuineCopy and QuineCore.
We are contemplating setting up an on-prem solution that tightens up the integration between Resolve and the Quine ingest tools significantly towards NAB.

CineD stopped by the other day
https://www.cined.com/quinecopy-release ... ment-tool/

That's fun

We realize that what we are up against with QuineCopy is essentially drag and drop in finder (which is as free as QuineCopy).

But we take on the battle!



The iPhone 15 Pro/ProMax can maybe be compared to larger camera systems, given certain conditions - in the imagery, but if a substantial amount of users starts shooting UHD Prored 4444 log on the Blackmagic camera-app on that thing, even the phone shooter will run into asset management issues.

We wrote this for the owner-operator:
https://www.quine.no/news/quinecopy-for ... r-operator


G