AV Artists Complain Monterey 'Orange Dot' Security Feature Makes Macs Unsuitable for Live Performances

[Ethosik]

Respectfully, that's not correct.

Title safe/action safe come from the days of things like CRT screens where there was a real risk of the edges of the image being cropped off by the viewers display. Or 16:9 content being shown on legacy 4:3 displays.

These days, they're much less relevent.

Telling other video professionals that they should be using title safe/action safe because you, as a video professional adhere to them, is not cool.

There are a great many instances in the video production world where this is irrelevant, and live visuals (IMAG, VJing, art installations, digital signage, outdoor advertising is now of them. Why? Firstly because the content is often designed to be edge-to-edge to fill the entire available space, and secondly because in most instances with that sort of work the screen size is known )often a bespoke size) and content is custom created specifically for that display... so title safe/action safe are not important.

Implying that adhering to title safe/action safe is the solution here, is to also imply that those working in these environments will always have to crop and zoom-in their content... or have black borders around their content. Both of which are, frankly, laughable ideas.

As a video producer, you still need to adhere to title action safe, even if you are going on YouTube which doesn't need those requirements. Its why all editors still have those safe areas, and why Video templates on Photoshop include those safe guides. Its just what you need to do when producing video content. And yes, if you keep your main content closer towards the middle of the screen, having a small orange dot at the top right will not distract from the action or titles because it is outside the title/action safe area. And might be completely hidden when people like my grandma like to convert HD content to zoom in and lose those corners.

You can do what you want, why does it sound like you took offense with me saying what I as a producer of video content say is good? Do what you want, its YOUR business. I am just telling you what other video professionals that trained me say that yes title/action safe is still 100% relevant in this day. Sorry it seems you took offense to my comment. But it will definitely 100% resolve this issue as the dot would not obstruct the action scene.

Here is a good article that explains why its still relevant. Even if you just do YouTube content. And going by history just a few years ago I did get dinged from a client because they like to zoom in and missed some critical text I added in my video. Client was not too happy about that.

Title Safe Still Matters - Especially for Online Video

Learn why title safe is still relevant for online video. A brief explanation of what safe margins are, and how they apply to HDTV and mobile video

eks.tv

 

[Ethosik]

Maybe in a perfect world. Here in the trenches you sound like that guy.

Most of the artists I work with have exactly one machine; many don't have a second display to test on. Even with available gear, I'm not sure I've ever worked on a show where all the paint is dry (both literally and figuratively) when the first curtain goes up: time to test is a luxury. It's not ideal but the choice to spend meager dollars on stuff like rent and food does not make anyone less professional.

Big, well funded productions might be different but most art is not that. (If we're honest, most of the well funded productions are less art and more spectacle -- looking squarely at you Hamilton -- but that's a digression for another time.) When money rolls in exactly zero people say "hey, let's buy a test computer." Paying the people who produce the work is far more urgent.

On one hand you are saying they barely get enough money. What are they doing buying a $1,000 system that has Monterey built in to begin with? On the other hand, if they are using a five year old system, why did they upgrade to Monterey to begin with? This is why corporate IT is VERY VERY SLOW for ANY sort of updates. My company didn't immediately update to Windows 11. Want to know why? It hasn't been fully vetted with our software yet. Same applies for ANY professional. If you are on a system with Big Sur, why risk upgrading to Monterey and have your entire business at risk? Just keep on Big Sur.

 

[R10k]

For people still not understanding, imagine this:View attachment 1932399

Haha, brilliant.

 

[R10k]

As a video producer, you still need to adhere to title action safe, even if you are going on YouTube which doesn't need those requirements. Its why all editors still have those safe areas, and why Video templates on Photoshop include those safe guides. Its just what you need to do when producing video content. And yes, if you keep your main content closer towards the middle of the screen, having a small orange dot at the top right will not distract from the action or titles because it is outside the title/action safe area. And might be completely hidden when people like my grandma like to convert HD content to zoom in and lose those corners.

You can do what you want, why does it sound like you took offense with me saying what I as a producer of video content say is good? Do what you want, its YOUR business. I am just telling you what other video professionals that trained me say that yes title/action safe is still 100% relevant in this day. Sorry it seems you took offense to my comment. But it will definitely 100% resolve this issue as the dot would not obstruct the action scene.

Here is a good article that explains why its still relevant. Even if you just do YouTube content. And going by history just a few years ago I did get dinged from a client because they like to zoom in and missed some critical text I added in my video. Client was not too happy about that.

Title Safe Still Matters - Especially for Online Video

Learn why title safe is still relevant for online video. A brief explanation of what safe margins are, and how they apply to HDTV and mobile video

eks.tv

Not to take away from the importance of action safe, but I think you might not understand some of the contexts in which video content is projected. You’re talking about how the dot won’t distract because it’s not on or close to the centre content. People will see the dot. The dot itself is distracting.

Plus, as videosoul tried to point out - some edge content is as important as the main content. The image as a whole is important. You can’t just overscan or crop it out, as if the centre content is the only thing that matters.

 

[ulyssesric]

Several people have already answered that here. But for latecomers, some examples:

1. People are reporting that the orange shot shows even if external video inputs are being used. That could be a professional camera, an external webcam, a media player, another video device.

2. It also apparently shows with external audio inputs.

3. It shows when the mic is active, and they might be using that for something like sound-to-light control or beat-matching.

Live camera feeds and audio inputs for live video mixing applications.

I mean yeah you're running some liveshow and you've a projector and you connect a computer to it, right ? Then why are you using the same computer for video/audio recording/mixing ? Why can't you do that using real studio equipment, or at least using another computer, and streaming video to that projector controller computer via RTSP or WebRTC or whatever ? You will have delay anyway and the delay introduced by streaming is far less than recording/mixing tasks.

 

[Ethosik]

Not to take away from the importance of action safe, but I think you might not understand some of the contexts in which video content is projected. You’re talking about how the dot won’t distract because it’s not on or close to the centre content. People will see the dot. The dot itself is distracting.

Plus, as videosoul tried to point out - some edge content is as important as the main content. The image as a whole is important. You can’t just overscan or crop it out, as if the centre content is the only thing that matters.

People moving around stage is distracting. When Tim Cook or Steve Jobs move around on stage its distracting. Lights around the stage are distracting. Curtains around the stage is distracting. The person in front of me is distracting. Again, I feel people are WAY overstating the issue here. Its like this orange dot is going to suddenly make AV artists all lose their jobs because its distracting.

 

[videosoul]

As a video producer, you still need to adhere to title action safe, even if you are going on YouTube which doesn't need those requirements. Its why all editors still have those safe areas, and why Video templates on Photoshop include those safe guides. Its just what you need to do when producing video content. And yes, if you keep your main content closer towards the middle of the screen, having a small orange dot at the top right will not distract from the action or titles because it is outside the title/action safe area. And might be completely hidden when people like my grandma like to convert HD content to zoom in and lose those corners.

You can do what you want, why does it sound like you took offense with me saying what I as a producer of video content say is good? Do what you want, its YOUR business. I am just telling you what other video professionals that trained me say that yes title/action safe is still 100% relevant in this day. Sorry it seems you took offense to my comment. But it will definitely 100% resolve this issue as the dot would not obstruct the action scene.

Here is a good article that explains why its still relevant. Even if you just do YouTube content. And going by history just a few years ago I did get dinged from a client because they like to zoom in and missed some critical text I added in my video. Client was not too happy about that.

You’ve again completely ignored the target user base for whom this will likely be a problem, and for whom title safe / action safe aren’t typically a concern. Heck, they’re often not even making content for standard aspect ratio displays.

I’ve had basic training in broadcast QC, so I know exactly when title safe/action safe is and isn’t important.

At no point in this entire discussion has content for TV or YouTube been the primary concern.

Besides, that zoom to fit feature you reference on TVs has no place in modern workflows. It’s a dirty “solution”.

 

[Ethosik]

You’ve again completely ignored the target user base for whom this will likely be a problem, and for whom title safe / action safe aren’t typically a concern. Heck, they’re often not even making content for standard aspect ratio displays.

I’ve had basic training in broadcast QC, so I know exactly when title safe/action safe is and isn’t important.

At no point in this entire discussion has content for TV or YouTube been the primary concern.

Besides, that zoom to fit feature you reference on TVs has no place in modern workflows. It’s a dirty “solution”.

Geez this really should not be so controversial discussion and I am surprised I need to make these examples.

Critical part is not obstructed by the orange dot. And I made the orange dot MASSIVE.

 

[videosoul]

I mean yeah you're running some liveshow and you've a projector and you connect a computer to it, right ? Then why are you using the same computer for video/audio recording/mixing ? Why can't you do that using real studio equipment, or at least using another computer, and streaming video to that projector controller computer via RTSP or WebRTC or whatever ? You will have delay anyway and the delay introduced by streaming is far less than recording/mixing tasks.

I literally answered that in my post that you quoted. Perhaps people are doing work where the audio input is triggering/timing the visuals? Perhaps they’re mixing external feeds into the video content using software like Resolume or Disguise?

Or maybe they’re working on projects where big multi-hardware setups are unreadable?

Lateral thinking, please.

 

[montuori]

On one hand you are saying they barely get enough money. What are they doing buying a $1,000 system that has Monterey built in to begin with?

Presumably to use as a content production tool? I can make money with one computer; two is (often) more difficult to rationalize. (Hence, at least in part, the rise of AWS and the like: corporations know that redundant test gear isn't adding much to the bottom line. Renting the capability is a better value proposition, even for large concerns.)

On the other hand, if they are using a five year old system, why did they upgrade to Monterey to begin with? This is why corporate IT is VERY VERY SLOW for ANY sort of updates.

I think you overestimate the technical prowess of most of the population. I'm not sure the average user knows the difference between upgrading from 11.5 to 11.6 vs. 11.5 to 12.0. You might realize that it's a big change, I know plenty of folks who are pretty great at what they do that would not know that.

Sometimes people do boneheaded things for which they are culpable. Expecting secondary displays to continue to work (and a very good case can be made that with the indicator they're broken) isn't, at least to my thinking, all that unreasonable. Like I said, with all your talk of "Corporate IT" and judgements on what "real" professionalism is, you sound a little out of touch with this world.

 

[videosoul]

Geez this really should not be so controversial discussion and I am surprised I need to make these examples.

View attachment 1932662

View attachment 1932663

Critical part is not obstructed by the orange dot. And I made the orange dot MASSIVE.

This is hilarious.

a) are you claiming that your clients would be happy if you played video content out to several thousand people on an enormous video wall at a major show and there was that massive orange dot in the corner?

b) how are you still failing to understand that in the world of live event visuals, advertising displays, information displays, digital billboards, art installations etc a lot of content relies on being edge to edge, and the content isn’t always centre focused?

 

[Ethosik]

Presumably to use as a content production tool? I can make money with one computer; two is (often) more difficult to rationalize. (Hence, at least in part, the rise of AWS and the like: corporations know that redundant test gear isn't adding much to the bottom line. Renting the capability is a better value proposition, even for large concerns.)



I think you overestimate the technical prowess of most of the population. I'm not sure the average user knows the difference between upgrading from 11.5 to 11.6 vs. 11.5 to 12.0. You might realize that it's a big change, I know plenty of folks who are pretty great at what they do that would not know that.

Sometimes people do boneheaded things for which they are culpable. Expecting secondary displays to continue to work (and a very good case can be made that with the indicator they're broken) isn't, at least to my thinking, all that unreasonable. Like I said, with all your talk of "Corporate IT" and judgements on what "real" professionalism is, you sound a little out of touch with this world.

That doesn't mean Apple (or Microsoft before people call me an Apple fanboy) are at fault for this. If you run such a critical business and you upgrade to Monterey or Windows 11 and suddenly your entire business is at risk of being shut down, is it either of the companies fault?

 

[montuori]

Geez this really should not be so controversial discussion and I am surprised I need to make these examples.

Critical part is not obstructed by the orange dot. And I made the orange dot MASSIVE.

You realize the orange dot is still visible, right? That's the problem. (And that dot's not massive at all. When I project it onto a 40' scrim or on the side of a building, then it's massive.)

 

[Ethosik]

This is hilarious.

a) are you claiming that your clients would be if you played video content out to several thousand people on an enormous video wall at a major show and there was that massive orange dot in the corner?

b) how are you still failing to understand that in the world of live event visuals, advertising displays, information displays, digital billboards, art installations etc a lot of content relies on being edge to edge, and the content isn’t always centre focused?

B - you just made the argument for title/action safe or similar boundaries. Since not everything has the EXACT SAME SIZE, so if you want stuff to get cut off feel free, but having boundaries is pretty much standard on both print and video production. If you don't adhere to it and are fine doing so, great! But it is still a standard practice.

 

[Ethosik]

You realize the orange dot is still visible, right? That's the problem. (And that dot's not massive at all. When I project it onto a 40' scrim or on the side of a building, then it's massive.)

The point I am making is that it will not distract and obstruct the action scenes and text if you adhere to these guidelines. The person on stage is distracting, the borders of the wall are distracting. Again, it seems like you people are making a giant mountain out of a mole hill out of this issue. If you adhere to the guidelines, the orange circle won't obstruct anything critical and make it less distracting since all your action is outside of it.

 

[videosoul]

B - you just made the argument for title/action safe or similar boundaries. Since not everything has the EXACT SAME SIZE, so if you want stuff to get cut off feel free, but having boundaries is pretty much standard on both print and video production. If you don't adhere to it and are fine doing so, great! But it is still a standard practice.

I’m sorry, but you’re talking complete nonsense. The point I’m making is that in those environments it’s highly possible that every pixel of the screen is of equal importance edge to edge. Title safe is irrelevant if the areas outside of that are equally as important as the areas inside.

What about that don’t you get?

Let’s take a major stage show, for example, where there is a 40ft high screen, and the set extends seamlessly from that in all directions. The set is blue, and the screen can display the same blue so that from a distance the join is hardly noticeable.

Can you not see how it’d be a bit of a problem if there was a big orange dot in the top right corner?

 

[Ethosik]

I’m sorry, but you’re talking complete nonsense. The point I’m making is that in those environments it’s highly possible that every pixel of the screen is of equal importance edge to edge. Title safe is irrelevant if the areas outside of that are equally as important as the areas inside.

What about that don’t you get?

Let’s take a major stage show, for example, where there is a 40ft high screen, and the set extends seamlessly from that in all directions. The set is blue, and the screen can display the same blue so that from a distance the join is hardly noticeable.

Can you not see how it’d be a bit of a problem if there was a big orange dot in the top right corner?

Piggy backing off of the Steve Jobs post earlier. I find these two elements more distracting than the orange dot. Not to mention the crowd in front of the camera is distracting too.

 

[wilberforce]

Just because it looks like the Eye of Sauron, that shouldn't be at all distracting...

 

[montuori]

Riiiiiight.

Damn. And there I was thinking the R81 and 3300k were appropriate in that scene. I've clearly been doing this all wrong: from now on it's just gonna be an unlit empty stage. Easier!

 

[montuori]

The point I am making is that it will not distract and obstruct the action scenes and text if you adhere to these guidelines. The person on stage is distracting, the borders of the wall are distracting. Again, it seems like you people are making a giant mountain out of a mole hill out of this issue. If you adhere to the guidelines, the orange circle won't obstruct anything critical and make it less distracting since all your action is outside of it.

Oh hell, we have lengthy discussions about what belt buckles actors on stage should be sporting. If you think any director anywhere is going to gloss over a GIANT ORANGE DOT anyplace visible to the audience, you're just mistaken. You might see all this as unimportant but if that's the case it's pretty clear you don't do this for a living. No shade intended, but please respect what we do, how much attention to detail is paid, and how odious random artifacts on a projected wall would be. It's not something that can or would be shrugged off by anyone I work with.

 

[Ethosik]

Oh hell, we have lengthy discussions about what belt buckles actors on stage should be sporting. If you think any director anywhere is going to gloss over a GIANT ORANGE DOT anyplace visible to the audience, you're just mistaken. You might see all this as unimportant but if that's the case it's pretty clear you don't do this for a living. No shade intended, but please respect what we do, how much attention to detail is paid, and how odious random artifacts on a projected wall would be. It's not something that can or would be shrugged off by anyone I work with.

Okay let me ask you this then, are you against watermarks? Guess what, I have a client that has a watermark that is a half box. Not a circle, but a box and its always on their footage at the bottom of the screen. So you would find that distracting too?

And besides, you keep making my argument for me. If your business absolutely 100% CANNOT function with that circle, then it is ON YOU because you upgraded a production, mission critical system to the latest operating system. You should never EVER EVER do this....EVER. I am always a version behind and I always keep a dedicated system for backup with an older version because my business is everything. I cannot downgrade to Big Sur on my new laptop, but that new laptop is not my only system for business. It would be a major mistake if it was. If its to the point where you will go out of business for an orange circle, you should know not to upgrade the OS.

Seriously, not sure why everything has to be extremes these days. Not every single business operates like you and this AV artist does. I got complained about for a client that zooms in their viewing and didn't like text was cut off so now I adhere to title/action safe. I have several clients that, legally required, has watermarks on their video that are on every single frame. Some are even text with logos and TM symbols which is far more distracting than a simple "orange" dot. And just imagine how big those watermarks are when using a projector! You don't need to attack me saying I don't do this for a living, or make me feel like I am horrible at my job. And I don't need validations from this forum because I make pretty good money off of the clients I have and they are happy.

Again.....mountain.....molehill. I seriously don't think this orange circle will stop production and end businesses like some here's post seem to suggest and the attitude here implies.

 

[fompsweeva]

Okay let me ask you this then, are you against watermarks? Guess what, I have a client that has a watermark that is a half box. Not a circle, but a box and its always on their footage at the bottom of the screen. So you would find that distracting too?

And besides, you keep making my argument for me. If your business absolutely 100% CANNOT function with that circle, then it is ON YOU because you upgraded a production, mission critical system to the latest operating system. You should never EVER EVER do this....EVER. I am always a version behind and I always keep a dedicated system for backup with an older version because my business is everything. I cannot downgrade to Big Sur on my new laptop, but that new laptop is not my only system for business. It would be a major mistake if it was. If its to the point where you will go out of business for an orange circle, you should know not to upgrade the OS.

You're talking in extremes. Yes, the business can function but it's a compromise. If you're running an art show, live production or anything that requires a bit more attention to detail simply accepting that an orange dot is always going to be overlaid on your screen is absolute nonsense. If you think this is acceptable you've obviously never worked in this type of professional environment. (I've worked corporate theatre / entertainment theatre / broadcast)

From a UX perspective, the orange dot's function is a warning to the user using the device. There's no reason to broadcast this to everyone who is viewing the screen in a broadcast / presentation environment.

For watermarks your client asked for that to be there. Not the same thing, it serves a different function.

I get your point about not upgrading mission critical systems, but this is not always realistic. Ever worked on an event and had a 3rd party bring their laptop for presentation? Had to upgrade OS to use particular software?

This is obviously an oversight by Apple and one they'll fix. Arguing against defending this orange dot has got to be one of the most ridiculous arguments I've responded to on the internet.

 

[montuori]

Okay let me ask you this then, are you against watermarks? Guess what, I have a client that has a watermark that is a half box. Not a circle, but a box and its always on their footage at the bottom of the screen. So you would find that distracting too?

If it's there for a deliberate reason, go for it. I might think it's crap design but if that's what your clients demand, I'm not the one calling the shots -- or writing the checks. Who knows, it might even help tell the story, in which case I might still think it's overwrought design but at least I could conjure a justification for its presence. There are times when a flashing red "recording" dot makes sense in live projections. I think it's usually a cheap shortcut but it being there conveys some sort of information.

 

[Ethosik]

I get your point about not upgrading mission critical systems, but this is not always realistic. Ever worked on an event and had a 3rd party bring their laptop for presentation? Had to upgrade OS to use particular software?

Third party - not my laptop so not my responsibility. But it shows things were not planned properly if that third party was not able to work in our environment. For these things you need to plan accordingly. For the other argument, that is upgrading from a NEED. Not upgrading, and finding out you can't work because of a dot.

And yes you are talking extremes. " If you think this is acceptable you've obviously never worked in this type of professional environment." Like I said, not every single business or client base or customer base is exact. And I still don't feel the need to keep saying I am not good at my job or I am not worthy of such a job.

Another example from a client that does us a projector and uses a wall for it. There is a giant cut in the middle of the wall which can be considered "distracting" but they are fine with it. Not every single place would care THAT MUCH about this orange circle. Some might, but this is why I say we need to stop talking extremes. And its not helping when you say "if its not MY way of doing business, you obviously are not in this professional environment"

 

[Tompkinson]

Its not a mountain, its a mole hill people. Minor distraction.
When the presentation starts, yeah I will notice that orange circle, but I will ignore it. But having presenters move, and the crowd cheer, that is more "distracting".

There are probably scenarios in which the dot is a minor distraction, but it would be absolutely unnacapatable in the theatre, opera, classical music worlds. Where video projections are evermore important, and Mac often used,

Nobody would accept a 15 sec. fade-to-black at the end of a scene... theatre is in total darkness for dramatic tension... except for an orange dot on the screen.
Some scenes will have no video projection, just black... but there is an orange dot for the duration of the scene.

Sometimes we use multilpe projectors for pixel precise video-mapping onto elements of the scenography, now each one would come with its own orange dot.
How would you explain this to an opera director, theatre management, museum curator?

Rebuilding the theatre's scenography to bring everything towards title/action safe is obviously not an option.
Scaling, stretching, cropping imagery we have spent months creating... is not a option.

As I wrote earlier: we do not update OSs for at least 6 months, so this is not a problem I have right now.
I am merely replying to your words because I find it concerning that you believe you can decide what is acceptable and/or distracting for others in the world of video projection.
Would you find it a "mole hill" if photosphop placed an orange dot on every image ist saved? How would you explain this to a magazine editor? or to a photograper whose image you are working on in photoshop? Just tell him he should "frame his photography so that it's title/action safe" ?
If Logic outputs a bleep throughout a recording of a symphony: what would you say to the director of the Philharmonic? "It's a mole hill, the trumpets are more distracting"
Anybody who takes pride in their work will not want to have an orange dot added in the final output.
That being said, I expect there will be a solution soon. Orange dot on computer screen is fine for me, but not on external output.