C.01Title
A production stack, mapped
A composite, anonymized commercial shoot in Hong Kong for a US-listed brand: two shoot days, one studio, a small immersive deliverable, an AI-assisted post workflow. This is an honest first pass, including how much came back Unknown.
The client is US-listed and campaign goods ship into the US, which makes UFLPA material and NS-CMIC relevant context. No federal contracts were declared, so §889 stays context rather than a bar.
C.02First pass
S.01Cameras & captureSupplier-declared
- Rental house named makes and serials on the manifest. No independent verification, and none was claimed.
S.02Wireless video & commsUnknownReview required
- The rental package included Hytera-class radios. Hytera is a covered entity for video-surveillance and telecommunications equipment used for public safety, security of government facilities, physical security surveillance of critical infrastructure, and other national security purposes. FCC import and marketing restrictions on previously authorized units were adopted on June 26, 2026 (DA 26-635, effective July 16, 2026).
- For this client it is trust context, not a legal bar, but it went on the review list and the rental house was asked for alternatives.
S.05Studio CCTV: venue ownedUnknown
- The studio could not name the camera vendor on day one. This is the most common finding in real mappings. The venue’s infrastructure sits inside your trust boundary and nobody owns the question.
S.09WardrobeUnknownMaterial dependency
- Stylist purchased off the shelf, including basics from mainstream retailers. Cotton and apparel are UFLPA priority sectors, and the same garment can carry different origin labeling in different markets, so the Hong Kong label does not settle the question (documented example).
- Because campaign goods ship to the US, fiber origin was flagged for the client’s import compliance owner, not for the stylist.
S.10CateringSupplier-declared
- Caterer declared produce sources on request. Tomatoes are a UFLPA priority sector; with no US import of foodstuffs this is client-sensitivity context, recorded and closed.
S.11AI post workflowEvidence verified
- Rotoscoping and dailies transcription ran on local hardware. The model inventory recorded base-model developer, weight source and hash, runtime, and an offline-operation check.
- Prompts and media never left the machine, and the wrap report says so. That is the difference between an adjective and a record.
S.06LED volume: rental houseUnknown
- Marked not my department and assigned to the rental house rather than guessed at. It came back on a separate sheet four days later; panel frame origin was still undocumented.
C.03Effect
What the map changed
- Radios were swapped on day two, not because a law required it, but because the client’s trust posture made the question cheaper to remove than to carry.
- The venue CCTV question got an owner and a deadline instead of being nobody’s job.
- Wardrobe fiber origin moved from never-considered to a documented open item, held by the importer of record rather than the stylist.
- The AI workflow’s locality claim became a verifiable record instead of a reassurance.
- Four of seven sheets closed at Unknown. The review was still useful, because it named who had to answer each one.
Disclosure
The editorial standards and correction process in the methodology apply to this page like any other.