Behind the Orange Curtain

This week we are back to a techie topic that actually comes from a question from client at Gear Monkey.  It involves frame rate and time code.  Specifically, how does frame rate affect time code and what are the differences between the various frame rates like 30p, 29.97, 24 and 23.98?  I will try to keep this one brief and concise so that no one’s brains melt and ooze out of their ears.

First, let’s address time code.  There are essentially two types of time code, drop frame and non-drop frame.  Drop frame time code was created to account for the extra amount of time that it took to broadcast the color portion of the television signal when NTSC was invented.  In order for the time code to match the actual elapsed amount of time, two frames needed to be dropped every minute but not every tenth minute.  During a discussion a few years ago on this subject I asked a group of editors when they thought it was appropriate to use either type of time code.  One editor responded, “Don’t they use drop frame on the east coast and non-drop on the west coast?”  I have never forgot that answer.  The bottom line is that if you are working in standard definition NTSC and will be broadcasting your program (obviously this doesn’t matter for commercials since the program has to be longer than a minute before it matters) then use drop frame time code, otherwise non-drop is fine.  In fact, in any HD format there in no drop frame because you do not need to compensate for the NTSC color delay.

Now, with regard to the varying frame rates available to us in the brave new HD world, here are some tips.  Firstly, let me clarify a few things.  23.98 and 23.976 are the same thing.  The abbreviated 23.98 uses that complex mathematical function known as “rounding.”  Wouldn’t my high school math teacher be proud?  However, 23.98p and 24p are NOT the same thing and I have seen the pain in the eyes of those who have made the wrong choice.  Any footage that will be broadcast or laid off to videotape for final mastering should be done in either 23.98p, 29.97p(or i) or 59.94p(or i).  It is now possible with the advent of things like Final Cut Pro and file based camcorders to create and edit true 24p or 30p projects.  This is fine if your distribution will only be via computer display or if you are printing back to film, however if you want to lay that project off to videotape or broadcast it you will be bummed when you have to re-render that project from 24p to 23.98p or from 30 to 29.97.  I will spare you the long explanation and to why this is, but it has to do with the 60Hz power source we have in the USA and other places.  Some  video cameras refer to 24p or 30p when they are actually referring to 23.98p and 29.97p (i.e. SDX-900, DVX-100, HVX-200, etc.)  If you are shooting with a video camera, you can be fairly certain that you are shooting in either 23.98, 29.97 or 59.94 (i.e. Varicam).  Just make sure that you set up your Final Cut or AVID project accordingly.  For more on this see this older post. 

Feel free to post additional related questions as comments to this post.  In my next post, I will address the issues of color space and color recording formats in current formats.  Happy producing!

I will be speaking on a panel this Wednesday, March 18th at 6PM covering “VIDEO 2.0 – 2K and 4K HD Production Needs.”  We will be discussing a variety of HD, 2K and 4K techniques, workflows and pitfalls.  The event will be hosted by the MCAI of Orange County at my good friend Brad Hagen’s office.  Come say hello and check it out.  

Here are the details:

MCAI Meeting – March 18th — We’ve got four experts to address the critical needs of high-end HD Production: Do you really need a DITech? How important is on-set color correction? What are the hidden issues of tapeless workflow? Do I need the expense of a video village? And is guerrilla HD possible? Bring all your questions to this important meeting!

Our panel includes experts in all aspects of HD. Their practical experience in shooting (and troubleshooting) and posting native 2K and 4K formats, as well as many other formats, will give you a comprehensive insight into the high end of Hi Def Production.

Click here for more info and to register

As Washington continues to dole out billions of dollars to every possible financial institution, insurance company and automaker, I thought we should look at how some of those companies are using those taxpayer funds – or in some cases keeping them.

As the economy’s slump continues, GM has raised an uproar among production companies by playing hardball on payment terms.  GM, who has received billions in tax dollars from Washington to “bail them out,” has offered to pay ad-production firms 50% of a commercial’s production costs 60 days after the first day of shooting and the remaining 50% when the ad is finished. That’s a major departure from the standard practice set by the AICP of paying 50% or 75% of the cost before production starts.  Mind you, GM spots range between $500,000 and $1 million each in production cost.

GM has been trying to persuade production companies to accept its new payment terms by suggesting it is looking to have a few “preferred vendors.” In order to be on the list, the production company would have to agree to the new payment terms. That reminds me of all the times that I have been asked to work on a pilot for free and if the series sells then I would get that contract and lots of work.  Guess how many times that has happened?

I don’t know of many, if any, production companies these days that could do this even if they wanted to.  Credit (and cash too for that matter) has become almost non-existent for all companies regardless of their size.

Even Anheuser-Busch (InBev) is trying to overhaul its advertising-related deals. The world’s largest brewer by sales recently told media outlets that they will now be waiting 120 days after an ad runs to receive payment versus the typical 30-day standard.  I guess that means that not enough people are going home and getting drunk on Budweiser after getting laid off from their jobs.  Perhaps this plan will help them in that regard, as I can guarantee you that this move will cost people jobs.

As it has been evidenced that Washington has no ability to solve this crisis, let’s hope that people will turn away from Washington and the plummeting stock market and just get back to work.  The best thing for the economy is for everyone to go back to leading normal lives; shopping, buying cars and homes, marketing and advertising.  Now, of course all these things must be done responsibly and irresponsibility is how we got into this mess in the first place, but at this point everyone, both those affected by the downturn and those who are not, has just stopped doing anything.  In our industry, the economy will not turn around until people start buying again and they are not likely to do that until companies begin to advertise again, not like GM and InBev’s plan, but decide to put legitimate dollars into marketing their products.

I felt that last night’s Oscar awards show was one of the best in many years.  However, there was one truly significant event that occurred last night that many people likely missed.  Slumdog Millionaire won best Cinematography for DP Anthony Dod Mantle’s work on the film.  What many don’t know is that the majority of the film was shot on a digital camera.

Slumdog Millionaire used the revolutionary Silicon Imaging’s SI-2K camera system extensively throughout the film.  Besides offering a look that was good enough to garner the Best Cinematography award, the camera’s flexibility allowed Mr. Mantle and director Danny Boyle to get many “hidden camera” style shots that still looked great on the big screen.  Last night represented a huge leap forward for digital cinema.

Look for an exciting announcement soon about this camera being available in Orange County through Gear Monkey.  If you don’t get Gear Monkey’s newsletter, sign up for it here at the bottom of Gear Monkey’s home page.  Trust me, if you are involved with making images, you will want to take a look at this camera. 

In the meantime, take a look at an entertaining commercial piece for T-Mobile that was also shot on the SI-2K.  Enjoy.

This week’s post deals with an extremely current and poignant topic – the economy.  But more specifically, the economy and how our businesses are being affected in the film, TV and advertising communities.  I don’t know of any business in our industry that has not been affected, many significantly, by the current, unprecedented crisis.  In the current economic environment, the phrase “runaway production” has become an understatement.   The production is gone and we will now have to battle to get it back.

Production in the Los Angeles area dropped to an all time low in 2008 as companies looked out of California for cheaper solutions.  It is, in fact, off fifty percent from the high in 1996.  I attended the National Association of Television Production Executives show in Las Vegas last week.  One of the sessions that I attended dealt with the challenge of shrinking budgets and skyrocketing production costs.  During the panel discussion Emiliano Calemzuk, president of Fox Television Studios, declared that they had solved the production cost problem – they are now saving almost 50% on their budgets by sending their productions to Europe!  I about fell out of my chair.

In order for production to start returning to California, those fine folks in Sacramento need to not only complete a realistic budget, but one that has substantial incentives to bring production back to the state.  Many other states have such incentives and they are significant.  For instance, by filming a feature in Connecticut instead of Los Angeles, producers could save $21 million dollars out of a 110 million dollar budget – a 19% savings.  What would you do if you were a producer?  While California’s government contemplates things like a 10% sales tax, I would be packing my bags.

For just one example of a state that cares about production and getting as much of it as as it can, look no further that the fine state of Michigan.  I have a friend who works in our industry out of Detroit.  He said the business there is booming.  Take a look at the following link about a motion picture production facility in Pontiac, Michigan.  Many other states are looking to get production work as well. 

What will we in California do to get it back?

While the causes of runaway production are many (unfriendly production environment, out of control union costs, difficult and costly permitting process, etc.), we will all have to work together to solve this problem.  It will be much, much harder to get the work back in the face of the new competition from other states and even other countries.  

On top of this, we are all dealing with the current madness brought on by the economic meltdown.  This is the most challenging time I have seen in my more than twenty years in business.  There is plenty of work out there, it is just a matter of reminding companies that they still need to market their products if they are going to survive and getting them to commit to spend.  We can do it, but we will have to work together and work a lot smarter to get our share of the work than ever before.

Let’s find a way to get it done.

Today’s entry will focus on a very “techie” topic; codecs, compression and frame rate.  At Post Factory we do a large amount of layoffs from client’s hard drives to broadcast tape formats like Digital Betacam, HDCAM and HDCAM-SR.  One of the ongoing discussions that we tend to have with clients is the compression/codec settings of their edited sequences and the frame rate of their project.  With the advent of the Internet and the proliferation of video on the Internet, there has been a lot of confusion about what settings are best.  I would like to address a couple of flawed arguments that I have dealt with over the recent years regarding this topic.

1.  Ideally, try to keep the setting of your sequence the same as that of your original footage.  More specifically, pick the best codec to digitize in and don’t change it throughout the production process.  This can be (and might be someday) the subject of an entire blog entry.  I have talked to more than a few people that edit their entire program in the DVCAM codec, then copy that sequence into a new one that is set for Uncompressed 10-bit and bring it to us – unrendered – to be laid off.  They are convinced that somehow this will improve the quality of their show.  Let me lay this to bed once and for all – it won’t.  But it will take a whole bunch of time to render and likely look worse due to increased compression artifacts.

There aren’t that many of us left that can remember the days of good old composite A/B roll editing where you were very concerned about “generation loss”, the degradation of the signal that occurs when you make successive copies of a shot in order to achieve a dissolve or more complicated effect.  Back then everyone understood that the first generation is always the best.  It didn’t get any better during the process, only worse.  The 21^st century version of generational loss occurs every time you change compression settings and re-render and just like “back in the day” it doesn’t get any better than the original.

2.  There is a big difference between what you can do on a computer and what you can do on broadcast television.  The primary lesson here is don’t bring me a 525/23.98fps sequence and ask to have it laid off.  There is no tape format that will accept those settings.  Before you start editing your project, think about how it will be distributed and plan accordingly.  You can play a 525/23.98fps QuickTime movie on a computer, just not on broadcast TV.  If you are sending your final show or spot to a station or network to be broadcast, then choose from one of the following formats:

      525/29.97fps (Digital Betcam, Betacam SP, DVCAM, DVCPRO etc.)
      720/59.94fps (DVCPROHD or HDCAM-SR)
      1080/29.97fps – aka 59.94i (HDCAM or HDCAM-SR)
      1080/23.98fps (HDCAM or HDCAM-SR)

Stay with one of these setups and you will stay out of trouble.  You can always give us a call at Post Factory before you get started with a project.  We will be glad to talk to you about the best plan for your particular situation and distribution.  Happy editing.

I am sure that this week’s post title will elicit some disagreement among at least a few people.  Now for all of you who have recently purchased Blu-ray players, don’t send me hate mail.  This is after all just my opinion.

While Blu-ray may not be dead at this moment, I would submit that its days are likely numbered.  The truth is that as technology and bandwidth improve, all of this type of content will be delivered over the Internet.  As of today, we already have many technologies that allow for instant access to HD programming.  Here are some examples:

Apple TV (which I use at home) allows for the rental and purchase of HD movies through iTunes.

Blockbuster’s Instant Access program allows for the instant download of movies to its MediaPoint player and other devices.

LG has developed a new High-Def set that will function as a streaming device and receive feeds from Netflix.

Netflix can also stream to Roku devices and XBOX 360’s.

LG also has a Blu-ray player that will receive and play streamed HD video.  They are calling it a “Networked Blu-ray player”.  

See a trend here?

Beyond the use of Blu-ray for the distribution of feature films by studios, it has proven to be a very challenging technology for the production community.  At Post Factory, we have had so many compatibility issues with Blu-ray that we finally gave up and moved on to other technologies like modified AppleTVs that we can push content to for client approvals and even kiosk-like display of programs.   Then you have the cost prohibitive nature of Blu-ray licensing fees that make it very unattractive for short run replication and content that must be updated frequently.

Some of you will now say, “What about the behind the scenes and featurette content on DVDs?  I like that stuff.”  Well to that I would say, me too.  However, I am currently in Las Vegas attending the National Association of Television Production Executives conference where just today the industry studios and conent creators were talking about moving that content to the web so they can get better engagement with their audience and enhance the “behind the scenes” experience by adding things like blogs and chats with characters and more.

If there is one thing that I have learned from the show this week, it is that the Internet becoming a significant if not primary distribution vehicle for films and TV programming is an inevitability.

Tuesday will bring us a new president and if his campaign promises hold up – change.  Regardless of your political affiliation or opinions (which is not the subject of this blog), things are changing, both in the world and in our business.

2009 will continue to bring changes to the film, television and advertising industries.  The single largest change afoot is the rapidly increasing use of the Internet as a blended distribution vehicle for television programming and video advertising.  At this point, no television property is complete without a web site and the web is increasingly being used as a vehicle for distribution.  I offer some recent and poignant examples:

1.  FOX streamed the recent BCS championship game live for the first time in the history of the game. The feed did not include FOX’s TV feed — a tactic that has become the norm for broadcasters trying to make live online coverage complement, not replace, what’s on TV.  Online angles included an overhead cable-cam, a shot isolated on quarterbacks and shots (and audio) of each school’s band.

Tuesday also brings the unprecedented partnership between CNN and Facebook covering the inauguration ceremony.  There is a reason that Barrack Obama won the “Marketer of the Year” award from Ad Age.

2.  The almost epidemic use of the Internet based video ad campaigns.  Shootonline now profiles an increasing number spots that never hit the broadcast airwaves.  Check out these examples:

            JCPenney’s | Beware of the Doghouse spot. 

            Dodge’s RAM Challenge  

            Honda’s Cinematic “Dream the impossible” Documentary Series Campaign 

The fact that advertisers are spending significant dollars on online or hybrid campaign like the RAM Challenge is a strong signal that the Internet has become a viable outlet for mainstream video advertising as bandwidth available to consumers has been exponentially increasing.  Online video viewing rose 34 percent over the past year.  The latest data also shows that 77 percent of U.S. web surfers watched online clips in 2008 and one analyst predicts a 45 percent growth in the coming year.

Here’s to change in 2009 . . . .