8K at 60p, and the future of post?

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Walter Soyka] “Did you just sneak in a Dune reference?”

I thought variety was a spice, not bandwidth? 😉

[Walter Soyka] “[Jeremy Garchow] “Sure, as a content creator, you can find a lot more niche audiences today, but how do you find them, and will you find them in time to make more content?”

Question: how does this change the way we produce content? What new toolsets would be helpful?
“

A client subscribe action, where as clients would subscribe, at least for a year, with guaranteed rates and early termination penalties. We would, in turn, provide tremendous service as well as a vast archive of material to draw from (of which, of course, we have the right to own, and clients must call me in order to access it if their subscription has lapsed). Who can write that code for me?

For the rest of the world? I’d imagine for most it won’t be an 8k Pablo Rio, or an 8k RedArri machine (pronounced reh-dairy). Cheap tools are pretty good in that you can tease great quality out of low cost items, and you add a little writing, lighting, and a microphone … and you can get pretty decent. What seems to be winning right now, is convenience; the convenience of being able to watch what you want, when you want it. That requires loads of content, and the value of the producing the content is lowered, even though people need more of it. I guess it’s pretty much the epitome of supply and demand.

There is also convenience with how many camera we bring on shoots these days. Sure, we have a main camera that is of very high quality, but then we have a small passle of lower quality camera that we can stick almost anywhere. This creates more content for me to deal with, and there is a massive shortage of time to get to the first cut. This is one of the things I like about FCPX so much, is that the presentation of the material in the browser allows a very quick and speedy access to all of this content. In my opinion, and for the work I do, there isn’t a better tool for this.

So, I think the way that niche markets changes how we produce content is that the value is skewed. People see amazing things on the internet, and it’s done quickly with pretty inexpensive gear. We are asked to do similar things, we propose our ideas, and then clients are shocked at how much it actually costs to do it in a way that is controllable, repeatable, and high enough quality to manipulate. It’s an uphill battle. It always has been on some level, it just seems a lot more difficult today, as well as payment terms being shifted from 30 days to 90 or 120 days. This has also been very difficult.

I also think that technology will overtake some of our jobs. I think you sent out the automatic mulitcamera editing technology being developed. When is the moment coming where an editor or a motion graphics artist is going to be supplanted by an algorithm, because good enough is suddenly just plain good? Again, I don’t meant sound alarmist, but these things do root around in my mind when I look at technological advancement. Also, I am not against technology, just to be clear.

[Walter Soyka]

Thanks for the dialog, John — this is the fun stuff I really love about this forum.

[John Rofrano] “If however, I was telling a great story like… oh… The Blair Witch Project… then technology really doesn’t matter… shaky handy-cam footage will do.”

See, I’d argue that technology mattered a great deal to the effectiveness of The Blair Witch Project. The medium was the message. Handheld 16mm/Hi8/whatever (the technology) was inseparable from the “found footage” idea that sold this to the audience as maybe, just maybe, a real documentary. BWP would probably be an utterly unremarkable film if it had been shot on 35mm with steadycam and cranes.

[John Rofrano] “Jeremy said that he just saw Interstellar and he loved it. “We are Explorers” was the theme. No doubt it looked a lot better than a 1966 Start Trek episode with the same theme but was it any more or less compelling? That is the real question.”

Interesting question. How well could a brand new audience, one that’s conditioned to expect a certain level of production and one without a pre-existing cultural acceptance, suspend their disbelief watching ST:TOS?

(I think in large part they would suspend disbelief based on the strength of the writing, deus-ex-machina episodes aside, but I’d bet that they’d occasionally be shaken out of the drama a bit by the acting and the limits of the effects of the day.)

[John Rofrano] “At the end of the day, a good song, is a good song, regardless of what you play it on…. and a good movie is a good movie regardless of what you watch it on. “

But surely listening to a song with white earbuds and listening to it in concert is different? And surely watching a movie on your iPhone is a different experience than watching it on your TV, which is a different experience than watching it in a movie theater?

Put another way — if you were making a movie intended to be shown on iPhones, would you make different creative choices than for one intended to be shown in theaters?

[John Rofrano] “So I’m of the belief that technology only comes into play when what you are “seeing” is more important than what you are “feeling”. “

With a really good movie, isn’t seeing the same as feeling?

Can you effectively convey the vastness of space on an iPhone screen? Does that change in viewing scale change your emotional response as a viewer?

[John Rofrano] “I’m not sure how 8K 60p is going to do that but I guess that’s the question you’re asking… where can 8K 60p take us? (…let me ponder)”

Inquiring minds want to know. (And so does Quantel!)

Really, thanks again for engaging. I obviously have a point of view here (I think that the history of “film” is one long love affair with technology moreso than other traditional art forms), but I mean this as more exploratory than argumentative. I do try to save argumentative for other topics.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Andrew Kimery]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Which follows a very precise model. Looking at the world through my son’s eyes, this model may not be relevant for much longer. There will need to be more House of Cardziz, or a longer season, or shorter time between seasons, or…more content.”

I feel like I’m not getting what you are saying. There will be more ‘TV-like’ original content made by Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, etc.,. and there will be more content made for digital signage and other things that used to just be static images but now can be moving images. More content means more people making content. Brining this back around to the forum’s namesake, I think this is a big reason why Apple set its sights on the ‘broad middle’ with FCPX because there are way, way more people were editing video content is another hat they have to wear at times than people that wear the editing hat all day, every day.

[Jeremy Garchow] ” And as an advertiser, are you going to want to support a limited 8k viewing audience, or so you want to hit as many pockets of every device carrier that you can?”

Why is it an either/or choice?

[Jeremy Garchow] “Yes, YouTubers and 8k viewers are (potentially) different markets, and of course they can coexist, but will they?”

I don’t understand why they wouldn’t as they serve different areas. To me it’s kinda like wondering how poetry, novels, essays, short stories, screenplays, news stories, magazines stories, blogs, etc., can all coexist since they are all variations of words on a page/screen. I see the world of video as expanding and becoming more stratified, not as a fixed-sized entity where something existing has to disappear in order to make room for something new to appear.

[Walter Soyka]

Wow, there’s a lot of food for thought in that post. Just one thing for a quick response right now:

[Jeremy Garchow] “I also think that technology will overtake some of our jobs. I think you sent out the automatic mulitcamera editing technology being developed. When is the moment coming where an editor or a motion graphics artist is going to be supplanted by an algorithm, because good enough is suddenly just plain good? Again, I don’t meant sound alarmist, but these things do root around in my mind when I look at technological advancement. Also, I am not against technology, just to be clear.”

Have you seen this?

“Here’s something exciting: Autodesk’s new computer-aided design software lets the designer specify the parameters of a solid (its volume, dimensions, physical strength, even the tools to be used in its manufacture and the amount of waste permissible in the process) and the software iterates through millions of potential designs that fit. The designer’s job becomes tweaking the parameters and choosing from among the brute-forced problem-space of her object, rather than designing it from scratch.”

https://boingboing.net/2014/05/20/design-as-paramterization-bru.html

Of course, even that job will become irrelevant when computers start designing things for computer consumption…

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]

[Jeremy Garchow]

[John Rofrano] “Anyone who has the talent to provide the content can capture an audience. Technology enables this, but it is just a means to and end where the end is providing compelling content. “

Sure. But how does the effect me, as a content creator for hire, that can provide compelling content?

How does it effect the people that want to buy that content?

[John Rofrano] “I saw the new 4K monitors at NAB and yes they are absolutely gorgeous and no doubt it’s better than HD… but our kids are not watching 4K TV’s even if we had them. They are watching on their mobile devices which makes 4K delivery a “novelty” not the “norm”. For the average audience, 8K at 60p doesn’t matter.”

I see it a bit differently. I do think the technology matters, and of course, the content has to be ‘compelling’. What is different is that today, you can have a 4k camera in your pocket, and soon that will be attached to a 4k pocket monitor, or you can beam your 4k content to the 4k monitor on the wall, wirelessly. The “high-end” gear, and the pocket gear are closer in technological terms than ever before. So while the argument could be made that 8kp60 won’t matter from a resolution standpoint, I am saying it will matter because you will be able to do it from your pocket, and what does that do to the Pablo Rio?

[Shawn Miller]

[Andrew Kimery] ” 2001 is a great story, but I doubt it would be the movie classic it is if it was shot in Kubrick’s basement on an 8mm Brownie camera with repurposed cardboard boxes for sets. ;)”

lol – I think Michel Gondry did just that in Be Kind Rewind… 🙂

Shawn

[Andrew Kimery]

[Jeremy Garchow] “I am saying it will matter because you will be able to do it from your pocket, and what does that do to the Pablo Rio?”

The same thing it does for a Pablo today even though people already have HD cameras and HD monitors in their pockets?

Some situations/clients will find a pocket-sized solution meets their goals and others will want something that comes with a grip truck right?

These last few posts I feel like I’m questioning everything your are say Jeremy and I’m not trying to be contrarian. I think we swim in different circles and without having your direct experience I think I’m having trouble hitting that ‘aha moment’ where I can really understand where you are coming from.

For me, as a freelance editor, I don’t worry too much about HD, 2k, 4k, b’cast, streaming, mobile, etc., outside of technical aspects (i.e. 4k requires more HDD space than HD and b’cast will have to meet b’cast specs) because editing is editing. Yes there are nuances to each screen (i.e. epic vista shots play much better on a theater screen than an iPhone screen) but editing is editing. Some other editors I know are worried about the disruption going on when it comes to new media vs old media but I’m like, why worry? From our perspective there’s nothing different between editing a show that’s going to air on NBC vs editing a show that’s going to stream on Netflix.

For people running their own shops (and you may be one Jeremy, I’m not sure) and having a more B2C business (where as I’m mainly B2B) I can certainly see how changing formats, trends, and customer expectations can be a royal PITA.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Andrew Kimery] “I feel like I’m not getting what you are saying. There will be more ‘TV-like’ original content made by Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, etc.,. “

This started with a question, does 8kp60 get us anything, and what does the future of post look like?

My response was, as the newer generation expects content at a breakneck pace, what does that do to content? You can, if you’re dedicated, digest a 13 episode web released season in a matter of evenings, or a week or two. How fast can you write, produce, shoot, edit, and legalify a show like House of Cards? Who is going to pay to do that at this new pace? Where you needed to have a couple of big shows like House of Cards to fulfill both time and advertising, you now need many many more shows, to fill the time, or else people will get bored and move to some other service. And will 8k60p help in this process?

[Andrew Kimery] “More content means more people making content. Brining this back around to the forum’s namesake, I think this is a big reason why Apple set its sights on the ‘broad middle’ with FCPX because there are way, way more people were editing video content is another hat they have to wear at times than people that wear the editing hat all day, every day. “

Yes it means more people making more content, at a lower price, and, I think, with different expectations. Does this mean 8k is the future? Let’s say 8k is reserved for movies. What does 8k do for me as a viewer? Do we need to build all new theaters? What is going to get the kids out to see the movies? The adults? The adults bringing the kids?

[Andrew Kimery] “[Jeremy Garchow] ” And as an advertiser, are you going to want to support a limited 8k viewing audience, or so you want to hit as many pockets of every device carrier that you can?”

Why is it an either/or choice?
“

Certainly it’s not, but how many people are going to need to see an 8k movie in the future, and how much content do you have to produce in 8k to make it worth it?

[Andrew Kimery]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Certainly it’s not, but how many people are going to need to see an 8k movie in the future, and how much content do you have to produce in 8k to make it worth it?”

By the time 8k goes mainstream it won’t be anymore expensive (relatively speaking) than HD was a few years ago. HD used to be expensive and now it’s dirt cheap. When the RED One came out 4k was exotic and now it’s on DSLRs and some cell phones. We spent decades on SD, then had a hell of a time switching from analog to digital (and HD at the same time), but now that everything in the content production and distribution chain is digital (and very file based) we are seeing things advance the speed computers and technology advances. Going up to a new resolution just requires fast computer chips and an upgrade computer code. Okay, that’s a big of an over simplification, but it’s much easier than having to engineer a and deploy a new tape-based format

I guess I see 4k (and eventually 8k) becoming a new norm the same way HD has. Eventually camera makers, TV makers (people that always need a reason to get customers to buy the next thing) will just stop making HD gear and we’ll all migrate to 4k (and much later to 8k) by default.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Andrew Kimery] “The same thing it does for a Pablo today even though people already have HD cameras and HD monitors in their pockets?”

We were prothelisizing the future, and I surmised that the difference in between pockets and shoulders is becoming less clear. Ask grip truck owners, they will say a lot of the same thing. Sure, you sometimes still need big ole lights, but often times, you don’t, and a few highlights with hand made LED strips will be just fine running off of an Anton for most of the day. This singularity isn’t happening today, but I feel it’s kind of close, and technology becoming much smaller, faster, cheaper, easier to use, easier to program/customize, and at decent quality, benefits some of us, but does it benefit all of us?

Also, it’s fine, I don’t think there’s an a-ha moment here! I don’t have any answers.

[Andrew Kimery] “For me, as a freelance editor, I don’t worry too much about HD, 2k, 4k, b’cast, streaming, mobile, etc., outside of technical aspects (i.e. 4k requires more HDD space than HD and b’cast will have to meet b’cast specs) because editing is editing.”

I get that. I delivered my second 4k (as a deliverable) spot today. Yesterday, I was in the audio post room, and I had my laptop out, not even plugged in to the wall, and double checking edits and graphics in full 4k quality. It is amazing when you think about it. I could not have done this 5 years ago. So, what’s the next 24 years going to bring? Things aren’t slowing down, certain entities are getting much larger, technology is getting much more efficient. Where is 8kp60 going to help us and should we chase that carrot? Maybe we should, I don’t know.