News Stories

NAB: Innovation Wanted

I’m looking for something that will change the landscape of production and post.

[By Philip Hodgetts, dv.com]

Innovation is what I seek every year while I walk the halls of the NAB Show. While I really appreciate the great tools that the major companies continue to bring us, the “innovation” is generally found around the edges and “down the back” of the halls in the 10′ x 10′ booths populated by the upstarts and… innovators.

This is also where I’ll be looking for the “cool toys.” They may not be crucially vital to production, but there’s some fun stuff, like a helicopter that can carry cameras and wireless links for under $300!

I suspect that my ongoing interest in metadata is not going to be shared by most, but I am looking forward to checking implementations of content metadata in the relatively new SMPTE-2021 (BXF) standard, and any innovative uses of metadata to drive postproduction automation. Disregard the importance of metadata at the peril of your career. I’ll be partnering with MediaSilo with metadata-related presentations at the Marriott near the Convention Center.

At least one 3D pioneer, Tim Dashwood, is planning new stereoscopic 3D tools for postproduction, and there will likely be a slew of new 3D tools released this year as the whole post workflow gets reworked for stereo images. Then there’s the meta trend toward large sensors, so I’ll be checking the latest from RED, Sony and Panasonic and hoping for a DSLR that’s more like a video camera.
In early February, Avid showed Media Composer 5.5, moving in exactly the direction it needs to.

If Steve Jobs’ e-mails are to be believed, we’ll see a new version of Apple Final Cut Pro in “early 2011.” Adobe will likely also have a new release of the Production Suite. I’m really hoping that Final Cut Pro (and the rest of the Studio) become even more “Applish” and really bring some innovation to the NLE interface, which hasn’t changed much since Media Composer version one — we have more polished and additional features, but the NLE is essentially the same as it was 20 years ago.

I’m looking forward to delivering my two three-hour in-depth sessions at the Post|Production World conference: “The Future of TV: How to Grow and Monetize an Audience” on Tuesday from 10 a.m.; and “The New Now: How to Grow Your Production or Postproduction Business” at the same time on Wednesday.

The other important thing I look forward to at NAB is the socializing. Friends and associates from around the country and the world converge at NAB. As well as the many informal socializing events, I’ll be at the MediaMotion Ball on Monday night and the Supermeet on Tuesday night.

Finally, I’m hoping for a little less change. With an ever-increasing number of codecs and formats to support, it’s time that the camera manufacturers consolidate formats so we can derive best-practice workflows. At a minimum, pleasedon’t introduce any more new formats at NAB 2011.

See the original post here: http://www.dv.com/article/104496

 

Apple exploring multi-camera iPhone systems for 3D picture taking

 

[By Neil Hughes, AppleInsider.com]

Apple has toyed with the idea of adding two or more rear-facing cameras and sensors to a device like an iPhone, allowing pictures to be taken and displayed in 3D.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office this week revealed a patent application from Apple related to 3D picture taking, entitled “Systems and Methods for an Imaging System Using Multiple Image Sensors.” First discovered by AppleInsider, the filing describes a system that would capture, process and render 3D images with the accompanying dual-camera hardware.

The application refers to Apple’s approach as a “paradigm shift from the known software-based approaches.” It notes that current software must “guess” at how to perform stereo disparity compensation for 3D images.

Those guesses, Apple said, can result in images with artifacts in a composed 3D image that would result in a poor quality photo. Apple’s method would instead employ a hardware-based approach with a “deterministic calculation for stereo disparity compensation.”

Apple would create hardware with multiple imaging systems, employing separate luma, chroma and depth/distance sensors to capture images that can be turned into a single, three-dimensional picture.

In addition to still images, Apple’s system would also be able to record video in 3D. Setup and calibration of such a system would be a simple one-time event, the application claims.

3D picture taking capabilities for the average consumer just arrived in the U.S. this week, with the launch of the new Nintendo 3DShandheld gaming console. Nintendo’s portable device features two rear cameras for capturing still pictures and playing augmented reality games in 3D.

On Nintendo’s gaming system, the 3D content is shown on a glasses-free 3D display. Of course, if Apple were to offer 3D picture taking capabilities on a future device, it too would need to feature 3D display capabilities.

The patent application revealed this week is not the first time Apple has shown interest in 3D imaging. In 2009, the company explored 3D display capabilities with head tracking technology, while in 2008 it was revealed to be researching auto-stereoscopic 3D display hardware. The Cupertino, Calif., company has also shown interest in a 3D interface for Mac OS X.

The patent application revealed this week by the USPTO is credited to Brett Bilbrey and Guy Cote. It was first filed in September of 2009.

See the original post here:  http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/03/31/apple_exploring_multi_camera_systems_for_3d_picture_taking.html

< PREVIOUS ARTICLES NEXT ARTICLES >

Specification for Naming VFX Image Sequences Released

ETC’s VFX Working Group has published a specification for best practices naming image sequences such as plates and comps. File naming is an essential tool for organizing the multitude of frames that are inputs and outputs from the VFX process. Prior to the publication of this specification, each organization had its own naming scheme, requiring custom processes for each partner, which often resulted in confusion and miscommunication.

The new ETC@USC specification focuses primarily on sequences of individual images. The initial use case was VFX plates, typically delivered as OpenEXR or DPX files. However, the team soon realized that the same naming conventions can apply to virtually any image sequence. Consequently, the specification was written to handle a wide array of assets and use cases.

To ensure all requirements are represented, the working group included over 2 dozen participants representing studios, VFX houses, tool creators, creatives and others.  The ETC@USC also worked closely with MovieLabs to ensure that the specification could be integrated as part of their 2030 Vision.

A key design criteria for this specification is compatibility with existing practices.  Chair of the VFX working group, Horst Sarubin of Universal Pictures, said: “Our studio is committed to being at the forefront of designing best industry practices to modernize and simplify workflows, and we believe this white paper succeeded in building a new foundation for tools to transfer files in the most efficient manner.”

This specification is compatible with other initiatives such as the Visual Effects Society (VES) Transfer Specifications. “We wanted to make it as seamless as possible for everyone to adopt this specification,” said working group co-chair and ETC@USC’s Erik Weaver. “To ensure all perspectives were represented we created a team of industry experts familiar with the handling of these materials and collaborated with a number of industry groups.”

“Collaboration between MovieLabs and important industry groups like the ETC is critical to implementing the 2030 Vision,” said Craig Seidel, SVP of MovieLabs. “This specification is a key step in defining the foundations for better software-defined workflows. We look forward to continued partnership with the ETC on implementing other critical elements of the 2030 Vision.”

The specification is available online for anyone to use.

Oops, something went wrong.