Production Technology Seminar 2009 - EBU Technical

45
from a broadcasting perspective, the first 3D boom in 1953/54 (requiring colour film for the anaglyph
filtering) has been commented on as a response to early colour broadcasting in the USA. This latest 3D
dynamic is based on the viewer‟s experience and the proven uplift in 3D vs. 2D release.
3.2.2 Comparison between leap from SD to HD and from HD to 3DHD
Perhaps the most significant consideration for 3DTV is to approach/understand it from a non technical
perspective. Many technologies have been introduced to the public yet the nature and balance between
the consumer experiences vs. the business model has limited appeal. Many broadcasters are still trying
to master HD and may consider 3DTV as something medium/long term. It could be argued this misses
out the fundamental motivation of 3DTV production/broadcast. To a user, the leap from SD to HD is
minor compared with the HD to 3DTV. An advertiser conveying a message in HD is a minor
improvement from SD (message recall, etc) compared with the leap from B&W to colour. Work is
underway to align the advertising community with the 3DTV proposition so it may result in a common
view that a premium is justified. If not, 3DTV might be purely for pay television operators but beyond the
full reach of FTA broadcasters. The table below compares the transition from SD-HD & from HD-3HDTV.
SD to HD HD to 3DHD
A Improvement in picture quality noticed by
engineers – often not by the consumer.
B Business model to produce or broadcast
HD is challenging and perhaps still
presents problems. It is difficult to apply a
premium to that content.
Dramatically and immediately noticeable by consumers ("wow" factor). It‟s
completely different to the first time they would have seen HD.
This depends on the standards process. If you can control access to the 3D
element, so you can apply more flexible business models (e.g. you get
programmes and/or adverts in 2D unless consumer/advertisers have paid a
premium).
C New cameras Mostly same HD cameras (just using special rigs). Can use specialist cameras
for certain shots.
D New infrastructure (HD-SDI) Same infrastructure as in HD (HD-SDI) with some dual path or mezzanine
compression for single path - depending on infrastructure.
E New displays. You either had a SD
television or an HD television.
This depends on the standards process. New displays (but stepping stone via
HD anaglyph, consuming 3D content on an HD display). Perhaps a start with
CGI generated programming once a week etc.
F New editing software New editing software or plug in‟s
G New sets/make up etc (potentially) Same sets/make up as HD.
H 400%+ more bandwidth than SD This depends on the standards process. One option is a full resolution per eye
model. Depending on content, if live or from playout it needs between 30-50%
extra bandwidth than 2DHD. With the 3D model where HD is inside a
dedicated channel it‟s possible to have half resolution per eye and use the
same bandwidth as HD. Thus, that method of 3DTV would be 100% extra.
I No control over access (HD by default) so
long as they could access the channel.
This depends on the standards process. Ability to apply business rules at point
of transmission or in the STB. For example, a 3D STB one-off licence
activation to view content fee for a non advertising PSB for certain channels.
J Not backwards compatible with SD Backwards compatible with 2DHD. Providing the viewer experience to watch
content in 2D (without wearing glasses).
K No real alternative market for 2DHD
content in cinemas - if you can watch it at
home
L By-product of HD can be SD but SD
content is plentiful and that is not a real
value to have an additional SD feed
M HD-STB baseline too quick for
1080p50/60 (format gap) – so is this
format going to happen to the
consumers?
N Not that different to shoot HD compared
to SD
O HD, for many broadcasters, had no
premium felt of value by advertisers. It
was just a bit better colour TV.
Accordingly for FTA broadcasters, HD is
often not easy to monetize.
Cinemas looking for alternative 3D content (can help cover production costs) –
as the production itself can open a new revenue stream by showing it in the
cinemas in 3D.
3DHD “by-product” is 2DHD. Yet this has a strong value as HD content still
commands a premium. Plus again to (2DSD) if the edit compromise was
deemed acceptable.
The 3DHD STB baseline (drawing board) still open – it is possible to include,
or to migrate to 1080p50/60. This is an ideal junction in time.
Shooting good 3D is a new skill, takes time to master. This really is a new way
of involving a viewer and that skill will take time. Recommend to start learning
process at this stage – not when the standards have been finalised & displays
in the shops. 3D will not go away from the cinema and the pressures for
consumer options will increase. In a way it‟s a far greater leap from SD to HD.
This depends on the standards process. Proven uplift with 3D cinema. Sets
precedent (up to 200%). Research on message recall of stereo 3D information
many help brands justify a small increase in advertising to have the option to
advertise in 3D – thus providing a viable business model for advertising based
FTA broadcasters. Similar to B&W to colour.
© EBU 2009 / Production Technology seminar / January 27 - 29, 2009
Reproduction prohibited without written permission of EBU TECHNICAL & EBU TRAINING