Get Adobe Flash player
Ask the experts of the producers and production companies. MAM... is the management of 3D data files essentially the same as any other video file but with double the data or is there anything extra to consider. For example, does the convergence data get recorded in the Metadata? Do we care? Is there any other information that in your experience is necessary to record for easy management? At Sky we have a large and complex MAM system for our 2D/HD Media storage, which enables us to move media in a tapeless environment. Being more 3D data specific - depending on the file system that is being used and the type of workflow, depends on the volume of storage needed and indeed what format it is ingested and stored as. Currently there are very few file systems that can handle what we call ‘muxed’ files. Muxed means that one file contains both eyes. These file types include stereo EXR (SXR), Cineform and .JS (Mistika files). All others like DPX require one file for the left eye and one file for the right eye. You can render both eyes to something like DPX as side by side but this will result in a slight loss of resolution. We usually ingest RAW files directly into one of our Misitika’s as the first step in our multiple 3D workflows/ pipelines and depending on things like data resolution, working environment, timescale, budget and final destination of the material depends very much on the workflow and ultimately how we store and treat the data. that 3D usually can’t, such as shallow focus, whip pans, jump cuts, drastic focus pulls, over the shoulder shots, etc. There’s a different way to filming 3D ‘well’. It’s not right or wrong, just different techniques that experienced professionals use to make the most of the medium. I think 3D adds a whole new element, which certain shots in 2D simply aren’t able to offer. Certain sports can look exceptional in 3D and offer more detail and a different, and in some cases more enhanced, experience to the viewer. Just as going from SD to HD offered something new. Should content producers be shooting in 3D even if they don’t intend using it now for future proofing? Yes and no. 2D uses techniques that work well in 2D but don’t suit 3D (shallow focus, etc, as discussed above). It’s like any medium - if you’re talented and you plan well, you can make the most out of it. You don’t shoot a documentary in the same way that you would shoot a football match You wouldn’t shoot 3D the same way that you would shoot 2D. Well, you can but it lacks imagination. In terms of future proofing I think it is much more important to consider things like resolution and shooting 2k and 4k instead of just HD. What sort of increase in 3D occurred over the summer of 2012 and has this demand / trend continued? Over the summer, we were pleased to open up access to Sky 3D to all Sky customers with a Sky+HD box so they could enjoy Eurosport’s 3D coverage of the Olympics. In our experience, getting more people to sample 3D is key to its success, as once people have experienced it they start to understand what’s so special about it. I’m not in a position to update on customers number following this summer, but given before that happened we were already reaching a quarter of a million customers, we were working from a very solid base and are some way ahead of that figure now. You have great 3D content in sport and natural history. What other genres are likely to make engaging 3D? We have some really interesting shows on the channel and we are bringing more options to the table in 2013/2014. Sport and Natural History have lent themselves very well to 3D and it really does enhance the experience for the viewer, which is what it’s all about. This year we have shown the Olympics in 3D as well as The Ryder Cup and our David Attenborough Natural History shows such as Kingdom of Plants and Flying Monsters have proved hugely popular with viewers but we have also discovered that music and live events work well and we are working more with drama and have some very exciting productions coming up. Don’t think ‘Genre’. Think ‘Subject Matter’. Movement and depth always look good. Static shots of cardboard cutouts do not.   Apart from the need for heavyweight processing power, Will 3D sport ever be able to offer the variety of shots that HD sports does and maintain the same level of enjoyment? That’s assuming that 2D and 3D obey the same rules. 2D can use tricks 40 | TV-BAY MAGAZINE TV-BAY072DEC12.indd 40 07/12/2012 15:14