Categories
Item of Interest

Digital Production BuZZ Index now at >5000 article and tutorials

Digital Production BuZZ Articles and tutorials index – The BuZZdex – now has 5103 articles http://bit.ly/9uXN68 All indexed by application, type, chapter and topic within the chapter.

Categories
Item of Interest

Andreessen’s Advice To Old Media

Andreessen’s Advice To Old Media: “Burn The Boats” http://tcrn.ch/axRraf – Only “old” media are building iPad apps to put up paywalls.

Categories
Item of Interest

Another way traditional advertising is being subverted

Another way traditional advertising is being subverted.- Transactional Advertising http://tcrn.ch/9AYjZt

Categories
Item of Interest

XDCAM Firmware update now available

XDCAM Firmware update now available http://bit.ly/97KKVC Some new features

Categories
Item of Interest

Apple gets product placement in 41% of movies last year

Apple gets product placement in 41% of movies last year. Most of any brand. And they don’t pay! http://bit.ly/bdtCUV

Categories
Item of Interest

Nick Swardson gets his own cable show

Nick Swardson gets his own cable show! Why do I care? They use Sync-N-Link in the workflow that’s why. http://bit.ly/X32jU

Categories
Item of Interest

YouTube starts transcribing audio from videos for transcriptions

YouTube starts transcribing audio from videos for transcriptions. http://tcrn.ch/bbvCRZ Not completely accurate yet. What a surprise! 🙂

Categories
Interesting Technology Metadata Video Technology

What is Transcriptize and what will it do for me?

Occasionally I do some work for my day job at Intelligent Assistance!, where we’re actively adding to our metadata-based workflow tools. This time taking the speech transcription metadata from the adobe suite and making it accessible to producers who want text or Excel versions, or even into FCP with the transcription placed into colored markers (one color per speaker). With Transcriptize you can also name the speakers, something not possible in the Adobe tools.

Here’s my interview with Larry Jordan where we announced it and the press release is below.

“Announcing Transcriptize on the Digital Production BuZZ”

Transcriptize expands the usefulness of Adobe Speech Transcription

Take transcriptions from Adobe Production Bundle to Media Composer, Excel and Final Cut Pro.

Burbank, CA (February 12, 2010) – Intelligent Assistance, Inc has introduced a new software tool that takes Transcription XML from Adobe Premiere Pro CS4 or Soundbooth CS4 and converts it text, Excel Spreadsheet or Final Cut Pro clip markers.

“Late last year, Larry Jordan asked if we could create something to make the Adobe Speech Transcription more available”, says Intelligent Assistance’ CEO Philip Hodgetts. “We thought that was a great idea and Transcriptize is the result, less than two months later.”

Transcriptize imports the transcription XML from the Adobe Production Bundle and allows editors and producers to name the speakers – something not possible in the Production Bundle. From there users have the option to:

Export a plain text file, suitable for the needs of a producer or to import into Media Composer’s Script Sync engine.

Export an Excel spreadsheet with a variable number of words per row – Perfect for a producer.

Open the XML from a Final Cut Pro clip and add the transcription to Markers where:

There are a variable number of words per Marker (including one Marker per speaker)

The speaker name is placed in the Marker name

Transcription appears in the clip Marker comment

Marker colors are used to identify each speaker (FCP 7 onward).

The transcription can be searched within Final Cut Pro.

Markers can be easily subclipped based on transcription content.

Transcriptize is available now from www.assistedediting.com/Transcriptize/. MSRP is US$149 with an introductory offer of $99 until the end of February 2010. NFR versions for review are available, contact Philip Hodgetts, details below.

Categories
Apple Distribution New Media

Why are 99c TV shows only a step in the right direction?

In a January article “Apple pushing TV Networks to slash prices on iTunes” and more recently “Apple to offer $1 TV shows in April” Business Insider/Silicon Alley Insider suggest Apple are pushing the price of programming through iTunes down, with the goal of selling “some shows” for 99c.

This is absolutely a step in reality’s direction but it still prices individual programs at well above the traditional income-per-viewer that networks have traditionally received, and way above what it would cost for an average viewer via a cable or satellite subscription.

At 99c, the content owner would get 65c per download as Apple take 35% and pays for the bandwidth (at about 10c a GB).

65c per viewer per show is right at the top end of what the big four networks have been able to command from advertising: per show, per viewer. (Even the Superbowl only gets 85c average per viewer per 3 hours show).  At the other end, the big four get a low of 25c per viewer per show.

But not all television is “big four” nor is it always worth the network premium. Take one of my favorite shows: The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. The best research I can find is that Comedy Central pays Stewart’s company about $5 million a year or $32,000 each for the 160 shows a year that are produced. The Daily Show has an audience of around 1.5 million viewers according to Wikipedia and other sources. Cost of production to Comedy Central is just about 2c per viewer.

Presumably Comedy Central are turning a profit between the 60c per subscriber per month they get from cable carriage and whatever advertising revenue is generated across the 5 or so showings of each episode.

And yet, through iTunes that show is currently $1.99 or 99c per episode if you buy a season pass for 20 episodes. (One of the few cases where a season pass gives significant savings). It’s still too much.

If Jon Stewart’s company sold direct through iTunes at, say, 10c an episode (because once watched it has little future rewatching value, unlike episodic drama or comedy) then gross revenue would be $150,000 per show or $97,500 after Apple’s cut. (Apple’s bandwidth cost would be around .6 of a cent in SD, or $8550 leaving Apple $43950 gross profit on the sales.)

On the other end of the equation, the content creator (Stewart) gets $97,500 or three times the income for the same show as working for Comedy Central brings.

So, while 99c TV shows are a step in the right direction there’s still a long way to go before Internet, on demand, video reaches fair price parity with traditional revenues. This is not an opportunity for the existing entrenched players to dramatically increase their margins: it will kill the nascent future.

Categories
Distribution Media Consumption Studio 2.0 The Technology of Production

What about the iPad and Media Production?

On October 31 last year Edo Segal wrote an article on TechCrunch with the title For The Future Of The Media Industry, Look In The App Store. The article is definitely worth a read but this jumped out at me:

But the entertainment industry has a vested interest in the success of this new type of convergence, as within it lies the secret to its continuing prosperity. The only way to block the incredible ease of pirating any content a media company can generate is to couple said experiences with extensions that live in the cloud and enhance that experience for consumers. Not just for some fancy DRM but for real value creation. They must begin to create a product that is not simply a static digital file that can be easily copied and distributed, but rather view media as a dynamic “application” with extensions via the web. This howl is the future evolution of the media industry.

It brings together some of the thinking I’ve been doing on how to challenge the loss of revenue from direct consumption or from advertising revenue when digital files of programming and music are so easily shared and copied. Techdirt.com like to summarize their approach as CwF + RtB = financial success: Connect with Fans and give them a Reason to Buy some scarce goods. Many musicians are already doing this and the results are summarized in the article The Future of Music Business Models (and those who are already there).

I agree that CwF + RtB is part of the future: we can’t charge for infinitely distributable digital goods but we can charge for scare goods (or services) promoted by the music.

But I’m not as sure that will work in the same way for the “television” business, which I define as being “television style programming professionally produced” even if it’s never broadcast on a network on cable. Certainly it will be possible to sell merchandising around programming, and everyone is encouraged to do that.

I’ve also written and presented – as long ago as my Nov 2006 keynote presentation for the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences – that producers and viewers have to be more connected, even to the extent of allowing fan contributions.

Well, last night I had something of an epiphany that bought together Edo Segal’s thoughts and my own as I contemplated the implications of the recently announced Apple iPad.

As a brief aside, I find the iPad to be pretty much exactly what I was expecting (although I thought maybe a webcam for video chat) and interesting. Although I don’t see where it would fit in an iPhone/Laptop world, I can see plenty of uses particularly for media consumption. (For example a family shares an iMac but each of the older children have their own iPad for general computing, only using the iMac for essays etc.)

But the iPad doesn’t really lend itself to static media consumption as it has been: where the producer sends stories fully finished and complete to viewers who passively consume. That’s when the import of Edo’s comment struck: there is more of a future in media consumption for those producers who create the whole environment.  This has definitely been done by many movies and shows but usually with more of a consumption-of-information about the show, rather than a rich interactive experience where fans of the show are as important as the producers.

The future of independent production and media consumption is an immersive environment (website, or better yet and iPad app) with:

  • Content
  • Community (forums, competitions)
  • Access to the wider story, side stories or “back story” in various media formats
  • Character blogs
  • Cast and crew blogs
  • Fan contributions and remixes.

Such an experience would be almost a cross between a typical television program and a video game environment. Sure programming is part of what can be consumed on the site; but there are competitions, games, back stories; additional visual material edited out of the program source, with additional shooting, using technologies like Assisted Editing.

Any unauthorized distribution of content will only be distribution the content, not the experience of the program in its full glory.

Now, there’s no particular reason why this couldn’t be largely done on a website, but it is as an immersive iPad app that I think it will really be fantastic. The iPad is very immersive and tactile. It presents no “border” (i.e. browser window and other computer screen elements) to distract from the programming. It begs to be interacted with because holding it in place to watch a 22 or 44 minute show doesn’t appear to be going to be all that great.

There’s one more selling point for the iPad: it allows in-app sales, so some of the “reasons to buy” can be sold very transparently without even leaving the app’s environment. Avatars, screen savers, certain games or activities might carry a small charge. Yes, even the media itself (or some of it) could carry a small transaction charge. Smooth, frictionless sales in an environment optimized to engage people in the story of the show.

Apple’s iTunesLP format is a very small start in this direction by building a micro-site for the album artwork. This is very powerful because it supports most modern web technologies in a tight package and interactive features (all, b.t.w., without Flash but looking a lot like Flash).

Edo has some further good ideas and I recommend reading the article at the top of this post.