PHILIP SPIEGEL - DAM Ideas

The Problem with Getting High…

Definition.

 

The transition to High Definition video as the accepted standard is basically over.   But media archives are still sitting on acres of shelf space filled with Standard Definition (SD) content produced and collected over the years in a variety of formats ranging from 1" and 3 /4" to the more recent digital video formats like DV and Digital Beta.  What is their place in this High Definition (HD) world?  How do we incorporate these assets into any new HD-based DAM workflow?

 

I think this is a common problem and while the basic tenets of good practice apply regardless of the format, the effect on archive management, DAM planning and the ability to service and support access requests; be it for commercial or production opportunities or research driven; will be different.  How different will vary by your business channel and environment. Are you an historical archive? Government? Academic? Commercial? Production? Entertainment? etc.  The details are going to depend on this and the range of impact will vary from not a lot to significant.

 

Let's look at an example.

 

In the broadcast, production and commercial world it is all about High Definition.  SD content still has legs but the value and shelf life is diminishing.  Its value is defined by the unique aspects of the content and / or the editorial need at hand along with the lack of the content being readily available and accessible in native HD.  While an HD DAM workflow may be maximized for newer HD native content the capacity to attend to the legacy SD has to be a part of the DAM planning.  This second tier of content should also be able to play within the same DAM environment.

 

So problem number one is assuring that there is a digitization plan for SD formats that keeps to the same protocols for the HD workflow...you want one process for both with all the same rules for ingest, storage management, naming conventions, etc.  The format should only matter as it applies to the equipment, routing and transcoding / file specs.  When you only have native SD video masters then an upconversion is needed to create an HD version.  That can happen before or during the digitization but I would pull the master for it from video source not from the digitized file.  Here it's all about doing the highest quality upconversion you can afford.  The quality and overall results will vary and I recommend tests before assuming one setting fits all.  Additionally, I would add a metadata field in the DAM to indicate that the content is native SD and the HD version was created via upconversion.  You want users to know when they are considering native HD versus upconverted HD...it matters.  In the commercial world, content upconverted can have a lower resale value because it is considered "faux" HD. 

 

Let's have a sidebar about upconversions.  These can be very satisfactory but they have limitations...you are stretching the resolution to the extreme so the quality and overall acceptability of the results will vary with a variety of factors including content, original format, resolution and quality of original capture all contributing to the overall results.

 

What if you have film?  If the SD content was originally captured on film and that film is accessible then a new telecine or datacine would be the way to go first.  And frankly, if you’re doing that then be sure to transfer the whole flat and do a good cleaning.   Super 16mm transfers well to the wider aspect ratios of HD without compromising the frame.  Regular 16 works well too but I would recommend a full film frame 4x3 pass within the 16x9 window with side pillars.   This retains all the film frame information and gives you the most room for content specific adjustment during the cross conversion to full frame 16x9.  Film grain can be a problem with regular 16, be mindful of this during the cross conversion.   35mm looks really good too and as above be sure to scan / telecine the as much (if not all) of the original full film frame as possible.

 

For other types of collections the SD / HD issue and DAM can be less relevant.  Generally if the goal is not for display or broadcast but instead access, review and research then SD is fine, digitization and file management can be maximized to create good archive and low resolution web files for use on the web.  The bigger issue of risk for SD content in these environments may lie with format obsolescence, especially for ¾” masters.  But again, don’t forget that the contents historical significance trumps all issues....the shaky-cam video of the Yeti monster enjoying cocktails with Elvis and three green Martians will be valuable and important regardless of the resolution, quality and original capture method.

 

So, the challenges for SD media archives in a DAM prioritized for an HD workflow are mainly the challenges of making the SD content relevant and prioritizing your attack of the SD content driven by content, capture method such as film original or video original and quality.  It needs a workflow plan for dealing with these other formats and generating the support files (via transcode) needed to participate in the efficiencies the DAM creates.

 

Great content always wins...making it relevant in HD keeps it a winner. 

What about the Content?

If you are sitting on top of an Everest-sized mountain of content then where do you start and how do you prioritize to create an effective content strategy? This is distinctly not a technology question but instead a business operations question.  How and why is content determined to be of priority and who is driving that definition?

Depending on the business, the content strategy can be defined by factors that can include:

• Condition, native format and overall stability and integrity of the original physical asset
• Is it an obsolete or soon-to-be obsolete format?
• What is the subject matter of the content? Do you even know and if you do then what is the criteria for determining value and importance?
• What type of media? (ie. film, video, photos, audio, documents, props, artifacts, etc)
• What are the rights issues? Or, what do you know about the rights?
• What are the urgent business needs from the content that will bring the most relief to business front lines?
• What about budget and available resources?
• Any combination of some or all of the above

The type of media in a content strategy is second to understanding the processes needed to manage, find and deliver the content. Also, there are different technology issues managing different types of media content but the prioritization process is separate and can be "type" agnostic.  The goal should be to identify the low-hanging fruit that will be return the most value from the effort in the fastest time (see previous post on ROI).

This all sounds easy and in some respects it is. Filtering out the noise that comes from the various interests involved to hone in on a path is the second step after gathering all the needs requirements up front.  Look from above the silos..what is needed to support the current and / or future revenue goals?  Having this will help identify a path for proceeding but its important to remember that the content strategy has to be dynamic and nimble enough to shift as changes in the business dictate.

Listen.