EDCF-T Meeting @ Cine Expo 2006
Wednesday 28th June 2006 Amsterdam RAI Room C @ 09.15
Meeting Minutes
The module chair Peter Wilson welcomed an excellent attendance which filled Room C at the RAI.
EDCF-T Work
The first series of agenda items aimed to identify areas of work, and volunteers to do it, to
commence soon after Cine Expo.
1. Mastering process for the D-Cinema End-to-end Document
There was a good response to the call for contributors. This guide will follow the same scheme of
multiple authors as the early adopters guide. The brief will be to explain how to take a DCDM and
produce a DCP for presentation.
Volunteers:
Patrick Von Sychowski, Jason Power, Angelo D’Alessio, Matthieu Sintas, Curt Belmer, Jim
Whittlesey, John Thompson and Wendy Aylsworth
Wendy suggested that Doremi might be useful contributors if they were members as they had
products in this area and may already have white papers covering this. Peter felt this could be useful
but that the guide should remain generic rather than proprietary
2. Interoperability between Level 2 & 3
How do you get football or specialized film into cinema venues? Whilst it was understood that the
DCI had purely considered film presentation there was considerable interest in Europe in the lower
levels – as identified by the EDCF. It’s a hot topic with the World Cup underway.
The EDCine project starts next month and Benoit Michel outlined the work planned. He presented a
PowerPoint at IDIFF which is on the EDCF web site but will be updated soon to reflect the latest
information.
Benoit identified 3 key statements which embody the investigative aims of EDCine
1. Will MJPEG, MPEG and DCI content be able to coexist?
2. Will content be available to and from any location?
3. Is optimal quality still possible?
They propose to go beyond DCI specs addressing bandwidth reduction, quality, stereoscopic
images and further compression. The project will also extend into interactive events, watermarking
and security, streamlining metadata through the full chain, transcoding between compression
standards e.g. DCI to H.264 and aim to support the standards needed through SMPTE.
The project runs for 3 years from 1st July 2006. The end of project demonstrations will show
interoperability between ‘B chain’ and DCI.
Peter wondered if a faster track to basic interoperability might be possible.
3. Siegfried Föeßel – Fraunhofer IIS
FIIS were hoping to have a method to relay DCI and alternative content (AC) to digital cinemas.
The generation of a document is in progress, Al Barton suggested this would effectively link the
ITU LSDI and DCI areas. Wendy added that the ITU groups are likely to close, and it would be
reviewed in July 06. There is a document out of the LSDI work that describes standards and how to
apply them.
Peter confirmed that it wasn’t new standards that were needed, just a simple brief on how to link
projectors to AC in the field.
There was an open discussion on the issue.
Jason Power suggested that with many cinemas showing the World Cup there may be some
potential material for case studies.
David Monk suggested that there was an opportunity for the EDCF to explain how to do this. How
do you enable DC infrastructure to stage a universal media event? Could it be clear enough for 50
cinema operators to link themselves up to events such as the World Cup?
Al Barton thought the brief should be to allow an exhibitor to equip an AC compatible venue.
Peter pressed the group to volunteer to progress this area. Siegfried Föeßel, Kommer Kleijn offered
to help whilst Peter chaired the activity. Rob Spray indicated that BT would hope to actively assist.
4. B Chain Concept
Suggested as a methodology to ease distribution of 25 fps movie to the big screen the principle
would clearly be appropriate for local commercials and trailers.
Benoit suggested that this should be a guide or guideline with advisory parameters on properties
such as colour space, aspect ratios and audio.
Jason pointed out that the term ‘B chain’ was already in use in the audio domain, and asked for
another. Peter conceded that as the term is already in use we need another name. Any suggestions?
5. Training the next generation
Angelo D’Allesio made a brief presentation. New technology was transforming industry but DC is
continuation of cinema with new tools and new professionals. He hoped waiting was not a winning
strategy.
Several film schools already have teaching in place for DC aspects but there is no communication,
these courses are not coordinated, the EDCF should have a coordinating role. Festivals also need
training support… all claim to be the first digital festival in Europe! They usually run from digibeta
or HDCAM. We have a duty to educate festival organizers.
The lack of expertise is a problem – very few in Europe know how to prepare a DCP. Angelo (and
Matthieu) had gained permission to translate the DCI spec into French and Italian. The spec had
been sent to schools in Italy, Greece and Switzerland. Richard Boyd mentioned that the Skillset
training for the UKFC had just covered basic server and projector operation, nothing on multimedia
(or AC) interconnection. The NFT test bed could be a venue.
Peter and Harry Mathias offered to help the training group.
6. Compliance or conflict?
Interoperability efforts are to be applauded but what is their legal standing? Can the compliance
projects interoperate?
We have 3 interop projects in Europe; The NORDIC project, ISA and FIIS has a contact from DCI.
The NORDIC project – Patrick von Sychowski
Born of the aim to switch all screens to high end DC, a complete switch as with ad screening. This
target has been parked as technology is not ready yet.
The project is running as a 12 month trial to assess the state of technology by building a mini
network across Norway to trial future infrastructure. It would not be single inventory across the 12
new venues. All major projector suppliers involved with a mix of servers from Quvis and Doremi at
the moment with others to come. Any DCI based kit is welcome. This is government funded not a
VPF commercial model
Results of the work will be published, in English!
ISA - Matthieu Sintas
Now there is a public ‘standard’ the ISA aim is to ensure good results and consistently packaged
content into DCDM and DCP. DCI is not just for the US but also for Europe and it should be open
to all to be informed. The ISA is based at the CST for processing, and in a theatre for visual testing.
Tests have been made with Sony and Kodak so far. Overall reports will be published but work with
vendors would remain confidential. The CST also do a lot of training on various topics.
Peter asked if there was a fee for joining ISA, Matthieu said that this would not usually be the case
unless the facilities were occupied for a prolonged period (a week+).
FIIS - Adrian Widera
Fraunhofer IIS was given a contract by the DCI to generate test materials and to write a test plan.
This is to facilitate certification if required. They have a plan and schedule to complete this work
by Oct/Nov 06. The first stage, writing procedures, is underway and should be completed by 3 July
06. The second stage, real world checking, will follow and will involve manufacturers as FIIS want
to avoid disqualifying equipment due to any misinterpretation of the spec. Equipment should be
FIPS140/2 (Cryptographic Models) compliant already. FIIS will not certify equipment and
systems themselves. Not all of the documentation will be open to the general public, security
documentation particularly may be kept internal.
Wendy added that whilst kit was clearly still developing, ingest interop has been identified as a
problem and a new SMPTE interop group was on the way. Schedules and playlists are also to be
addressed within SMPTE.
Work had not started on file exchange within theatres, Michael Karrogosian said that interop work
had concentrated on systems in use in the field. Whilst film systems can swap a show in 15mins
this may not be possible with DC.
7. Open Group - Michael Karrogosian (more docs at MKPE.com)
Is the Open group (OG) the right vehicle for interoperability? Do we need third party branding with
enforcement?
OG is a professional organisation who address and solve this kind of problem. OG was based in the
UK but their DC certification would be US based at the start. OG was formed to standardise and
manage Unix, they own the Unix brand. Membership is by subscription and work is paid for by
manufacturers submitting equipment for test. Their first proposal was the introduction of an
organisation to create interop specs and their second to create a certification body.
Peter asked why manufacturers should pay, MK replied that this was simply because they could
pass the cost on. Peter was not sure that the pass/fail test model was useful to industry, particularly
for smaller players.
Peter asked Wendy whether any studio would close a screen for low brightness? WA, speaking as a
studio, said if there was a poor chain that might be avoided but they would not pull content.
Ioan Allen, said that in 30 years he had never heard of content being pulled. The go/no go issue was
different from quality.
Curt Belhmer added that Technicolor has an interop lab established this year, in the absence of
anything else. They were aiming to share results, matching pragmatic requirements rather than any
other agenda.
There was a round table discussion on the subject which concluded that with the standards involved
in flux any interop effort would have to be dynamic and that several areas need to be considered as
well as future compatibility with new generations of equipment. Competitor differentiation needs
brand independence which makes functionality compatibility difficult.
All groups (including Technicolor) agreed that they were happy to work together and Peter asked
for a chair for an Interop group… None was immediately forthcoming and Siegfried from FIIS
added that there was also the aspect of theatre systems which FIIS would be covering. Peter asked if
Angelo could prepare a document on this for IBC
8. Formally create the Archive group
How do you archive Digital Production or utilize Film Archives for Digital Presentation
Nicola Mazzanti attended and Peter asked that he lead the discussion of the topic by outlining the
needs of archivists as he saw them. Nicola was not sure of the EDCF’s aims but suggested that the
problems were clear. There are already several activities going on, in fact the second largest part of
EDCINE was archive related. We would need to consider what part an EDCF group would play.
Peter agreed that there were several problems; how to store DI movies, various other production
storage issues and the recovery of old material for release and use.
Nicola felt that there were two major issues which only partly overlapped:
1) how do we archive the wide range of material which is shown in a DC context. DCI material was
not so bad as it’s a standard, but it’s the other content that has no uniformity. 10 years into the use
of DI archive media should not just be about a format it should be part of a strategy for storage and
recovery.
2) Any strategy must make stored content available vertically throughout the chain – not just DC –
it must be available for more than cinema release to be worthwhile. Archival cinemas are going
down and there must be other outlets to make archival viable.
Nicola said that whilst there was plenty going on in Europe and the US, there needed to be more
communication. People needed to be brought together to discuss the issues and perhaps this could
happen through the EDCF? More may be possible, he wasn’t sure of the EDCFs remit and level of
interest.
Wendy pointed out that there were several avenues of activity; some in the academy, within
SMPTE in V29 on physical media in archival and there was a group in Worldscreen looking at
using lossless wavelet coding as the master format of an archive tree. She suggested that the EDCF
should look at those as a start.
Benoit added that EDCINE may have some helpful output in around six months.
9. Frame rates for Europe
The initial agenda item pressed this following statement;
‘No 25 FPS Digital production can pass through a DCI system without being compromised’
SMPTE Committee work will be required to add extra Frame Rates as an addenda to DC-28 so we
need volunteers. US members of DC28 have no interest in this so we must make a European team.
Peter started by saying this position had changed somewhat after an interesting meeting at NAB
Wendy had asked Kommer to present his IMAGO proposals to the SMPTE.
Kommer said that these were not just ‘European’ frame rates but also the cinematographers choice.
Support should be mandatory to ensure that all venues could show all content, to maximise the
opportunities and rewards for production. The overall goal was to eliminate the need for
unnecessary frame rate conversions in DC. Kommer reiterated that IMAGO’s proposals also
include allowing change of frame rate within a presentation, allowing 4k resolution at rates higher
than 24fps and the elimination of 48fps as a new frame rate.
John Thompson added that this was not restricted to film as adoption of DCI would lock out native
rate display of European adverts as they are almost all 25 fps. This was a major revenue stream and
so needed consistent support in venues.
Wendy cautioned that ads were not film and so this was outside the DCI remit in any case.
Michael Karrogosian suggested that there were a couple of places within the specification where
parameter such as frame rate could be introduced, in the DCP or at the playlist. Ioan Allen
wondered to what extent should SMPTE get involved as the DCI spec is just a subset of the main
DC28 effort. 25Hz was a fact of life and his companies servers supported it and SMPTE should
too.
Kommer agreed, much European cinema production is now 25Hz for cost reasons and whilst the
‘official’ method was to show these at 24fps some cinemas were now configured to run at 25. This
of course meant that 24fps content was wrong! IMAGO wanted cinematographers to be able to
choose the rate for production rather than exhibition reasons. Maybe even US productions may
change, perhaps to use 60Hz, he speculated. Wendy felt that 24 remained easier to match to both 25
and 30.
John Thompson, David Bancroft, Angelo D’Alessio and Matthieu Sintas offered to assist in
supporting this subject. Wendy agreed that was exactly the kind of issue that should be covered in
an ad hoc group.
Kommer and Peter highlighted the EC meeting on the following Friday in Brussels, The wording of
the agenda suggested the need for a separate European standard and this was definitely not the
position of the majority of EDCF members. 6 people from meeting were planning to attend;
including John Graham, Angelo D’Alessio, Kommer Kleijn, Peter Wilson and Matthieu Sintas.
Kommer suggested that a new major advantage of adopting the IMAGO proposals as would be to
integrate European factors into DC28 and undermine EC objections.
Benoit felt that this meeting was typically part of the Commission process when preparing a call for
research projects. They are trying to get ideas from industry for project frameworks. This was to
determine where Europe should invest in industries and may shape how money is spent for the next
6-7 years. John Graham felt that whilst this was part of the usual EC routine the document’s
undercurrent was more political, trying to incite a protectionist position to protect the EU or isolate
US.
There was some concern over the exclusion of non-Europeans from the meeting. Wendy had asked
to attend but been refused whereas Angelo had been invited specifically as a representative of
SMPTE, rather than on the basis of his other European affiliations. Whilst the EU does not seem to
appreciate SMPTE its documents will soon have international standing through ISO.
10. Any Other Business
There was no AOB
11. Attendees:
Al Barton
Sony
Angelo D’Alessio
CDG
Arian Widera
FIIS
Benoit Michel
XDC/EDCINE
Curt Behlmer
Technicolor
David Bancroft
Thomson
David Monk
City of London University
Harry Mathias
DCMP Consulting
Ioan Allen
Dolby
Jason Power
Dolby
Jean Francois Nivart IntoPix
Jim Whittlesey
Deluxe Digital Media
John Graham
EDCF
John Thompson
BSC/The Hat Factory
Kees Ryninks
CME
Kommer Kleijn
IMAGO
Massimilano Gasparri Consultant
Matthieu Sintas
CST
Michael Karrogosian MKPE
Nicola Mazzanti
Cinemetheque Royale, ACE
Patrick von Sychowski Unique Digital/NORDIC Project
Peter Wilson
HDDC
Richard Boyd
BFI
Rob Spray
BT
Ruud de Bruyn
CME
Siegfried Föeßel
FIIS
Thierry van der Kaa XDC
Thomas MacCalla
KMP
Wendy Aylsworth
Warner Brothers/SMPTE
End of Minutes