IS THE IPHONE NOW A NETWORK CAMERA?

[Hrvoje Simic]

There is a big difference between auto-cutting in Premiere and our patent-pending live-auto-switching based upon facial recognition technology and other sensor input.

Yes, the difference lies in the type of algorithms and what's mutual is the fact that algorithms decide instead of a human, reducing the quality of the produced content.

Saying that solo news production using auto-facial-switching is artless is a bit like saying cutting an entire album by yourself with a keyboard in Pro Tools is artless.

1) News production is minimally "art".

2) Audio Editor in Pro Tools does not cut by "auto cutter", nor uses any tools which decide anything for him.

3) Field news production (proper one) requires at least: a) cameraman, b) journalist c) editor. Because each part requires specific type of experience and knowledge, and even if the cameraman or journalist do the editing, and even if it is a simple edit, it is still irreplaceable by an algorithm.

4) One can program the switching, but automated camera feed and switching is not a proper content production. "Auto facial switching" cannot replace editing decisions which are based on the story.

Does an artist need a studio full of musicians and a full size grand piano to make quality art?

Yes he does if he composes a song with more instruments. Grand piano depends on aesthetic choice.
If grand piano was a reference to a larger broadcast camera, there are smaller and practical broadcast cameras.

Did Michelangelo need a team?

Michelangelo did not do digital multimedia production.
Also, he used very basic tools which did not replace the craftsmanship.

Art in it's purest form is the expression of a single individual working alone.

If the type of art is individual.
Art has many forms and many of them require a fusion of creative minds in creating a single work of art.

Webcast, or news production (if that is intended), apart from teamwork, has minimal relations to this as its purpose is not individual's expression and artwork but quality produced and minimally biased coverage of the news/event.

Imagine how long it would take me on opening morning at CES or NAB to record, edit and post a 3-camera interview covering some hot new product launch with my EPIC gear?

Epic is a cinema camera, not designed or optimized for news production or webcasts.
35mm sensor cameras usually aren't. When something is being used for purposes it was not designed for, additional variables and compromises are introduced. It would take you much less with proper cameras for the job. Even less with a proper team.

3 camera shoot of a new product launch usually requires multiple shots of the product launched and talking heads shot from three angles do not add any significant value to the newsgathering in that case. Cutting between the person being interviewed and shots of the product depends on what is said and the context. If the company rep says "well we are improving on products we see as inferior compared to the competition" and "auto cutting" randomly shows one of their products, the message is sent to all the viewers one probably didn't intend. Also, even the best spokesmen sometimes babble unimportant stuff, either by drifting off point or following the PR text which is too long and boring for video material. Which needs to be edited out. By a human.

I can do the same thing alone with Vizzywig and 4 iPhones (one as remote mic) in under 4 minutes and be the first to post online when that's all that matters. More importantly, I can hit the next booth in 60 seconds.

No you cannot do the same thing. You can do the thing which may seem similar to you.

If speed is the only criteria, quality of news production is greatly endangered.
Even more so if you don't even review what you shot. Can be tricky if something went wrong or if it simply provided the unintended context.

Soon, I will have real-time auto-facial switching working with my EPIC's connected to my iPads through Teradek Cubes and uploading to YouTube in minutes. Then replace with 6K on my laptop with very minimal post editing required. Best of both worlds.

Sounds interesting. Don't see the point, though.

Using expensive 6K cinema cameras to shoot an interview (not the most practical or fastest route), loosing time to setup the system, than skimping on editor in order to publish it ASAP.

If someone is nothing more than a machine operator or equipment hauler, they should be concerned, if one is an artist, they have nothing to fear.

If by "machine operator" you mean "professional cameraman", they will not be concerned.

Also, the activities of pushing a loan mower and operating a camera (so the material is properly shot)...tend to differ significantly. In complexity, responsibility and the amount of beneficiaries, among other things.

Focus pullers might want to start spending time learning how to use touch gestures to pull focus on an iPad. The tools will change but their eye, their art won't change.

The eye of a focus puller is on a scene to judge distances. Touch screen has no physical reference for the manual control, follow focus rotaton does. Touch gestures are useful to simplify a complex action. Focus pulling is not a complex action. Holding an iPad is not very practical, and it tends to break if it falls down. Also, in professional newsgathering there are no focus pullers, camera operators pull their own focus, and they don't do that on 35mm imagers wide open.

The smartest ones will get involved in creating the software that makes the process more automatic.

Automation is useful for simplifying fully predictable and repetitive processes which don't require real time decisions, improvisations, feeling and other human elements.

 

[michael zaletel]

I disagree on every point Hrvoje. I respect your opinions but they are not fact. As always, time will decide.

-Michael