It’s time for BMD to create some “typical” system designs

Questions about ATEM Switchers, Camera Converter and everything live!
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Peter Gould

  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:14 pm
  • Real Name: Peter Gould

It’s time for BMD to create some “typical” system designs

PostSat Apr 07, 2018 12:52 pm

I posted an article similar to this on Creative Cow and I’m posting this one here in an effort to reach BMD’s attention.

Among my other pursuits, I'm an adjunct professor teaching film and television production at a community college. I and one other adjunct have completely taken the department over from the full time professor who was running it, who just retired. We are undertaking raising funds for a complete facility redesign. It's desperately needed. To get a sense of how far behind they are: the centerpiece of their studio is an Echolab SD switcher. Echolab hasn’t existed as a company since 2010. Six classes use that studio. It is one equipment failure away from bringing the program to its knees.

So: our plan will use a 4 M/E BMD switcher, URSA Broadcast cameras with studio viewfinders, Hyperdecks, all new infrastructure, etc., etc. Pretty much the racks and the lighting grid will be all that remains from the former incarnation.

But I ran into a major omission among BMD's documents that I suggest the company should remedy as you embark more and more into SYSTEMS instead of individual pieces of gear, and that is some boilerplate system designs that fully reveal the engineering team's vision of how a complete BMD studio would ideally work.

As just one example: in our installation, virtually all productions would be a recording (or live airing) of the director's linecut. But once in a blue moon, I can see doing ISO recordings at the camera end in addition to the linecut. Not often enough to justify purchasing individual Hyperdecks for each camera, but I still want to plan for the potential. In which case the cameras need to record timecode which would match the timecode attached to the recording of the director's cut (yes, we could do without it, but that's sloppy and if I'm designing a facility it's going to be done right to set the proper example for students). I see that the URSA Broadcast has a BNC input which can be timecode OR house sync. Somewhere or other in the vast camera manual, I seem to recall also noticing that the camera can sync to the SDI return from the switcher. So I'm guessing at least one configuration envisaged by BMD engineers would rely on the SDI return for sync and would feed TC to the TC/Sync input. (We would not use the fiber back on the cameras as they're less than 100' from the control room and money is tight).

But I shouldn't be guessing at configurations. The right way to go about this would be for BMD to release some "typical application" system diagrams, incorporating BMD switchers, cameras, and ancillary gear, to use as a jumping off point. All the individual documents for cameras, switchers, panels, decks etc., are great - but on top of that it would be HUGELY helpful to folks in my position if there were some "Blackmagic System Design" documents showing the engineering philosophy for a best-practices approach to using all this stuff together.

Because if I'm raising six figures to build a new system for the school and staking my job and reputation on it, I really want to know I'm approaching it the way your engineers had in mind!
Offline

MambaFiber.com

  • Posts: 833
  • Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 5:26 pm
  • Location: SLC, UT

Re: It’s time for BMD to create some “typical” system design

PostTue Apr 10, 2018 6:43 pm

I'm a big fan of BMD, but I'm also a big fan of systems that work. If you are holding out for an ALL BMD system, well I wouldn't. They have a lot of incompatibilities between some of their products, and of course EVERY system needs to fill a different need for it's user so it hard to find an off-the-rack solution for video production. also, needs change as we learn what we can do so I like to see systems with a lot of flexibility as well.

you should also realize that, at least from my perspective, that BMD runs in several differing directions and they themselves have not proven to me that they KNOW what a live production system really needs to be. one example - they don't have a TC generator product, or at least have better TC control of the ATEMS, like being able to generate different formats and dictate start times and have a better plan to distribute it. but they don't and this is an issue in LOTS of productions. I'll give them a lot of credit lately for starting to "get it", but they just aren't there yet and still ALWAYS seem to leave out one little thing in every product that would have otherwise made it fully usable. like the intercom not working on the new fiber backs. don't get me started! :-)

You'll find a lot of "glue" in our systems from other manufacturers that make everything play well together. Rather than pin your hopes on BMD, king of really nice looking but ultimately misleading promo material, I think you would be better off finding an integrator that has experience in building video systems that will guarantee to leave you with a working system. Whatever you pay an entity like this will likely save you far more than monies mis-spent on problem gear and the budget killing additional fixes/patches to make it work yourself. Outline all of your goals ahead of time, the later you change direction the more it's going to cost to get there.

I will recommend adding a VideoHub to your system. And the bigger the better. We have 40x40 on our little systems and 72x144 on the biggest. Prob the best move for flexibility we have made looking back. I'd say skip 4K for now, 1080 is going to be fine for many years I think. And good for you realizing your project may get to 6 figures, yes VERY possible. It's sad every time I see someone buy a TVS HD and think they can use the one piece of gear to make a show...
Greg Bellotte - owner
MambaFiber.com
FaceBook.com/MambaFiber
Offline
User avatar

Tom_Bassford

  • Posts: 1665
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:12 am
  • Location: Europe / UK

Re: It’s time for BMD to create some “typical” system design

PostWed Apr 11, 2018 7:32 am

Yes to all of that.

There is too much missing from the blackmagic solution for them to be able to show you a fully working system design.

Many of their products sway away from traditional broadcast workflows and create a load of new problems by doing so.

If you are going to bother doing a studio build then do it right. Whatever you put on now will have to last another 15 years. Don’t worry about 4K the resolution really is irrelevant, you need kit which has the standard functionality that you get in real studios.

If you are looking at URSA Broadcast then the fibre backs are essential, otherwise you are creating a bodge job messy solution which doesn’t work in the same way as a real tv studio. I’d also look at the low cost Ikegami studio cameras which are not much more expensive than the URSA system but are a lot more standard in their style and layout.

A large router is essential, as are decent engineering monitors (blackmagic do not make a good engineering monitor)

Speak to a professional vision engineer and technical director before you buy anything, work with an integration provider to design and implement the system.

It’s never been possible to simply buy a load of off the shelf equipment, plug it all together and end up with a working tv studio. There are many subtle workflow issues which need custom solutions to solve.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
http://www.atemuser.com
if it was easy it wouldn't be called engineering
Offline

Peter Gould

  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:14 pm
  • Real Name: Peter Gould

Re: It’s time for BMD to create some “typical” system design

PostWed Apr 11, 2018 4:03 pm

Tom_Bassford wrote:If you are going to bother doing a studio build then do it right. . . Speak to a professional vision engineer and technical director before you buy anything, work with an integration provider to design and implement the system.


I've designed and built a number of facilities over the years, so I've BEEN the "professional vision engineer and technical director" for other companies' projects. Both in terms of preparing the facility blueprints and in terms of getting my hands dirty with soldering irons, labeling systems and crimping tools. This is not new to me.

What I'm faced with here is a state that is virtually broke and simply won't pay for a soup-to-nuts outsourced design/build. So I can let their program die out completely (which would have happened if the two of us had not come onboard when we did) or I can make it work. If we work very hard we will get them to raise outside funding to pay for the equipment (barely). I anticipate spending volunteer time to do the build. I further anticipate not getting everything I want in terms of gear and having to make it work anyway.

It could not possibly be worse than what they have now - an SD facility with a dying infrastructure that was at the low-end-corporate-facility part of the spectrum in 2001, has been band-aided together over the years with a hodge-podge mix of consumer gear, cannot be properly sync'd because the consumer gear has no timing adjustments, and yet still is used by half a dozen different classes. I cannot imagine that as an experienced pro with 30+ years in the business I can't replace this mess with a three-camera facility that works. It's not a commercial facility - it merely has to provide a student experience that feels like one and lets them produce a body of work they can show off.

I have an opportunity to take a direct hand in putting this right and then having years of teaching opportunities (which I love). Or I can tell them the only solution is to do what I already know is impossible. So as I size up the situation, I can either do what I can do with the hand I'm dealt or walk away from it. Those who know me know that I never walk away from a challenge and that I have a demonstrated history of not failing. I'm not planning on changing either element of that history here - but I agree that if the environment was a bit different I'd be sounding a lot like you do.

The bottom line is all I'm looking for from BMD is the same information a contracted integrator would need in order to do the same thing I'm proposing to do. Integrators and those who design facilities for a living need the same information I'm asking for. What BMD does not manufacture themselves should still be included in proposed facility designs: if they don't make a TCG then show a facility design with a TCG they like from some other source, coupled with a suitable DA.

No engineering team from BMD (at least none that I can imagine) sat down to create the individual product designs with no thought to how they would interrelate. It's inconceivable that prototypes were not wired together into systems that could be tested. It's equally inconceivable that those systems were not internally documented. Otherwise they wouldn't know if their own products worked together, and no manufacturer is that stupid. All they need to do is pretty up some of this information and incorporate it into the product manuals.
Offline

Peter Gould

  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:14 pm
  • Real Name: Peter Gould

Re: It’s time for BMD to create some “typical” system design

PostWed Apr 11, 2018 4:16 pm

MambaFiber.com wrote:I'm a big fan of BMD, but I'm also a big fan of systems that work. If you are holding out for an ALL BMD system, well I wouldn't. They have a lot of incompatibilities between some of their products, and of course EVERY system needs to fill a different need for it's user so it hard to find an off-the-rack solution for video production.


Oh no - I'm not that silly. I'm already assuming that (for instance) audio, CG and intercom will be separate non-BMD systems (though the CG will need a Decklink interface). Primarily from BMD I'm looking at the cameras, switcher, control panel and recording devices (Hyperdeck Mini's) and then wanting to know what ancillary gear is known to play nice with the BMD ecosystem. I'm also starting to look more at the URSA Mini Pro instead of the Broadcast Camera for this solution since it looks like the Broadcast Camera simply crops the URSA Mini sensor to a bayonet lens size and we might as well use the whole sensor via an EF or PL mount lens. Of course that raises still more questions about compatibility (will the BMD infrastructure provide proper iris control over a Canon CN7x17? It looks as though it SHOULD but there's a world of difference between that and "definitely will").

The system will be run in HD - obviously there's no current need for 4K, but being able to TELL the administration that the system is 4K-capable will provide some needed assurances.

It's just that in order to set a budget and be approved for purchases, I will have to already have created the system design - which means I need to design the system without having my hands on any gear. That gets me the purchasing list and the budget. Avoiding "gotchas" is a major issue even though I WILL add a contingency portion to the budget.

As I said to another poster in this thread, my alternative is to hold out for a budget that will cover a contracted integrator. That would exceed any possible budget and scrap the entire system, probably shuttering the entire department. I'm not looking to go there.
Offline
User avatar

Scott Smith

  • Posts: 959
  • Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 12:51 pm

Re: It’s time for BMD to create some “typical” system design

PostWed Apr 11, 2018 6:40 pm

A "Studio camera" the size and quality of the URSA Broadcast Camera should not have an either/or connector for timecode and reference. They should have both. It is stupid omissions like this that make their products good-stuff-for-the-price instead of great gear. There are plenty of other similar examples of disheartening design flaws. I hate it, because if it weren't for these little screw-ups they are absolutely great products - but some of these omissions sometimes make the difference between a hell-yes product and an I-don't-think-so product.
Scott R Smith
BMD Stuff I use: ATEM 2-M/E, 4 x ATEM PS 4K, Broadcast Videohub, 6 Hyperdeck Pros, 4 Hyperdeck Shuttles, Multidock, Smartscope Duo, Smartview, Intensity Extreme, Decklink Studio, and lots of Miniconverters and Open Gear Converters.
Offline

Peter Gould

  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:14 pm
  • Real Name: Peter Gould

Re: It’s time for BMD to create some “typical” system design

PostWed Apr 11, 2018 8:31 pm

Scott Smith wrote:A "Studio camera" the size and quality of the URSA Broadcast Camera should not have an either/or connector for timecode and reference. They should have both. It is stupid omissions like this that make their products good-stuff-for-the-price instead of great gear.


Absolutely. In this application I can deal with the omissions. The current studio has NO ISO recording capability whatever, so even being able to record the occasional ISO without timecode is more than they have now. What I can build "for the price" looks like it will be far beyond what they need. I just want to get everything out of the gear that it can possibly give, and forecast every possible need in advance so I'm not backfilling once the project has been budgeted and kitted out. BTW it does appear that when tied to an ATEM, the camera can sync to the HD-SDI return video, freeing up the TC/REF BNC to take TC. But wouldn't it be nice to see it diagrammed out? Switcher, reference, TCG, DA's where needed, 4-place CCU - all in a system diagram others could use as a reference? If I have to do my own I will probably share it, but it would be SO nice if BMD would come up with something as a time-saver!
Offline
User avatar

Scott Smith

  • Posts: 959
  • Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 12:51 pm

Re: It’s time for BMD to create some “typical” system design

PostWed Apr 11, 2018 9:23 pm

I have Panasonic AG-HPX255 cameras in the studio. I wouldn't mind upgrading to 4K cameras with a bit of depth of field. But I want my timecode and my reference, like I currently have. I don't think that is asking a lot. Heck, if they could take in black-burst with embedded timecode in it, and utilize both reference and TC off of one cable, we'd have an upgrade. Not sure why companies haven't figured out how to do this.

But you are correct that the documentation could be better. It looks good at first glance, but the details just aren't there. It's essentially a bunch of words and drawings that say "the button labelled white balance controls the white balance, and the connector labelled mic is where you plug in the mic." Well, duh. I am exaggerating, of course, but not by much.
Scott R Smith
BMD Stuff I use: ATEM 2-M/E, 4 x ATEM PS 4K, Broadcast Videohub, 6 Hyperdeck Pros, 4 Hyperdeck Shuttles, Multidock, Smartscope Duo, Smartview, Intensity Extreme, Decklink Studio, and lots of Miniconverters and Open Gear Converters.
Offline
User avatar

Tom_Bassford

  • Posts: 1665
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:12 am
  • Location: Europe / UK

Re: It’s time for BMD to create some “typical” system design

PostWed Apr 11, 2018 9:40 pm

Peter Gould wrote:
No engineering team from BMD (at least none that I can imagine) sat down to create the individual product designs with no thought to how they would interrelate. It's inconceivable that prototypes were not wired together into systems that could be tested. It's equally inconceivable that those systems were not internally documented. Otherwise they wouldn't know if their own products worked together, and no manufacturer is that stupid. All they need to do is pretty up some of this information and incorporate it into the product manuals.


I’d love to agree with this statement, but experience of BMD’s approach makes me very hesitant to do so. They employ a lot of fpga engineers with no broadcast experience and many of their products are missing the crucial final 10% of design / functionality to actually be usable in a proper live tv environment. (See classics such as their “smart” videohubs which cannot switch cleanly even between fully referenced signals) Check put some of the employee reviews on a website called “glass ceiling” for an insight into the company.

The ATEM is a great platform and certainly the best vision mixer on the market for less than $50k but there are still a lot of gotchas.

I’d try and get some hands on time with the kit before you make purchases as going in blind can be costly


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
http://www.atemuser.com
if it was easy it wouldn't be called engineering
Offline

Peter Gould

  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:14 pm
  • Real Name: Peter Gould

Re: It’s time for BMD to create some “typical” system design

PostThu Apr 12, 2018 11:28 am

Scott Smith wrote:I have Panasonic AG-HPX255 cameras in the studio. I wouldn't mind upgrading to 4K cameras with a bit of depth of field. But I want my timecode and my reference, like I currently have.

It does look as though we can have that by syncing to the return from the switcher which frees up the other port for TC.
Scott Smith wrote:It's essentially a bunch of words and drawings that say "the button labelled white balance controls the white balance, and the connector labelled mic is where you plug in the mic." Well, duh. I am exaggerating, of course, but not by much.

Nope - not by much. It’s documentation written as though for people who have never done any of this before. A very strange read for someone accustomed to docs from the major manufacturers (Sony/Panny/GV/ForA etc.)

Return to Live Production

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 guests