NAB 2013- Final Thoughts

NAB 2013 - wrap up.

 

The show finished with its usual gentle grinding to a halt on Thursday lunchtime, and its clear that most of the exhibitors were relieved to have a chance to rest their feet, and maybe take some time to catch up with their colleagues around the show. I'm pretty sure the shopping malls also saw a big increase in footfall, we spent some time ourselves at the Fashion Show Mall to pick up the all important presents for the family, and bumped into lots of NAB shoppers! Closely followed by a relaxing hour and a half by the pool, the first time I got to see it since we checked in!

 I thought I'd take a little bit of time in this post to discuss the Eco-system of the industry we all work in, and the inter-dependence of the various strands of the business. I thought of this as we were discussing the latest digital cinematography cameras over a Mojito in a bar on Wednesday night- often when the best ideas come!

Anyway, one of the guys we were talking to specialises in the rental side of the business, especially camera and grip rental. I asked how he saw the breakdown between the various cameras in the marketplace, and what impact the advent of very low cost products had on his business. He explained that his clientele are driven predominantly by the director and his expertise or knowledge, couple with the budget of course. If its a high-end drama or cinema project, it's likely to be a Sony F65, if its a commercial or other TV drama, it's likely to be Arri Alexa or Red Epic. Anything below that tends to be more budget driven, although he did say the Sony  F55 &  F5 are making an impact. 

So this got me thinking about the  business, and the food-chain from manufacturer through  production company, to end client- whether TV station or cinema or any other outlet.   Of course all elements of the business are struggling and having to cut costs wherever they can. The advent of the digital cinema camera has revolutionised the business in the same way as videotape revolutionised the TV production and news businesses many years ago, and it's an open debate as to which drives which- does lower-cost kit drive down the cost of production, and therefore the budget available, or do lower-cost productions demand lower cost kit, and this in turn force manufacturers to produce kit to suit?

In the past, the cost and complexity of 35mm or 16mm film production meant that only the most worthy projects were shot on film, maybe those with international sales potential, or some other justifiable reason  for the expense.   

But, as with the videotape revolution, the new digital cameras- especially the DSLR models- has opened the market up to a vast increase in the number of producers pitching to TV stations for productions shot on digital. This of course is a good thing, and from a cultural standpoint, the democratisation of content creation helps to promote the diversity of views that a healthy society needs. There is, and should be, a place for these productions in the broadcast landscape, and may exciting and original ideas have been brought to fruition on DSLR cameras.

However, because there are many more production companies shooting lower cost programmes, it gets difficult for the high-end productions to hold onto their share of the programming budget. Not that the commissioning editor would choose to have a production shot on a lower quality system, but the overall environment and cost base tends to be driven lower, which feeds into the time spent refining the production, and leads at times to a more hurried production with less attention to detail.

At the same time, the breadth of technology, especially at the content creation end of the food chain, has fuelled a proliferation of programmes of all genres, from drama to lifestyle, to reality TV and more.

The advent of virtually unlimited TV channels, not to mention online services, has created a huge and hungry beast to consume the content that's produced, with channels dedicated to virtually any interest group. These channels will often repeat programmes endlessly, but even so still demand huge amounts of fresh content on a regular basis. Would these channels exist if the lower cost of production (and of course distribution) didn't enable the quantity of content needed to fill the schedules?

  

We can argue the quality of much of this programming,  but the fact remains that there are many more people employed in the industry now than at any previous time, notwithstanding the loosening of the old labour regulation environment.

And, as resellers, this broadening of the base feeds down to us, with increased markets for the hardware and software that enables the content creation.   So the symbiotic relationship between the broadcaster and the production company, to the facilities house to the systems supplier and manufacturer, creates an Eco-system in which all are dependent on each other.

Without the manufacturer introducing innovative, low cost products, the facilities house or camera person, couldn't offer the services at the cost base they can now. The production company couldn't produce the programme at the same budget. And the broadcaster would have to pay more for the content, and this in turn would  mean fewer channels (which some might argue is a good thing!) and higher advertising costs.

The exact inverse is also true, if you start with the broadcaster, and follow the trail down. So the interdependence of all the various elements of the industry is much deeper than we'd all think on first glance. We truly are an Eco system, with total interdependence on each other.

And nowhere is this more apparent than at a major trade show such as NAB, where you have all the elements coming together- from broadcasters to programme makers to manufacturers to distributors. All getting along splendidly!  It is probably the biggest single reason why NAB and IBC, along with the other major shows such as CABSAT and Interbee have survived so long.

People deal with people, and at the end of the day, a show like NAB is all about the people you meet and the relationships you build. Ours is a truly sociable business, and no matter it's trials and tribulations, there are really very few of us who'd choose to work in a different industry.

So that's it for this year. We'll be producing a review of highlights from the various manufacturers once we're all back at the grindstone, but for now I hope you've enjoyed reading my first blog- it's been an interesting experience, and I've enjoyed it, and the feedback and comments I've received. So thanks to all those who took the time to read and respond, and until next time, remember you can keep in touch via the following:

Twitter- @kevineurotek

Facebook- Kevin Moore

LinkedIn - Kevin Moore

And of course the Eurotek contact details.

Thanks for reading!

Kevin