Silverlake's Fancy Film Post Services specializes in independent films with tight budgets. CEO and CTO Bill Macomber is especially vigilant when it comes to keeping overhead manageable, and that means taking a very practical approach to post-production services. We sent Macomber five questions about how he is dealing with the transition to 4K — and received a healthy dose of skepticism in return. Unless you're looking to debut on streaming services or play in very large theatrical venues, Macomber says 4K is little more than a buzzword.
1) You work on both independent film and television projects. When did 4K become more than theoretical for you?
It is still largely theoretical. We are not steering our clients towards 4K. I think the quality advancements are minor. The only distribution companies who are pushing for it are the "tech" ones, like Netflix, who see it as an advantage. Even Disney's new animated movies (i.e., The Jungle Book) are being animated in 2K. The truth is that it is very hard to tell the difference between 2K and 4K video. Rule of thumb is that you need a [television] screen larger than 80 inches to even perceive the difference.
2) How have you made accommodations for working in 4K? How are you meeting the storage requirements?
Our storage is ready. While I don't think that 4K is ever going to be more than a niche market, having high speeds on network drives is getting more and more critical. The people who have made money on the rush to adopt 4K have already made it. The price for 4K delivery is plummeting as supply has glutted the market with companies that are "4K ready" but still working in 2K and HD. It makes more sense to buy affordably priced gear, such as the Titanium-Z shared storage from Small Tree, that can handle data rates like 4K but will still be a good investment.
3) How are you doing QC and monitoring the 4K image?
When we need to, we use consumer Samsung monitoring.
4) Where is HDR on your radar?
HDR is a very exciting new standard. The difference is very noticeable. I think that this technology will have a bigger impact than 4K, both in theaters and in homes. The power needs of the HDR monitors are the only stumbling block for home use. The current models will not get efficiency certifications and [thus] will not be available to consumers in Europe.
5) Can you describe the overall effect of the transition to 4K on your business?
Mostly, we educate our customers on the fact that 4K is a fad that, just like 3D, will continue on in a niche roll at large theaters and on some streaming services. But for most of our indie clients, it represents a needless expense.
Crafts: Post/Finishing Storage
Sections: Technology
Topics: Q&A 4K bill macomber fancy film five questions storage
Did you enjoy this article? Sign up to receive the StudioDaily Fix eletter containing the latest stories, including news, videos, interviews, reviews and more.
Networks require episodic TV to be archived in 4K. Few feature films shoot in less than 4K resolution. Studies have predicted a fivefold increase in 4K television sales for the current years end, from just under 1 million units sold in 2014 to about 5 or 6 million by the end of 2015, with a 4K TV in half of US homes by 2020, a mere four years away.
“Niche”?
Yes Niche. It doesn’t matter what engineering types demand. Acquisition has nothing todo with deliverables. Shooting in 4k makes sense if for no othe reason than reframing opportunities.
For deliverables what matters is what MOST consumers percieve and demand. MOST Consumers don’t give a damn about 4k. The only reason 4K tvs are selling is because they are being sold at relative blow out prices because they couldn’t sell them initially because consumers DID NOT CARE.
4K in half of US homes is a JOKE. Netflix 4k IS NOT 4k except in packaging. 1080 at half the bit rate of 4k would look better. than what is being passed as 4k. (Right now 1080 is streamed @Ejody:disqus 1/4 the bit rate of 4k)
Unfortunately Macomber is really misguided. 4k content is already being required for major networks as stated by Ejody. Just in my personal circle many have already switched to 4k televisions and a few with 4k projectors. This sounds like the same argument I heard when going from 720p to 1080. It’s not a fad. Until display resolutions reach 8k (33 megapixel )the human eye can still discern resolution, of course this is also governed by pixel density. 4k not a fad, saying 4k is a fad is a fad.
What gear sluts and engineers require has nothing to do with what consumers at large demand. Demanding a higher res format for future proofing doesn’t mean there is any ACTUAL consumer based demand. One can always upscale and 99% of profesionals could not tell the difference never mind consumers.
Is this article a joke? I’m trying not to be glib about it, but most of what is said is terribly misinformed.
I went to a Film Festival a few years ago, probably 2011. At a panel on local industry “professionals”, a videographer who owns an advertising firm joked “Maybe I’d use a RED as a boat anchor”, following up with, “I like to shoot in 720 – it saves room on my P2 cards”. That guy sounded ridiculous then, and the man being interviewed sounds just as ridiculous now.
Considering the fact you can’t find any pro-level camera that DOESN’T shoot 4K, I have to shake my head at this article. Hell, even Youtube has been offering 4K for over a year now. HELL… I edit 6K currently on my laptop (albeit a beast of a laptop).
And this company guides their clients away from 4K in order to keep their own costs down? So they’re not really helping their clients produce the best image, they’re more concerned with their own bottom line.
Honestly, articles this ridiculous make me doubt the validity of everything else on studiodaily’s site.
4K as an acquisition format is a separate issue from 4k as a deliverable.
4k as a deliverable is happening. There are 4k TVs and projectors and clients who want 4k masters and DCPs. This has been happening for a number of years even before 4k TVs were available.
Welcome to the high end.
99% of the people demanding a 4k deliverable don’t need it. Just Future proofing for demand that isn’t there. 99% of people can’t tell the difference between uprezzed 2k and 4k.
How hard would it be to steal away this guy’s clients? While it’s true HD broadcast is still the standard, it doesn’t mean you can’t future proof by going 4k.
Fad or not, if a client wants to try something, why not try it? It’ll be paid for. This guy won’t be known for doing anything daring or cutting edge. Fortune favors the brave.
No fortune favors the people who make money from hyping technology to lemmings that can’t resist. 4k makes sense for acquisition. As a deliverable most people do not care.
Unless you’re doing weddings, events etc, your client isn’t the public, so your client might care.
The public only wants a good show. How it’s presented isn’t their concern, it’s mostly the client and ours. The only time the public cares is if we fail to deliver what we promise.
It sounds like he is coming from the direction of small indie filmmakers. Do you need to shoot 4K if you are a low to no budget filmmaker? Nope. Can doing so hurt your film? Nope. So, if you have the tools to shoot 4K (i.e. GH4 with 4k @ 100mbps), why on earth would you not. 4K doesn’t need to be heavy, my 7 year old computer handles it just fine.
Content is king.
The majority of cinemas in the UK project digitally at 2K.
In the 80s/90s the majority of local cinemas were resolving the equivalent of 720P from 35mm. Complete with dust and scratches and missing frames.
Despite that, I loved the cinema of the 80s and 90s.
Content is king.