SMPTE Meeting Presentation

3D Sports Production at the 2012 London Jim DeFilippis, MSEE, PE Broadcast Engineering Consultant, Los Angeles, CA, [email protected]

Written for presentation at the 2012 Los Angeles Fall SMPTE Conference Abstract. For the first time the Olympics were telecast in 3D. In the past, some 3D coverage was available on a closed circuit basis of limited Olympic events. The London Olympics 3D Channel covered multiple sports, both live and ENG coverage, and provided a full up 3D channel of over 275 hours of 3D programming. The core of the 3D coverage was provided with (3) OB Van remote production units as well as (6) single camera EFP production units. A variety of stereoscopic rigs were used in each of (4) venues along side the Panasonic ENG/EFP P2 3D Camcorder. Some special stereo cameras were also used including: pole cameras, rail cameras, RF cameras and underwater cameras. The paper will present the unique challenges to providing 3D coverage, from organizing the 3D channel as well as the technical challenge of covering sports in 3D while accommodating the full up 2D production. Finally, the paper will discuss what worked and what did not. Keywords. 3D, stereoscopy, production, Olympics, sports

The authors are solely responsible for the content of this technical presentation. The technical presentation does not necessarily reflect the official position of the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE), and its printing and distribution does not constitute an endorsement of views which may be expressed. This technical presentation is subject to a formal peer-review process by the SMPTE Board of Editors, upon completion of the conference. Citation of this work should state that it is a SMPTE meeting paper. EXAMPLE: Author's Last Name, Initials. 2011. Title of Presentation, Meeting name and location.: SMPTE. For information about securing permission to reprint or reproduce a technical presentation, please contact SMPTE at [email protected] or 914-761-1100 (3 Barker Ave., White Plains, NY 10601).

Copyright © 2012 Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers. All rights reserved.

Introduction For the London Olympic Games of 2012, the host broadcaster, OBS1 was asked to provide a full 3D broadcast service for the 2012 London Olympics. Planning started approximately 9 months prior to the Opening Ceremonies. Participating Rights Holders included NBCU, BBC, Eurovision, Japan Pool, Sky Italia, Ch9/FOXTEL, and others. Panasonic provided support including specialized 3D stereoscopic production equipment, specifically professional 3D monitors and the first P2 camcorder capable of capturing stereoscopic 3D images. This paper is a report on the overall setup and production of the 3D Channel with discussion of the challenges found in covering live Olympic sports. Creation of the 3D Project The OBS 3D Project team2 organized (3) 3D OB Vans to produce full up stereo TV productions at (4) Venues: Olympic stadium (Opening, Athletics, Closing), Lee Valley (Canoe Slalom), Aquatics (Swimming, Diving, Sync Swimming), and North Greenwich Arena (Gymnastics, Basketball). The three OB vans suppliers were: Telegenics (Stadium and Lee Valley), Alfacam (NGA), EMG (AQU). In addition, English speaking Commentators provided live commentary that was delivered to the IBC and injected into the live venue feed at the 3D cabin. These venue 3D productions would account for the majority of the 3D programming including the most popular Olympic events. To provide a base of operations for the 3D Channel, OBS organized a separate facility just outside the main IBC, which was composed of an upper and lower set of (4) cabins, each level having 529.5 square feet, for a total of 1059 square feet. The 3D IBC was organized with the top floor for production and editorial, including (4) edit suites. The downstairs was the main technical operations space and included the 3D Channel Playout Gallery (Master Control Room), the Technical QC Area, the 3D Archive Room and the Equipment Room. OBS Engineering provided the design, installation and testing of all the equipment and facilities in the 3D cabin.

Live Production The Live productions , as described above, were produced at each of (4) venues: •

Olympic Stadium (Opening Ceremonies, Athletics, Closing Ceremonies)

•

Lee Valley (Canoe Slalom)

•

North Greenwich Arena (Gymnastics, Basketball finals)

•

Aquatics (Swimming, Diving, Sync Swimming)

There were (3) Outside Broadcast units (OB Vans) dedicated for 3D production:

1 OBS, Olympic Broadcasting Services, provides Host Broadcast services for the Olympics and is part of the International Olympic Committee (IOC). 2 The 3D Project team was headed by Mark Watson, Supervising Producer, Kristin Mason as Production Coordinator and Eric Green as Technical Manager.

Copyright © 2012 Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers. All rights reserved.

2

•

Telegenics (Stadium and Lee Valley)

•

Alfacam(NGA)

•

EMG (Aquatics)

Olympic Stadium/Athletics Coverage3 Typical of the complement of 3D cameras, here is a list used by the Telegenic OB Van at the Olympic Stadium: No  

1  

Type  

Lens  

Mount  

Location  

Hard  

2  

22x7.6   Side  by  Side   Centre  low  main  stand   Rig   EFP/HH   17x1   LW  Tripod   Inside  track  on  bend  

3  

RF  HH  

17x1  

LW  Tripod  

Repo  -­‐  Field  Events  

4  

RF  HH  

17x1   LW  Tripod  

Repo  -­‐  Field  Events  

5  

EFP/HH   17x1  

LW  Tripod  

5b   EFP/HH   17x1   LW  Tripod  

Inside  track  on  bend   Outside  track  at  300m  

Coverage  

Overview  /  wide   overview   Track,  throws   and  jumps   Track,  throws   and  jumps   Track,  throws   and  jumps   Track,  throws   and  jumps   Track  &  Jumps  

6  

Hard  

22x7.6   Side  by  Side   Low  opposite  tribune  

Track  &  Jumps  

7  

Hard  

22x7.6   Side  by  Side   Outside  track  at  300m  

8  

Hard   SSM   Hard  

22x7.6   Side  by  Side   End  of  100m  straight  

Track   somehrows   End  of  Track   Races   Track  &  Jumps  

9  

22x7.6   Mirror  Rig  

10   RF   4mm   Horizontal   Trackcam   Trackcam  

Outside  track  at  200m   100m  home  straight  

11   Polecam   5mm   LW  Polecam   Repo  -­‐  Field  Events  

End  of  Track   Races   Various  

The EFP/HH and RF/HH cameras were the Panasonic AG-3DP1 camcorder. The RF Trackcam and Polecamera (‘Birdie Cam’) were small format CMOS type with fixed lens. The Hard cameras were 2/3” professional HD camera systems, and Camera 8 was a triple speed (150Hz) camera system. In addition there were (9) 2D cameras signals which could be converted to 3D as required.

3 Information about Open and Closing Ceremonies was not available to the author, thus will not be covered in this paper

Copyright © 2012 Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers. All rights reserved.

3

Figure 1. Typical 3D Coverage Camera plan (Athletics)

For recording there were (5) EVS LSM disk based recording systems including (1) triple speed camera/recorder (Cam 8). Real time graphics (timing and scoring as well as start lists and results) were provided by an Agile Graphics 2D character generator. A typical ‘inflator’ (slide slip) technique was used to place the graphics at approx 1/2” negative parallax (in front of the screen). Typically the OB Van complement included a Stereographer with Convergence Assist operators as required. The Stereographer had a direct PL connection to the Technical QC position in the 3D Cabin so as to coordinate 3D quality control with the Tech QC Stereographer. The goal of the 3D Production team was to match the level of coverage that the 2D Integrated feed produced4. Because of the limited resources available, for each session cameras had to be re-positioned for the discipline to be covered during that session and thus reset between sessions. This proved to be quite difficult and was an on-going issue of camera setup and alignment. The quality of the images from the small format/fixed lens cameras were sub-optimal and did not provide for good 3D image quality. However the large format cameras (2/3” sensors) used in the mirror rigs and the side by side rigs did provide sufficient quality for the 3D production. The Panasonic hand held cameras, though limited by their 1/3” sensors, produced acceptable 3D images; however there were many issues related to proper setup due to the diverse and varying lighting conditions inside the stadium (from bright morning, gray afternoons, 4 For the 2D production, there are (4) Control Room complexes. (3) Sub control rooms dedicated to track, field (throws), field (jumps) and one integrated control room that combines the sub control rooms. The 3D Integrated Production had only one control room to cover all these diverse disciplines.

Copyright © 2012 Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers. All rights reserved.

4

twilight and night time) the AG-3DP1 did not have a wide enough range of exposure (limited to between f4.0 and f5.6 for best 3D results). The RF modified AG-3DP1 units experienced problems with the remote control of convergence (special modification done by Panasonic) as well as issues related to battery life. In production, there were always the challenges of the camera placement and objects in the near field causing edge violations as well as extreme negative parallax. Problems with the graphics overlay when there were in-scene objects in negative space, thus causing ‘graphic window’ violations (see Annex for details on 3D errors). Another unique challenge to production was the ‘close up’ of the athletes after a race. Due to the limits of the near convergence of the AG-3DP1, while using the NEAR function, to 1.1m (43.3” or 3ft 9.3”), meant that the other photographers were in the shot and thus either the cameraman needed to pull back or the director would need to use a 2D camera shot. However when the 3D worked there were some very dramatic and interesting shots. The final finish of the races, seeing the pack during long races, the runners jumping over the hurdles. The Field events proved more difficult. The jumps worked best when the camera did not ‘follow’ the athlete in the run up but rather presented a fixed shot converged at the jump point. Problems with the use of the Birdie Cam to cover the high jump due to the camera ‘shooting’ into the lights; this caused a noticeable flicker5 because the shutters were not synchronized between each ‘eye’ of the stereoscopic cameras. North Greenwich Arena/Gymnastics and Basketball. The Alfacam facility at NGA had the following cameras and equipment: •

(5) EFP cameras with 17x1 lenses. (1) RF unit

•

(3) Mirror Rigs with 22x7.6 lenses. (1) SSM unit

•

(1) Side by Side Rig with 22x76 lens

•

(1) Agile Graphics 2D CG plus 2D to 3D converter (side slip type)

•

(5) EVS LSM Dual channel disk recorders. (1) SSM type

•

(3) 2D Camera signals converted to 3D

For Basketball, the configuration changed to (8) cameras with (3) Side by Side rigs and (1) Mirror rig. In a similar arrangement to Athletics, the OB Van Stereographer had a direct PL connection to the Technical QC position in the 3D Cabin. Gymnastics 3D Coverage

5 Flicker was an area of concern to OBS and the Right’s Holders and has been a subject of world wide studies of the potential hazards of flicker when viewing 3D.

Copyright © 2012 Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers. All rights reserved.

5

The coverage of Gymnastics was difficult due to the tight arrangement of the apparatus as well as the 2D cameras and field of play personnel. Many shots were compromised with objects in the near field. However after a couple of sessions, the camera personnel working with the Director established a 3D production that matched the level of the 2D production. The coverage further improved when the team sessions concluded and the individual sessions started. The 3D Trampoline 3D coverage was very good and took advantage of the dramatic lighting which provided enhanced contrast between subject and background (the 3D images provided the viewer with the ability to ‘see’ the athlete in mid air without confusion of the background). Basketball 3D Coverage Perhaps due to Basketball finals beign scheduled during the last days of the Olympic Games, the 3D coverage was superior and worked well, although the first half of the first game had some issues. The 3D definitely gave the viewer an enhanced view, almost ‘courtside’ in the intimacy and ability to see the action. The basket cameras were 2D inflated thus did not prove as useful. A 3D ‘basket cam’ would have enhanced the 3D coverage of Basketball. Aquatics/Swimming, Diving, Synchronized Swimming The EMG 3D facility at Aquatics had the following cameras and equipment: •

(5) EFP EFP cameras with 17x1 lenses. (1) RF unit

•

(1) Mirror Rigs with 22x7.6 lenses, SSM type.

•

(2) Side by Side Rig with 22x76 lens

•

(1) Polecam with 5mm lenses (‘Birdie Cam’)

•

(1) Underwater Mini Robotic

•

(1) RF Track camera with 22x7.6 lenses.

•

(1) Agile Graphics 2D CG plus 2D to 3D converter (side slip type)

•

(5) EVS LSM Dual channel disk recorders. (1) SSM type

•

(6) 2D Camera signals converted to 3D

For Diving, they used 8 total 3D cameras including (4) EFP type, (2) Mirror Rigs, (1) Side by Side, (1) Underwater Robotic and (1) Polecam. Synchronized Swimming used a total of (11) 3D Camera systems (similar configuration to Swimming). Of key importance as the use of the special 2D rig (topside/downside camera) which provided a unique view simultaneously above and below the water. This camera was converted using a ‘barrel type’ converter. As with the other venues, the Stereographer in the truck had a direct PL connection to the Technical QC position in the 3D Cabin.

Swimming 3D Coverage Swimming coverage was difficult due to the lighting with water and reflections. The EMG crew struggled to balance each camera to match the ‘blue’ of the water as well as minimizing the reflections within the mirror rigs. Overall, the coverage was good but in general 3D did not particularly enhance swimming. Due to technical limitations, the 2D

Copyright © 2012 Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers. All rights reserved.

6

CGI enhancements (line identification, world/Olympic record pace line) were not available to the 3D telecast. Diving 3D Coverage 3D Diving coverage was very good. The dramatic shot with the contrast between the diver and the background was enhanced for the 3D viewer. It would have been great to have the vertical track and overhead track in 3D but the converted shots worked reasonably. There was an issue with the Mirror Rig due to the change in elevation of the camera rig while covering the diver, causing the mirror alignment to shift. A creative solution from the EMG EIC was to use a ‘cargo strap’ to better secure and couple the bottom and top camera units of the mirror rig.

Figure 2. Mirror Rig with Cargo Strap

Sync Swimming 3D Coverage 3D coverage of Synchronized Swimming had mixed results. The shot with the swimmers entering the pool was amazing. However in the pool, there wasn’t a good 3D shot. The main camera used was a special 2D camera rig, with a camera above the water and one below, stitched together as one image. The 3D production converted this 2D camera using a non-linear ‘barrel type’ converter, which produced acceptable results. Perhaps the 3D coverage could have been improved if there had been a 3D rig mounted on a crane to provide a dramatic overhead shot of the performances.

Final Thoughts First, I am thankful for the opportunity to have been a part of this exciting new Olympic Broadcast service. Hopefully it will continue on in future Olympics. I am indebted to all that helped and supported this effort. I think our efforts have shown that 3D Sports can be done on a large scale. However there are challenges to be overcome if 3D Sports production is to increase. The two major challenges faced by the London Olympic 3D Project were preparation time and lack of 3D experience. Given the late addition of the project, time was limited and thus more resource and effort should have been brought forward. Additional time for crews to train up on 3D as well as training with 3D experts would have been most helpful. However, in spite of these challenges, the overall 3D production was

Copyright © 2012 Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers. All rights reserved.

7

compelling. Key to good 3D Stereoscopic imagery is camera placement and shot selection. Keeping the two images identical in terms of video levels, zoom/magnification and vertical disparity is critical. Scaling back the coverage of events in 3D, especially where the 3D does not add to the viewer experience is worth considering. My observation is that there are some sports that are 3D friendly (Diving, Gymnastics, Basketball), some sports can be enhanced with limited 3D (Athletics) while there are sports where the coverage in 3D provides minimal enhancement (Swimming). Perhaps a hybrid sports production technique should be considered, one that combines both 2D and 3D cameras into a unified production. This may not work for all sports but for sports where large lens/far camera positions are needed for the base coverage, 3D cameras can supplement and enhance the coverage. Some have proposed ‘5D’ production techniques, where the 3D rig is mounted alongside the 2D camera. The difficulty of this approach is that the direction of the 2D and 3D cameras need to be coordinated and thus a compromise which will not produce the best coverage for either 2D or 3D in my opinion.

Acknowledgements I would like to thank the following people from OBS: Manolo Romero, Sotoris Salamouris, Isidoro Moreno, Guillermo Jimenez, and Dennis Baxter, Mark Wallace, Kristin Mason and Eric Green For all there help and assistance the Panasonic team including: Masato Hachiman, Koji Yamamoto, and Noriaki Wada Finally, the QC Stereographers, Enrique Criado and Richard Hingley, who were patient with me as I learned the finer points of 3D.

Copyright © 2012 Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers. All rights reserved.

8