The broadcasting industry is undergoing a significant transformation thanks to the rapid advancement and adoption of virtual production techniques. No longer a novelty, virtual production has become a core strategy for many broadcasters, impacting news, sports, and studio operations alike.
This evolution is driven by numerous factors, including cost efficiency and increased creative flexibility. The limitations of traditional physical sets are being overcome by the limitless possibilities of virtual environments. This article explores the perspectives of several key industry players.
Mathieu Mazerolle of Foundry notes that the meaning of "virtual production" has expanded over time, encompassing a broader range of techniques blending real and virtual imagery. He points out that broadcast has been a pioneer in this space, but the techniques are advancing in quality and realism as seen in Hollywood, which broadcasters are now increasingly adopting.
Onur Can Gulenc of Zero Density observes that the US is catching up to Europe in the adoption of virtual production. The accessibility of new technologies like generative AI is a key driver, lowering the barrier to entry for smaller channels.
Miguel Churruca of Brainstorm highlights the benefits beyond creating non-existent scenes. He emphasizes the cost savings from reduced set construction and the increased flexibility for diverse content creation. The demand for hyperrealism and integration with other hardware are also key considerations.
Steve Taylor of Vizrt points out the division among customers regarding green screen versus LED volumes, suggesting that neither technology has emerged as a clear winner. His company is working to remove the limitations of green screen to enhance flexibility.
Mazerolle further emphasizes the potential of virtual production to enhance viewer immersion and support personalized content. He highlights broadcasting's early innovations and the vast untapped potential in this area.
Gulenc lists the advantages of virtual production, including reliability, efficiency, integration, and enhanced storytelling. He notes the improved efficiency gained by using the same graphics across different applications.
Mike Paquin of Ross Video stresses the flexibility and cost-effectiveness of virtual production, enabling quick creation and switching between immersive environments. This allows for deeper storytelling tailored to different branding and platforms.
Taylor notes a significant shift towards remote production, highlighting the advantages of working from home or local studios rather than relying on expensive travel and on-site equipment. He questions why the industry isn't fully embracing cloud-based solutions.
Mazerolle observes that broadcasters are gradually adopting virtual production, often collaborating with third-party studios or building in-house teams. He highlights the rising viewer expectations for visual quality and the potential of Hollywood-level compositing in live feeds.
Gulenc refutes the common misconception that virtual production is only suitable for special projects, citing examples of its daily and 24/7 use.
Churruca emphasizes the cost reduction and increased sustainability of virtual production. He points out the increasing coexistence of virtual and real technologies.
Taylor reiterates the ongoing debate between green screen and LED volume approaches and the lack of a definitive winner.
Mazerolle emphasizes sports as a rapidly evolving area for virtual production, highlighting the use of virtual desks, immersive studios, and AR graphics responsive to live data. He also mentions the importance of complex compositing in live pipelines.
Taylor cites successful examples of large-scale live events using virtual technology, questioning why wider adoption isn't happening yet.
Marcus B. Brodersen of Pixotope stresses that virtual sets are not merely "fancy graphics" but a unified solution replacing various elements of physical production, leading to significant cost savings and creative multiplication.
Mazerolle acknowledges the upfront investment in virtual production technology but emphasizes the long-term cost savings and creative possibilities. He advises broadcasters to consider future-proof technologies and standards like SMPTE 2110.
Gulenc agrees that the long-term benefits outweigh the initial investment, emphasizing reduced material waste, time savings, and increased studio utilization.
Churruca discusses the democratization of virtual production due to a wider range of affordable solutions, allowing creators to prioritize their creativity.
Brodersen stresses the importance of proper planning for successful integration, considering camera tracking, GPU power, and infrastructure. He advises choosing the right approach based on needs and factoring in technical resources.
Mazerolle highlights the critical aspects of camera tracking, latency, and color fidelity in achieving seamless integration and emphasizes the importance of reliability and speed in live broadcast environments.
Paquin addresses past resistance to virtual solutions due to reliability issues but emphasizes improvements in tracking technology, including the emergence of trackless virtual applications. He stresses the importance of complementing existing workflows for successful adoption.