by Marty Shindler

Since the introduction of the personal computer nearly two decades ago, keeping up with changing technology has been a challenge. It’s never been easy, but the rate of change keeps accelerating, making it ever more difficult. It challenges our production and post-production departments as well as the administrative side of our businesses. Even at home we have to face the problems of obsolescent formats and equipment.

According to Internet service TrendWatch, "two out of three creative professionals say ‘keeping up with technology’ is their Number One business challenge. The Number Two challenge is deciding where their business should go in the future (61%) and [Three is] finding qualified employees (45%)."

On the production side, there have always been many technical options. Where would CGI look better than a live action shot? Might CGI also eliminate certain risks for the production team and be more economical overall? Should we use real or virtual sets, or some combination of both? As demonstrated by Siegfried & Roy: The Magic Box, the computer-generated sets are becoming more innovative and economical all the time.

New films stocks are routinely being announced, leading directors and DPs to ask, "Should we shoot the stock that was introduced a few months ago, or wait to see what will be available when we begin principal photography?"

In the end, producers and directors have to decide what will make the shot look better on the screen, and at what price.

Perhaps some of the most complex technology issues face the post-production side of our business, where hardware and software seem to change on an almost daily basis.

It was not that long ago that SGI hardware was dominant in post houses, with the Macintosh platform running a close second. Sure, specialized equipment from vendors such as Quantel, Sony, and others was in use. But this was before the advent of the PC and the Windows NT operating system. Their distinct advantage: lower cost.

Today, the NT platform running on workstations from a variety of equipment vendors has made significant inroads into the post-production world. CPU speeds keep increasing while cost of memory and storage keeps declining. (Unfortunately, we can expect last month’s tragic earthquake in Taiwan – home of 10% of the world’s chip fabrication plants – to spell the end of dirt cheap memory for some time to come.)

In the early days (two or three years ago) not much software could run on NT, but that has changed. A few companies focused on NT, and their lower-cost packages gave the mainstream vendors a run for their money. They have thus been forced to develop their products for a distinctly cross-platform market. Competition in this arena is now intense.

Other important post-production tools such as scanners (including telecines) and recorders are undergoing rapid changes. As workstations become capable of handling larger file sizes, image scanning at 2K, once considered adequate, is giving way to 4K, leading many facilities to rethink their equipment configurations. LF production often requires 6K or even 8K images.

On the recorder side, CRT film recorders are still the mainstays, at least in terms of number of units in service. Several companies are working on less expensive laser recorders, claiming that the image is better. Cost and manufacturing issues continue to plague a few in this group. Time will tell how they will fare in the marketplace.

Networking entails another set of rapidly shifting technologies: 10-base-T, 100-base-T, and various other high-speed configurations for internal networks give employees the ability to transfer information and work product quickly and easily. Basic dial-up, dedicated T1, ISDN, switched DS3, OC3, and OC12, allow companies to communicate with the outside world. Which of these systems is best is highly dependent on the needs and circumstances of the specific company.

We are fast approaching the day that with full roll out of broadband technologies, video and high resolution still and moving images will be transmitted around the world quickly and easily as part of the production and approval process. The same networks will be used for the deployment of electronic/digital cinema.

Remember Moore’s Law? That law of technological change, according to one of the founders of Intel, states that the speed of processors doubles every 18 months, while prices decrease.

In the world of the Internet, companies creating new products are faced with serious challenges in managing their products’ life cycles. People purchasing these products confront the challenge of figuring out which technology to buy, when, and how to get the best price. They also have the added worry that what they buy may be out of date the next day.

So what is a company to do? What can be done to maximize value of money spent on new equipment? How can one avoid the impulse to buy the latest, just because of some new bells and whistles?

The answer, in one word, is "plan." The key to surviving in this environment is to manage decisions about new technologies. Don’t let the new technologies manage your decisions.

Companies go through periodic rounds of purchasing decisions. Holding purchasing until specified times in the fiscal year allows for a fair assessment of equipment needs. Perhaps the only exception should be equipment required to meet unexpected work requirements that will (hopefully) be associated with added revenue.

Of course, for many this is easier said than done. However, I have found a useful tool to be the capital plan, a process whereby an inventory of the current equipment is made, listing the important features of each component.

Useful life – stated in either pure usability terms or accounting terms – should be included as part of the plan. Keep in mind that most equipment does not really become obsolete just because two or three subsequent versions become available.

As part of the annual budget process, the capital expenditure budget should be developed. This written plan should include a prioritized listing of the capital equipment needed to produce the following year’s anticipated work. It should also allow for an orderly transition from the oldest to the latest equipment. The plan should include criteria for the new equipment and benchmarks that the new equipment must meet or exceed before it will be acquired to replace the existing in-house equipment.

Before new equipment is purchased, its economic benefit to the organization, whether in terms of increased productivity, reduced maintenance costs, or other quantifiable criteria, should be determined.

Transitions from one system to its replacement should never be thought of as an overnight process. Planned transitions can make a distinct difference in maximizing the capital equipment budget. Impulse buying can have a disastrous effect on the plan and a company’s cash flow.

Sticking to the plan will make all the difference. It will enable management and the employees to work more effectively in this rapidly changing technology environment.