20150323-Media-Entertainment-Webinar-Mar23

Tom Coughlin, Coughlin Associates

www.tomcoughlin.com

Digital Storage in Professional Media and Entertainment

Technical Challenges and Business Opportunities

1

About the Presenter

Thomas M. Coughlin, President, Coughlin Associates is a widely respectedstorage analyst and consultant. He has over 30 years in the data storageindustry. Dr. Coughlin has many publications and six patents to his credit.Tom is also the author of Digital Storage in Consumer Electronics: TheEssential Guide, published by Newnes Press. Tom publishes the DigitalStorage Technology Newsletter, the Digital Storage in Media andEntertainment Report, and other reports.

Tom is active with SMPTE, SNIA, the IEEE, and other professionalorganizations. He is VP of Future Directions for the IEEE Consumer ElectronicsSociety as well as Director Elect for IEEE Region 6. He is serving his third termas a member of the CE Society BoG and was Vice President of Operations forthree years. Tom is the founder and organizer of the Annual Storage VisionsConference, a partner to the International Consumer Electronics Show, as wellas the Creative Storage Conference. He is the general chairman of the annualFlash Memory Summit. nnesota as well as a BS in Physics from the sameschool.

© Coughlin Associates, 2015 2

Outline

• Why We Should Care about Digital Storage

• Media and Entertainment Storage Survey

• Digital Storage in Content Capture

• Post-production Digital Storage

• Digital Storage in Content Delivery

• Content Preservation and Archiving

• Breakdown of Storage Capacity and Revenue for Media and Entertainment Applications


Example resolution, data rates and storage capacity requirements for professional media

standards

4

8K Ultra-HD may use more than 100X capacity of HD!

8K X 4K based upon “Super Hi-Vision” Video Parameters for Next Generation Television, SMPTE Motion

Imaging Journal, May/June 2012, P. 63-68

© Coughlin Associates, 2015

Richer Images = more storage• Frame rates for movie content

are increasing from the historical 24 frames per second (fsp) to 48 or 60 fps and may eventually be as high as 300 fps.

• Cameras are now available that can support 120 fps (even up to 3,000 fps)

• 4K production is commonplace but 6K and even 8K movie production starting in professional video projects.

• Video resolutions of 16K and even higher are contemplated in the future.


New Views• KDDI and some European

players have performed “free viewpoint” demonstrations with content captured using 4-30 4K video cameras simultaneously.

• Light-field imaging could allow even more immersive 2D and 3D video (greater image depth possible) and would increase required storage capacity by at least 3X conventional images

• Color gamut increases as well as better contrast and extended luminance levels

LytroLight-field Camera

Free View Point Video


Increase in Color Gamut, Dolby Vision

How Long Until Exabyte Video?• As video resolution and frame rate increase, camera

image complexity increases and stereoscopic projects multiply, the storage capacity and bandwidth performance requirements becomes staggering.

• A calculation shows that 16,000 X 8,000 pixel resolution, 24 bits/pixel, 300 fps raw video content could require 115 GB/s data rates and 414 TB/hour. If 4 cameras were used to create data for a “free viewpoint” presentation the raw data would be 1.66 PB for an hour of content

• Truly the bandwidth and capacity requirements to work with future rich media formats are staggering!

• Even HEVC won’t be enough


Media Content Size Trends

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

One page ASCII text

1KB 10KB 100KB 1GB1MB 10MB 100MB 10GB 100GB 1TB

CD Quality Stereo Audio

DVD Movie (MPEG-2)

HD Movie

Ultra HD Movie

Virtual Reality, 3D Movie

Data

Rate

(Mbps)

Multimedia Object Size

8© Coughlin Associates, 2015

Virtual Reality: Making A Holodeck

• Free floating holographic and other advanced display technologies are in the works—within the next 10 years we could approach something like a display allowing you to move within the action—leading to holodeck-like experiences

From Wired Magazine



Digital Entertainment Content Workflow.

10

Content Acquisition


2014

Results

Film2%

Magnetic tape7%

Optical discs10%

Hard disk Drives24%

Flash memory57%

Year Magnetic Tape

HDD Optical Flash Memory

Film

2009 34% 23% 9% 19% 15%

2010 25% 22% 17% 28% 8%

2012 20% 22% 12% 44% 2%

2013 15% 18% 7% 59% 1%

2014 7% 24% 10% 57% 2%

Content Acquisition (2)


Percent Born Digital 2010 2012 2013 2014

<10% 3.9% 0.9% 1.1% 0.0%

11% to 20% 1.3% 0.4% 0.0% 1.1%

21% to 30% 3.2% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1%

31% to 40% 3.2% 2.6% 1.1% 2.1%

41% to 50% 5.2% 2.2% 3.3% 2.1%

51% to 60% 5.2% 1.7% 2.2% 1.1%

61% to 70% 5.8% 3.1% 6.5% 4.2%

71% to 80% 8.4% 8.3% 10.9% 7.4%

81% to 90% 16.1% 10.9% 15.2% 15.8%

91% to 100% 47.7% 69.9% 59.8% 65.3%

>50% 83.2% 93.0% 94.6% 93.8%

1 hour2%

2-5 hours33%

6-10 hours29%

11-50 hours21%

51-100 hours7%

>100 hours6%

Other2%

64.5% of Respondents

said they capture 6 or

more hours of content for 1

hour of finished work

Hours captured for an

hour of final content

12

Pixar Render Farm



Professional Non-linear Editing Model System

14

Digital Editing and Post Production


• 87.7% had DAS(compared to 87.3% in2013, 92% in 2012

22.3% of these had morethan 50 TB of DAS storage(compared to 18.3% in2013)

• 75.0% had NAS or SAN(compared to 70.9% in2013, 53.8% in 2012

About 11% had more than500 TB of NAS/SANstorage (same as 2013)

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

110.0%

1-10 11-100 101-500 501-1000 >1000

PercentagewithDASorNAS/SAN

NumberofPeople

%DAS

%NAS/SAN

15

Post Production


• In 2014 25.6% ofrespondingparticipants saidthey used cloud-based storage forpost productionversus 24.7% in2013 and 15.1% in2012.

• In 2014 28.1% ofthe respondentssaid that they had1 TB or morestorage capacity inthe cloud vs. 23%in 2013.0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000

4,500,000

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Tota

l C

apacity (

TB

)

NLE Cloud Capacity (TB)

NLE Local Networked Capacity (TB)

NLE Local Capacity (TB)

2014 Digital Storage for Media and Entertainment

Report

16


Internet Content Distribution System (CDN)

Source Content

(NAS or SAN)

Content Central ServerEdge Server

Edge Server

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Source Content

(NAS or SAN)

Content Central ServerEdge Server

Edge Server

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

Internet User

17

Content Distribution


• Average hours on central content delivery system was about 1,142 hours in 2014

• There were 688 hours ingested monthly in 2014

• In 2014 43.2% of respondents had more than 5% of their content on edge servers

• About 21.4% used flash memory on their edge servers

The Future of Content Distribution• MPEG H.265

encoding (up to a 50%additional compressionbeyond H.264)– 2-3 X additional overhead

for decoding (HW productsin 2014)

– About 100 X moreprocessing overhead at thesource for the best qualitydelivery content

• Adaptive DynamicStreaming over HTTP(DASH): seamlessadaptive streaming ofcontent.


Typical HEVC video encoder (with decoder modeling elements shaded in light gray).

Digital Cinema (Mercado Theatre, Santa Clara)

20

Digital Cinema Projector

USB hard drive For movie distribution to theatre


Content Archiving Media

Magnetic Tape

Optical Disc

HDDs


LTO projected tape generations


Sony/Panasonic Optical Archive Roadmap


HDD Roadmap


Digital Archiving and Preservation


• 41.9% had >2,000 hours of content in a long term archive in 2014

• The average rate of conversion is about 7.0% • In 2014 67.3% of the respondents said that

their annual archive growth rate was >6% • 35.1% added 1,000 hours or greater to their

archive annually in 2014• About 33.3% had >2,000 hours of unconverted

analog content in 2014

Cost for Storing 1 PB for 20 Years


• The total cost of saving 1 PB of data for 20 years is about $1.49 M for HDD storage and about $468,000 for tape storage.

• For HDDs about 37% of the total cost is in the first year.

• For tape about 19% of the total cost is in the first year.

$1,000

$10,000

$100,000

$1,000,000

An

nu

al

Es

tim

ate

d C

os

t fo

r 1

PB

HDD

Tape

26

More Archive Survey Results


• About 25.4% never update their digital archives in 2014 (compared to 42.4% in 2013)

• About 67% copied and replaced their digital long term archives every 10 years or less in 2014 (this was 47% in 2013)

• 40% said that they would use a private or public cloud for archiving content in both 2014 and 2013

27

Percentage of tape formats used in digital archiving


Growth in Near Line and Off-Line Archive Storage

29

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Archive Storage

(Petabytes)

Near-Line

Off-Line


2013 Media and Entertainment Storage


Media and Entertainment Market Storage Revenue Share

by Segment

Distribution of Storage Capacity

2014 Digital Storage for Media and

Entertainment Report

Post Producti

on1.2%

Content Distributi

on1.8%

Content Acquisiti

on0.5%

Archiving and

Preservation

96.5%

Post Production

25%

Content Distribution

24%

Content Acquisition

4%

Archiving and Preservation

47%

30

2013 Market Share of Capacity Shipped




31

Tape42.6%

Optical11.4%

HDD45.4%

Flash0.5%

Cloud Storage Capacity for M&E


0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Clo

ud

Cap

acit

y (P

B)

Archiving and Preservation

VOD

Internet Distribution

Post Production



Cloud storage

revenue to

increase to over

$1.5 B by 2019

32

33

Conclusions

• Flash memory is now the dominant technology for content capture, followed by hard disk drives and optical discs •Improvements in network storage performance as well as resulting production efficiencies is driving the growth of network storage over direct attached storage.•Likewise the use of digital storage in data centers (cloud storage) is playing a bigger role in media and entertainment to provide OTT content distribution and collaborative workflows.• The increase in content resolution and the amount of content is driving performance and storage in content delivery systems and the growth of on-line distribution storage.•Storage capacity and growth in professional media and entertainment show the size of digital content libraries while storage revenues reflect the value of the content where it is used.


References

• 2009-2014 Survey of Storage in Professional Media and Entertainment

• 2014 Digital Storage in Media and Entertainment Report, Coughlin Associates, http://www.tomcoughlin.com/techpapers.htm

• 2015 M&E Professional Storage Survey is now active: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/5NXY95W


http://www.tomcoughlin.com/techpapers.htm

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/5NXY95W

Thanks


20150323-Media-Entertainment-Webinar-Mar23

Technology

Transcript of 20150323-Media-Entertainment-Webinar-Mar23