The development of playout automation for television neatly parallels, and encapsulates, the dramatic changes that computers and off-the-shelf IT hardware have brought to the broadcast business. It is also a critical part of another dramatic change: the movement from broadcasters transmitting one or two channels to playout centres taking responsibility for many tens and often […]
The development of playout automation for television neatly parallels, and encapsulates, the dramatic changes that computers and off-the-shelf IT hardware have brought to the broadcast business. It is also a critical part of another dramatic change: the movement from broadcasters transmitting one or two channels to playout centres taking responsibility for many tens and often hundreds of channels, says David Jamieson
The first playout automation systems were developed 25 years ago by companies like Louth (now part of Harris Broadcast). The early architectures usually involved two separate sets of processing: a standard PC which managed the content database and the playlist – it was usually one channel, one system – and a real-time device controller, usually based on purpose-built hardware.
The device controller had to be sophisticated because the principle devices to be controlled were VTRs, either standalone or in robotic tape libraries. The tapes in VTRs had to be cued to the start point then wound back to a fixed pre-roll. The VT was rolled then the cut was made on the master control switcher.
One challenge, now forgotten, was that you had to make a decision at the system design stage whether to store one piece of content on a tape – which would give you a very expensive 30-minute cassette for a 30-second commercial, or a 10-second sting – or to allow multiple pieces of content on each tape, making your automation to pre-compile each commercial break or programme junction by dubbing it on to yet another tape.
As we all know, servers made the handling of content much simpler, allowing automation systems to do more complex things. A single system could control more than one transmission channel, queuing multiple pieces of content in advance then giving the start command at the instant it was required.
An increase in processing power meant that developers of automation systems competed to add new functionality. Graphics devices were also connected to play in interstitials, automatically. Then these interstitials became interactive, with “coming next” and rundown sequences being generated on the fly from information in the playlist. By combining graphics devices and effects banks, programme junctions became more elaborate, with squeeze backs and hot starts now commonplace.
Early automation systems were almost completely independent, with perhaps a playlist handed over from the scheduling and asset management system at a fixed time each day, with little chance of changes to the playlist after that. Now broadcasters expect tight integration between scheduling, traffic, asset management and automation.
As well as allowing the schedule to be refined close to transmission – useful when programmes arrive at the last minute – this brings real commercial benefits. Broadcasters can sell commercial spots almost up to the moment of transmission, because the sales and traffic systems talk to asset management to know that the content is ready to be aired, and they talk to the automation to update the playlist.
It also created the possibility of new sorts of television channels. Casino channels can offer games like roulette, based on a secure random number generator calling up the video clip which shows the ball dropping into the right number, and building a graphics sequence based on the number of subscribers who won. Shopping channels can switch content quickly to reflect what is selling well and what is not moving.
This is central to the way that broadcasters need to consider automation today. It is no longer a standalone process, but part of an integrated environment encompassing all of the broadcasterÂ’s activities. It is obviously a central part: a broadcaster that does not transmit its programmes will lose its audience; if it does not transmit its commercials it will lose its revenue.
Because it is so central to the enterprise it is really important that this integration is in place. It enables smart workflows, so content flows through the whole facility smoothly and with the minimum of manual intervention. It also provides a commercial overview of the whole process, so the boardroom can see directly what is earning revenue and what is not; where there are bottlenecks in the content path and where there is over-provision.
With the move towards multi-platform delivery that becomes even more important. With a well-designed content infrastructure it should be a relatively simple matter to establish a pipeline to serve a new device. More importantly, it should be immediately obvious what the costs will be in serving that platform, whether the new pipeline will have a productivity impact on established services, and what the likely revenue and margin will be.
The broadcast playout automation system is one part of this environment. So it has moved from controlling linear devices like VTRs to working with files. In the near future, thanks to standards like AVB bringing timing accuracy to ethernet, it will only be dealing in files.
The central structure remains the same, though. There has to be a rapid access repository of content – the playout server – together with graphics and switching capabilities to create the sophisticated and seamless output that audiences expect from major broadcasters.
Will these be discrete devices, or will they all be virtualised processes running on standard hardware? In other words, will we move from the best of breed playout architectures we expect today to integrated solutions, the so-called channel-in-a-box.
Channel-in-a-box solutions started out as entry-level systems which were constrained in what they could do. Today it is perfectly possible to take the core elements of server technology, graphics and playout control and implement them in an integrated solution, still at low cost and still in a 1U box.
Applications for such integrated solutions include rapid response start-ups. If you want to get a new channel on air, then this is simple and fast. It is perfectly reasonable to expect to go from the concept of a channel to trial transmissions in just a couple of days. If the channel becomes a huge success you can simply migrate it to the main automation platform without dropping a frame; should it fail it has cost virtually nothing in hardware and systems integration.
Many channels will stay forever on integrated solutions, as will disaster recovery sites. Indeed, another benefit of these low cost, high performance devices is that many more channels will gain resilience because it is now simple and affordable to do it.
Playout automation has transformed the broadcast industry over the last quarter of a century. Now part of an intelligent workflow environment, and readily scalable at a momentÂ’s notice, it continues to be at the heart of the new world of any content at any time to any device.
Â
David Jamieson is the Head of Pre-sales and Solutions at Harris Broadcast.
