FIMS Innovative Media Information Management in Digital Workflows

Transcription

1 FIMS Innovative Media Information Management in Digital Workflows

2 Brad Gilmer Executive Director Advanced Media Workflow Association Hans Hoffmann EBU Head of Media Production Technologies SMPTE Engineering Vice President 2011

3 AGENDA What s the problem? Requirements Commitment Work plan Outlook and possible standardisation

4 What problem are we trying to solve?

5 Courtesy of: Ian Wimsett Senior Technologist

6 Red Bee Media London, Paris, Berlin, Seville, Sydney 129 origination streams Each year: 500,000 on-demand assets 132,000 hours of ingest 100,000 hours of closed captioning 500,000 EPG programme listings 6,500 promotional items

7 File-based workflows circa 2006 Data Schedule interface Playout automation Tapes Ingest server Ingest server DAM system with workflow Storage cache Playout server Playout server Linear channels Linear channels Data tape storage Disc storage Storage manager Edit system Transcode nodes Key VOD platforms Data interface

8 Increased complexity Tapes Client data feed Ingest server Ingest server Tapes DAM system with workflow Auto QC Ingest server Ingest server I/face I/face Transcode nodes DAM system with workflow Auto QC DAM system with workflow I/face I/face I/face I/face Transcode nodes Playout automation Playout automation Playout automation Playout automation Linear channels Linear channels Linear channels Linear channels Tapes Ingest server Auto QC Transcode nodes VOD platforms

9 More systems. Inefficient duplication Similar services proliferating Custom, point-to-point interfaces hard to support Utilisation not optimum What s the alternative?

10 Orders Raw materials Service Service Service Media factory Service Service Service Service Service Finished products

11 Orders Programmes Graphics Scripts Schedules Media factory Subtitle Service Version Service Package Service Channel Service Playout Conform Service Transcode Service Audio Service Description Service Store Finished products

12 XML, , Ordersphone Programmes Graphics Scripts Schedules Channel Playout Subtitle Audio Description Media factory Conform Version Package Transcode Store TV channels Programmes Promotions EPG listings

13 Adapted Services QC B DAM B DAM A Service Wrapper or adaptor Orchestration (Workflow) Service layer Transcode A Abstracted services. Not custom APIs!! QC A Transcode B

14 Initial Implementations DAM Service Client Data Service

15 Example 1 DAM service (Digital Asset management) Workflow Orchestration (BPMS) Service layer Wrapper or adaptor Service DAM A DAM B DAM C DAM service: - Create placeholder - Search assets - Get asset details - Export asset - Import file asset - Replicate asset to DAM

16 Example 2 Client data service Client A Channel management A Schedule interface Client B Client C Client D Channel management B Channel management C Channel management D Schedule interface Schedule interface Schedule interface DAM system A with workflow DAM system B with workflow Client metadata - old method All interfaces different

17 Example 2 Client data service Client A Client B Client C Client D Channel management A Channel management B Channel management C Channel management D Schedule Client data service: - Publish BXF schedule - Publish client schedule X - Publish client schedule Y - Publish client schedule Z X - B Y - B Normalise to BXF XML Router BXF messages

18 Summary of Challenges For Early Implementers Common service definitions not easy Proprietary service definitions are. proprietary Custom adaptors need support Standardized service interfaces are desirable

19 FIMS Initiated to Address These Challenges in a Standardized Way

20 Message from Hans Hoffmann Why FIMS is Important to Users

21 EBU and AMWA Both organisation started with workflow and process analysis Existing work did not accommodate media industry requirements Commbining forces made sense Common understandings: To provide an accredided set of standards for interoperable services To be fast, because the window of opportunity to influcence industry is short (proprietary systems) To create a reference implementation To be clear on IPR Leaders behind FIMS: Giorgio Dimino (RAI), John Footen (ChimeMedia), Brad Gilmer (AMWA), Jean-Pierre Evain (EBU)

22 Business Requirements For FIMS manufacturers - Reduce costs - Reduce risks associated with integration - Concentrate on market differentiation and innovation, not interfaces For FIMS users - Faster time of integration - Lower cost and risk - Access to best of breed technology - No vendor lock-in - Easier cross-media multi-platform delivery - Flexibility to adapt workflows to meet new opportunities

23 Technical Requirements For IT - Modularity, loose coupling - Workflow agility and framework independence - Scalability / upgradability / interoperability between vendors - Long-term maintenance flexibility (shorter IT innovation lifecycle) - Customization: best of breed vs. stove-pipe solution (one doesn t fit all) For Media Industry Must support Highly collaborative human workflow Geographically distributed facilities High-bandwidth transfers, SLAs Time synchronization, multiple resolutions

24 FIMS Request for Technology: phase 1 scope Phase 1 focuses on the framework Define a few services to test framework (e.g. Ingest, Transcode)

25 Proposed FIMS Framework for standardization High Level Architecture Reference Architecture Definitions Media Service Management Service lifecycle Service behavior Media Service Awareness Service Registry Service level agreements (SLA) Media Service Communication Service description Media Service interface Schemas Message format/patterns Operations Job descriptions Media Content Awareness Definition of an asset Media formats, wrapper adaptation Provenance/version Time awareness Scheduling for real-time Parallel simultaneous processes (streaming media, ingesting files) Security and identity Service security Media security Client context Framework Extensions Framework lifecycle Taxonomy SLA ontology Implementation bindings REST WS-* Phase 2 More process analysis Identification of eligible services

26 200,000 Foot View of Methodology Process Analysis Web Services, OASIS model FIMS binding: REST, WS-*

27 Primary Contributors

28 Roadmap 2010, October 30 First draft specification Preliminary framework by IBM and Sony Based on the agreed FIMS framework as established in the FIMS RFT 2010, December 31 Consolidated specification Taking into account requirements from other users and implementers - Avid, BBC, Cinegy, EBU Addressing storage and wrappers - AMWA, BBC, EBU , February 23 (You Are Here) - Specification V2.0 available for review 2011, April 9-14 NAB FIMS Initial demonstration North Hall, International Research Park 2011, March 10 Status report to new SMPTE TC 34 Media Systems, Control and services 2011, June 30 Final phase 1 specification of the FIMS media SOA framework 2011, April-June RFT2 Service specification based on Phase 1 framework

29 Join FIMS All phases of development of the FIMS specification will be public Wiki: Take the opportunity to influence FIMS You may still join and contribute even if you didn t respond to the RfT Participation is open under the following conditions No need to be an EBU or AMWA member Ruled by the FIMS Participation Agreement terms - This applies to contributions in any forms and participation in meetings, webex, etc. FIMS project are governed by AMWA IPR Policy ( - No license required - Compensation-Free Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory License (RAND-Z) - Submitters retain IPR rights Implementers gain access to any compensation-free licenses through AMWA Implementers Agreement

30 Conclusions - Migration to service-based media workflows is a critical for future success - A standardized framework and standardized service definitions are critical steps in this effort Be part of it!

31 FIMS Framework for Interoperable Media Services EBU AMWA FIMS Framework for interoperable Media Services Giorgio Dimino, John Footen, Brad Gilmer, Jean Pierre Evain RAI, Chime Media, AMWA, EBU