The hologram misconception

THERE’S much ado about holograms.

The country’s first automated elections saw the biggest broadcast networks trying to outdo each other in using television graphics, nearly overshadowing the more pressing election issues.

Instead of the tried and tested “splitscreen” often used to broadcast reports by TV reporters outside the studio, rivals ABS-CBN and GMA Networks harked back to the Star Wars era and showed images of reporters standing inside the studio carrying on conversations with news presenters, as if seeing each other despite the fact that latter were in remote locations.

The truth was that these reporters were merely standing in front of “green screens” and superimposed on the studio. Unlike Star Wars, the news presenter and the reporter did not really see each other eye to eye.

And so when GMA kept repeating it was beaming holograms into its “Eleksyon 2010” studio, ABS-CBN, which used the term “augmented reality”, cried foul. GMA was forced to use the term “hologram effect” instead.

Cheryl Favila, ABS-CBN News and Current Affairs supervising producer, said the network made use of “augmented reality”.

“The idea is that the viewers can see the graphics that are actually not there at the studio. Large graphics can be seen in a sense that they’ll think it’s there but it’s not,” Favila told the Varsitarian.

Through a tie up with Orad Hi-Tech Systems Ltd., the creator of this technology, ABS-CBN brought the reporter’s image from the field into the studio.

Danton Wieneke, ABS-CBN News and Current Affairs engineering department head, said augmented reality involves image transfer from live video to a frame.

“For example, if we are going to insert a video, we send a live video feed to the hardware so it may repost the video or the graphics with the live video on the studio,” he explained.

“The reporter is virtually present because we can move the camera. We can pan toward the reporter that is in the field like he is really in the studio. We can pan to him, we can zoom in the camera to him, we can pan back to the anchor, who is really in the studio as if the reporter is really on the studio,” Wieneke added.

GMA Network, on the other hand, boasted of its “holographic effects” in its election coverage, claiming it was the same technology used by the Cable News Network (CNN) during the United States elections in 2008. What it did not say was that CNN drew flak for the use of the technology, with critics pointing out that the holograms were awkward and unnecessary.

Kilai Rivera, Educational Technology Center multimedia and video specialist, explained that GMA Network made use of the “chroma key technique” that requires a green screen as a background. The image passes through a switcher, a device that selects between different video sources. The background is cut creating an illusion that the reporter is really in the studio.

“CNN also used Vizrt software for their hologram, but on a much grander scale,” Chan said.

“However, CNN’s effect had more dimension, thus enabling cameras to move all around the hologram without making it look flat, unlike that of GMA.”

But Wieneke did not agree. “A hologram, like CNN did, has over 20 or 30 cameras situated 360 degrees around the reporter or subject on the field,” he said. “GMA has only one camera shooting against green screen.”

But Nicholas Chan, system specialist of Vizrt, Malaysia, defended the use of the term “hologram”.

He said the term “hologram” was used to refer to the effect of the software that the network used.

“The word ‘hologram’ itself is not copyrighted. There are a few differing definitions of it and there is no standard organization for hologram technology that explicitly states the actual definition of the word,” he added.

For her part, Favila said ABS-CBN never claimed to have produced a hologram through the network’s technology during its Halalan 2010 coverage.

“We never said it’s hologram, not even a hologram effect, because when you see a hologram, you see 3D,” she clarified. “Hologram, I believed should be 3D. But in that particular effect of virtual presence, it was not 3D, it was just a virtual presence.”

A plasma television served as guide to the anchors to see the graphics.

“We look at graphics as a tool for us to be able to make our presentation more clearly to the viewers so that they could appreciate and understand our reporters better,” Favila said. “That’s why we need to practice several days and nights to get the hang of it.”

Comparing the two network’s technology, Rivera said ABS-CBN’s augmented reality is better than GMA’s chroma key.

“Observing the graphic images produced by the two networks, ABS-CBN’s augmented reality were more seamless and less glowing than GMA’s chroma key,” Rivera said.

However, he was quick to point that the two technologies are different from each other.

“There is no correct technique since the two networks are using different technologies. But if I were to compare the two, I think ABS-CBN’s augmented reality was more high- end,” he said.

Favila said the real aim of this innovative technology was to catch the attention of young viewers.

“[We wanted] to get them to watch our coverage, help us look after the integrity of our entire election process. It is for the viewers to say that with the use of this technology, they’ll be able to guard the integrity of the election process,” she said.

GMA’s Eleksyon 2010 has bested their election coverage over ABS-CBN’s Halalan 2010, rating 12.3 on an AGB Nielsen survey in Mega Manila. The audience share was 39.6 percent on GMA compared to the 31 percent of ABS-CBN’s. They have edged theirs with advantages such as quick count on the election night, in which ABS-CBN had none.