In this episode, Stacy sits down to chat with virtual reality advocate and Ryff CEO, Roy Taylor. The two discuss Roy’s passion for artificial intelligence, and their discussion provides further insight into how artificial intelligence is already being used to maximize product placement opportunities.

marketing mistakes and how to avoid them podcast with stacy jones

become both dynamic and digital

Ways To Connect:

Email: [email protected]
Linkedin: roytaylor
Twitter: Roy_Ryff

Hollywood Branded Refresher Episodes
Check out some of the past interviews below:

You can check out our playlist here

Hollywood Branded  Content Marketing Blog
The following content marketing blog below provide even more insights.

hollywood branded influencer marketing school

The Path To Becoming A Certified Influencer Marketer With Hollywood Branded

Get ready to learn a ton of how-to’s and the tips and tricks of our trade, as you advance your influencer marketing game!

influencer marketing school
  • Full-Length Training Videos
  • Transcripts – Infographics
  • eBook Guides
  • Case Studies
  • Hollywood Branded Surveys
  • MP3 Downloads
  • Animated Videos
  • Additional Educational Material
  • Quizzes & Exams
  • Certifications In Influencer Marketing

We GUARANTEE that this class series will provide you with the foundation to make campaigns successful for your brand.

Transcript:

Stacy: 00:00

  • Welcome to Marketing Mistakes and How to Avoid Them. I’m Stacy Jones, the founder of Influencer Marketing and Branded Content Agency Hollywood branded. This podcast provides brand marketers a learning platform for topics for us to share the insights and knowledge on topics which make a direct impact on your business today. While it is impossible to be well versed on every topic and strategy that can improve bottom line results, my goal is to help you avoid making costly mistakes of time, energy, or money, whether you are doing a DIY approach or hiring an expert to help. Let’s begin today’s discussion.

Speaker 2: 00:31

  • Welcome to Marketing Mistakes and How to Avoid Them. Here’s your host, Stacy Jones.

Stacy: 00:35

  • Welcome to Marketing Mistakes and How to Avoid Them. I’m Stacy Jones. I’m so happy to be here with you all today and want to give a very warm welcome to Roy Taylor, the founder and CEO of Ryff, a new tech startup designed to change the way we think of and use images. Roy is not only a vocal advocate for immersive technologies including virtual reality, augmented reality, and artificial intelligence. He also has quite the film background and is the director for the board of the British Academy of Film and Television Arts in Los Angeles and a technology advisor to three film schools. On our podcast today, Roy is here to talk about how the technology his team has created can lead to a change in the future of product placement through artificial intelligence and visual computing. We’ll learn how Ryff works and what brands need to be aware of. Roy, welcome.

Roy: 01:21

  • Thank you. Thank you. It’s a pleasure to be here.

Stacy: 01:24

  • Well, Roy, you have a passion for bringing technology to film, television, video games and virtual reality. Can you tell us a little bit about your background and what got you to where you are doing what you do today?

Roy: 01:36

  • Yes, thank you for the chance to do that. I started my career by deciding that I wanted to work doing what was most fun and in my case that was playing video games. So in 1998 I had my own business. I working selling semiconductors. And a friend of mine told me about this company called 3D Effects that made a hardware accelerator that could make video games look beautiful. I tried it, I thought it was wonderful and decided that was how I will just spend my life. So from there I went to work for a company called Nvidia and I was the first vice president, the first senior executive for them working out of my bedroom in 1998. And we started out in a very, very modest way and the business grew and grew and grew and it was a spectacular success in video graphics processes.

 

  • Along the way I had to learn how to invent a style of business because you can’t buy graphics processes, you have to buy what was called an adding card. And I invented a new way of doing business to do that. And so that was so successful that brought me to America. And so I started to roll out this kind of ecosystem business worldwide, working at Nvidia, then in America until 2010 and then decided that I want you to kind of move on and do some thinking in a similar field but some of different. So I went from working in 3D in video games to working in 3D in film and television. And as I did that, I started to become aware of some of the advantages, also potential pitfalls around the placement of actors and objects and scenes in depth.

 

  • So that led me to learn around about 3D and then VR and augmented reality because they’re all related to this step, issue and opportunity. And through that work I got involved with BAFTA as you mentioned in the introduction I got to work with Jim Chabin and the fine people over at the advanced imaging society. And got to start working with film schools advising on how to use depth and technology in storytelling. And from there I had a wonderful time working for a company called Master Image, which then became RealD. And then worked for another company called AMD and set up a studio for them in Hollywood advising films directors, producers and technologists on how to use technology for future storytelling until the middle part story of last year. I set my own company up Ryff, which is aimed at her taking the next step forward and applying technology to storytelling by allowing you to change the pixels on the screen by some of you. So that’s a very quick [inaudible 00:04:48] history of my career.

Stacy: 04:51

  • Well it’s a fascinating one in a lot of technology and software and that makes sense since you only started your company last year with risks and you’re not even really more than a year in and you have buyable product that you are putting out on the market and looking at ways that you can build it. So congratulations on that.

Roy: 05:11

  • Oh, thank you very much. Thank you. A lot of hard work.

Stacy: 05:15

  • I am sure. I have no doubt for someone who has been living in this world of product placement and seeing companies pop up over the decades. I think that you have actually gotten it to a place that is further than a lot of your predecessors who have been trying to create some different evolutions and product placements. So congratulations to you on that.

Roy: 05:37

  • Thank you.

Stacy: 05:38

  • So can you tell us a little bit more about Ryff? So I know you said it’s about changing pixels on screen and that’s a really great way to describe changing out an image or appearance of a product. But can you kind of give us a little bit more of a deeper dive about what Ryff actually does and what it offers to advertisers?

Roy: 06:02

  • Yes, absolutely. One of the kind of spurs for the company came because there is a process taking place right now in television whereby large companies, technology companies are offering to scan back catalog for TV studios. And the reason for that is because a lot of TV companies are finding out that they have catalog inventory of shows going back to ’40s, ’50s, ’60s, ’70s, the last 50 years plus. And they very often don’t actually know what’s in the content. So they may know the name of the show and a couple of the stars, but they couldn’t tell you what was in the story or who else was there, what costars were there or extras.

 

  • And so the scans are taking place to try and detect what is in the back catalog. And there’s many millions and millions of hours at this. Well, I seem to ask, there’s a certain irony that when you make a frame of film or television at the time that you are making it you know everything which is in that frame.

 

  • If it’s real, you have the manifest file. You know exactly where an access shirt came from or for a table or a prop. And if it’s digital, then you have all of the metadata. And not only that, but at the time that you’re constructing that frame, you also have absolute edit control. You can change this for anything in or out. Until such time as you push final render and flatten the video and then everything’s lost. All the data is lost. All the controlling edit is lost. And so a friend of mine asked me, do you believe that there is a way the one day you could board costs, frames of film and television, the elements in the frame, well not compressed, not flattered. And the compositing actually would take place in front of the viewer on the fly and my alto tune was yes, because that is the video game industry.

 

  • If it were any other way you can blow things up or drive vehicles or interact with them. Now the difference of course is it video games look like video games and film and television. Even if it’s animated, it looks beautiful and the quality is that much higher. On the other hand, the video game industry has to do some really complicated math that the film world and TV does not. You have to send data packets in fractions of a millionth of a second all the way to Korea on back. So you could snipe somebody when you’re playing online after refresh the screen 90 times a second instead of 30 and it has to do the full resolution.

 

  • Very, very difficult to do all of that photo realistically. And yet Stacy, if I ask you, do you believe the process will continue to be more powerful in the future? The answer of course is yes. Well if you believe that then we must ipso facto [inaudible 00:09:23] agree that those two worlds are on a collision course because with more powerful cloud rendered processing, we can make the video game infrastructure deliver photo realistic imagery that is both editable and traceable. We’ve all of the data and all of the information so we’ll always know exactly what was in it. But more importantly we can allow us chose to edit it if we so wish. That’s the premise of Ryff.

Stacy: 10:03

  • Well that is quite the premise. And so what you’re talking about at the very base of it is how to actually create a layered file, if I’m correct. So how you actually can in film and television bring in, since everything is compressed and flattened out. And I may be getting ahead of myself because our listeners don’t know some of these things yet, but you actually bring in objects like brands into those scenes in order to make them be part of the contents. Right? Than changable.

Roy: 10:39

  • Yes. We can take products out so we can put them in and since we’ve OTT streaming, we know who the viewer is. We could do that on a per view or basis so that you get to see your products in the scene, which are appropriate both for you. And this is very important, always appropriate for the storyteller and the content owner. We are always respectful of the art and always respectful for the story teller. So we would never ever put anything in this scene that wasn’t absolutely appropriate for the story of being told. Nevertheless, we can also then make it appropriate for the viewer too.

Stacy: 11:22

  • Right. So therefore what you’re saying is the viewer at home, if they have a particular affinity or a known target based off of how the content is being served up through IP addresses and the like, you can actually target what you are presenting to the viewer through the contents.

Roy: 11:43

  • Absolutely. Absolutely. For example, it might be entirely appropriate that you would have some kind of snack from general meal was for a US audience, but you may want to change that snack for when the show gets shown and Israel or South Africa or Turkey or Spain or somewhere else. You could change the snack without changing the narrative or doing anything, which would be take away from the story being told entirely appropriately as an example.

Stacy: 12:17

  • Okay. And so how does your company work with filmmakers? Is it from the very beginning where you’re going to production and you say, “Hey, we’d love to bring this technology into your content, let us set it up?” Or is it something that after the production has finished and they’re in final edit or beyond that you can actually go in and manipulate and add layers into the content to provide the photo realism of the brands within the content?

Roy: 12:46

  • Yeah, we can go on set and do it as the content is being made or we can go after the fact, we can scan existing inventories and then allow the insertion of appropriate brands working with the content owner, the work, the content owner after the facts, existing inventories so we can support both.

Stacy: 13:12

  • Okay. And for listeners to might not know the whole world of product placement and how it works traditionally, know anything that is going to be seen in a movie or TV show that is coordinated before filming really commences. So the prop master, the set decorator or the transportation coordinator who’s dealing with the cars or the wardrobe stylist who’s dealing with clothing. They are doing outreach and they are securing brands that are going to help land reality to their scene or they’re going to help offset costs. So the production doesn’t have to purchase products that they need, like every time someone has a phone production would have to buy that phone, production would have to buy that phone unless expo manufacturer actually provided it to them. Same thing with cars, same things with lots of big ticket items as well as little ticket items like in grocery stores scenes, which add up very quickly.

 

  • And so Roy, your technology allows, instead of being all in the beginning of figuring out what brand fits in the scene and how it’s been being used and sending it to the production and having an onset, your technology is actually allowing people at the end of that shoot to be able to trade out and update that product line. Correct?

Roy: 14:28

  • Absolutely. Not at the end of the shoot, but after the final lap takes place so we have an absolute flexibility. It’s interesting, a friend of mine is a director and he was telling me about this current process and he said, of course now, but it’s wonderful to have a product placement industry that will help him both finance a film, reduce the cost of production and then deliver to him some of the products he want to make that particular scene or that he likes on the other hand, being asked to stop in the middle of filming because the actor isn’t holding the product in the right way is not so welcome. A brand which demands to see the dailies is not so welcome. And of course from the brand’s point of view, not making it through to final cut, the final cut isn’t so great or an expensive lengthy and very important placement.

 

  • The thing gets lost because the director pans left like two inches. That isn’t helpful either. So one of my messages will be to anybody who works in the industry currently is look, we can help, we can help with all of that. First of all, you don’t have to go on set. There’s no need for anybody to get on set again. So that’s going to be very, very welcomed, I believe by the copyright, the story teller, but directors and the producers. But it’s also going to add enormous flexibility in terms of what can go into the scene. You also have tremendous opportunity for resale. You may only put a brand in right now once with the audience in mind, could be in North America for now you have the ability to resell that placements for Canada and resale again the Mexico and restart again for Portugal and on and on and on.

 

  • That kind of flexibility I believe is going to create enormous, enormous opportunities both for brands have access who might not. I mean, you may well for example, be enormously enthusiastic to try and get into a particular movie, only defined that you’ve been outbid. Well, this way you could say, well, I was out bid for North America. But I still really, really likes to be your brand partner for Mexico. And now that’s entirely possible. So I understand your question. Your point of view from the disruption is going to call from a long established industry, but I also believe that disruption’s going to come an enormous, enormous amount of wonderful opportunity. And very exciting opportunity. A lot of people.

Stacy: 17:35

  • Sure. And I think one of the biggest hurdles with all of this is that a lot of people totally don’t get the power and value of product placement is still surprising. I’ve been doing this for over 23 years now and there is beliefs that seeing a brand within a piece of content won’t actually make a sale happen. And it’s incorrect. It’s the same type of advertising when you see an ad and a print advertisement or a billboard or you see a TV ad or you see social posts about it, all of its reinforcement. So people do get a massive amount of benefit from having product placement in movies and TV shows. But there is a scalable learning that needs to still happen for brands to see that there’s going to be an opportunity for them to pay dollars to be in all of this content in scenes besides those which they’re usually more apt to pay when there’s a true story being told around the brand. How are you all helping educate people on this? And the need and the want and the power of product placement in content?

Roy: 18:53

  • Did you make a number of really good points. So first of all, let me take on the question about understanding the perceived value. I was say that that’s already getting better. That’s the first part, two parts of answering that point. The first part is just certainly seem to be getting better. It looks like we’re having some success in winning the argument. The second part of the answer is however, is I believe the perceived value is going to be a lot easier to demonstrate when we’re able to do two things. The first thing we can do is we can make sure that the brand integration is appropriate, both for the product, the audience, and the scene. Nobody likes to see an obvious, a brand placement for a brand which doesn’t relate to them.

 

  • And does it seem to be appropriate for for the scene. So, for example, if I am a 25 year old male and I am watching a film and there is a woman’s hair shampoo and it’s in the middle of the living room table, you’re probably going to say I don’t like that and I don’t know how that’s going to work for me. On the other hand, if the 25 year old happens to see a period of weather and he happened to see an ice cold beer or an ice tea or something which is appropriate to him and make sense to him, then I think the value of that is much easier to share. With the other part of this is because we know what is on the screen, we can tell you we’re going to be able to produce metrics, which we’ll be able to tell you if it was seen and then what we’re going to be able to do is overlay that with your own resells results because we can tell you why it was saying and we can do trials.

 

  • We can put your ice tea and maybe somebody like Salt Lake City and we can put an ice cold local beer and maybe in Austin, in Texas. And as the brand you’ll be able to see whether the correlation matches the placement to a degree which has never been possible before. And one of the things as you’re creating a lot of excitement in the meetings I go to is that ability to be able to measure your ROI for brand integration in a way that just did not exist before.

Stacy: 21:33

  • Okay. What about the issue? Right holders? So when we go through the process of working with our clients and putting them on a movie or TV show, there’s actually, it’s not just simply calling them up and saying, hey, use our brands. There’s actually a selling process. And a lot of times there are a number of decision makers who contractually have rights to say what brand would actually be in a scene. Beyond the producer and director you also have the actors. And so how are you all going to jump that hurdle right now of having an actor who, let’s just say he has viewpoints on certain brands being too edgy for him. Or maybe it’s an actor who has a lifelong, it’s Le Bron James and he has a lifelong contract with Nike. And so he’s not going to want to have a box foot wear of Adidas branded in front of him. How are you going to be able to work around the creative issues that always pop up within the world of product placement?

Roy: 22:51

  • Right. So it’s a good question. So thank you and have all the questions that get asked it seems like the toughest actually is the easiest. And the reason for that is because all of those rights you mentioned already exist and already get negotiated. It don’t happen currently without those permissions. So we don’t have to reinvent permissions. They already exist because the entire industry for them. So if you just Google rights management, you will find hundreds and hundreds of companies which exist to do just that. But when I point out to people that occasionally and sometimes sadly more than occasionally, there is an issue, those issues can be extremely stressful. Extremely, particularly if a very important piece of talent actor associated issue and even more stressful is that issue might mean that the project was put on hold or even worse, it has to be taken off air or out of distribution.

 

  • And I’m sure you must know yourself, Stacy, many, many horror stories having worked in this industry of where that’s happened. So when I point out to people that literally within seconds that problem can go away or be solved, we can just take the offending product out of the scene, then I see a huge change in reaction to the question because we’re not just about putting things into this thing. We can also take things out of the same.

 

  • And the cost, and I call that the Henry Cavill’s mustache issue. When Henry Cavill would have wear a mustache in one film and hen he wasn’t allowed to have a mustache and the other film and then the studio spend millions of dollars in post-production trying to remove the mustache. Okay. Well for us it’s not millions of dollars. It’s a few clicks. And so suddenly the issue rights management, we become not a challenge, but a very, very welcome solution.

Stacy: 25:16

  • Okay. And Are you all going out educating Hollywood right now on these opportunities? So are there real TV shows and feature films that brands can get involved in today or is that still a little bit often in the near future?

Roy: 25:35

  • No, all being well, we’re hoping to be on air with our first show this month.

Stacy: 25:41

  • That’s exciting.

Roy: 25:42

  • So if anybody is listening and is interested about engaging with us then we would love to hear from them.

Stacy: 25:50

  • Okay. And what are the typical costs involved? Is it CPM based or how are you projecting costs for brands to become involved?

Roy: 26:01

  • So we are going to have a model. Should be CPM based and which in the future will we auctionable? So the tagline is our plan is to become the Google ad words of the moving image. So what will happen is if you have a brand, you’ll be able to go online such a particular scene or actor or show. And then you’ve got to do a search and we’ll come back with the search results and tell you all the opportunities to be integrated.

 

  • You’ll only be able to do that for products that are whitelisted by the content owner. So you would have put alcohol in any scene with a minor, that kind of thing. It’ll be a white list and black list. And then we’ll be able to do is we’ll give you results just like Google ad words does and charge like who got up was does. But that’s the future. Right now what we’re doing is a case by case pricing. And the strongest reaction we’ve had is, my goodness, are you sure you can afford to do it that cheaply? Well because of the way the model we have and the way we do it, we can afford to the price aggressive to a degree that is shocking everybody that we are talking to.

Stacy: 27:22

  • That’s terrific. Getting back a little bit into right holders and why brands are chosen in scene and how you guys are going to work around it.

 

  • A lot of times a brand will be chosen because it enhances a character. Right. So we know that it’s a high end character, he or she wears the best of the best, buyers of the best and only those brands that would academize that would be actually associated. So are you with this almost programmatic structure that you’re suggesting, would you be white listing then only brands that would be appropriate so that you have your Tiffany’s in one scene of a box and not necessarily your Jerrod’s when it’s supposed to be a extremely high end jewelry placement?

Roy: 28:18

  • Yeah. So I’m glad you asked us to revisit the question. Because it gives me a chance to reemphasize this point, we will never ever put a product into a scene ever that doesn’t have the full permission, authorization, comfort and total approval of everybody was involved in that scene. The content owner, the talent, the producer, the director everybody.

 

  • So we will never seek to impose anything into that scene which should not be there. And which is not approved. Every company has a thou shall not and that is ours. We will never do that.

Stacy: 29:01

  • That’s great.

Roy: 29:02

  • But let me repeat, you may for example say this particular, and this particular film or TV show is very appropriate, for example, has a strong liqour and so you absolutely make sense that would have a particular brand of whiskey, but it might also be entirely appropriate that you have Suntory for when it’s in Japan and you might have Cheetos, but when it’s in Texas and it might be Smirnoff when it’s in the UK and it might be Grey Goose when it’s in France, I don’t see any reason why within a range. And I only a range was approved by, but a range of products we could still meet the needs of the story, the director and the talent.

Stacy: 30:04

  • Okay. How do you approach, are you projecting that referral product placement solutions? So there won’t still be traditional credit placement being done? Or is it an accompaniment and an enhancements?

Roy: 30:22

  • Well, first of all, I would not ever be as arrogant as just presuppose I could walk in on an existing 50 year old industry and change things like that. That’ just not who I am personally. And it’s not my company, not our company. In the same way that there are people that will always want to do things in a particular way, there will always be traditional place. And I’m absolutely certain of it in the same way the Christopher Nolan still wants to a film using traditional film, a 70 millimeter ans so on. It will always be around, we will be there for those times when it’s appropriate. And for those films and TV shows where it’s helpful, this may still be some times when there isn’t and there will still be some people will say I just don’t want your technology, namely a particular production.

 

  • And that’s so okay. This is an enormous, an enormous industry. I think PQ media came out with the latest results, which said that brand integration/product placement in 2018 was $15.6 billion. That’s a big business. Has Plenty enough, they’re going to a big business for ref. So I believe that we will be successful. I think that we can be very, very helpful to a content industry, which has had to deal with varied anything from actors that suddenly say inappropriate things and become a problem. Two phones which suddenly catch fire, two brands which suddenly are no longer desired because of whatever thing that happened with them.

 

  • And I think when you think about the amount of money that’s been left on the cutting room floor because the brands didn’t get it past final cut. And the energy and the effort that go wasted in that we will be an enormously really, really powerful, wonderful tool to save that money. And then I think we’ve seen to like a friend or the industry rather than a competitive outside of trying to barge are you in? How long would like us not to be seen.

Stacy: 32:35

  • How do you then protect. And that’s great. How do you protect against all that content that has been shot and that will be shot where brands have run co-motional campaigns knowing that they had exclusivity in the film. How do you make sure that the brand deals where really the understanding of it is, is when a brand has provided money or trade out and secured a contract with the production, they’re not expecting that that production down the line is going to change. It’s after final edit. So if Bond and Heineken had their big partnership and Heineken spent $50 million in promotional advertising and everyone knew about it, what is their protection? Because they thought that they had it locked down. They’re like, oh, we did the film, we shot it, we’ve done the promotion. We paid our money? What is preventing them from five years down the line, 10 years down the line, another beer company, or maybe it’s a sparkling vodka in a beverage cup. What is keeping them safe from the partnerships that they have done where they’re not going to have to worry about being cut out?

Roy: 34:01

  • Absolutely. It’s a great question. First of all, only have to add a single paragraph or two to the contract and that’s taken care of. Well when you say that, as you can imagine in your mind’s eye, you’re thinking about a major film like a James Bond film for example with a multimillion dollar deal. We probably might never get involved in the middle of that.

 

  • The vast bulk of television and film, which is consumed is not what happens in the first 90 day window of a major $1000 movie. It is when the movie is five years old, it is when very popular TV shows. And why shouldn’t the content owners, we spend so much time and so much effort producing some of the greatest stories in so many experiences that we ever get to experience. Why shouldn’t they monetize that?

 

  • Why should they not have a chance? Because right now they can’t.

Stacy: 35:08

  • And I fully agree with you. But on the brand side, as far as protecting the brand, why should they lose out after they took a risk, not knowing if the film or the TV show was going to be successful. And even if it’s limited budgets or limited products that they supply. Why should they now on that side of it actually have a potential detriment and no protection? So, this is something that’s going to come up in conversation. I know we’re going to be asked about it. And so I’m just curious to know how do you walk the walk with that and what are the answers? And I don’t think there’s necessarily a 100% answers that you can provide that are locked and loaded today is just something to rationalize and think about and talk about. Because even your little bitty productions that are out there for an independent film, when a brand is thinking about working with it it’s harder selling to get a brand and a Bond films really easy actually for large brands to say, yes we want that.

 

  • And there’s a lot of competition. But then you have thousands of productions that are out there, hundreds that are being produced. 99 Netflix alone is went over 800 now in a year of content that they’re producing. Thousands where you’re having brands come forward and they are providing their product, their phone, their bottled water or their clothing, whatever it might be. And they’re taking a risk on that film by the trade or the dollars that they’re paying and not knowing. Again and they’re hoping that this is a movie magic moment and that five, 10, 15, 20 years from now they made this cool decision that they are still going to be talked about at that company long past their days for having done such a smart thing. Brands are going to lose out in the traditional sense if that future forecast is now unstable.

Roy: 37:06

  • So it a couple of things to answer I think I can answer it right now, which is first of all, just because you can doesn’t mean that you will all you should. So because you can change it doesn’t automatically mean that it will be changed. There was absolutely no reason for those relationships or those brands to feel threatened. All they have to do is to say we agree that this placement is in perpetuity and that’s it. It’s done. That’s the end of it. So the protection is actually really, really simple for them. Now having said that, you just made a very interesting statement. You said that you think that they tend to be there for five, 10 or 25 years. I can hardly think of a single brand, the same look and feel for that period of time. Even though like Coca-Cola bottles have changed, the logo may be similar but the colors may change. So they may benefit enormously from risk because they can keep their brand look and feel up to date.

Stacy: 38:11

  • That’s a great point.

Roy: 38:13

  • And they can also localize it, when you were Coca-Cola and you and the particular movie for the North America, but you want to change it. For example, in Indonesia you may want to the American logo style called Colo. Logan doesn’t work very well. So in Indonesia have a very distinctive, very different look. Well for Indonesia you wouldn’t go to a post-production company would just be too expensive. We’re the last should be very easy. Or for example if you are in the Middle East and you want to change, whether Coca-Cola has a very different logo. Again, Coca-Cola is an interesting one because they have very distinctive, you always know as Coca-Cola because they are red. But the actual logo are very, very different looking per country.

 

  • So I would say we’re no threat at all. You don’t have to, but you certainly may be very, very glad we exist when you do want to change it.

Stacy: 39:18

  • Sure.

Roy: 39:19

  • Or more you do wish to re monetize.

Stacy: 39:22

  • Sure. And for our listeners who may not know right now, localization and post-production happens. So like when a movie like the SMURFS, which is super popular in China shoots, you have Chinese brands who really want to be in that film. But it doesn’t look so good to have these Chinese brands in a film that has an American audience who doesn’t know what these Chinese brands are. And in fact they look very different in the brands that we would use. So Ryff would actually provide a solution that would be far less costly to either right now what they have to do is either have to shoot the scene twice and use the different brands and then they have to do double the editing or they have to go and post production and actually layer by layer, scene by scene. Each rain has to be changed out which can take a massive amount of time and money. So Ryff that’s a solution that you all offer as well?

Roy: 40:22

  • Yes, that’s absolutely true. By post production all refilming is expensive and time consuming. And may still not cover all of your options.

Stacy: 40:37

  • Okay. And so I know you this next month are going to actually have a show that is going to be viable for brands. What type of opportunity like let’s share how they can reach out to you to get involved, but what does a brand need to do to actually get involved? Do they have to provide layered files to you of their image? Do you all shoot it. Like, what are the actual technical to do is that a brand would need to know about?

Roy: 41:10

  • That is so simple was to be shocking. All they have to do is send the 3D models or the image files. And if they don’t have those, we can make them for them too, and we can do that generally in around about 24 hours maximum. It is really shockingly easy.

Stacy: 41:28

  • And then are the scenes that you’re looking at where you’re popping in the product or taking it out or moving it around, is it something that is interactive where is it something that has to be static, the bottle, the product is sitting on a table or could it be in an actor’s hands?

Roy: 41:45

  • Yeah. So right now the static, in the next 18 months, there’ll be able to be interacted with by the talent.

Stacy: 41:54

  • Okay. And is there anything else that our listeners need to know about how to get involved with this besides speaking of the phone or emailing you? What else do they need to know?

Roy: 42:11

  • We are really, really fun, nice people. We’re not here to interfere with people’s businesses and disrupt their relationships. We’re here to give you the chance to change things, make edits, be flexible fast. So we’re not threatening anybody. In fact, I believe we’re going to create a new golden age of product placement. The first golden age of brand integration because of the ease of which is going to be possible to do something which was previously difficult. I think is probably polite. Going back to your description of earlier, getting on set and the approvals, making sure you’ve got the right model. I’ll give you just one example. I spoke to a company in Venice beach is working with Hewlett Packard. Did you print your integrations well in order that they can cover all of the countries for the re-shoots, they’ve got a warehouse full of over 100 printers and asked to remember, oh, for this thing, is this HP XYZABEZ, model I.

 

  • Oh no man. You said modal G, oh and I got to go get that modal G back. Make sure they’ve got the right model. It is laborious. It is not fun for anybody involved. Especially go the port director. He just felt it was going to wrap up at six and go have something to eat and now I was told he’s got to stay on set and refilm another three hours. That’s not fun. That’s not Fun.

Stacy: 43:54

  • It’s not fun. But luckily those types of mistakes if you’re working with right agency shouldn’t happen too often. So that’s a good thing. That’s not usually part of our day typically.

Roy: 44:09

  • My ambitions Stacy is to take that expression used with very much tongue in cheek but also a sigh of realism expression. We’ll fix it in post and swap it out for the brand integration industry. We’ll fix it with Ryff.

Stacy: 44:28

  • Right? Yep. That’s true. And so where do you see this technology going? You said in 18 months you’ll be able to actually be moveable with the products and brands that you are integrating. What do you think the future is?

Roy: 44:46

  • The future’s very exciting. Our roadmap is predicated by cloud based GPU as graphic processor units. Cloudbase rendering the number of GPU in the cloud today is sufficient to do the kinds of things that we’re looking at. In the future the number of those processes will grow exponentially and the power of those processes will grow exponentially. As they grow so will our capability and we’ll be able to change more of what you see on the screen and we’ll be able to do more interesting things with the content. But that’s for the future.

Stacy: 45:29

  • That’s an exciting future.

Roy: 45:32

  • It is. It is. It really is.

Stacy: 45:33

  • So for our listeners who are interested in learning more about Ryff, how do they get a hold of you? Where do they go?

Roy: 45:39

  • You can visit our website, www.Ryff.Co not.com, .co and they can visit the website and fill out from there or they can just email me directly. I’m pretty open. I’m just [email protected] and I’m very good at getting back to people.

Stacy: 46:01

  • That’s awesome Roy. Is there anything else you want to share with our listeners today?

Roy: 46:06

  • Yes. You’ve been a delight to speak to and is very kind of you to give an opportunity for somebody new to this industry and doing something new. The chance to share our story. I don’t want to say thank you very, very much for the opportunity.

Stacy: 46:23

  • Of course I am very much so embracing all things branded content and I really truly believe that stories are told better for brands as well as content through the partnerships that we can build to them. So it’s important for everyone to understand and know the technology and the options that are out there so that they can elevate not only their brand, but also their production. I do see Ryff as being a contributor to that in a potential forefront leader in this space and I’m excited for your success.

Roy: 46:59

  • Well, thank you very much and thanks again for chance to talk to you.

Stacy: 47:02

  • Of course. Roy thank you. And for all of our listeners tuning in today to Marketing Mistakes and How to Avoid Them, again, Roy has provided us a tremendous look into not the future but the today and I greatly appreciate it this time. Roy thank you, and I’ll chat with all of you again on our next podcast.

Thank You For Tuning In! 
There are a lot of podcasts you could be tuning into today, but you chose Hollywood Branded, and we’re grateful for that. If you enjoyed today’s episode, please share it, you can see the handy social media buttons below and the left side of the page. 🙂

Also, kindly consider taking the 60-seconds it takes to leave an honest review and rating for the podcast on iTunes, they’re extremely helpful when it comes to the ranking of the show.

Lastly, don’t forget to subscribe to the podcast on iTunes, to get automatic updates every time a new episode goes live!