Eric Toline Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 Sometimes you have to educate the client and point out the error of their ways. If possible let them hear the difference. OTOH all your explanations could fall on deaf ears. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Sjostrom Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 That could also be a pitfall, to point out errors.. Ie, if you would point this out, and the client perceives it as a problem, the client might ask YOU to do it, and in a hurry of course. Its like a reversed hostage situation "oh thanks for pointing that out can you help us pretty please!?" Or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 " I can only think that a couple of things are happening here " I can only think of one thing: did the check clear? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toy Robot Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 " I can only think that a couple of things are happening here " I can only think of one thing: did the check clear? Hahah, yes. I received payment Monday, and they sent me the link to the video today. Good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrd456 Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 A split boom/wire mix works well a lot of the time,but it's sounds bad when they combine them.They don't seem to understand when you tell them why it's wrong to do this......it's sad J.D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 " it's sad " it is what they said they wanted; and they got it, and they paid for it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MatthewFreedAudio Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 " it's sad " it is what they said they wanted; and they got it, and they paid for it... We are the sound professionals and we do have a responsibility to educate our clients...to an extent. If they don't know the difference between split mono and stereo I wouldn't blame them. I have educated many clients on what to do with lavs left/boom right or why there is only a mono mix. I have never had a client demand a split mix of lavs to one channel and boom to the other and actually want that as their final deliverable knowing that it isn't supposed to be that way. I have also educated many video editors on their listening environment and have helped them improve how they listen to the audio coming out of their systems. Nothing wrong with informing those that really don't know any different. And, it reduces the number of times that a split mono mix becomes the final deliverable. Production Sound Mixing for Television, Films, and Commercials. www.matthewfreed.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Given that in many cases post will not be "real" post these days, the fact that it's what they have always done isn't relevant. I have done industrials where I have been told they always split tracks to camera. I tell them I'll run a mono mix to camera, and provide ISO tracks as a back-up if there's something wrong with the camera audio. I've never been argued with, and have been called back saying my tracks are so "smooth" compared to the past. My guess is that other guys gave them a split and it was just not dealt with properly in post. I still believe strongly in providing what your experience tells you that you should provide. If they don't trust you, then turn down the job. If I can't be sure my tracks will be dealt with properly, then it can only harm my reputation in the long run. The client isn't always right. Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Perkins Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Given that in many cases post will not be "real" post these days, the fact that it's what they have always done isn't relevant. I have done industrials where I have been told they always split tracks to camera. I tell them I'll run a mono mix to camera, and provide ISO tracks as a back-up if there's something wrong with the camera audio. I've never been argued with, and have been called back saying my tracks are so "smooth" compared to the past. My guess is that other guys gave them a split and it was just not dealt with properly in post. I still believe strongly in providing what your experience tells you that you should provide. If they don't trust you, then turn down the job. If I can't be sure my tracks will be dealt with properly, then it can only harm my reputation in the long run. The client isn't always right. Robert Well, I've been argued with (beaten down in fact) over this issue, and the production has always come in on the side of the editor. So I don't argue any more. If split is what the want, then that's what they get if I can do it. Isos are great but there are many situations in which they aren't wanted (I give them to them anyhow) or used even when they would have helped (oh well). I had a thread here a few days back about an editor who used the scratch audio track from a 7D in the cut, didn't get around to syncing up the real audio from me. I only found out because they brought me back to do the audio post on the piece. (The director made the editor go back and sync up my audio to the cut--bless him.) phil p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 My experience is very similar to Phil's. I will reluctantly send a split feed to camera, but I try to back it up with an email to the editor (or post people) and a sound report that clearly identifies channel assignments, and recommends using one over the other where appropriate. I have witnessed dailies situations where an inexperienced assistant editor combined 1&2 for a viewing DVD or file, and it was phase cancellations up the ying-yang. Sad when this happens. I pray that this doesn't happen on the final air delivery, but strange things happen... I make very sure that they know this is not a stereo mix, but a 2-track mix. Big difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Perkins Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 My experience is very similar to Phil's. I will reluctantly send a split feed to camera, but I try to back it up with an email to the editor (or post people) and a sound report that clearly identifies channel assignments, and recommends using one over the other where appropriate. I have witnessed dailies situations where an inexperienced assistant editor combined 1&2 for a viewing DVD or file, and it was phase cancellations up the ying-yang. Sad when this happens. I pray that this doesn't happen on the final air delivery, but strange things happen... I make very sure that they know this is not a stereo mix, but a 2-track mix. Big difference. NEVER use the word "stereo" to describe what is in fact two discrete mixes, which may or may not combine at unity level all that well. This is the "loaded gun" aspect of this technique--the editors, having asked for this need to know how to use it. phil p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toy Robot Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 NEVER use the word "stereo" to describe what is in fact two discrete mixes, which may or may not combine at unity level all that well. This is the "loaded gun" aspect of this technique--the editors, having asked for this need to know how to use it. phil p And therein lies the original dilema. I'm of the mindset that educating people regarding workflow is fine and dandy, but when a client asks for something specifically, I'm not about to start treating them like they don't know what they're asking for. That's a sure fire recipe for not being called back. That thought takes me all the way back to my original post, in that the workflow was both a.) requested by the client, and b.) made clear in writing during delivery of the final tracks. I'm all for helping, but at some point it is out of our control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VASI Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 I think the time for one "white paper" about L/R standard recommendation for ENG, Documentary, Film is here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 " NEVER use the word "stereo" to describe what is in fact two discrete mixes, " NEVER use the word "stereo" to describe what is in fact two discrete channels, unless there is actually a spatial (Stereophonic) relationship between them. " the time for one "white paper" about L/R standard recommendation " begin by not designating them L/R (I know, that is often what equipment is labeled ) " Well, I've been argued with (beaten down in fact) over this issue, " so in the end, I guess it all depends... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 I agree -- not designating them "Left" and "Right" is a good start. (This is one of the few things I dislike about the SD 788 -- the fact that the first two channels it records to are designated as "L" and "R." I would rather they just number them all.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VASI Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Yeap I know. The L/R is for example not the "standard". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.279748a58a2b862b7aa5f3b84126e232.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.