sync boxes and when it became the sound dept.'s rental item

[PCMsoundie]

I saw this other topic in this forum: Smart Slate: Sound Dept Vs Camera Dept

and and it got me thinking about the sync boxes attached to HD & digital cameras.

I realize that on most sets the sound person is generally regarded as the person in charge of syncing things (since we have the better clocks on the timecode equipment) and with slates and sound the syncing usually is for multiple cameras to the mixed sound recording.

I think this is more with scripted narrative shows rather than TV but when exactly did 2, or 3 smart slates providing timecode on the set being supplied by the sound department become a regular thing in the last 15 years?

Some equipment interfacing with cameras started being supplied by the sound department. When did Syncbox's start being supplied by the sound dept on scripted narrative shows?

Was it when the HD cameras became pretty standard on sets in the early-to-mid 2000s with HD's requirement for Trilevel Sync (and thus needing a Lockit box feeding blackburst)?

Was this because of reality-TV series with many cameras on set or did they just pick it up from scripted narrative shows (like episodics) using many cameras?

I've used the Denecke SB-T and I think the SB-3 Dcode Syncbox Time Code Generator. I don't own one and really haven't been asked by hardly any TV producers to provide them. I've been on a few jobs where they just showed up and I had to use them.

Am I supposed to suggest them to be used even if I don't own them? When during pre-production would be appropriate? Should production add it to the camera rental or should I be responsible for this if there are a few cameras on the shoot?

[John Blankenship]

I saw this other topic in this forum: Smart Slate: Sound Dept Vs Camera Dept

and and it got me thinking about the sync boxes attached to HD & digital cameras.

I realize that on most sets the sound person is generally regarded as the person in charge of syncing things (since we have the better clocks on the timecode equipment) and with slates and sound the syncing usually is for multiple cameras to the mixed sound recording.

I think this is more with scripted narrative shows rather than TV but when exactly did 2, or 3 smart slates providing timecode on the set being supplied by the sound department become a regular thing in the last 15 years?

Some equipment interfacing with cameras started being supplied by the sound department. When did Syncbox's start being supplied by the sound dept on scripted narrative shows?

Was it when the HD cameras became pretty standard on sets in the early-to-mid 2000s with HD's requirement for Trilevel Sync (and thus needing a Lockit box feeding blackburst)?

Was this because of reality-TV series with many cameras on set or did they just pick it up from scripted narrative shows (like episodics) using many cameras?

I've used the Denecke SB-T and I think the SB-3 Dcode Syncbox Time Code Generator. I don't own one and really haven't been asked by hardly any TV producers to provide them. I've been on a few jobs where they just showed up and I had to use them.

Am I supposed to suggest them to be used even if I don't own them? When during pre-production would be appropriate? Should production add it to the camera rental or should I be responsible for this if there are a few cameras on the shoot?

If you don't have any, they should be a camera rental item. If you have them, you should get the rental.

[ProSound]

If you don't have any, they should be a camera rental item. If you have them, you should get the rental.

+1 I own 2 so I try to get additional rent on them if they refuse I tell them to have the camera dept provide them

[taylormadeaudio]

Negotiate your basic kit rental w/o them... then (if you have slates and syncboxes) offer them at a fair rate - above your standard kit rental. Otherwise, tell them you'll be happy to provide the timecode to sync whatever units they go with.

~tt

[jrd456]

The problem is eventually they will expect sound mixer to have sync boxes as part of there pkg.The TC slate used to be a separately charged item. But the way it's goin',sound will be recording the video from the camera [pix 260]

J.D.

[RPSharman]

For the last few years I have tried to rent lockits to production, but they are always part of the camera package. I have, therefore, never owned any.

I have worked primarily on scripted TV and feature films, and it's never been expected that I would supply the lockits.

If you can make money at it, then by all means do so. But I hope nobody starts giving them away. I don't want anyone to expect me to own them and include them in my package.

Robert

[JonG]

If you can make money at it, then by all means do so. But I hope nobody starts giving them away. I don't want anyone to expect me to own them and include them in my package.

+1. I dont want to have to spend money on things like this if I am not being compensated for it. I have been on films where they just expected me to have them, as well as a smart slate, even though those things were not discussed in pre production (even with non TC cameras!). I avoided owning a smart slate for a long time because of this, and the simple fact that Ive had to replace my dumb slate too many times to trust an AC. But the younger crown is starting to expect these sorts of things, like they expect X amount of wireless, hops, etc. as part of your basic kit, instead of letting us, the department head, make the call on how we want to mic a scene.

The future looks grim, as the "digital revolution" and general devolution of educational systems like film schools have become, churning out students for profit rather providing a real world education. I still get approached by these clowns expecting me to provide my kit along with some low rate and no rental. It's frustrating to say the least.

[Jeff Wexler]

The problem is eventually they will expect sound mixer to have sync boxes as part of there pkg.The TC slate used to be a separately charged item. But the way it's goin',sound will be recording the video from the camera [pix 260]

J.D.

SOUND will always be recorded by the Sound Department, regardless of the method of "capture" (hate that term) for the sound and the image. WHERE it will be recorded and by what piece of gear is the issue --- rapidly changing on almost a daily basis for many types of work (sending sound to a camera, or not, double-system to sound gear, post syncing, etc.). Video, and possibly sound, recorded on a device like the SD Pix 260, is just another version of sending sound to the camera. The fundamental problem I have always stressed once anyone was relying on the CAMERA to record the sound, is one of procedure, working style and responsibility. The Sound person on a shoot is responsible for the sound on the shoot (simple enough, right?) but the device(s) recording the sound are in the hands of another department - CAMERA - whose responsibility is to the IMAGE, not the SOUND. This begins with the choice of "recording device" which in this case is again, another department, not the sound department. In my opinion, sound and image must always be DOUBLE SYSTEM with the proper "system" chosen for each task presided over and operated by trained, experienced professionals in that craft. It is very easy to just say "we've lost", in this new world we're just going to have to send a signal to the camera department and hope for the best. I'm not ever going to go that route but I will probably be retired before the masses of untrained and inexperienced sound people let this all happen.

[syncsound]

One thing that I've done to simplify bargaining and to cover my rental is to quote two different tiers of recording: single system and double system. My rates are slightly higher than what is usually quoted, but it's a fairly complete package in terms of extras (comteks, etc.) I do this to get a fair rate without having to itemize. Lockits and smart slates are standard with my double-system kit, but by no means are they "given away."

[Philip Perkins]

Lockits are still extra, moreso than TC slates for me. In terms of when they are used or not, I make the suggestion based on what they tell me about the job, and in conference w/ the camera dept and maybe post too (if there is a post dept at that point). There are lots of ways to skin the cat w/ sync, so I try to find out what they think is appropriate, and then suggest modifications of the package if I think they are headed for trouble. I have Lockits, but don't care if they use mine or ones from the camera rental house, as long as we have them if they are needed.

phil p

[jrd456]

SOUND will always be recorded by the Sound Department, regardless of the method of "capture" (hate that term) for the sound and the image. WHERE it will be recorded and by what piece of gear is the issue --- rapidly changing on almost a daily basis for many types of work (sending sound to a camera, or not, double-system to sound gear, post syncing, etc.). Video, and possibly sound, recorded on a device like the SD Pix 260, is just another version of sending sound to the camera. The fundamental problem I have always stressed once anyone was relying on the CAMERA to record the sound, is one of procedure, working style and responsibility. The Sound person on a shoot is responsible for the sound on the shoot (simple enough, right?) but the device(s) recording the sound are in the hands of another department - CAMERA - whose responsibility is to the IMAGE, not the SOUND. This begins with the choice of "recording device" which in this case is again, another department, not the sound department. In my opinion, sound and image must always be DOUBLE SYSTEM with the proper "system" chosen for each task presided over and operated by trained, experienced professionals in that craft. It is very easy to just say "we've lost", in this new world we're just going to have to send a signal to the camera department and hope for the best. I'm not ever going to go that route but I will probably be retired before the masses of untrained and inexperienced sound people let this all happen.

The video as well as the sound.

J.D.

[Marc Wielage]

I'm not ever going to go that route but I will probably be retired before the masses of untrained and inexperienced sound people let this all happen.

Sadly, the sound people are not letting this happen -- it's the producers who make bad decisions like this. If it were up to the sound department, I think very few mixers would prefer allowing the camera alone to record sound for any project, except perhaps one being shot under battle conditions for news or docos.

I agree that the whole idea of "capture" is grating. I have no doubt there are some producers and directors who imagine a world where they could just lock down four or five cameras, slap wires on everybody, and just hit record. And then reframe shots, zoom in, recompose the image, adjust exposure, and all that other stuff in post. Ditto with sound: just mix it all later.

There's 1000 reasons why this won't work, but some of these morons believe they need to reinvent the wheel and ignore the many traditions of the past 80-90 years of filmmaking...

[Wandering Ear]

SOUND will always be recorded by the Sound Department, regardless of the method of "capture" (hate that term) for the sound and the image. WHERE it will be recorded and by what piece of gear is the issue --- rapidly changing on almost a daily basis for many types of work (sending sound to a camera, or not, double-system to sound gear, post syncing, etc.). Video, and possibly sound, recorded on a device like the SD Pix 260, is just another version of sending sound to the camera. The fundamental problem I have always stressed once anyone was relying on the CAMERA to record the sound, is one of procedure, working style and responsibility. The Sound person on a shoot is responsible for the sound on the shoot (simple enough, right?) but the device(s) recording the sound are in the hands of another department - CAMERA - whose responsibility is to the IMAGE, not the SOUND. This begins with the choice of "recording device" which in this case is again, another department, not the sound department. In my opinion, sound and image must always be DOUBLE SYSTEM with the proper "system" chosen for each task presided over and operated by trained, experienced professionals in that craft. It is very easy to just say "we've lost", in this new world we're just going to have to send a signal to the camera department and hope for the best. I'm not ever going to go that route but I will probably be retired before the masses of untrained and inexperienced sound people let this all happen.

Although I fully agree with the position that the right equipment should be used for the right job (dual system) there are certain advances in technology that make that not so absolute. I. E. AES inputs on cameras. If I control the full signal chain through the digital conversion, then feed aes into camera, I can record in camera with full confidence in quality. That's still not what I prefer, but I won't have to be nervous about it. Same goes for recording to products like the pic260. This makes me no less of a mixer, I still have to worry about mic choice & placement, creating a good mix track, working with production to fix location noises, etc... Which at the end of the day will have more of an impact on the quality of sound than if I'm recording on a 788, a fusion, or using apogee converters to feed an aes input.

[studiomprd]

" but when exactly did 2, or 3 smart slates providing timecode on the set being supplied by the sound department become a regular thing in the last 15 years? "

sorry, I don't think there is an exact answer, but many of us were supplying multiple TC slates, happily, on productions all the way back to the early 90's. Happily?, yes as they were a good rental item at $50/day each --I recall one TC slate was often included with the TC Nagra at $125/day. Add sync boxes came later, but at a good rental. As others have said, even if they came from another source, we were happy to jam them as needed.

Workflow (I don't think we called it by that name back then) was pretty standard for TC Nagra /TC slate gigs, and syncing cameras, and confirming it was all working together began to come up later in the last millennium .. I recall jamming Panavision Platinum film in the 90's, even before hi-def video cameras, and doing an episodic shot on dual Digi-Beta's in the mid-90's...