Foley artists beware..

[ShubiSnax]

" A pair of associate professors and a graduate student from Cornell University, however, have developed a method for synthesizing the sound of moving fabrics -- such as rustling clothes -- for use in animations, and thus, potentially film."

[greg sextro]

My buddy sent me this link earlier today. There's too many things wrong with this, that will never replace foley artists for animated films.

[Olle Sjostrom]

Science vs Emotion

You can't win, science.

[Jesse Flaitz]

I could be mistaken, but I think they use information from the animation software to create the info needed to make the sounds. Something that probably isn't compatible with regular digital video. Also, I wasn't overly impressed with the sound quality anyway (tho the process itself is pretty impressive), and I would miss the company of my foley friend Shaun "the Walker" haha.

[Jeff Wexler]

One of the first mixes that I sat in on for a movie I had worked on I remember the re-recording mixer bringing up a fader where there was a loop of mag running that they called "Lillian Russell" --- it was essentially a rustling sort of sound that when used judicially and at the proper low level, worked very well to convey movement sound (someone getting up from a chair, clothing noise, etc.). They used this loop several times during the mix along with extensive and very complete Foley tracks. There would be times when they preferred "Lillian Russell" to the sounds that the Foley artists had done.

[Henchman]

" A pair of associate professors and a graduate student from Cornell University, however, have developed a method for synthesizing the sound of moving fabrics -- such as rustling clothes -- for use in animations, and thus, potentially film."

The cloth track is about the least work of all when doing foley.

Nothing to worry about here.

[atheisticmystic]

The huge thing missing in the whole "digital race to replace absolutely every fucking task we do as human beings (let alone filmmakers)" is the importance of "embodiment". It's not just whether the computer can make a convincing foley track, it's that in that process, I as a filmmaker (and human being) lose an enormous process of working my way through the physical task and universe with my body; and that process is HOW WE GROW AS ORGANISMS.

With each filmmaking task (or any task) that we wholly give over to the Symbolic Order (digital task processing), we give away EXACTLY that amount from the order of The Real, we slowly lose that skill as filmmakers (and in turn do NOT pass that skill on the next generation), and in so doing, we go in the diametric opposite way of adaptation.

It may be hyperbole, but you know what happens to a culture that propagates stimulus instead of story??

[Marc Wielage]

I agree with Steven: these guys are making mountains out of molehills.

Sometimes, just because you can do something with a computer is not reason enough to do it. I have the same problem with a lot of motion-capture films using CG characters, when it could've been done much more convincingly with human beings. And I'm almost always opposed to Auto-Tune in vocals, especially when it's overused to the point of turning singers into machines.

People gotta stop being such slaves to technology, and recognize that it's the imperfections of humans that make most of us so interesting.

[Philip Perkins]

This is exactly what it seems: an academic exercise by academics. This might well turn into something useful someday, as part of a relentless desire that is apparently innate in humans to automate and remove human interaction from as many endeavors as possible.

phil p

[Marc Wielage]

Sometimes, it does seem like we're headed towards a time where every facet of motion pictures -- set design, lighting, actors, voices, sound, camera movement, etc. -- will be completely synthesized and computer generated. I'm not looking forward to that.

About 12-13 years ago, I did a week or so of work on the motion-capture film Final Fantasy, and the producers were absolutely convinced it was going to change Hollywood. At the time, I was working on another live-action project, and showed a DP the results. He wrinkled his nose and said, "we already have a word for that: bad cartoons." Hard to argue with that.

[Bondelev]

Actually this has completely pragmatic uses. Video games have the characters moving in nexpected ways, it would be nice to have different sounds each time they moved.

[Marc Wielage]

Video games I can accept for using this approach. What is scary is how many live-action/adventure films are edging closer and closer to looking like Video Games...

[Jaymz]

Actually this has completely pragmatic uses. Video games have the characters moving in nexpected ways, it would be nice to have different sounds each time they moved.

Exactly. Currently, games use fixed audio files with mediocre sounding pitch randomization to keep small effects (footsteps, cloth etc) fresh. This would be a very cool approach for that. But the larger sound effects, especially ones that require realism, will likely keep the current method.

[VASI]

Maybe science win the emotion.

[atheisticmystic]

I concede my complaint to the gamers.

Maybe science win the emotion.

Not very scientific, but extreeeemely funny.

Thanks

[milotrain]

There may be at some point in time a tool that lets foley be an automated process. It may indeed become close enough to the organic process we use to justify using it as an economic gain. 15 years ago we would all have said that the things we can do with melodyne and iZotope were impossible and required an organic process to tailor to the work.

Yes technology will improve, even replacing art in the name of production cost reduction. That's the nature of what we do, but it won't ever replace the art completely and it will hopefully make Foley artists better.

Only half the job of a good Foley team is recording things that you can see on screen, a lot of a good crew's job is to add quality to the soundscape by introducing creative elements that are not cued by the supervisor. A good supervisor will leverage a good Foley crew to this end, and non of that process could be automated.

[Marc Wielage]

Yes technology will improve, even replacing art in the name of production cost reduction. That's the nature of what we do, but it won't ever replace the art completely and it will hopefully make Foley artists better.

Yes and no. I can remember when AutoTune came out and some producers said, "wow -- now we can take anybody who can't really sing and make them a star!" Talent and hard work are still required, and automated technology is merely a tool, not the whole solution.

The other problem is, the more technology can do, the higher the expectations by creative people like directors and producers. I can remember when power windows came out in color correction, giving us the ability to make one part of the picture a different color than the other part of the picture, directors were very excited. Now, post routinely adds 15, 20, even 25 simultaneous power windows to one shot, and the DP and director just expects this as standard -- essentially re-lighting the scene from scratch. It's much better (IMHO) to just get it right the first time, on the set. Same thing with dialogue.

The same argument can be made against motion-capture movies. I'm all for technology in service of the story, but many of these films just leave me cold, losing a lot of warmth and humanity in the process -- and I think of myself as a very technically-hip guy. But I also need an emotional connection to the movie, and I think all these automated tricks can ultimately be oft-putting and unnatural, especially when used to excess. Foley is more an art than it is a science, and the foley artists have to create the nuance and emotion of the characters -- not just the sounds they make. A walk or a movement can be angry, sad, lethargic, abrupt... it says a lot about the character, and I'm not convinced there's a knob for that.