Jump to content

Do we need a three person crew?


Don Coufal

Recommended Posts

I would like to start this thread to help answer some of the questions that I have read on several other threads on this group. I want to choose my words carefully as not to offend anyone who might be working in a manner inconsistent with my beliefs.  As far a the crew goes, I believe that it is important on any long form project to work as a three person crew. The budget certainly should not be a determining factor on the need to have a third person. As we all know, lower budget projects, more likely then not, will require the need for a third person more so then bigger budget projects. 

Let’s look at why we as a sound department need a third person.

1.To deal with cable. Like many on this group have commented, a hard line cable is, at this point, still the best solution to receiving the best signal from the mic and returning the best signal to the boom operator. Since we all know about problems associated with RF transmission, it is also the most reliable means of recording the audio. Having said that, wrangling cable should not be the first argument used to justify the position. If a wireless product can produce audio equal to a hard line and produce an IFB return that meets the same standards as a hard line (i.e. (?) Zaxcom) then by all means if you can afford that solution then use it. This would be a revolutionary product for the film industry.

2.Battery management. We have already entered a world where we use more batteries in a day then we used to use in a month. Comtecs, IFBs, Slates, Wireless Mics, Qaids, Power Supplies for wireless mics, and various other items that may need to be pulled out at any time. Not to mention the variety of rechargeable products that are in the kits and need to be ready at any time.

3.Sound Abatement and Control. This is probably what I consider the biggest argument for the third person on a sound department. That’s because it is an ever present problem that needs to be dealt with on almost every take and certainly on every location. It can be the determining factor in the quality of sound you are able to produce. I won’t go into it now because it would take too long to look at all the issues involved. Suffice it to say we have all encountered them at one time or another and how we were able to deal with them determined the results we were able to achieve or the method in which we were forced to record the sound.

4.Liaison with the crew. To achieve our best work as a sound department, we all need the help and support of other crew members like grip, electric, wardrobe, hair, props, first and second ad’s, pa’s, effects and locations. The third person on a sound crew is essential in developing and maintaining these relationships. A two man crew does not have the time to effectively work with each of these departments.

5.Be a second boom operator when needed. With todays style of film making, it is necessary to have a second boom available at all times. Even if it is only to pick up a line or two of dialogue from scene to scene, this can save production time, money, quality on their projects. There are also times where the first boom operator will need help with wiring talent and making sure that mic is performing to the best of its ability on the talent.

6.Put out fires. Being responsible for the entire production sound track is a lot to shoulder for just two people. Look how many people help with the picture portion of a film. I don’t think this needs any further explanation.

Any one of these can take up most of the third’s time on certain shows. It points out why we need to work as a three person team. So as not to bore, I have left out many other needs and duties that can be performed by a third and would love to hear others input on this subject.

I do want to address quickly the issue of fighting to keep a three man crew. As we are all aware, the industry is changing and constricting more so now then ever. The producing entity is always looking to cut cost, cut jobs, and allow lower cost workers (I.E. PAs) to do more and more of the work. This is evident in all areas of the business whither it be commercials, tv, reality, or movies. It will be up to us to determine if we are going to go along with it or fight it. Do we really want to continue to to do the”best job” that we know we can do or will we choose to give them the “best sound they deserve”? These are two totally different decisions.

If we choose the first answer then we will all have to be very diligent and work with our local union to help preserve the third person position. We will also have to be constantly aware of not doing things in such a way as to say to the producer that a third really isn’t necessary. For those who are working on long form projects that will not hire a third, then look into the unions trainee position and have the company hire a trainee. (8192 Y-16A  Pro. Sound Trainee    hourly-$16.58  ) You will not only be doing yourself a favor and the company a favor, but you will also give someone an opportunity and the training needed to help build a stronger sound community in film. Now if you choose the second answer then you have no one but yourself to blame.

I believe this concept could also be applied to the “reality world”. Isn’t it possible in that world to convince production that a second person is necessary when you are carrying seventy pounds around your neck? Just a question. Would love to get others take on it.

Don Coufal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can only speak for long form narrative... I have worked on many shows with both two and three person crews, both as a mixer and as a boom or utility person.  The sacrifice of quality is evident when working with a two person crew.  I have found there to be tremendous compromise, and added stress on both the boom op and mixer when a third is not present.  All of Don's points are valid.  Usually, the first thing to go is the "relationship" the department has with the rest of the crew.  I tend to toss Comteks on the follow cart, and adopt a sort of "do it yourself" attitude.  It's a shame, because I like to be a full-service department. 

Recently, on a vignette for a longer piece, I had a two person crew.  There were certain times I felt I was doing a "good enough" job, but with a second boom, it could have been perfect.

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3.Sound Abatement and Control. This is probably what I consider the biggest argument for the third person on a sound department. That’s because it is an ever present problem that needs to be dealt with on almost every take and certainly on every location. It can be the determining factor in the quality of sound you are able to produce. I won’t go into it now because it would take too long to look at all the issues involved. Suffice it to say we have all encountered them at one time or another and how we were able to deal with them determined the results we were able to achieve or the method in which we were forced to record the sound.

Don Coufal

Thank you Don for this post --- it helps to focus this issue of 2 person or 3 person and so forth. I agree with all of the things you point out here, I particularly like the fact that you mentioned the personal relationship aspect --- not just the 3rd person but the whole issue of the way the sound DEPARTMENT works with the rest of the crew. I also feel very strongly about what we generally call "sound abatement" since this is something that needs to be dealt with almost constantly on today's sets. The multitude of varied responses to the assaults on the soundtrack cannot be carried out effectively by the sound mixer behind the cart or the boom operator on the set.

I also appreciate Scott's reply/comment since it helps all of us understand the realities of "reality" shows with regards to the job, the personnel, the equipment. I am the first to admit that it is a world that I have little to no experience in myself, personally, since the bulk of the work that I do is in feature films.

-  Jeff Wexler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm new to the reality world but I agree it seems that a lot of producers in reality tv are hoping to make gold with nothing..  PA's become AC's, van drivers become grips (but are still paid a PA wage)..  etc..  One of the shows I mixed on recently was trying to get by with 1 sound mixer for every 2 cameras!  In some situations this worked ok (never great) but inevitably they would end up trying to shoot two separate scenes/conversations simultaneously with only one mixer..  When post reported back that the audio wasn't working they looked to me and the other mixer for an answer and solution.  We told them they needed to do one of two things; hire more mixers, or use multitrack recorders and iso all the mics.  Of course they took the cheaper option and rented 2 devas.  The bags went from 35 to almost 50 llbs and the work load was still too much for our 2 man staff... and with the amount of havoc that dual-system audio caused in post (dealing with hvx drift and hour long rolls) it probably would have been cheaper to hire more mixers from the get go...

It just seems like the growing trend is to try to do much more with less than ever and when problems crop up the solution is to throw more equipment in the mix without the staff to utilize it... good grief!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question Don, ( a man who knows much, but posts little:) The answer is of course 3 can do the job better than 2 or 1 in the long form of TV and Films as anyone should know, but this isn't always the case. Seems sad to say because Production Managers and Producers should know by the nature of their jobs that this is true, but I think many need to be educated why this is so. How to teach that value to others is not an easy task I presume. An written expanded explanation of your question and why the 'Third' may be a way to start with each new job. Of course a direct dialog is even better. Never having the 'Third' sitting around the set reading or doing the cross words (thats the mixers job), is also key, but taking the time when the situation presents itself to explain why you were able to do such a good job with the extra manpower would be helpful as well. I think perception is an issue. Most don't understand what we do to begin with and some don't like the fact that many 'Thirds' make a higher scale than 'Keys' in other departments, so when they see us, they don't always see the value of what we are doing. Going the extra mile when interfacing with the other departments helps on any set no matter the size of the sound crew. As Scott pointed out, and Don well knows working with Moe, commercials are a 2 person gig 99% of the time. Along the lines of the pressure to do a film job without a 'Third', we get pressure to do the commercial job without a boom. I won't, but others do all too often, but before I play my final hand, I always try to educate the Producer as to why it is a bad idea with real consequences for the job at hand. I frame the discussion as a quality issue as it is also a time money ratio as well. The smart ones get it. The same discussion will also get me a 'Third' on the wild n weird shoots that come our way in commercials. As for 'Reality' work, Scott n others who do probably know well what would help them most. Good rainy day to you Don. Later.

CrewC

(a man who posts much and knows little)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FROM CREW:

"As Scott pointed out, and Don well knows working with Moe, commercials are a 2 person gig 99% of the time. Along the lines of the pressure to do a film job without a 'Third', we get pressure to do the commercial job without a boom. I won't, but others do all too often,"

The concept of fighting for a third seems strange when there is more and more pressure to work without a BOOM OP!!!!

  More and more spineless mixers are agreeing to this tactic, and I am asked more and more to do it.... Like Crew, I do not.... I have lost 2 jobs so far this year because of this...

A Third?    Not in the commercial world......

A new tactic is the " Documentary style" request....  sometime there is a reason, sometime there is not.... 

TV and Features, a third is the norm, and should be ..... 

As for fighting the trend, forget it.....  WAY too many mixers working out there with absolutely NO balls....  NO ethics, NO caring whatsoever for the future of our business.

Put a fork in it...... were done!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey BobD, you are right, there are too many ball less, shortsighted worms out there who work 1 man and would stab themselves in the back if they thought it would get them a job. Thankfully for the time being I work with folks who trust me and give MD and I the job because we deliver like you n your Boomer. Those same producers have been giving me a 'Third' on HD multi cam shoots. It takes time and dialog, but so far I am winning over some of them. I even did one last year where I got 2 mixers, 2 boomers, and 1 cable man on and this was the prod. company's request. I tried to talk them down a bit because the job didn't require 2 mixers. but they wanted that option, and we had fun, but the 2nd mixer and boomer didn't even roll. Oh well.

In films, I have worked in all three positions and can't imagine ever doing the job as well with just two of us.

CrewC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good man Don!!

A third person ads:

!/ efficiency plus a second boom.

2/ can deal with minor isssues allowing rehearsals and shooting to continue

3/ is available if the main boom is late or ill.

4/ allows training of a new person to the industry

Cheers

Mike

www.mikewestgatesound.co.nz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Don,

I missed your seminar a few years ago-- but not the video. I've watched your video many times and insisted new crew working with me study it.  A couple of those trainees gained a wealth of operating knowledge in leu of actual "set time". It ramped them up ten fold.  Your seminar is the best training "ever" for anyone in our craft.  Thank you…

I have never had anything good come from working a feature with a two man crew (akin to piercing the skin on the back of ones neck and be hung for a month). 

Sad but true...  A one man crew doing a feature.  Is this a natural progression

from reality show producers  changing venues or an overzealous SM ?

Flourish & Prosper

Sincerely

Ron Scelza CAS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Don,

I missed your seminar a few years ago-- but not the video. I've watched your video many times and insisted new crew working with me study it.   A couple of those trainees gained a wealth of operating knowledge in leu of actual "set time". It ramped them up ten fold.  Your seminar is the best training "ever" for anyone in our craft.  Thank you…

I have never had anything good come from working a feature with a two man crew (akin to piercing the skin on the back of ones neck and be hung for a month). 

Sad but true...  A one man crew doing a feature.  Is this a natural progression

from reality show producers  changing venues or an overzealous SM ?

Flourish & Prosper

Sincerely

Ron Scelza CAS

It's always about the money, a 3rd @ $400 a day over a 30 day shoot is $12k that they save.

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eric,

Your right about "it's all about the money. That is why I suggested in my post to look at the Trainee Position available through the local. That would be more like $5000 for a film like you suggested. I'm just suggesting that we all take a look at all the options before agreeing with production that is is not necessary. They will always push to get something for nothing. But like a good friend, script supervisor Marion Tumen, always says "If you don't ask you'll never get it".

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I started out (ironically w/ Don Coufal and Jeff Wexler, over 30 years ago), a third person was far, far less valuable than today.  As one who recently worked as a third, after a a long time away as a mixer (again re-starting with Don Coufal, sorry about that day Don), I was overwhelmed at first.  I actually had to write up a flexible check list for myself.  The biggest shock was how often the necessity arose for the third to handle the putting on and taking off of the wireless for the actors.  That used to be exclusively a boom operator's job, but now there are too many wires on everybody for the boom to watch the set and do all the wiring.  Sometimes I would be the only sound person standing by the cart when the actors would line-up to be wired.  That took awhile just getting hip to the new styles of wiring tips that have grown up most recently into a very specialized art form.  I had to re-learn a whole new set of techniques that changed with the different lavs and wireless units.  Then there is the battery management.  Those two things alone can keep a third real busy.  Also, now the follow cart, is an emerging important part of the package that is used for much more than carrying extra carpets....boy my feet and back really hurt at the end of a day and the only time I got to read the paper was when I peeked over the mixer's shoulder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding wiring lots of actors.  One thing I find very important is that regardless of who wires an actor, they should tell the other members of the sound crew how and where the mic and the pack is placed.  If the boom op wires an actor, but an adjustment needs to be made while they are busy on set, it's helpful not to have to fumble around looking to see how it was done.  This is yet another reason why a 3rd is critical.  With wires being used more and more often, with more characters and more cameras being the norm, there simply has to be someone available to be on set, someone behind the panel, and someone at the follow cart ready to fill in the gap at a moment's notice.

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many flippant replies that come to mind when advocating the necessity for a third man, but in all seriousness, no tongue in cheek whatsoever, I think the sound utility position is quite a varied and essential part of an episodic TV sound crew. Just for starters, invoicing for expendables and keeping track of use and replenishing stock. Time cards, stock labels, and all the administrative needs of a sound crew. Then there's the on-the-job aspect of second boom, which is more often than not on some episodes; carpet placement for background; equipment maintenance and cleaning; truck loading and unloading; finding the sweet spot on location that is close enough for wireless and yet far enough to be low profile, (in my case anyway)

I'm selling the position short here because all the essentials of sound utility have been previously mentioned, but the job is and ever will be one that would surely be missed if that position went away.

MIck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Richard,

I got them straight from the recent rate card as listed under "contract" on the 695 website. I think this will take you to it. http://www.695.com/mbr/rate-07-09-s-d.html You may have to sign in yourself. I know this is available because I used it a few years ago to get MiKe Herron into the business. He was a PA on Fight Club and wanted to get into sound. We talked to Jim Osbourne first and then to the Production Manager. It was agreed that if they listed him as a Sound Trainee on the call sheet for thirty days he could get on the roster and thus in the union. They did, he did and now he is doing very well in the business. My point is that this is available and could be used as a way to avoid having to cave in to some of the demands that are made.  It would mainly apply to those lower budget jobs that think they just can't afford a third. If no one is listed then I assume you would need to clear it with the union and just find one of the many young people who would be dying to work with you. Just my opinion.

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the Y-16A position...I think we are heading down a slippery slope here.  It would make sense that a Y-16A trainee would be useful as a SECOND video assist or 4th sound person (or 3rd on a typically 2-person crew - like commercials or additional units), but to allow a substitution of a Y-7a utility person for a Y-16A trainee as a concession seems to be in violation of the contract.  Please help me clarify this.

It is great that Mike was given a tremendous opportunity on "Fight Club".  I got my days in a roundabout way as a video coordinator in 1995.  We all need our lucky breaks.  But "Fight Club" had Wayne on video assist and a full sound crew.  No jobs were being lost.  The UPM may have listed him as a sound trainee for the sake of contract services, and Jim may have let him in, but the show probably did not contribute to MPIPHP or pay him $16/hr.  "Deadwood" used to record their video tap, although rarely watched, and the camera guys wanted to have nothing to do with the monitors (except for getting their gear on for rental).  The concession there was that they would not have hired a video guy anyway, so instead they hired a Y-16A "trainee".  How long is that person a "trainee"?  I suppose it's better than the shows that record video and DON'T contribute to MPIPHP.

If a producer must hire a three person crew, then they must hire a Y-1 mixer, Y-4 or Y-8 boom, and a Y-7a or Y-8 third.  A trainee is not a substitute.  Am I right?  And if a producer in NOT "required" to hire a third, then why would they agree to pay a Y-16A trainee when a PA will still be within the rules, and will still be half the cost, and no additional contributions?  I would LOVE to give someone a chance to get his or her days, etc., but not at the expense of a qualified and unemployed Y-7a.

I fear I am rambling....sorry.

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the Y-16A position...I think we are heading down a slippery slope here.  It would make sense that a Y-16A trainee would be useful as a SECOND video assist or 4th sound person (or 3rd on a typically 2-person crew - like commercials or additional units), but to allow a substitution of a Y-7a utility person for a Y-16A trainee as a concession seems to be in violation of the contract.  Please help me clarify this.

If a producer must hire a three person crew, then they must hire a Y-1 mixer, Y-4 or Y-8 boom, and a Y-7a or Y-8 third.  A trainee is not a substitute.  Am I right?  And if a producer in NOT "required" to hire a third, then why would they agree to pay a Y-16A trainee when a PA will still be within the rules, and will still be half the cost, and no additional contributions?  I would LOVE to give someone a chance to get his or her days, etc., but not at the expense of a qualified and unemployed Y-7a.

I fear I am rambling....sorry.

Robert

I don't want to speak for Don who quite clearly stated the possible hiring of a Y-16A, but I don't think anyone has suggested that for a Union contract mandated 3-person crew, a Y-16A could be hired instead of a full Utility Sound Technician. This does happen but it shouldn't. I believe the contract clearly states that a Y-16A cannot be hired to replace the proper contract mandated and required 3rd person. Probably Don was referring to those jobs that are 2-person jobs from the start --- either Union jobs that by virtue of one of our 35 separate contracts and side letters of agreement allow for a 2-person crew, or a job which is non-union being staffed by only 2 union members (and agreeing to hire another person, a P.A., for $10/hour).

As for our experience on Fight Club, this was prior to the official Y-16A designation and the accompanying rules and regulation, and I believe Mike was considered the 4th person on the sound crew. Mike actually did help us out on the set and also assisted Wayne in video.

-  Jeff Wexler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff actually stated my position very well. I was suggesting to look at a trainee position for those people who are, for what ever reason, working on long form projects with a two person crew. We all know that a three person crew helps us to do better, more efficient work and it also let's the production know that even on lower budget projects a third person is needed. The trainee position is in the spirit of compromise without compromising our desire to do the best job possible. Instead of a PA you might actually have someone working with you who loves sound, wants to learn, and is committed to the job.

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thought was simply that given the current landscape, I find it hard to believe a producer would pay any more than he or she has to, a PA wage with no additional contribution.  This PA, like Mike was, can be given a chance to contribute to the team and learn.  But if adding a third or fourth person to the crew is necessary and justified enough for the producer to pay a Y-16A, then I believe the job should go to an existing member.  Even before the "non-strike" SAG situation, many existing members are out of work and struggling to maintain benefits.  It'll get worse if the new contract passes.  Lots of these folks are eager, enthusiastic, both new and "old".  It just seems ill advised to invite new members at the expense of existing ones.  I don't know the exact intention of the Y-16A classification being added, but I believe it was added when work was more abundant.

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If i am getting all this right, please let me know...

1. A third is essential in long form jobs.

2. The third has to be a union person instead of a trainee.

3. Do NOT take trainees in the position of third - you will be reducing a job for an eligible person (member of union and in waiting for a job as a third).

4. Trainees can and SHOULD be taken when possible as a fourth member of a sound team. (Members of the group may have made some exceptions to this in their past experiences, for overall good.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to find out what the local thinks.  The contract mandates that if an unusual burden is placed on the department, then staff must be added until the burden is relieved.  Vague language, as usual.  Can those additional staff members be trainees?  I suppose in that circumstance, you might be able to convince a producer he must pay twice that of a PA, and pay an additional 30% or so for contributions, etc.  The only time I have worked on a union two-person crew is when a third was not mandated (2nd unit/commercial).  Most 2nd units on TV these days work with a full crew anyway, but I have requested, and been given a 3rd after talking about what the work entailed.  In my opinion, if the producer understands the requirement for additional staff, then they will pay the full Y-7A.  They probably don't even know about the Y-16A, and if they did, would they have offered me that on those 2nd unit days, taking work away from my usual guys?

Where do we get the trainees from?  What happens to them after they work as a trainee?  There are just so many questions to be answered.

As always... the devil's advocate,

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert,

I believe that several people here have very intelligently spoken on the issue. It is always good to dissect both sides of an argument so it is always good to have "the devil's advocate". I would point out, however, that when the opportunity arises, we would all do well by offering to someone the trainee position. This is not taking work from "one of our brothers or sisters" but rather helping to create a stronger more viable brotherhood or sisterhood. (It is so hard to be politically correct these days). One thing I have learned after all my time in this business is the more you help and give to others, the more you will get in return.

Just my opinion.

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...