Jump to content

Numbers and Locations


Tim M

Recommended Posts

So in doing research I'm trying to pin point certain things and find the source. For example as a location sound mixer, it seems that most of the time we are brought in after the locations have already been locked in. Its seems most veterans say talk with decision makers blah blah blah and they will sometimes move etc...but when it comes to numbers...

how much time and money is usually spent for a producer(s) (before production begins or shortly thereafter) to get rid of an old location and move to a different location and getting director/DP approval or whatever all over again versus staying in a location with bad sound and getting ADR.

This is a creative question, but when it comes down to just pure money, which is what we all talk about on location anyway saying, "this location is going to cost you way more in ADR etc etc." Has anyone responded saying, "Well it will ultimately cost more in production time finding a different location that having to get ADR.:

Must we always be bitter in cases where our services are most likely not going to be used in the final product or on set, or with you veterans are you at the point where you see this and you accept it with glee that your work will only be a scratch track.

Have you ever blantantly told whoever that this location will turn out poorly no matter what you try to do and they replace you?

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sad fact is that once we get there to shoot, alea jacta est!

depending on the projects most smart, experienced producers -production managers on major movies include the sound department on their scouts, but even then, the decisions are often pretty well set, and may be resistant to changes. Also on some big budget projects, a scene may end up being re-shoot, but that, too, is rare.

Episodic TV (beyond the pilot) rarely, very rarely includes anyone from the sound crew on the tech scouts, but the good location managers generally are sound knowledgeable and somewhat sound friendly. Also the 1AD's generally give a good heads up to issues on their episodes.

For most commercials, and low budget stuff: not a prayer!

Edited by studiomprd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been invited to approximately zero commercial location scouts. I've become very Zen about the results as of late.

The main attitude is "Fuck sound" if they think of us at all in commercials. High end films sound gets consideration. Not sure about TV. Mostly they don't change locations but they may make a bad one better.

CrewC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bad news is this...

I have had two cases (episodic TV) where the BG noise was so loud that everyone assumed they would ADR the scene.

The first case was a quiet scene between 2 women in the middle of a parking lot in downtown Los Angeles at rush hour. 5 pages of exposition and less than three hours to shoot. We had three cameras, one on a crane shooting wide overhead, the others on long lenses getting coverage. Too loud to boom anyway. Snow machine just out of frame blowing snow in and hissing away. The actors occasionally missed cues because although they were only two feet apart, they weren't always looking at each other and had trouble hearing each other over the noise. Two lavs. Scratch track. Or so I thought. They used it all, and with the new BG noise layed in, watching on TV, it wasn't that bad.

The other case was just recently. No more than 40ft off camera were trucks and cranes and a construction crews installing solar carports in a huge parking lot. The scene took place in a school. No justification for the noise, like above which took place in the heart of NYC. EVERYONE assumed the scene would be ADR, and I sure hoped it would. But they used it. The BG was noise was there, but the girls were talking loudly (somewhat heated scene), and it was only a page. I doubt anyone watching really noticed the weird construction noise in the BG.

So the short of it is that it has become less and less of a problem to "fix it in post" for many types of scenes, and if an ADR session is required it often costs far less than "fixing it on set". And they know this.

There are times to fight for it, and times to take a deep breath and do your best.

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've run in to all kinds of scenarios. I mixed a feature film a few years back where 30 pages of dialogue were to be shot in the backyard of a house directly under a flight path. I'm talking about planes in final approach, 30 seconds from landing. The location was originally locked, until the tech scout. We arrived..I laughed and said "are you kidding me?" They thought they could squeeze in the dialogue between planes landing. I had them all stop...listen...and tell me when they didn't hear a plane. There wasn't a moment without planes. The director was smart enough at that point to move locations and we got all the needed dialogue plane-free at a different location.

I do a lot of reality TV work and I'm surprised at how aware of sound some of these producers are (although many are not). There is no ADR option so it has to be right the first time. We wait for planes, loud trucks, odd noises, etc. Sometimes a location is plain old bad and I make them aware of that. The most I can do is make it known there is a small, medium, or large issue that will adversely affect the sound. A lot of factors play in to if we change locations or fix the issue.

Cost is always a concern. There is no way to say for certain what the ADR will cost or what exactly it will cost production to move locations (there is but that's for someone back in the office to sort out). New permits, additional scout location, changes in lighting, etc.

It's the producers job to deal with the numbers. You can make them aware of sound related issues but its up to them to sort out the most cost-effective means to the end. And at times, the look of a location simply trumps the sound.

Sound is a major factor in the process but it is only part of the process. Overall time, budget, actors' ability to nail ADR, the pull of other departments, etc all play in to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys, I know there is no cookie cutter situation. In low budg land, which is where I still am when it comes to features...I've had a situation awhile ago about the location where the executive producer, producers, AD, director, and I met to talk about the sound. Basically it was a tennis movie and there was a highway next to the courts, an active baseball field to the right of the courts, and a kiddie pool behind the courts. Basically they all stared at me and asked if I was doing my job correctly since the dailies weren't sounding that great.

Secondly the actors keep sweating through my mics, I had a bunch of Trams at that time and my day rate probably didn't even cover that. It was a mess overall and I actually lost quite a bit money from that in terms of equipment costs overall.

I just am never sure of how to deal with a situation like this. I should have put them on their asses, because nobody in that area would have worked for that amount of money. I was really great friends with one of the producers who offered me the job and was doing him a favor of sorts...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike Michaels:

The sad fact is that once we get there to shoot, illia jacta est!

"Alea iacta est"

(Ille means "that," Alea is "die" or, plural (aleae) "dice")

(Supposedly, it's what Caesar said on crossing the Rubicon)

RPSharman:

Two lavs. Scratch track. Or so I thought. They used it all, and with the new BG noise layed in, watching on TV, it wasn't that bad.

I had a similar experience. Three people dining alfresco on a rooftop garden downtown. One knew it was an urban setting but the images didn't show anything of the sort. We all assumed that it would be ADR but, in the time between shooting and scheduling post sound, one of the lead actors died. He was a young fellow in good health but died as a result of a bad accident. The editors had to make due with my original tracks and the scene played out OK. I mention this as a reason to make a good effort to get the best sound you can even if everything seems to be stacked against you. (But don't make a pest of yourself on a scene expected to be looped.)

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing that few outside of the craft understand is that there is no magic when we record sound. A freeway next to a set will be there on the track whether we use a radio or a shotgun in some form. Personally I always ask to hear the original recording in question when there is a problem. That is a lot easier w our new recorders these days. Feel your pain.

CrewC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" situation awhile ago about the location where the executive producer, producers, AD, director, and I met to talk about the sound. "

these folks fall under the "don't know what they are doing" exceptions...

and always " make a good effort to get the best sound you can even if everything seems to be stacked against you. (But don't make a pest of yourself on a scene expected to be looped.) "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What most impress me, in situations that you are shooting tight shots in a noisy environment and one can't understand why this kind of misé en scene couldn't be done anywhere else, besides the loud and non controllable location is choosen.

Another thing is when those situations developed that always someone in the crew comes to me and say: "I am so sorry for you... you can't get any decent tracks in this location...your sound will be so bad..." and I always reply: "this is not MY SOUND, this is the film's sound, the film you are also doing !"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha exactly Marcio. I still can't believe they paid me peanuts, but the producer sent me "in confidence" haha the budget for the post and the same executive who was concerned with the sound on set blindly approved the post budget on the later side of near 50k just for audio. Divide that number by zero and you will be closer to what I got...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever blantantly told whoever that this location will turn out poorly no matter what you try to do and they replace you?

When I'm lucky enough to be on a location scout and encounter a noisy location, I'll try to be tactful and will say:

"This location will be problematic for dialog. You have a freeway over there, the windows are not treated, there's traffic from the right, and the building's air conditioner is causing a constant low-frequency vibration." And usually at about that point, a train horn blares or a jet passes overhead. "Plus trains and planes and automobiles. Given all that, I'll give you the best possible dialog I can under these circumstances, but it'll be problematic. You would probably be better off finding a quieter location where we can manage these problems easier."

Usually, I'm told, "we're stuck with this place and have to live with it." And I say, "OK, I'll do my best, but at least you grasp the challenge we have."

Sometimes they get it, sometimes not. The good news is, post mixers have better tools than ever to minimize some of these flaws, and they can salvage some pretty bad stuff. I just had to listen to a major network show (which I won't name), and since it was late at night, I listened to it in headphones. I could definitely hear gating and filtering going on in certain exteriors, but you know, all things considered, it was fine for TV. You could hear the dialog, it definitely wasn't ADR, I noticed the background noise problems, but it didn't bother me.

I'm not saying that "mediocrity has become acceptable," but I think the nature of TV and projects of a certain budget is: we make do as best we can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Marc, so do you think the idea that post studios have more options is what is causing dayrates to decline despite inflation? It is interesting how many live theatre sound designers from the 80s don't understand and are frustrated with how drastically their contracts have dropped from that period because need isn't there. It seems to be a more complicated issue with live film sound mixers, because the need is definitely there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Robert... I have been surprised once or twice with the quality of production sound on scenes I thought would need ADR or sound terrible. I still will make a strong case for the best possible situation for sound... but, ultimately, it up to production. It will either cost them, or their movie will never make it out... and that is their decision, not mine. I do the best I can.

I have never been fired for saying, this is absolutely unusable... because, I think most producers understand when that is the case, even if they are unwilling to change things. But, I believe deep down, they know hiring a new sound person isn't gonna fix the problem.

There is a warehouse I have worked in twice, in LA, that is right next to a recycling plant. One of those shoots was a music video... so, fair enough. The other was a feature film, and we were there for three out of four weeks. Production ended up switching the shooting schedule to overnights, instead of day shoots, per my request. It was the hardest request I ever had to make (zombie schedule!)... but, there was no way we could have shot there from 9-5. And... the movie has been quite successful... and, the producer told me when all was said and done, they needed no ADR! :) So, I am always vocal about what should be done... but, I won't escalate it into an argument. If I have made a strong case and they don't want to hear it... I stop talking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Marc, so do you think the idea that post studios have more options is what is causing dayrates to decline despite inflation? It is interesting how many live theatre sound designers from the 80s don't understand and are frustrated with how drastically their contracts have dropped from that period because need isn't there. It seems to be a more complicated issue with live film sound mixers, because the need is definitely there...

I don't think post is the reason. I think there's a lot of neophyte producers and directors out there who have no clue what rates really are. To me, stupidity is driving low-budget rates down more than anything else.

I gots no idea about the live theater business, since I try to work mainly in features and documentaries. I suspect a large part of the reason is due to the economy. Maybe the bigger problem is that too many people get into producing and don't have a realistic grasp of what budgets need to be. (I'm thinking of people in the "Ed Burns $9000 Feature" school.)

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...