Jump to content

Off-Camera Dialog


Marc Wielage

Recommended Posts

still wondering what most guys with a mono-mix do with the off-cam lines. Drop them altogether? Make them aware of potential overlap? Keep the radios in the mix (just drop the on-cam radio)?

Matthias asked this question elsewhere, and I thought it was a complex enough topic that it deserved its own separate answer.

I have dealt with this before in post, literally with neophyte studio execs who go crazy when they can't hear off-camera dialog to "put the scene in context" (quote/unquote). In post situations, I'll tell them, "hey, don't worry -- you're covered on about 19 takes of a close-up of the other person," but they're still a little rattled.

In TV, what I've generally seen is that they'll make an attempt to at least get the off-camera actor on a wire, then get the on-screen actor on a boom. It's a good question as to which piece of dialog gets in the final mix; on a TV schedule, sometimes anything goes. In overlap situations, I try to get at least one or two "alternate" takes where the actors do their lines separately, knowing that the editor may just overlap them during the mix, but has the flexibility to go either way.

I'm curious as to others' preference and expectations for off-camera dialog. Me personally, I'd rather something get down than not, but I can also see where, in a feature situation, the editor and director would be experienced enough to understand that they've already got that dialog on another camera and another take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One digital shoots with what I call "Stutter" takes where the camera resets and the take keeps going I will do 1st pass with Lav of off camera actor turned up in the mix. Then Stutter with 2nd pass Lav turned down. More and more these single takes get stretched out to 3-4 resets it give them options

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it appears the scene will all play on booms, I'll try to get it all on the master and the overs, logistics willing. If I have already got the one side, I'll typically go to one boom for on-camera when we turn around. No point in recording something we already have. If there is overlapping dialog, which I can't talk the director out of, then I stick with two booms. If the off camera is totally inaudible, I might put a 2nd mic overhead for the sake of the village, if there's space to put the 2nd boom operator. I don't usually wire actors, or mix in wires, just for the hell of it. If the editor has what they need for the final and/or temp, and the post guys have what they need, then I feel I have done my job.

I'd rather concentrate on making then end result good, than placating the village. But I do tend to put on a good show the first week. I don't want to be fired, after all. And I want to be sure they hear the words, at the very least.

If it's comedy, and ad libs off camera might make the show, then I go for it all.

I guess every show is different. But for me, I want to get what I consider important 100% of the time. I'm willing to lose a little off camera to achieve that, if I can't do both.

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two booms is definitely the higher-quality way to go. In an indie/low-budget situation, that's gonna be tough.

The debate between wireless and booms has been going on for a long time. It's sobering to watch current TV shows and note the amount of wireless going on. I know Jeff and others have lamented how there's a new generation of directors that either 1) don't know or 2) don't care about the "in your face" sound of lavs, and they kind of accept it under a lot of situations, some of which are technically wrong.

The one redeeming thing is that at least dialog editors and mixers have the tools to get lavs closer to the sound of booms than ever before. It's not the same, but it does take the sting out of it, to some degree. And if I have to choose, I'll go for a boom every time, provided the set's reasonably quiet and we can get in there without any lighting or multiple camera issues.

I was very happy last week on a video game commercial job where we were able to do about half of it solely on a boom, because the director was patient, the DP was cooperative, and I had a very adept boom op (my pal Brandon Griffith, also a fine sound editor in his own right). We had some real screamers on this one, and the boom came through far better than the lavs, particularly in terms of overload and dynamic range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good topic. I've always been a fan of recording offlines when possible but there are a few things to think about when doing so. Actors will give there best performance on their hero shot and when doing offlines may well pull back on the performance, some do, some don't, if I need a particular line that was NG on their CU I'll let them know and try and get in on an offline, generally that way is better than going for a wild after the scene is finished and it also saves having to ask for wilds which is also a good thing time wise. Overlap wise I def go for a 2 boom situ or a boom and wire if only one boom op, before I go for a wire though I'll try and get someone else on the crew to do a 2nd boom as it matches way better. Mic'ing offlines is the one area that I like (most) digital cameras as they tend to be pretty quiet when rolling so mic'ing offlines when the camera is right beside the off actor is possible. On TV jobs I probably mic offlines much more, a lot of the time stuff is cross shot anyway so there are much less "off" lines, plus post turn around time is much tighter so it can speed things up if good offlines are there as the picture edit may well keep the actor off screen so it helps if post doesn't have to go searching for the relevent dialogue to drop in. Film wise less so for the reverse reasons but these days most players are wired so if I have the option I'll mix them in if it sounds good. All that said if for whatever reason I can't get offlines I don't sweat it, they are called offlines for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

on my last feature shoot I had to lav all actors with lines all the time. It seemed weird to provide a mix for the master wide shot that included all actors on mic and then to drop the off cam lines (from the lavs) when covering the CU, 2shots etc. and have all the off sounding lines in the mix.

Thats where I felt a 2track mix comes as the better option because I had the clean boom for the on cam actors and all the others (laved anyway) on the other track.

With a mono-mix I would not want to compromise my clean and for the CU important boom track with some lavs from the other end of the room. It doesn´t have to be an overlap that sounds weird but an actor that touches his lav or costume while the on-cam got´s a line that would ruin the clean boom in the mono mix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a good point too, Matthias. You don't want to ruin a mono mix by mixing in off-camera lavs, when suddenly the off-camera actor decides to touch the lav for some reason, since they're not on camera and the action doesn't need to match. And as mentioned, their performance might not match either. And if your mix has that character on the boom from before, the lav track wouldn't do the dialog editor much good. Although Marc points out it's a bit easier to match these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I tend to do in the coverage when off-camera actors are wired: for the first take, I'll mix 'em in (if not for the whole scene, then first couple lines) just to let post know they remain wired. Then I let it go.

In any event, once wired, wired for the whole scene and all its coverage and iso's maintained. Why not? If the off camera player's battery dies, sometimes I don't replace it until and unless they're back on camera.

Will use "off camera" dialog in every mix when we see a significant portion of the side of the "off camera" or out-of-focus foreground face or there's deliberate overlapping.

Good idea to give this its own thread, Marc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I have to tell u out of my experience.

I had a film with the red cam. With a tight location from the off cam to the talent in the picture, the fan was very noisy (even to the talent boom), so I made a professional decision not to put a mic on the off cam.

Well I dont know what politics were involved in that set, but I was fired with the excuse of not recording the off cam.

So what I have learned from this is... No matter what. Give them the hole show, open mics and channels. They won't understand, and if you have the time.... Just put the Fu**** mic.

They won't use it but it can save ure ass from a stupid excuse to fire you.

Hope you will never get the ugly experience of being fired with a stupid excuse like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alfred I applaud your candor and honesty with this valuable story! And I think you had good reasons to do it the way you did. I think they were both wrong and complete idiots to let you go, since obviously you know what sounds good and usable. (It also seems like your camera crew didn't want to put the Red in "silent" mode, or it was some old Red that was always loud?)

This is a fantastic topic Mr. Wielage! I go for everything I can possibly go for, to record as many relevant sounds that I can get. Door slams, footfalls, backgrounds, and especially off-screen dialog. Usually with a 2nd boom. I decided awhile a go that I was going to mix for the entire scene, as if each take could completely play out sound-wise. So if that were the only take the audience would see of the scene, it would sound as close to "posted" as possible. Lately I've been doing a lot of highly improvy stuff and lemme tell you all, this practice has paid off big time. I also always strive for perfection in the body mics, and then strive to not have to use them ha ha... I will be very open here about the fact that it was RVD's sagacious counsel that guided me through a lot of overlappy off-screen type dialog capturing. Someone should bump that old "Overlapping Dialog" thread.

Obviously if there's no overlapping off-screen dialog for me becomes strictly a dailies thing, and having watch dailies it's awesome if you can hear the whole scene well in each take.

If there's a terrible noise on the off-screen lines as in Mr. Tesler's situation, I tended to leave those lines out of the mix, and continue to track the 2nd boom (or body mic). I do know that sometimes sounds like camera fans and HMIs can be dialed out thesedays so I do still go for even the noisy off-screen dialog.

Dan Izen

Well I have to tell u out of my experience.

I had a film with the red cam. With a tight location from the off cam to the talent in the picture, the fan was very noisy (even to the talent boom), so I made a professional decision not to put a mic on the off cam.

Well I dont know what politics were involved in that set, but I was fired with the excuse of not recording the off cam.

So what I have learned from this is... No matter what. Give them the hole show, open mics and channels. They won't understand, and if you have the time.... Just put the Fu**** mic.

They won't use it but it can save ure ass from a stupid excuse to fire you.

Hope you will never get the ugly experience of being fired with a stupid excuse like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great thread...

Alfred, I'm sorry to hear about your recent experience -- sounds like they are either incredibly dense, or were looking for a reason to replace you -- it doesn't take much -- any old reason will do... for me, on a gig I did a couple years ago, it was all about a cup of coffee... if the right person wants you gone, there's nothing you can do about it.

As to off-cam. dialog, it can be a bit of a crap-shoot as far as how useable any of it will be, but I don't think there's any harm in having it (within certain parameters - pretty much already discussed here)... it is frustrating though when you're trying to get the off-cam. stuff, and the actor is standing 8" away from (for instance) a RedCam (many other brands are just as frustrating, but I have a special hatred for RedCams)

I can't recall ever getting any notes from post or above the line about not including off-cam. dialog, although as previously mentioned, if it sounds bad for whatever reason, I tend to just leave it in the ISO's and maybe put a note on the sound report that the off-cam. stuff is there if they want to use it for dailies, etc. Otherwise, I might feather it in at a lower level, and/or ride the fader a bit (depending on the technical demands of the higher priority on-camera sound.)

Ultimately, as we tend to implement lavs more and more these days, I figure it's best to give them any and everything I possibly can -- you never know when they might need to grab something in order to make it all fly. Better to have it and not need it, than...

Anyhow, nice thread -- it's reassuring to know many of us are in the same boat when it comes to stuff like this.

~tt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im doing a post thing now where over and over again I am crippled with overlapping off camera dialog. Nightmare!

Is there any isolation provided by independent (lav) mics? That's a whole separate can of worms that we continually have to address -- especially with either less-experienced actors (and/or directors)... or when there's a high level of improvising going on.

I think for the PSM, the MO has to be CYA... make sure someone high up in the chain signs off on it... for the Post people... ?... wear a hat so it's harder to pull out your hair?

~tt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously if there's no overlapping off-screen dialog for me becomes strictly a dailies thing, and having watch dailies it's awesome if you can hear the whole scene well in each take.

Dan Izen

that´s another point: I really enjoyed keeping all actors on mic and listening to a complete mix in every setup we shot. Once you got the dialogue in your fingers it´s really fun doing it, don´t you think?

Also since I stepped up from 744 to 12trk Fusion I can now start mixing they way I want knowing I´m covered by the isos if all goes bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sort of like the idea of including off-cam lines when possible, but it's important to manage expectations since the off-cam actor might be close to a noisy camera, HMI ballast, open door, in the direction of the generator, etc etc. re allowing them to overlap a lot. They also might not be standing in a part of the set the sound of which will cut well with the rest of the scene. These days most actors are from some kind of ensemble training (if they have training) so they seem more comfortable having the other actors work with them (as opposed to scripty etc), so this kind of thing has become the rule rather than the exception it used to be. (Among currently working actors, not staying to read your off-cam lines while the other actors do their closeups or etc is considered kind of an insult--like sending a message...)

phil p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great topic Marc! The last few projects I have mixed were comedies where the actors were always giving different lines on and off camera. I have always thought it was important to get everything on and off camera. Also it gives you a another pass at the dialogue if there was a clank, crash, plane, truck, that was on a line that was on camera. Most of the sound editors that I have worked with like to have both for these reasons. Yes I keep most actors wired most of the time. It gives post all of the options if they are needed, and myself with my mix it gives me options and as Mark said on the wide and tights I'm covered. My mix most of the time has the off camera if it works for the mix.

Cheers,

Whit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whit brings up the other caveat: when the actors start getting bored, some start improvising, and if those improv'd lines are off camera, that could be an issue.

I'm on Alfred's side: production should "get" that the off-camera dialog is already covered on other takes, and the best performance is going to be in the close-ups. It's maddening that people overreact when there's five people in a scene and two of them are off-camera, and when they have lines, the producers (or even director) complain, "we missed that line!" Believe me, I've tried to explain this in post to people before, and they either look blank or they say, "I don't understand -- don't we have enough tracks to get those other actors as well?"

facepalm.gif

Otherwise, I might feather it in at a lower level, and/or ride the fader a bit (depending on the technical demands of the higher priority on-camera sound.)

I have to confess, when I include the other off-camera actors' dialog, I usually drop it into the mono mix at a lower level, just by instinct. My hope is that they're never gonna use it, but not all projects have the benefit of good dialog editors and a decent mix. For stuff like this (low-budget), all you can do is "cover your ass" and hope for the best.

On occasions where I couldn't get off-camera dialog, I usually emphasized this in the sound log notes and also conferred with scripty, just to note "Character X dialog carried in master and close-up only, not for reverse." I've never had a complaint about that -- so far. But lately, if I have the extra tracks and wireless available, I'll mix it in provided it sounds OK and feels appropriate for the scene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whit brings up the other caveat: when the actors start getting bored, some start improvising, and if those improv'd lines are off camera, that could be an issue.

Hey Marc,

I just wanted to say that the actors are not getting bored but they are developing the scene. Comedy changes and has many different ways of addressing the script. What is done in the master changes and develops in the coverage. I have seen these actors work and make a scene even better than scripted and add to the scene. That is why I think it is important to capture the off camera words. I always like to think that we are the "defenders of dialogue" on the set. That is a term I started on the Kevin Smith pictures that I have done over the years. He is one of the most sound friendly directors I have ever worked with. If sound has a problem everyone does. That is not very true with most of the other productions that I work with these days.

Cheers,

Whit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A thought that I have to say about on and off camera dialogue is that we are entrusted as the production sound mixers to capture these words to help the director tell a story with the performances by the actors. I would never want to miss recording a performance that was outstanding on or off camera. Maybe I am being a little old school and romantic with our craft but I think that is our job. This may not work for every area of our craft with all of the different jobs and styles, TV, docs, reality, commercials, industrials and others. My couple of thoughts since this thread was started.

Best,

Whit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never mix the way you do, just ISO since I'm mostly by myself. And also that seems to be common practice among other mixers in Sweden... Don't me why. We just Iso

I always take everything I get even on the boom. If I have the time to go between actors in the shot and those off cam, I do it. I think about it the way you do when you're cleaning; clean the rug and also under it, you might not see the dust but that doesn't mean it isn't there!

Perhaps an actor says something in a different tone (and the response from the other actor probably changes cus of it) that the director really liked instead of the lines he/she already got in the first place. Now that it was off but still recorded properly, he/she can use it :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just wanted to say that the actors are not getting bored but they are developing the scene. Comedy changes and has many different ways of addressing the script.

Very good point. I worked a little bit in post on the Adam Sandler movie Grown Ups and there were a ton of adlibs in that (plus hundreds of 20-minute takes). No question, some of the ad-libs were the funniest parts of the movie, and wound up being in the final mix. That was often covered with 3 cameras, so I don't doubt the sound crew had to be very flexible and just roll with the punches on that.

I once did a session with famed sitcom director Jimmy Burrows, and I remember at one point when a scene wasn't working, he kind of sighed and said, "there's no such thing as comedy by the numbers." So much of the timing and nuances comes from the actors, and they definitely have to come up with new stuff on the spur of the moments -- some from the writers, some from the actors, some from the director. In this particular case, they went back and reshot it (this was for a pilot), and the new scene was spectacular. (That's why Burrows gets the big bucks.)

Sitcoms kind of have their own rules for dialog coverage, and so many of those are multi-camera, there is no off-camera dialog -- it's all on-camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I wear the producer or director hat, I side with Whit... and have been very happy to have had the tracks he provided on some films we did together long ago.

But last year, I boomed on some overlap days for a medium budget drama, and the lead actress asked that she not be boomed while reading off camera, because she intended to save her performance level passes for while she was on camera. I was surprised, and did as she asked. I wondered (to the production mixer) if this was due to our being the overlap unit, and was told that this was actually standard on both units of the series.

So.. to quote the Senator....

"IT DEPENDS"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is really interesting- I was taught not to cover off-camera lines if it's covered on another shot in drama shoots (however if they've got mic on them I'll roll ISOs, not going to the main mix). I was working on a very loosely scripted drama yesterday, and lines were changing between takes quite frequently, so used a plant mic for the off-camera dialogue.

For doco stuff with an off-camera interviewer, I'll try and get a radio on them- but they often seem to insist their voice won't be on the final mix... (and how often is it?)

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...