macruth Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 just thought this was a nice educational blog post: http://randycoppinger.com/2012/04/05/how-a-shotgun-mic-works/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Wexler Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Excellent! I would venture to say that there are a surprising number of people using directional microphones that have never bothered to find out how they achieve directionality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted July 26, 2012 Report Share Posted July 26, 2012 Incredibly, I just had an email from a producer today (not a student -- an actual reality-show producer on a commercial network) who asked if I had a shotgun mike that would surreptitiously pickup a clandestine participant from about half a block away. I call this the "Blow Out Syndrome," where young producers believe the fiction of how sound works in TV shows and movies, as opposed to real life. One thing they don't consider is, background noise can become a greater issue than distance, under some circumstances. Almost 40 years ago, I ran a parabolic microphone for a few ABC network football games in Florida, and even those are not the "beam of light" some people assume they are. You try to explain to non-technical people that all a shotgun does is reject more stuff from the sides, and their eyes glaze over... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylormadeaudio Posted July 26, 2012 Report Share Posted July 26, 2012 Exactly, not to mention trying to explain to them that we have 2 ears, eyes, and a brain (some more than others?) that help us eliminate or "tune out" noises we don't want to "process"... a microphone can not do this -- I usually just resort to telling them that I will record with utmost clarity whatever sounds are present at the moment. My Boom Op gave a great analogy yesterday regarding unwanted sounds: Take some water, add some blue dye (wanted sound)... then add some red dye (unwanted sound)... stir it all up and then try to remove the red dye. If they can't understand this, then God help us all. ~tt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted July 26, 2012 Report Share Posted July 26, 2012 " producers believe the fiction of how sound works " unrealistic expectations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Flaitz Posted July 27, 2012 Report Share Posted July 27, 2012 Take some water, add some blue dye (wanted sound)... then add some red dye (unwanted sound)... stir it all up and then try to remove the red dye. If they can't understand this, then God help us all. ~tt I got a call from a producer the other day telling me there was a lot of interference on some of my audio tracks. "What kind of interference?" I ask, expecting them to say some kind of RF on the scratch track or something. She responds, "there is too much traffic noise on the dialogue"... No shit, you decided to shoot two scenes of a girl talking on her phone, one of them directly under the BQE, and the other on 37th and 7th ave. Good times... P.S. I told the Director and the AD on both locations the dialogue would be unusable, they decided not to change locations and somehow it's still my fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 I told the Director and the AD on both locations the dialogue would be unusable, they decided not to change locations and somehow it's still my fault. Comteks (or the equivalent) will be your friend on this stuff. If the director can actually hear it as it goes down, they know exactly what's there, and even non-technical people will understand: loud background sounds do not magically go away, especially on city streets. Realistically, I think all they can do is 1) ADR the whole scene, 2) get wild lines in a quiet spot and work with that as best you can, or 3) use very directional microphones and/or noise reduction to lower the noise floor a little bit. I should make another one of my little cartoons where I explain to the producer, "the name of the job is location sound mixer, not dialog sound mixer. We record the location and the actors in it. The noisier the location, the worse it's going to sound." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Flaitz Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 I'm just using G3s for IFB to the director and scratch audio to cam. Not to thread jack, but one of the producers on set told me to cover my ass by stating takes the were bad for audio while I'm still recording so they can hear it in the dailies... Is this standard practice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrd456 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 I'm just using G3s for IFB to the director and scratch audio to cam. Not to thread jack, but one of the producers on set told me to cover my ass by stating takes the were bad for audio while I'm still recording so they can hear it in the dailies... Is this standard practice? usually best to note it on sound report,but in extreme situations I will verbalize it on recording [of course off dial.] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylormadeaudio Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 I'm just using G3s for IFB to the director and scratch audio to cam. Not to thread jack, but one of the producers on set told me to cover my ass by stating takes the were bad for audio while I'm still recording so they can hear it in the dailies... Is this standard practice? I do this frequently -- yeah, it's a sort of CYA move, and should really be used sparingly, but sometimes the situation warrants it -- the above example is perfect. Because many (most) above the line folks don't understand what we do, there's a tendency to regard our craft as a "mix" : ) of technical wizardry and voodoo. When we try to explain the limitations and/or physics of a situation, the obligatory glazed-over look that ensues says it all. Unfortunately, the trust we earn is often after the fact, but the good news is perhaps they will learn to listen to their next PSM a little more intently. ~tt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Anderson Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 I'm just using G3s for IFB to the director and scratch audio to cam. Not to thread jack, but one of the producers on set told me to cover my ass by stating takes the were bad for audio while I'm still recording so they can hear it in the dailies... Is this standard practice? I'll sometimes use the slate mic on the recording to correct a visual mis-slate by an assistant camera, but not to give commentary on the quality of the sound. I do use the public line to the Comteks a lot. It doesn't go to the recording, but I'll let Directors know if a take is going sour for sound. Up to them if they want to continue with it or save a performance. The open communication on set is a good thing to do, but I'd feel uncomfortable putting my voice on the actual recording with judgement calls. Josh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylormadeaudio Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 ...The open communication on set is a good thing to do, but I'd feel uncomfortable putting my voice on the actual recording with judgement calls. Josh This is a good point... and one can quickly lose grace with a Director if the practice is overused. I too have been amazed at how something I thought would be ADR'd for sure wound up making the final mix. ~tt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Director must have seen 'The Conversation' with Gene Hackman The picture is of a microphone - not a rifle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Flaitz Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 Looks cold in there Jim. I also felt it wouldn't help me much to verbally record issues in the audio track for several reasons, but I did it on a few tracks anyway. It's difficult to try and explain certain aspects of audio to someone who knows very little about it, but I figured the best approach in this situation was to say "Sure, you're right" and keep doing what I do. Someone who maps a location on the street near 5 different bars clearly has very little consideration for how their sound will turn out... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordi Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 I generally tell the director and AD that they will KNOW that a take is bad for sound, at the same time I do - Because of the jet plane / truck / helicopter passing right through the set. Just about everything else I can work around. At the same time, I know how much a good post person can remove. This is about communication and managing expectations on location. If they were expecting studio quality sound, why not make it plain that getting that would be impossible while filming under a freeway at the airport on the ocean? (I've been there!) If a take goes south in the middle (There's that damn helicopter again), I usually let the AD know beforehand that if he has a question about whether the take is bad for sound to just look in my direction. If I'm not giving a thumbs-down or shaking my head, keep going. If I am non-verbally indicating it is borked... It is up to HIM to call cut or poke the director. I'm not interrupting the process unless the set is (loudly) on fire. Putting it verbally into the recordings just seems like a cheap shot. Explaining that you will perfectly record exactly what is available on set (and that analogy of the ink in the water is GREAT!) is more politically astute, and might at least get you hired again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted July 31, 2012 Report Share Posted July 31, 2012 " G&E had band-it, " banded, as in: the individual wires are banded together. " Putting it verbally into the recordings " during the scene?? never, and if not during the scene, it won't be heard.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikewest Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 Love the topic! Was using a parabolic in 1964 with cheap omni, quite interesting!! Meanwhile in 1966 I had the pleasure aiming an Electro 632 (7 feet long) at the ball for a whole football match, rigged in the stadium roof - LIVE TV Those were the days mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPSharman Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 In a bad location, I'll have my boom op point the mic in the worst possible direction during the slate and the time leading up to action, that way they can hear how bad the actual noise prior to proper boom direction and lav use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylormadeaudio Posted August 5, 2012 Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 In a bad location, I'll have my boom op point the mic in the worst possible direction during the slate and the time leading up to action, that way they can hear how bad the actual noise prior to proper boom direction and lav use. Ditto -- I've actually resorted to recording small video clips on my phone of noisy locations as well - narrated to describe the offending noises. I love it when they say something like, "well, don't you have radio mics?". I used to try and explain the difference between an omni radio mic and a more directional shotgun mic, but can usually tell right about 5 to 10 seconds in - as their look glazes over - that I've already lost them. ~tt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikewest Posted August 5, 2012 Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 Had this problem recently. Large glass windowed room overlooking the sea. Tight shot on a woman with a good and loud voice. Decided on using a boom mike. Producer later complains of distortion or something!! Editor confirms background is problem. I de-noised one take lightlyand notched it at about 200Hz - perfect. Sent to producer advising that locations were usually chosen for several reasons but not for sound!!!!!!! Results sound great on air!! mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.