Jump to content

A choice of distributing workload - how would you do?


Jesper Magnusson

Recommended Posts

I'm about to do a small fictional project as location mixer, and a possibility of choice came up that I in my limited experience am a bit unsure how to tackle. This concerns the number of people on the sound team and the distribution of work and responsibility. I don't think it's a choice I will have to make in the end, but I thought it could make for an interesting topic as to what others would view as a better choice and why. I know that in the end this is very subjective and depends on your particular skill set and work habits, but I'd still like to hear some thoughts.

First, a little background: The film will use very long uninterrupted takes, with several actors that will have much freedom to improvise their dialogue and interactions. Based on this I went with two booms all the time, and the most important actors laved (limited channels and equipment as well as time for experimenting with lav technique). My mind was all set for booming myself while monitoring all tracks (no real mixing required), and having a second person boom as well, relying on the booms and having the lavs for one or two wides and as backups.

Now, because of certain changes in the schedules, there is a small chance that I might get access to not one but two people on the sound team besides myself. The first one I know, who as a bom op is not too bad but might have some problems with this kind of shooting, and the other I don't know and has limited experience.

Three alternatives presents themselves.

1. To go with the original plan of two people, where I both boom and monitor all channels and can make most of the decisions. If there is a third I suspect he/she would become a bit redundant on a film of this size.

2. Have the other two boom while i focus on monitoring and taking decisions based on it.

3. Have the first person handle monitoring and recording (which she has some experience doing) while I and the third boom. The equipment does not allow for the boom ops to hear any more than their own mic.

Most of my experience is from booming, and I think I might do the job a bit better than the first bom op, and probably also the unknown. The first choice would then reasonably result in more solid booming (as I can cover the harder parts of each take), and I can still monitor everything to make decisions about the takes etc. The downside is the double load of actively booming (and the booming could get very active) and effectively monitoring all other channels at the same time, and so the two tasks may impede on eachother.

The second choice is more balanced, but it partly depends on the unknown bom op to be able to do a decent job.

The third lets me focus on booming to make shure that comes out good, but puts more responsibility on the first sound assistant to make decisions about the take as a whole, maybe more than it should as I'm the one ultimately responsible for the result.

So, be free to speculate or ignore!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stuff like this is almost impossible to mix, especially if it's being improvised. If even the blocking is unpredictable, you may have to go with wireless boom, just to keep the cables out of the way. I would also vote for multitrack and multiple lavs just for the unexpected situations you can't take care of any other way.

Steve Deichen and I had something like this a few weeks back, and our issue was that because it was a "found footage" project, they were often so wide, there was no place to put the boom. The conceit of movies like this is that the camera angles are all over the place, frequently very wide, but the dialogue has to always be intelligible -- which could not actually happen if it was a roving camera (or a concealed camera, as it was in our case).

You could give them a reasonable temporary mix using an Automix function, and lean on using the boom if the acoustics and position warrant it. No matter what, projects like this will probably have to be completely remixed in post, but chances are, a lot of it will still be usable. Get wild lines whenever you're not sure, and I bet the dialogue editor will thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stuff like this is almost impossible to mix, especially if it's being improvised. If even the blocking is unpredictable,... The conceit of movies like this is that the camera angles are all over the place, frequently very wide, but the dialogue has to always be intelligible --

Marc brings up the most important feature of your conundrum...production on these gigs NEVER seem to understand how sound is recorded and almost NEVER listen to your suggestions on set.

When actors and directors decide to do their own thing "in the moment" because they want to "keep it real"... you wont be given the information you'll need to record good sound because the filmmakers don't understand what you need to get good sound. That level of ignorance is so deep, they wont understand even when you TELL them what you need. So even after you plead on set, in post you'll end up with lots of extremely boring ten minute takes of many off-axis, inexperienced actors yelling over each other.

It will be "Overlap Hell" and no production strategy will combat it.

OTOH, I made that very mistake and feel there was some value to learning it the hard way.

So if they're paying you your full rate...Point Mic, Collect Check.

Best,

Steven

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, that's the other issue: "Overlap Hell." Even worse if it's multiple cameras and multiple takes, plus the cameras don't perform the same scene the same way twice.

It's frustrating how many bad habits these neophyte producers & directors seem to have. A few get it after awhile, but it's an uphill battle...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I realise I was a bit short in my explanation about the project and the task. When I was first told about it I thought about the same way you do, that it was unrealistic and would be very hard to do, and the result would show for it. I said so, and the director have been very understanding in trying to meet me halfway without breaking the intended style.

However, a few things make it more interesting:

1. Every scene will be a single take with a single camera (though we will of course do several takes for each scene). No cutting or editing in post between different camera angles etc. Based on this, the overlaps from improvisation etc may not be a big issue.

2. According to the director, in their tests they do use quite wide images, but the frame ends just above the actors, so booming should still be viable. This is also a requirement from my side - if the image is to high, all bets are off.

3. There will be time provided for wild lines should I need them.

4. I won't actually have to do any mixing, just monitor for faults and keep the levels good (4 ISOS). All mixing happens in post.

5. The main actors will be available for ADR.

So, based on this, I decided to simply make the most of it, making it an experience. The director knows it will be hard and the sound might come out lacking, but I will do my best. The biggest problem right now, is limitations in sound equipment since that's provided by different help groups for youths. So the gear is cheap and I may not get as many wireless etc as I want, so keeping it simple is the best bet. I'll try to fix wireless for the boom, but that may be difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Jesper! First of all let me say don't forget to have fun! Second thing, why two booms? In these kinds of run n gun situations I always find a bit annoying having to think what the other boom is getting and not. One boom around the camera is simple, and will work great. If you're confident in your booming skills, that should be your main focus.

The only time using two booms is applicable IMHO, is if the actors walk from room to room and the camera stays in another room. That way you can keep a second boom in the other room.. Maybe that's the setup? If the cameras always moving, I would never use two booms.

And don't forget plants mics!!!!

Improvising actors are fun, but they also tend to want some solid acting. So probably after a few takes they'll start showing some sort of pattern in movements and cues.

Is it in Stockholm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Olle - nice of you to chime in!

Yes, it's in stockholm, starts this coming week. I'm not unhappy or sweating about it - I'm doing the job primarily because I think it will be a fun challenge! The reason for the thread is simply to explore my options as we all want to do a good job (though the reason for the thread seems to have drifted a bit).

No, the two booms are not meant to go from room to room (though that may also happen). The reason for two booms is because there will in most scenes be 2-4 actors interacting at some point, and while I'm somewhat comfident in my booming skills I don't know if I can cover them all when there's only one take through the whole scene, and there may also be elements of improvisation. There's not much room for mistakes when you can't put isolated pieces togheter. While I agree that it could be a bit of a pain to organize and monitor the two booms, one boom can cover the person currently talking while the other is ready in place for the next, and it will also help with what could otherwise be big fast boom movements between three different actors.

And plant mics are definately on the menu, but the kitchen has limited supplies.

Some of these problems could be solved with proper equipment. I've done a few low- to nobudget shoots like this before, and I always find it hard to draw a line as to how much I can reasonably ask for. It's easy to say that I need a multichannel recorder with 8 ISOS, 6 wireless for actors and boom, comteqs etc, but how much of that can I justify considering the low budget, if I might be able to get results with the gear they easily can get that, while not great, could be workable?

It's also easy to say that production has unreasonable expectations, but giving this situation, what can be done without breaking the "one take"-style?

Maybe ask to keep the improv on a short lieche, get them to keep the frame down, cover with booms and get wild lines when needed.

In the end, I think it may simply be a case of doing what you can with what you got, and tell production what they can expect from that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesper,

The ability to edit sound, irrespective of how many cuts there are, is dependent upon the replication / repetition of dialogue across takes. When a group of actors "improv" without a script, that editing process is infinitely more difficult and time consuming because nothing is replicated. Overlap remains a critical issue even within a continuous take because the two dialogue elements are unable to be discreetly controlled in post unless every single moving mouth has its own dedicated mic.

This is where production will frequently fail you because you don't have enough wireless kits, and they don't understand that if you don't know who will be talking and where they will be standing when they do, your boom is FREQUENTLY rendered useless.

I dig a challenge as well. Keep an open mind through the process, and if you recognize things on set that you read here in this thread, the information will "click" for you in a very satisfying fashion.

Have fun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your instinct of keeping things as simple and flexible as possible is right on. One boom, mostly--maybe a 2nd sometimes but only if it can be wireless. Maybe some wireless plants, and maybe a few wires on actors for scenes that just won't boom (middle of traffic etc). This is how countless indie films (and in the old days, big films) were done--you get what you can without getting in the way of "the moment" and they clean it up in post. Multitrack will help a little with this but only a little. I would not put anyone out on a boom who doesn't have some experience with this kind of thing and hasn't already demonstrated a flair for anticipating actors and dancing with cameras. If people like that aren't avail then on that day you have to one-man-band it--this is not the situation for a newbie. If you are lucky enough to get 2 people you trust for booms--then you can sit watching a monitor and mix, but to me the most important thing going on here is who is working that main boom mic and where is it from second to second during the shot. You need the best person you have to be on that boom, and if that person is you then that's what you gotta do.

philp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ability to edit sound, irrespective of how many cuts there are, is dependent upon the replication / repetition of dialogue across takes. When a group of actors "improv" without a script, that editing process is infinitely more difficult and time consuming because nothing is replicated. Overlap remains a critical issue even within a continuous take because the two dialogue elements are unable to be discreetly controlled in post unless every single moving mouth has its own dedicated mic.

This is where production will frequently fail you because you don't have enough wireless kits, and they don't understand that if you don't know who will be talking and where they will be standing when they do, your boom is FREQUENTLY rendered useless.

This is nicely put, and I completely agree. This is one of the reasons why I see this as a challenging situation, and also why I want to be able to get a second boom in whenever I want to get as much coverage as possible on every take. Since the other takes might not be very useful in the editing, I want to minimize the chance of missing a cue.

I'll keep your advice about overlapping in mind, and I'm going to talk to the director about it - thanks.

Philip: You put up a good argument for the importance of booming, and probably doing it myself. I think I'll do a test first to see if I can keep it up while monitoring all the other channels, and if not I will probably let my second handle the monitoring while I make sure the boom is good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I don't agree that the boom is rendered useless if you don't know what is coming at you. We boom documentaries all the time-what's required is to have your kit together and be alive to the moment--really concentrate on reading subtle cues from actors and camera ops about where they might go next. In addition one has to accept a certain ambient approach, because you can not fully "commit" to an actor with your boom mic a lot of the time, you have to stay looser and use room reflections to help you get dialog you are not on top of. This is a situation in which a really high quality mic with a wider pattern say Schoeps MK4 can be your friend. You also should really consider getting with the scenic, props and location people to make sure the sets (especially if they are practical locations) are as conducive to good sound recording as possible.

philp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Philip, I have gone through all those things in my discussions with the director. I will be travelling for the shoot and the locations are already set, so I will have to do with what it is. A good cardioid, hopefully two, is on the list of gear to get (the neumann km184 seems to be the best available to me).

One thing I've managed to convince the director to try before the shoot begins, since there will be several people besides the actors moving around during the takes, is to have small pieces of felt put on their shoes. I've tried this once before with pretty good result, so I'm hoping it will do the trick this time too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like Philip's advice on which microphone to use. Sometimes the equipment that's available is thought to be the only option. In your case, where the improv will be likely, a mic with a forgiving pickup pattern can be a gamechanger. If you don't have it, rent it! I know where i'm from the rental for a microphone like Shoeps MK4 will rent for $25/day, and usually is given a 2 or 3 day week. Hopefully similar deals are available to you.

Convince the producer or director that you "need" this microphone. Even if you think it would only be an extra bonus to you. If you don't stress it like a do or die situation you likely won't get it. But do so and you'll find them become as enthusiastic as you about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I don't agree that the boom is rendered useless if you don't know what is coming at you. We boom documentaries all the time-what's required is to have your kit together and be alive to the moment--really concentrate on reading subtle cues from actors and camera ops about where they might go next.

While I whole-heartedly and enthusiastically defer to your expertise and experience Philip, just the continuing flow of information about this gig seems to place it closer to the uninformed clusterfucks at my end of the pool, than the seasoned professionals swimming in the deep end where you work your seasoned craft.

I may be wrong, and do hope all the best for Jesper, Son of Magnus. Much will be learned and enjoyed I'm sure.

Best,

Steven

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I don't agree that the boom is rendered useless if you don't know what is coming at you. We boom documentaries all the time-what's required is to have your kit together and be alive to the moment--really concentrate on reading subtle cues from actors and camera ops about where they might go next. In addition one has to accept a certain ambient approach, because you can not fully "commit" to an actor with your boom mic a lot of the time, you have to stay looser and use room reflections to help you get dialog you are not on top of. This is a situation in which a really high quality mic with a wider pattern say Schoeps MK4 can be your friend. You also should really consider getting with the scenic, props and location people to make sure the sets (especially if they are practical locations) are as conducive to good sound recording as possible.

philp

I'd like to second what Phil says here in his last sentence. A good microphone, such as the Schoeps he mentioned, can do a lot of the work for you in situations like this if you're not having to fight background noise

and terrible room acoustics every the shot gets a bit wide. Likewise, if you find yourself having to use an inexperienced boom operator, a more forgiving acoustical environment will make up for at least some of the

lack of technique and shyness about the frameline that such folks almost always bring to the day's work.

Good luck with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" The film will use very long uninterrupted takes, with several actors that will have much freedom to improvise their dialogue and interactions. "

warning

" all set for booming myself while monitoring all tracks "

warning

" a small chance that I might get access to not one but two people on the sound team besides myself. "

warning

<pay rate and conditions>

even though you didn't mention them in a good quote...warning!

" don't think it's a choice I will have to make in the end, "

warning

" limited channels and equipment as well as time for experimenting with lav technique "

warning, and warning...

" limitations in sound equipment "

warning repeated.

" as a bom op is not too bad but might have some problems with this kind of shooting,"

warning

" and the other I don't know and has limited experience. "

warning

you don't hear all of these alarm bells going off ??

this is a lo-no budget POS project by a group of clueless wanna-bees who have unrealistic expectations.

only if the rate is worth it to you, and..." ...if they're paying you your full rate...Point Mic, Collect Check. "

" That level of ignorance is so deep, "

That level of arrogance is so deep,

" Every scene will be a single take with a single camera (though we will of course do several takes for each scene)."

now, if you believe this, I'd like to speak with you about a bridge from LAX-HNL...

this will last no more than a couple takes

" No cutting or editing in post between different camera angles etc. Based on this, the overlaps from improvisation etc may not be a big issue. "

that won't last, but even if it does, all overlaps will still matter...

" simply make the most of it, making it an experience. "

it will be bad experience, this is not how fiction movies are made...

" The only time using two booms is applicable IMHO, is if the actors walk from room to room and the camera stays in another room. "

err, not typically, though I would agree that two booms when there is 'no plan' can be difficult to deal with, and not advisable for this farce.

" what can be done without breaking the "one take"-style? "

that is style over substance. they do not know what they are doing, and that includes the alleged actors!

BTW, you will need the third person as utility, believe me you are going to need one!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consider me warned...

Seriously though, I'm thankful for all of you for taking your time to critique the situation and giving me advice, for what you know is a small nobudget shoot. I didn't really intend the thread to take this turn, but I'm glad it did. I know that what I'm getting into is very far from the ideal, and that production is green and will pay for it. But I'm not established enough to call myself a professional either, and I've been upfront with the fact that what they want to do is very hard and will result in compromising dialogue. They approach it more or less like as a documentary with rehearsed lines, so it will have documentary-level sound.

Today was the day prior to the first day of shooting, and the crew and actors visited some of the locations to rehearse the scenes. The good news is that I think I will be able to handle much of it with one boom, letting my assistant handle monitoring. The bad news is that one of the exterior locations is full of industry-type lights from both sides, with the scene being a long walk turning around many corners. This makes me have to practically do piruettes with the boom to avoid shadows. So, lavs will hopefully work, and I will do my best booming, but it might still need some ADR. The small good part is that the director will try to put pauses in the dialogue at the points where I need to adjust for shadows.

So, at the moment I know that the whole thing is a bit unrealistic, and I've said so to the production. Now I will just do the best of it, and afterwards I'll tell you the results so you can all have a go at me :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the shoot is over, and for those curious about it I thought I'd share the tale. Both two days of shooting it rained all day, and to a lesser degree also snow on the second. It was cold and wet, but thankfully the gear did fine.

The first day was by far the hardest - a single scene was on the schedule (the scenes were few but long), namely a two minute walk by three people in an industry area. The background noise was a bit loud but manageable, and the difficult part was the strong lights coming from industry lamps on the walls. Because we were all moving and also turning around corners there were boom shadows that moved all over the place. The lavs were put on fast and were more or less unusable, and I don't know if I could have done it better with my level of experience. The pieces of felt that was to dampen the footsteps of the team couldn't be used, since they sucked up the water on the ground and left distinct prints.

To make it work we marked all the places where the boom had to disappear to not make a mess, and then the director worked with the actors to create natural pauses in the dialogue at those places. The time was short though and at the end of the day we didn't quite nail it.

Second day started in a restaurant. Six people with dialogue, but thankfully the place was small and most of them talked in a limited area. I was able to boom it all using a cardioid, and the lavs were used as plant mics at several different places. The owners were kind enough to shut of the ventilation and almost all of the refridgerators etc, so the end result was decent.

Then we went for the last scene, on a loading platform close to where the walk took place. During the scouting the place was pretty calm, but this night there was a lot of stuff happening. Each take was 5 minutes long, and not a single one was without an airplane passing, trucks and cars driving by, workers going out for a smoke and slamming doors or any other on a long list of disturbances. It was bad, and also hard for the actors because of the timing on some of these things. One of the two main actors also talked a lot quieter than the other and had a hard time raising his voice, so the background will have to be matched to his level in post. Many takes later we got some material that was simply good enough, considering.

Because of the snow on the second day, we went back and did the walk again so there wouldn't be any faults in the continuity. The surroundings were worse, but using the experience from the day before we did a better job and got it after 2-3 takes. I think the lavs sounded a bit better too.

In the end, the results were a bit lacking, but I think we got something that worked for each scene even if it's a little noisy. None of this was a surprise for either me or the director, so hopefully he will still be pleased with the end result.

Some lessons learned:

-Keep it simple. Even though I had help the first day, I could have more or less handled it all myself, with a single boom. The lavs were good to have and might help with some words, but I could have done it all with just a boom.

-Read the script AGAIN. I read it several times before shooting and before each scene, but I could have made an even better job at remembering the dialogue for better booming.

-Talk to the director. By talking about each problem with the director and sometimes also the DP, we could find ways where we met eachother halfway, making small sacrifices to solve something bigger.

-Take the time to experiment more with lavs. Better placement could have helped with some of the noise problems, and I fell short on this.

So, even though it was harsh I still think it was a pretty good experience, and I want to give a big thanks to everyone who gave me some advice here.

Best regards

Jesper Magnusson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some lessons learned: Keep it simple... Read the script AGAIN... Talk to the director... Take the time to experiment more with lavs.

These are all good lessons! The best lessons I have ever learned in post or production have been the hard ones. In a situation like yours, I think even having lots of rehearsals would also help.

It may be possible to salvage what you have with ADR, and bear in mind that ADR is a very normal part of the production process. There's no crime in having to use it, and no rule that says 100% of all dialogue, all the time, has to be live from the set. I know of ADR done on very tiny movies and student films, and it can be done inexpensively in some cases. And in some cases, wild lines done on set can save the day, too, at least to give the editor something to fall back on.

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...