HD Shoots & Third Man

[G$]

Hi JWS Forum Members:-D

I am posting of an open letter I  received from a good friend of mine. A local 695 brother.

I back him all the way.

G$$

==============

Hello all,

  This is an open letter to IA 695 and it's members concerning a 

problem facing Boom operators and the sound team in general working on 

High Def Commercial shoots.

  With the changing times and the changing technologies, it is 

apparent some staffing changes need to be addressed concerning our job 

functions on these HD commercial film shoots. While on these shoots 

certain job functions such as the running of the HD Audio lines to the 

cameras, as well as the extended time a boom op is required to hold a 

boom while shooting on the HD cameras needs to be addressed and 

adjusted so a high quality product can be produced by the sound team.

    Boom holding times of up to a half hour are not uncommon, and 

cannot be done in a quality manner for a 10 to 12 hour day. It is just 

not possible. This forces the sound team to be boxed into a corner by 

having to use wireless mics when for many reasons they might not be 

the best weapon of choice for the team. Radios are great, we love ours 

and we use them extensively with great results, but sometimes they are 

not the best choice for many reasons. With this forced hand, our job 

as a sound team has now been compromised to the detriment to our 

department and the project at hand. This is a horrible situation to be 

in for all involved. A sound team with a cable person would be a 

solution to this problem and the problem of working with the boom 

operator in relief to trade off as a boom op on those 30 minute shots 

or as a cable person so the boom op could concentrate on his or her 

boom duties and provide relief when necessary.

  Of course we could use wireless to go from our mixing cart to the 

multiple cameras, but I always choose to send a quality feed on a 2 

channel line to each camera so as a nice mix with less hardware is 

utilized. This format I believe is less prone to the sometimes 

problematic situations associated with batteries, frequencies, and 

wireless mics in general.  That being said, with one boom operator it 

is very difficult to keep up with camera moves, dropped audio lines, 

cabling up and re cabling the audio sends to camera while trying to 

radio multiple talent, move the cart, re-cable or be prepared to watch 

a blocking and boom a scene.  It seems that there is now a huge grey 

area in who is actually responsible for these sends and cables. Is it 

Cameras responsibility or ours?  Don't even get me started on who is 

responsible for the actual mix on the cameras themselves, they are not 

my gear, and with 10 different cameras now being used, it is a problem 

as well keeping up with all the menu functions and settings for these 

many cameras...  I am an audio mixer not a camera technician, nor is 

my boom op. I for one can only guarantee my mix on MY gear and my hard 

drive. That is my policy, the cameras as things sit now are the back 

up audio. Without someone from my camp making sure they are plugged in 

and routed properly, that is the way it has to be. We are sometimes 

far away and simply not able or are too busy to deal with that 

problem. The cables are routinely just unplugged and thrown on the 

floor with nobody to be responsible for their re plugging in or 

movement. We need help here, someone to take charge, and be 

responsible. A qualified cable person trusted by us is the only 

solution although he or she I would NOT want to be responsible for the 

actual camera. That in my opinion is the job of the camera tech.

  I think it is high time our approach to how the IA sound team is 

staffed,  and how it  performs its job functions on  commercial HD 

shoots is adjusted along with the changing technologies so as the 

quality of our job does not suffer further. I am proposing the adding 

of a cable person to this style of shoot so we may continue to do the 

great job IA 695 mixers are capable of performing. Any further delay 

in the implementation of such a staffing change will in my opinion 

continue to have negative results for us as sound craftspersons and 

the shows and projects we are responsible to provide a quality mix for.

  I hope you agree and support my agenda to have a third person added 

to our staff.

  Sincerely,

  R.C.D      IA 695

[old school]

G$$ I couldn't agree more. I get a 3rd 60 / 70 % of the time on HD shoots. I have a discussion with the producer about take times. Some times it is resolved with a fisher boom, sometimes by me calling cut. At this point it seems to be an endless educational process for the director and producer with me being the teacher. I work with mostly good folks who get it so they understand that if you shoot 4 hours of HD tape to get 1/2 hr of what we used to call takes, not only is your editor going to hate you, it will cost you much more $$$$ and time in post. I am all for a standard and am trying to set one as I get more n more HD gigs. Thanks for the post.

CrewC

[Philip Perkins]

After a whole lot of really chaotic multiple camera HD (and etc) shoots, we've decided that we have to really press for answers in the pre-prod process of even small shoots in a way we never did in film.  Things are not very standardized, even less so outside of LA I think.  It is rare for me to get a 3rd on any sort of video shoot, and some of these shoots I have to do alone.  I try to get with the DIT (if there is one) and the AC (if they'll talk to me) in addition to the producer and make them tell me what the drill is going to be.  If they really want to move, then we are going to do our level best to cut down on the number of cables we put out--for it IS the cabling that kills us most of the time.  A simple clap slate, audio going to one of the cameras hardwired w/ a (hopefully) wireless TC feed and an audio backup is the minimum for us in SF, where the mixer's audio recording is regarded as a backup to the camera audio.  But it IS vital to find out what cameras will be used (esp re RED), as well as get copies of scripts, boards etc to see what they want to do.  Getting a third might be possible if we could come to some arrangement that the camera/video depts shared this person, and that one of their primary jobs was the cabling up as we move around.  I don't have a lot of hope that the camera dept will give up exclusive control of a body for this, but it would help.  (AND....part of the problem is DPs and ACs who are pissed off about shooting video at all, and treat the whole process, the gear and us with more contempt than usual...)

Philip Perkins

[Rob Lewis]

I'm more of an ENG/EFP guy doing 1-2 camera shoots, and I don't have a boom operator most of the time.  I agree with G$$ about having a 3rd to insure proper cable runs and camera settings as I have boomed on several productions like this. I can't watch blocking rehearsals and reroute cables at the same time.  I also must agree with Scott that we must learn these external and menu driven audio settings for these cameras even though we are not camera techs.  I feel that if the camera must be fed audio that these audio settings are our responsibility.  Scott is providing a valuable resource on his blog with PDF's of camera manuals.  I have also been putting together a cheat sheet that I keep in my bag to remind me how to quickly check camera settings on all the different models I run into on shoots.

I attached a copy of the cheat sheet for those of you who want to browse.  It is in it's rough stages, and not everyone will agree on mic/line and lineup tone setting's, but I have been using it for a while now with no issues.  Feel free to check it out, make suggestions or corrections.  All info is based off of manual instructions and my experience.

[jasony]

Thanks for the cheat sheet, Rob. Great idea.

[Rob Lewis]

Welcome.  As I mentioned, please feel free to edit, suggest and add to.  Please, if anyone has info for the RED one camera other than the minor info I have on it please add to it.  I know double system is best for the RED camera but I see a lot of producers asking for audio plugged directly to camera, so that Info would be appreciated.  We may want to start a new thread about this as well, I apologize if this is considered a hijack,  I just felt that this info was pertinent to this discussion.

Thanks,

Rob

[old school]

I agree that is important to know the way around most of the cameras we use. Knowledge is power. Thanks to Rob for a cheat sheet, good idea. Also when I said 60/70% of the time I get a cable person, I meant with 2 or more HD cams.

CrewC

[Guest BobD]

I agree that is important to know the way around most of the cameras we use. Knowledge is power. Thanks to Rob for a cheat sheet, good idea. Also when I said 60/70% of the time I get a cable person, I meant with 2 or more HD cams.

CrewC

Agree with Crew,

  It is good to know your way around these cameras, and we usually do.

Now I will say how I really feel,  I strongly disagree with us as mixers being responsible for a piece of gear I do not maintain, own, get any rental income from or work with enough to guarantee a quality mix.

  Rob,  nice approach, and I really think you are a nice fellow for your kind and light hearted team spirit. Scott as well...   

   There are so many cameras now, no official work flow protocol, so little time between shoots to "study up the latest manual,  a cluster -uck around the camera which usually, they make you feel like a pain in the ass just to get them hooked up and running, and, to make matters worse a DIT or camera tech normally hired to deal with these issues. Why is this my problem?   Let them either provide a cable person or better yet, let us have a trained cable/boom op to cover the bases we have mentioned. It makes perfect sense.

Now,  what if we in theory for conversation were to have to put an image onto our recorders along with the picture?  You mean we would move over and allow who knows who push their way into our dept. and start playing around with our recording devices?  I don't think so. My device, my responsibility to get the info where it is supposed to go, and be responsible for it!  So why is the opposite situation even on the table?

  I do not want to be responsible for the camera audio..  I can't stake my job on someone else's camera working properly, being up to date on digging deep into it's menu functions, being able to get to it, and being a "nice guy" to do it....    It's a camera, let them deal with their rental or operators gear....  Funny, nobody is responsible for dealing with my gear, nor do I want them to.  IA is fishy with this arrangement and is currently looking into this situation.   I see only trouble ahead if this current protocol continues.   I for one am sick of this huge grey area we currently work under, and the perception that since it is sound, it is my problem and responsibility to now operate the camera...  NOT MY PROBLEM!   The producers who wish to just use and depend on the camera audio should staff accordingly to make that option work and work right. This also means they have  staffed our department to properly take care of the job at hand.  30 minute takes torturing our boom ops, whining about the extra fees for 2 channel jumps ( at a cost of what, $6000) and  using every moment of or time to get our job done due to the added responsibility adds up to a cluster -uck.

   Now, it is important to note I am discussing this situation based on a large commercial shoot, not a mom and pop little production.  For those gigs a more involved mixer/ camera working situation is warranted no doubt, but for the big jobs the idea of us dealing with the camera after they have staffed a camera tech is bull---t!

  As for the color coded cables Scott,   forget about it,  you could do anything you want and the people around the camera will unplug them, quick connect or not and throw them on the floor...  happens all the time, over and over....   Idiots... These people dont care, and unless someone is hired to babysit the baby's, the situation will never change.  It is not hardware, it is a people problem.   I wish it was not so, but it is. Other departments just do not care.  You can be as polite and helpful as you can,  the friendliest person ever and you get what?  a dirty look trying to fight your way to the back of the camera to deal with either your sends or your jump gear.....

  Also,

   I strongly recommend calling ahead to the editor, conversing and coming to an agreement AHEAD of time on the work flow, this must be done verbally and backed up via email so there is a record of the arrangement. This is a big help when production calls complaining about something, only to find out it is what they called for....  protect yourself, your craft and your product.

   So many ways to do this, but,  I am a big fan of time code on the cameras independent of my audio time code. Forget about sending them code, I use a TC slate so they have a reference of scene and take as well as my code for use later IF necessary. Unless of course they demand it. Even so, they sometimes have no idea and say, yeah, that will be fine as well....   remember, the audio on the camera is already sunk up... duhhhh...

Let them keep their code jammed to each other on their cameras.

So,  I strongly believe that we need to NOT overstep our departmental partitions by beginning to now be "camera techs" after they have already been hired. I do not want to touch those things, not my deal, not my gear. If I can't maintain it, store it transport it and pamper it, I don't trust it. I am not comfortable putting my reputation on it.  Rental equip. is the same thing, but sometimes you must deal with that. Hopefully for a day or so.

   It is the beginning of a new protocol dealing with this new set of issues, be careful how this NEW protocol is laid out. Think now before it is too late. Please don't include me in your "kindness and helpfulness campaign" in setting these  new boundaries. Think about it carefully now before we are now responsible for who knows what.I believe my job stops at my sends...  and should. I am not in the camera local.

  We really need a third boom op/ utility on these shoots period, and we need to be released from the final responsibility of the audio on the cameras. I can only guarantee MY audio on my cart and my HD. The rest...  is a guessing game I am unwilling to play.

Bob Dreebin CAS

[old school]

Hey Bob, good to hear from you again, missed your presence. Your POV is bang on. The recordings we make are job 1,2,3,etc. The camera is the other department and while I'm happy to radio or cable to it, I will not nor should not have to guarantee a piece of gear I don't own or maintain. I would shoot myself if I had to monitor off one of those cameras.  A conversation with post is always a good idea when possible cause in commercials because production people know little and most likely will bury you. A 3rd person in our department would make it a much smoother operation with a higher degree of success.

CrewC

[studiomprd]

" It is good to know your way around these cameras, and we usually do. "

that said, and agreed with, Bob is, I believe, correct!

as it was mentioned that perhaps we are required to be more knowledgable and / or helpful on the "smaller" shoots, I mostly disagree that we should be accepting camera dept's responsibilities.  I find that often these folks -beginners, students, or professional low budget producers (I call the latter "serial abusers")- go out and buy or rent more camera than they are competent with in the belief that using it guarantees a brilliant movie; they come to set without a plan, which they insist on sticking to!  Often they have not read the manual, and I've heard things like: " well, XXX just got this YYY camera last week, and I decided to use it last night ".  after being told that a ZZZ camera would be used, and having prepared to work with it.  --just to clarify, the planned camcorder ZZZ had XLR line inputs, the newer, shinier flavor of the week (ZZZ) did not accept audio on XLR's though it did "shoot in 24P"!!

So XXX (the DP!!) doesn't even know how to use their new toy, but "they" all figure that since it has some great new feature or something (magic??), it will just automatically be better... I've had situations like that, and the DP (XXX) not only had not read much of the manual, he did not bring it to the shoot!!  (s/he thinks being a DP means pointing the camera!)

I urge all my students who are recording sound on the camera-corder to listen to the headphones coming out of it. and I stress that it is the job of the person operating the camera to know everything about it, as it is their instrument, (and not the sound department's).

BTW, this trend is, in my opinion, a major reason the sound local will  be merged into the camera local, a move that I think has more potential benefits than problems. (as you all know, I suffer from chronic "Foot in Mouth Disease"!!)

[Philip Perkins]

I hope you guys can make your "not my problem" attitude and demands for a 3rd on HD shoots stick--you will be a beacon of hope for the rest of us.  Meanwhile, in most of the audio-for-video world, the current issues w/ camera audio, knowing the cams and hooking up are nothing new whatsoever.  This has been the way it has been in the video world since ENG/EFP started, and since many producers have come up that way those attitudes have continued as HD has slowly taken over jobs that were once done on film.  For a great many, if not most of us, saying that the camera audio isn't our problem will basically get us de-hired, permanently, by that producer.  On a decent sized feature or episodic or even a commercial being done by people with clue, I think that the double system audio and/or cableman thing is the way to go.  For the day-hire smaller stuff, there is no tradition of double system audio and despite our best efforts (and recording on our own recorder regardless of what the producers have said) the on-camera audio is what they end up using 98% of the time.  For those of us stuck in this this world, for whatever reason, studying up on the cameras, coming up with strategies to deal with cabling and camera hops and sharing TC and figuring out post-friendly (or possible, at least) methods for dealing with multiple cameras is a better use of our time and energy than fighting a battle that was lost before we started.

Philip Perkins CAS

[Guest BobD]

Phillip,

  As I stated,   the smaller gigs require a different approach..... that's for sure,  I agree, and I am glad to work with and help out to get the job done. Especially those smaller jobs direct to video...  you are 100% right.

    But,  the big shoots require a straightening out of this mess as it becomes more frequent. This battle for the larger shows regarding staffing in the HD format have not at all been lost. I think clear heads and reality will sink in for all concerned. It has to, as it sits now things are a bit broken...  The powers that be want film speed regarding movement of gear, set up and long takes....  It is not sustainable, that's a fact. It will suss itself out, but we MUST work together to raise concerns, and suggest solutions. We can and will fix things.Mixers should be positive and not cave in and give up before we all have a chance to right the ship. If they do, they are now part of the problem.

  I don't want to not "Share my TC because I am an ass, I just don't think it's the best method, I want to make that clear... Use a TC slate.  If is a demand by post to feed the cameras, I am happy to help them out. This whole thing is not about attitude as much as about responsibility, and having more put on our plate that in my opinion is simply not my or our job. I currently have enough responsibilities, the funky cam- corders     ( 20 of them)  simply put, should not be one of them.

Now,

    I hijacked a bit this thread with my banter about the responsibility of the camera feeds and such. My main concern was and is the health, wealth and ability of our trusted boom ops who need our help now in dealing with their dilemma, the 30 minute takes and hook up and cabling issues. They need our assistance, support and guidance as department heads to help clarify and fix this busted  protocol so they can do their jobs  which then allows us to do ours by getting get the mics, whichever ones they are using where they need to be so we can all do or jobs in a professional manner. The result is a better running, and more professional set which will result in a better product. You would think that mattered...   I know, it probably does not, but it should, at least in my world. I know the money would be better spent on cheese whiz or on set starbucks deliveries, but this is my opinion and I am sticking to it

  Without the boom ops being able to keep up and get the job boomed, miked or cabled......  I am nothing. I never forget that.  And on that note, It should be mentioned that I will never take a job that does not have a boom op on the call sheet in the first place. I have turned down more jobs and lost more money because of that than some have made.... Shame on those folks who do agree to that. If it means losing the job, than so be it.... lose it and good riddance. I don't need the money from people and Producers who think and run their show like that. Unless of course the DP is pulling his or her own focus.

Sorry for the thread hijack.... This was about help for our boom persons....   

Try to understand how they feel about this HD trend, ask them....  The ones I know dislike the situation as it now stands. They need us you mixers, lets see what we can do as department heads to help..  we are dept. heads, lets all act like it and see what we can do

BD

   

[Don Barto]

Yes, a wonderful and very useful cheat sheet, bob.  Just wondering, how many here set the DVX-100's and HVX-200's up for -12 dBFS operation as opposed to -20?  And if you do record at a -12 dBFS operating level on these cameras, what sort of maximum peak and VU levels do you send out from your mixer, as metered by the usual analog devices provided on ENG/EFP sound gear?  I have used -12 on occasion, but it makes me a little uncomfortable, and I end up shooting in the dark and perhaps being too conservative with levels.

[wbrisett]

For the day-hire smaller stuff, there is no tradition of double system audio and despite our best efforts (and recording on our own recorder regardless of what the producers have said) the on-camera audio is what they end up using 98% of the time. 

This has also been my experience. In fact, I went back to listen to a piece I still had on my Deva when I heard the rough cut of one recent project. The Deva audio sounded great, the audio on the QT file was really poor. When I inquired about the sound quality, I was told they weren't happy with the way it sounded, so they tweaked it. I asked if they used the DVD disc I gave them, and as you might expect, the answer was no. I explained again why they should use the other audio, the producer said he would do that next time.

I hate when my name is attached to projects where the audio quality isn't up to where it could or should be, and where I can't do anything about it.

Wayne

[Guest BobD]

Yes, a wonderful and very useful cheat sheet, bob.  Just wondering, how many here set the DVX-100's and HVX-200's up for -12 dBFS operation as opposed to -20?  And if you do record at a -12 dBFS operating level on these cameras, what sort of maximum peak and VU levels do you send out from your mixer, as metered by the usual analog devices provided on ENG/EFP sound gear?  I have used -12 on occasion, but it makes me a little uncomfortable, and I end up shooting in the dark and perhaps being too conservative with levels.

Don,

Being that it is a cheaper mid-line camera, I personally allow more headroom rather than less.  better safe than sorry ... especially since they as mentioned will probably be using it.  Even if it sounds worse than the mix you pull and turn in, as Wayne says...    I do the -20 and remain on the conservative side. You are burning 1s and zeros. As long as they burn nicely you are fine, no need to be hot on your mix. The cheaper the camera, the more I watch what I send.  I try not to get above -6db... on the really high side for a loud delivery....  But that's just me...  I am sure others here either push it a bit more or even burn the audio at much less, staying at the -20db mark!!!  either way is no problem, but the cheaper the camera, the more you should in my opinion watch what you send down the line. 

[RPSharman]

On smaller shoots I find the director is usually our biggest ally.  He/she is often an investor.  I make it very clear at the beginning, when sound to the camera is requested, that I will not be monitoring the sound, and cannot guarantee its quality.  He/she usually agrees, and I hope that in post they end up using my audio.  But I also know this doesn't always happen, so I make every effort to ensure the camera audio is usable.  Since usually these jobs are favors, what's the point if you are not making it easy/cheaper for them too?

I have always had a third on HD shoots with reasonable budgets.

Robert