Audio Post Production Workflow

[VASI]

This is the 1st part in an ongoing weekly series looking at the audio post production workflow. We have enlisted the help of top end professionals in their respective fields to walk us through what they do and sharing some tips and tricks along the way. The series will be based on TV drama in the UK and these days takes a lot from the film workflow but also a lot of what applies is very similar in other genres all be it not on as big a scale.

 

Part 1 - Assistant Editor, preping sessions

 

Part 2 - Assistant Editor, preping sessions

 

Part 3 - Dialog Editor, setting up dialog sessions

 

Part 4 - Dialog Editor, preping for ADR and finishing the dialog edit

 

Part 5 - Dialog Editor, marking up for ADR and handing on to the re-recording mixer

 

Part 6 - ADR on location - part 1

 

Part 7 - ADR on location - part 2

 

Part 8 - Foley - part 1

 

Part 9 - Foley - part 2

 

Part 10 - Sound Effects

 

Part 11 - Mixing part 1

 

Part 12 - Mixing part 2

[Winter]

Thanks! Nice post!

[Ze Frias]

Excellent read. My favorite right away, Part 1, under Problems with Timecode:

 

"if there is a problem with the timecode, almost all of which come from the camera department, the individual take will have to be synced by hand."

[amathie]

Thanks for the posting. I'm a beginner and have a basic question, so thanks for your patience!

 

What does the "Slate" parameter refer to? Is this parameter incremented by one unit every time the clapper shuts? In a screenshot from one of the above Parts, there was a column "Slate/Take" with values 202/1, 202/2, 202/3, implying that there were three different takes with the same "Slate". Should the slate increment with every new take?

 

Thanks

[Vincent R.]

Thanks for the posting. I'm a beginner and have a basic question, so thanks for your patience!

What does the "Slate" parameter refer to? Is this parameter incremented by one unit every time the clapper shuts? In a screenshot from one of the above Parts, there was a column "Slate/Take" with values 202/1, 202/2, 202/3, implying that there were three different takes with the same "Slate". Should the slate increment with every new take?

Thanks

Slate in my world is used for change of camera setting. To put it simple. So a scene has 4 camera settings for example, that equals 4 slates. IE: scene 7 - slate 4 - take 5

Some productions I did had a continuous slate, so you could end up with scene 12 - slate 200 - take 1.

[Constantin]

Here, slate refers to the take. Shot refers to camera setup

[studiomprd]

welcome, amathie: " I'm a beginner and have a basic question, "

there are several excellent books that we keep recommending here on jwsoundgroup.net;  I suggest you do some exploring, and get a hold of a couple and learn from them.

[amathie]

welcome, amathie: " I'm a beginner and have a basic question, "

there are several excellent books that we keep recommending here on jwsoundgroup.net;  I suggest you do some exploring, and get a hold of a couple and learn from them.

 

 

Thanks for the welcome.

 

Yes, this site seems to contain a mine of information from talented people working at the top of the industry; it's inspiring.

 

I did take the trouble to read three pieces about slate etiquette and formats from The Black and Blue Camera Assisting website which I found very informative, but wasn't able to answer my own question.

[amathie]

Slate in my world is used for change of camera setting. To put it simple. So a scene has 4 camera settings for example, that equals 4 slates. IE: scene 7 - slate 4 - take 5

Some productions I did had a continuous slate, so you could end up with scene 12 - slate 200 - take 1.

 

Hi Vincent,

 

So in your environment, if I've understood you correctly, the slate number increments every time there is a new camera setup (change in camera position, lens change etc). In your standard example (scene 7 - slate 4 - take 5) then the slate number returns to 1 on every scene change, whereas with the continuous slate, (scene 12 - slate 200 - take 1) the figure of 200 means that there has been a total of 200 different camera setups during all of the recorded scenes so far. Is that correct?

 

Here, slate refers to the take. Shot refers to camera setup

 

Hi Constantin,

 

So in your environment, the slate is increased every time there is a new take. I presume that is then continuous over the whole production so that the total number of slates is equivalent to the total number of recorded video files and therefore each unique slate number can be matched to a unique video file name.

 

I suppose the only important thing is that everyone involved in the production consistently uses the same protocol; does anyone know what is the accepted standard protocol used in the UK?

[Constantin]

So in your environment, the slate is increased every time there is a new take. I presume that is then continuous over the whole production so that the total number of slates is equivalent to the total number of recorded video files and therefore each unique slate number can be matched to a unique video file name.

No, actually the system is virtually the same as Vincent describes, except for nomenclature. We have scene-shot-slate, whereby shot refers to a camera setup and slate refers to the take number. So scene 4, 2nd camera position, take 3 would be 4-2T3. Take number gets reset every time the shot number changes

[amathie]

Thanks for clarifying that.

[VASI]

Here we have Scene - Shot - Take. Shot = camera frame (wide, medium, close up etc) with number; not letter.

[ThiagoPerry]

Hope I'm not intruding with this question..

 

When you guys start mixing a project, do you import the exported stems from the editing phase or do you simply keep using the original project created right at the beginning of the it..

 

This part of the post- workflow confuses specially because I'm still figuring out what is the best way or more practical..

 

Thanks in advance..

 

-TP

[Jay Rose]

When you guys start mixing a project, do you import the exported stems from the editing phase or do you simply keep using the original project created right at the beginning of the it..

 

Not sure what you mean. 

 

Are you asking "do we load the picture editor's dialog tracks and work with them, or do we rebuild from the production recordings?"

 

These days, if the picture editor has been careful and the production mix is competent, there's no reason not to use their edits... going back to the original when we need isos. The editor's version is a bit-for-bit copy of the original, unless they've deliberately messed with it.

 

But we don't get stems from the editor (which might have some processing). We get OMF or AAF files, which are smaller because no bits are wasted when a track is silent, which carry the editor's original clip names, and which have handles to let us fix the dicey edits or harvest roomtone.

 

This assumes an all-digital workflow, of course, including either ingest of the original production sound files or an all-digital transfer (if for some reason they're using tape). It also assumes the editor knows not to add any processing to the audio, not even a volume change, or can shut off the processing before generating files for us.

[Philip Perkins]

+1 Jay Rose: in the USA a "stem" is a mix track.  As a postie I MAKE stems as part of my deliverables, by food group, or by speaker channel  in 5.1 and so on.  The LAST thing I want from a picture editor is anything mixed from their system at all, besides whatver demo mix they were listening to as a guide or ref mix.   We get an OMF or AAF export of the editor's cut audio, and on shows with lots of track we might then have to do some kind of conform to get back all the original multitrack tracks from the field recordings for sound editorial.

 

philp

[Constantin]

The way I understood ThiagoPerry's question he was actually asking how he as the re-recording mixer would get the project from the sound editing phase.

But I may have misunderstood

[ThiagoPerry]

Not sure what you mean. 

 

Are you asking "do we load the picture editor's dialog tracks and work with them, or do we rebuild from the production recordings?"

 

These days, if the picture editor has been careful and the production mix is competent, there's no reason not to use their edits... going back to the original when we need isos. The editor's version is a bit-for-bit copy of the original, unless they've deliberately messed with it.

 

But we don't get stems from the editor (which might have some processing). We get OMF or AAF files, which are smaller because no bits are wasted when a track is silent, which carry the editor's original clip names, and which have handles to let us fix the dicey edits or harvest roomtone.

 

This assumes an all-digital workflow, of course, including either ingest of the original production sound files or an all-digital transfer (if for some reason they're using tape). It also assumes the editor knows not to add any processing to the audio, not even a volume change, or can shut off the processing before generating files for us.

 

 

The way I understood ThiagoPerry's question he was actually asking how he as the re-recording mixer would get the project from the sound editing phase.

But I may have misunderstood

 

It's exactly what Constantin said.

 

Sorry I forgot to mention the re-recording mixer part. In Portugal, we're used to do the whole thing our selfs (editing, processing, mix, etc) and we rarely think of someone else handling the mixing stage of the process.

Edited December 12, 2014 by ThiagoPerry

[Jay Rose]

and on shows with lots of track we might then have to do some kind of conform to get back all the original multitrack tracks 

 

Thanks, Phillip. I forgot to mention that (and I've been requesting lots of conformed scenes for a music docy).

[Philip Perkins]

How a sound editor delivers to the mix is often a matter of discussion (or negotiation) between the parties--the mixer's preferences for project layout, mic choices, alts and so on.   The projects I've worked on in this way have had the sound editor delivering their work to the mixer as ProTools sessions, to a specific template.

 

philp