Jump to content

Off-Camera Dialogue Poll


jawharp

Do you mic off-camera dialogue on a regular basis?  

52 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you mic off-camera dialogue on a regular basis?

    • Yes
      33
    • No
      19


Recommended Posts

I've worked for many mixers.  Most (myself included) focus on on-camera dialogue and do not concern themselves with the off camera.  This has always made more sense to me because the off camera actors are generally not acting at 100%, and 2 booms out means twice as many possibilities for boom shadows/reflections/unnecessary set clutter.  There is also no weirder look to get than the one given by someone staring at you, wondering why you're booming someone who's not in the close up their currently shooting.

I have worked for some mixers who swear by always double booming for off camera dialogue.  The most common excuse for this that I've heard from them is "It's so they can cut it in case there are overlaps."  This has never made sense to me.  It doesn't remove the overlap problem from the on-camera mic, and limits the choice of which take editors can use for the off camera.  I would rather just tell them not to over lap.  

Obviously, this is not going to be the same situation job to job.  There may be reasons to boom the off-camera like the director liking the performance better when they do overlap, editors requesting you get everything whenever possible, an actor you can't tell not to overlap cause they'll flip out, etc.

I was wondering today how many people get off-camera regularly, and how many people don't.  That's why I made this poll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The off camera dialogue recording helps and the picture editor. Opens a new dimension in speed and storytelling process (cutting) when he/she has the off camera dialogue recorded. My vote is Yes, but I would like to have an option "Sometimes Yes, Sometimes No".

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I can see how the importance of the actual dialogue is almost impossible to quantify and needs to be taken into account on a case by case basis.

This poll was more about the person's usual plan for micing any scene going into it, regrdless of how the scene would have to be mic'd after seeing a blocking rehearsal.  It was to refer to the way people work rather than the micing of particular scenes.  

A better way to phrase my question is probably: do you always assume you will be micing the off camera, regardless of the timing/blocking of an actual scene?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A better way to phrase my question is probably: do you always assume you will be micing the off camera, regardless of the timing/blocking of an actual scene?

Phrasing it that way, the answer for me would be no. I will say that regardless of the scene, as a department (I am on features always with a 3-person crew) I am always prepared to mic the off camera if it is needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally do not like the idea of putting off camera dialogue on he production track. It seems to be justified only in that people watching dailies need to have the real experience. As far as micing off camera and putting it on a seperate track so it is available for the editor, I have no problem with that. Of course there are many reasons why that track will be useless anyway. I tend to think in terms of feature work so I realize it may be different in TV or other media. My choice is always make the on camera the best possible. Overall that will be the most useful for the editor. 

As an aside though. I do find that if there is a microphone available, most mixers seem to want to open it up. Just saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd do it if the director or editor wanted it, or an actor requested it.  In my dramatic film experience, which includes a lot of low budg films, often the "off camera" side of a  scene isn't great for sound anyway--the mic is looking at the camera (cam noise), crew people who are out of the shot but may be moving around, the dolly, lighting gear and so on.  We've discussed before that often actors who are "reading" off-camera for the close up of another actor who is in closeup might not be putting out 100%, or might even be doing something on purpose to elicit a reaction from the on camera talent.  Of course, anymore this discussion is often moot because of the proliferation of cameras shooting all the coverage at the same time….

p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally do not like the idea of putting off camera dialogue on he production track. It seems to be justified only in that people watching dailies need to have the real experience.

That's what I've seen in dailies post, too. Believe me, I've gotten calls after dailies from the post supers yelling, "did you leave a track turned off? We're not hearing the other side of the conversation!" And I remind them that all they hear is the production track, not the isos. For all I know, the production sound team may well have additional mics going. 

I will say in TV, they generally have all the speaking actors covered in every angle, only because of A&B camera (and sometimes 3 cameras), assuming all the actors are there 100% of the time. I would bet this is more a question for the editor and whether they want the other actor(s) mic'd or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes and no. Mostly yes. If the actors are giving it, take it. Why not? You've gone through the trouble of setting up. If an actor is off-camera, but sees the boom floating overhead, they typically keep performing. Late in the day, if the energy is waning and performances are uninspired, pack it up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally do not like the idea of putting off camera dialogue on he production track. It seems to be justified only in that people watching dailies need to have the real experience. As far as micing off camera and putting it on a seperate track so it is available for the editor, I have no problem with that. Of course there are many reasons why that track will be useless anyway. I tend to think in terms of feature work so I realize it may be different in TV or other media. My choice is always make the on camera the best possible. Overall that will be the most useful for the editor. 

As an aside though. I do find that if there is a microphone available, most mixers seem to want to open it up. Just saying.

I think Don Coufal said it very well, but, as Don will attest, I often decide to leave the off-camera dialog in the mix for TV production. In my opinion, there may be almost as many reasons to mic the off-camera dialog and put it in the production mix as there are to leave it out...

Almost, but not quite...

The most often used excuse for having off-camera dialog in the mix is to allow for overlapping dialog, which basically means that someone doesn't want to direct and/or someone doesn't want to act. Overlapping off-camera dialog limits editing options on several levels and compromises the iso dialog tracks and the production mix, and, therefor, should be avoided. Sometimes having off-camera dialog in the production mix makes for what some consider a more interesting dailies experience, but, even still, this should be avoided if the off-camera mic adds compromising noise (camera fans, ambience, etc.). 

Too often the fact that off-camera dialog is isolated on its own tracks gives license for allowing and even encouraging overlapping dialog, which is a compromise similar to wireless microphones giving license to wide-n-tight takes. We all know it sucks, and not just a little bit.  In the end, it reduces the quality of the dialog tracks, when what we should strive for is to increase the quality of the dialog tracks.

It gets a tricky with multiple cameras because what's not on one camera may be on the other, and, since it sometimes may be difficult to know when the B or C camera are working, it's best to play it safe.

Like it or not, like most questions on the group, the Senator has the correct answer: "It depends." There is no single correct answer. The best decisions come from experience and understanding the process. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Normally I'd leave any lavs that are off camera recording an iso, but I will usually instruct my boom operator to only mic the talent that is on camera. The reason is that often there is non verbal communication going on when the on screen talent isn't actually delivering a line- the sound of a sigh, the way someone breathes or taps the surface a table. There is a myriad of audio that is not dialogue that  might add to the story, or show the emotion of a character. If these actions are on camera and create noise then I want to be sure to capture it. These actions may be performed  by the on screen talent even as the off camera talent is speaking and so I would rather make sure I get sounds that happen on camera.  I find that actors when they are off camera don't always give 100% on their performances anyway. I even had one actor refuse to wear a mic when he wasn't on camera because in his words, he 'doesn't want the editors  using audio from a performance that was only 75%' He actually pulled it off and gave the mic back to me before stepping onto set.

Of course this is a general rule, and situations sometimes call for other choices so it's always important to be adaptable to whatever the production requires.

Reality will normally have every mic recording all the time wether the talent is on camera or off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Mostly I'm in shock Don posted an opinion here. 20 posts in how many years? ;~)

FWIW I do what is needed. That means yes & no to the survey. That said, If post wanted it and I had the personnel and I wasn't compromising the on camera dialog I see no problem doing so but if I have no request for that work flow I do it the old way.

CrewC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It bothers me when my boom ops abandon the on camera for people off camera. Actors often wait for their close-ups to throw in bits. 

If a second mic is welcome in the room (space, lighting, etc.) then they can be in there. But as many have written, I don't want something that shouldn't be used put in the mix. 

I tend to try to get all dialog in the master. On and off. It helps, I think, for the director to get the sense of performance as it develops. I'll get off camera lines from then on if I anticipate issues and might need to supply off camera dialog for the dialog editor. But once someone's performance is captured and there's no reason to play the off camera, I let it go. 

I don't believe in trying to impress people with all the words for dailies. I'm more concerned with tracks that will easily cut into a clean track for the very first assembly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally do not like the idea of putting off camera dialogue on he production track. It seems to be justified only in that people watching dailies need to have the real experience. As far as micing off camera and putting it on a seperate track so it is available for the editor, I have no problem with that. Of course there are many reasons why that track will be useless anyway. I tend to think in terms of feature work so I realize it may be different in TV or other media. My choice is always make the on camera the best possible. Overall that will be the most useful for the editor. 

As an aside though. I do find that if there is a microphone available, most mixers seem to want to open it up. Just saying.

I'll open up the off-camera mic once or twice during an early take so post has a better chance to be aware that it exists; thereafter, mostly fader is closed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone who cuts dialogue in post, I use the OC lines quite frequently. It has never bothered me when they are recorded, but it has certainly bothered me when they are not. I understand all the reasons that it is not, but if it is as simple as putting a wireless ISO on another track, I don't see any reason not to. Better safe than sorry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like recording the off camera. It's always better to have and not need. I am reminded of this just about every time I try to ignore it.

+1

I haven't worked with drama in a long time, but when I did, I always tried to put a shotgun mic on a stand to pick up off-camera dialogue. Or a lav mic if the actors were moving. I don't know if it ever was used, but it helped produce a good/relevant dialogue sound for the director.

Some days I was the sound mixer and at other times I was the boom operator. I would never chase off-camera dialogue with the boom, unless asked to.

I guess it's best to discuss the procedure with the director and explain the pros and cons.

 

Cheers

Fred

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I work with a 3 person crew so generally we get the off camera lines if possible on the 2nd boom. 

It seems puny/lazy not to and it gives post a pass at different versions of wild lines. Also seems to help the cadence of the cut for editors etc. So what if it's not up and as good as when the person is having their single shot. As long as it doesn't jeopardize the gold of what's in the picture I really don't see why someone wouldn't do it given the resources.

Don't you folks like to mix? Then mix off camera in and stay engaged. A single mic up on the CU while missing the other side of the conversation is just...... boring.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely agree with Scott. I feel like one of the reasons I feel ok mixing two booms and multiple wires while shooting the rehearsal is because each "easy" shot is practice towards the difficult ones. I like using two booms and grabbing off camera lines in case there's an intentional or even accidental overlap. Then we have it. And I use two booms so the off camera versions match sonically with what we record when that character is on camera. I feel like if I were to ask any producer or director if they wanted me to record the off camera lines or not, their decision would be pretty easy: record it. Why not? If editors want to steal a line or a word from the off camera versions and no one can tell that the actor wasn't given their "best"...then good on all of us. Where's the problem? Sometimes the off camera performances do sag as actors rest while not on camera, but sometimes that changes from line to line within a shot or take. I don't see a reason to over think it, just record it. 

Josh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How's my 3rd going to massage my shoulders and fetch me esspressos if he's busy booming off camera?

Seriously though, I like to use 2 booms when practical. It's important production understands the value of a 2nd boom operator, and sees them working to help get good sound. But if they're just in the way, once the on camera stuff has been well recorded, I usually pull them off the set. 

2nd boom off camera is also good for training new boom operators to listen to nuances in placement. 

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...