Jump to content

Camera Hop Hell


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Philip Perkins said:

I generally trust that everyone will try to do their job correctly, including me.  The best way I've found to go, after many years of file-based recording, is to put some kind of mono ref track on the camera (for field playback checks, as a help to the DIT, as a syncing guide if it is decided to sync with PluralEyes etc, esp with cameras w/o real TC setups) and send the camera TC as well, if possible.  On verite docs I like having a camera mic on the camera as well, if that is possible.  I do a lot of doco post and find that camera mic often very useful, even when tracks from the soundie are available too (camera is often closer to some things than the soundie).  It is possible that someone in post may be too ignorant, lazy or harassed to sync up my tracks, that is down to that person and their bosses.  I have no intention of doing a worse or incomplete job on my end because someone down the line might do their job poorly.  Part of my job is documenting the tracks I make and making sure that the relevant people know where they are and what's in them.   If you find that a certain client continually blows off your recorder files in favor of scratch hop audio then you need to have a talk with them about it.  I still have a few clients who are very definite about wanting the camera audio to be the primary track, in that case you move from ERX/G3 etc to real hops like SRb etc, and continue to record, document and submit your recorder tracks anyway.  Eventually they will see the light about isos and higher fidelity.

+1

On another note, to open an app from an unidentified developer without having to go through the security settings and remembering to change them back, right click on the app and hold option as you click "Open".  This will give you a prompt that will allow the app to be opened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Some clarification is in order here, some very wrong information posted in this thread. 

1)  There have been no changes to our policies regarding block changes during my tenure here.  Sorry, guys, but I haven't changed things there.  That statement is just plain wrong.

 2) We will do block changes on units so long as we a) have parts and boards available and  b) the product can actually have a block change effectively done.  Parts can be especially onerous since the pace of change is so fast anymore that surface mount parts availability can change overnight.

Some products, particularly single board designs, simply cannot be cost effectively block changed - specifically, these are the IFBR1a, the R400a, the UCR100, and the Venue Modules VRT and VRS.  It is more cost effective to simply exchange these units for new ones at a reduced cost.  It is the exchange for new products on these units for which there is a seven year limit - We based that on the time it takes to completely amortize your equipment costs (if you aren't amortizing your equipment costs, check with an accountant - you're missing out on important tax deductions where you can recover those costs).  We can still service them, we just had to put a time limit on exchanges.

If you have another product that for which we say we cannot do a block change (MM400a or UCR200 for example), it is because the parts are simply no longer available, not due to an arbitrary limitation on time. 

If we have the boards, we will do the block change (or repair).   Period.

PS - I double checked with our service department to make sure I didn't get anything wrong here (just in case something had changed when I wasn't looking)

My apologies if this may have been explained previously by someone else in a confusing fashion - I certainly can see how that can happen so I hope this clarifies our service and block change policies a little better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this.  This does not quite jive with info I have gotten from Lectro over the (many) years, perhaps I misheard or misinterpreted the emails, and I have done quite a bit of block swapping on older units.  The main takeaway for the OP is to examine your options carefully re the cost of reblocking (for instance) vs selling and rebuying.  Neither are cheap fixes, both work well, but as I said above I think you have to kind of commit to using the reblocked radio for some time to recover the costs involved (this on a higher end unit like 411a).  For lesser units like LMa, for me so far it hasn't made economic sense to have the work done.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Please forgive the very late reply to those who have posted here in order to offer opinions, thoughts and help. I want to thank all of you for your contributions.  For what it is worth, I went with the Zaxcom Camera Link and a pair of ERX3TCD.  I have now used them several times and I couldn't be happier with the audio quality, range and reliability where Time Code transmission is concerned.  I'm looking forward to adding QRX200 RX's in the very near future.

Again, thanks to all.

Tom

Link to post
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...