Jump to content

Off with the old and...never mind


Mick

Recommended Posts

I was reflecting today on how much the equipment we use has evolved over the last twenty years or so, but more on the way in which we are almost obliged to embrace new technology with obsolescence built in. I was chatting with Glen Sanders a few days ago, lamenting the demise of my backup Deva 2 which only a few short years ago cost me $10k and which is already an electronic dinosaur. Back in the day the only upgrades we had to cope with were stereo and then time code nagras. Not nearly as big a deal as the upgrades currently available from Deva 2 to Deva 5 to Deva 5.8 to Deva Fusion, not to mention the advancements in SD machines and Cantar etc etc. I'm not saying of course that we have to make ALL of those transitions, it's just that the game and the market are different now. Producers are demanding the latest and greatest in digital recorders, some without a clue as to what they are or what they can do. Wireless is going through a similar transition. Zaxcom is raising the bar pretty high on a regular basis with Lectrosonics close on their heels with the octopad.

The amount of money required for a mixer to maintain up to date equipment is quite staggering and I hope that at some point Zaxcom, Cantar, SD and all the other manufacturers of digital recorders find a plateau of technology that they can reside on for a while. Maybe sell lots of one model machine rather than introducing new ones every few months. I know, it'll never happen. Wishful thought for the day.

Mick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear ya Mick. Seems that the only tools in our rigs that keeps their value over the years is our microphones. Our mixers do well too, but I see that changing as well. I love all the new stuff, but... I wish the Zaxcoms, Sound Devices, Lecrosonics of the world would offer a healthy discount price on their products for cash purchases, or carry paper on say the 2nd half of the full price. Might make it easier for some of us to pull the trigger on the new gear.

As for Producers, I feel it is in our best interest to educate them in a friendly manner to the plus n minus aspect to all workflows. This is true of Post as well. Good teamwork is in everyones interest IMO. I'm sure it is your opinion as well as your practice. Take care.

CrewC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that these manufacturers are in a breakneck speed to top each other -- to our technological gain and financial ruin. As I see networks trying to dial back the weekly package price of equipment rental from $2000/week to $1850 (and worse). How can we keep upgrading without the revenue to support it?

As an aside, I was shocked to hear the Producer on my recent series asking me "Why don't you use your Nagra, instead of your sound cart?"

That goes to the argument raised by Mick about Producers asking us about the latest technology. To that Producer a Nagra was the the latest technology.

Go figure.

Regards,

RL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...As an aside, I was shocked to hear the Producer on my recent series asking me "Why don't you use your Nagra, instead of your sound cart?"...

You should'a broke out the 4.2 and rolled.  Naturally, it would be a good idea to run a backup on the Deva for when the producer discovers that post can't handle Nagra tapes any longer.

John B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should'a broke out the 4.2 and rolled.  Naturally, it would be a good idea to run a backup on the Deva for when the producer discovers that post can't handle Nagra tapes any longer.

John B.

I was asked that recently by a gaffer who's been in the biz about the same number of years as me, and all I could think to say was "Well, all this digital stuff wasn't MY idea...."

Philip Perkins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so what is the best "investment" my movie students could make with their limited funds toward their careers??

Well, the two things that I suggest they could buy that they could get the most useful life from, the most value: good microphones, and good lights...

eh??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably the best thing you can buy now for your future-proofing is...... old mics........I have just seen a collection that a colleague of mine has.......fabulous.....and he picked them up in second hand stores.....old ribbon mics...all those that you wished you had one...he has several...he has been offered many thousands for some of them...its his superannuation....by the time he retires they'll be worth a mint...many he has picked up for peanuts....think about it....if you think they are expensive now......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" I would think the best "investment" that they could make would be to gain "experience" working on/with a sound crew, "

a little more about that question I frequently get asked:

these are movie students (aka film `students, but not all of them will ever use film!) and they have money burning a hole in their pocket(s), and want to know what to buy.

They aren't asking about abstract "investments" but should they buy a xxx piece of equipment.  (very often a camcorder, but sometimes they ask about a sound mixer or recorder).

there have been some good comments, some of them on the abstract, like "experience", but of course they all want to be Directors, and yes, they actually seem to really believe that just for graduating, they will go out with their student movie and folks will trip over themselves to offer them huge sums to direct their major projects. (we know that that is pretty darn optimistic, though, don't we?? --well, they do not, and some of them want to buy RED's, and HVX's, and etc. etc. or even DEVA's or SD's.  problem is, by the time they actually get to use them (remember, they don't want to be sound crew, they want to be wunderkinds!) whatever they buy will probably be obsolete; they should rent the camcorders, and mixers, and stuff, right??

we now return to this helpful discussion...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so what is the best "investment" my movie students could make with their limited funds toward their careers??

Well, as we all know, it's pretty foolish for someone of limited experience to purchase a major item like a Red camera or a Deva recorder. As you rightly point out, the gear is likely to be outdated by the time the buyer really gets to use it.

But there are a number of things that people willing to work as assistants (rather than as proteges of major players) might acquire that would serve them well into the future.

For sound people, having a first class boom pole is always a good thing. When the owner moves up to mixing, it can still supply the trainee boom person. A good headset is also worth the money.

Every aspiring cinematographer should have their own light meter. When setting lights and exposure you want to be comfortable that your readings are accurate. When you have your own you can be sure it hasn't taken any nasty falls and you can be comfortably familiar with its operation. The digital meters these days can be a significant purchase - maybe $500 or more.

And, for someone looking to work on crews, starting at the bottom, no purchase is more likely to lead to work than a pick-up truck. Productions will always hire a PA or grip with a truck before one with an Honda Civic.

David Waelder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing that newbies should be aware of will be the expectation to show up with whatever "new" gear they buy at a VERY low rate.  Some people bought RED packages as an investment to jump into the business at the middle by working for little or no money, but perhaps getting some rental for the camera and some credits and connections.

A good quote I heard recently -

"With the improvement in quality and the decreased cost of High Definition cameras, there are more opportunities to work for free than ever before."

Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This same trend is really killing the post-production business, too. It's getting to the point where post companies have to through out all their video recorders every five or six years to buy "the latest and greatest." This is a problem assuming, say, you bought 10 $100,000 D-1 machines in 1992, then have to replace them all with 1080i HD machines in 1999, then throw all those out for 24p machines in 2003, and now have to throw all that out to invest in 2K data servers today.

I think it's even worse for cinematographers. Imagine investing $100,000 in a Sony F900 in 1999, then having to replace it in 2005 with a $100,000 F950. And now you have to throw that out and get an F35 (for double the price). True, the lenses might be compatible, to a point. But all the DP/operators I know are griping, big time, about having to deal with equipment obsolescence and getting nibbled by production companies on their rental rates. That, plus having to compete with the kid down the block whose daddy just bought him a Red camera after the kid graduates from film school...

--Marc W.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  This is a much larger issue having to do with the glorious digital age.  The marvels we were promised are fleeting and ALWAYS become quickly outdated.  And rarely work as advertised.

  I think it's because the market doesn't support real research and development to make digital chips and boards that will actually hold up for 20 - 30 years.  Once a problem is found, it's too late to go and make it better since the manufacturer is already on to the new chip/board/processor that will keep them competitive (and also fail in 2-3 years).

  Anyway that's my best guess as a layman who's had to deal with "new" products that suddenly have no parts available when they spring a digital problem - perfectly good devices that are useless because one little chip stopped being made.

  I have very little faith left in digital tech, mostly because it's guaranteed that it won't be supported in 5 years.

  Dan Izen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that if all this company give a good trade in program for us the old user of their gear that will help us out in term of upgrading gears... and like a lot of you guys touch on that digital age gear are changing so fast and some gear can not be fix or upgrade... If a good trade in offer is given to those that have such problem will be great... me too have suffer with this fast changing of gear of course mine is no as bad as most of you guys... but knowing that you just bought a gear and within the next month a new and better model is out, that really upset everyone here and there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the real problem is that cameras and sound recorders have all essentially become computers. (I like one DP who calls the Red camera "a computer with a lens on it.")

And we all know that computers get obsolete in four or five years. Just try to bring your 2004 Dell or Mac back to the dealer and say, "hey, can you let me trade this in for a new one?" Not gonna happen... sadly.

--Marc W.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the real problem is that cameras and sound recorders have all essentially become computers. (I like one DP who calls the Red camera "a computer with a lens on it.")

And we all know that computers get obsolete in four or five years.

The late (but not really lamented) Stelladat had a very nice feature. The DAT transport was a removable module. One could release it with four screws and pull it out of the chassis. Stellavox specifically addressed the issue of obsolescence in their sales material by assuring potential clients that a new recording medium could replace the DAT portion of the recorder if one were developed. The mike pre-amps, power supply and metering aspects of the recorder, all more stable design elements, would carry over into the new format.

This seemed to me a very nice feature. As it happens, it probably wouldn't have worked even if the Stelladat had proven successful. That recorder duplicated with DAT the capabilities of a stereo Nagra so there were only two mike/line preamps. Later, after Jacques Sax revised it, there were four inputs. So, even if one dropped a hard drive into the chassis where the DAT transport had been, the elements of the recorder would have been less than what became necessary or wanted.

Still, modular construction that permits keeping many of the elements that don't change and scrapping only those that quickly evolve is a good way to address the challenge. We might encourage manufacturers to take this approach.

Part of that encouragement is being willing to pay the extra cost for products with that capability. It's much cheaper to build a product with all electronic components on a single circuit board. Modular construction inherently demands multiple circuit boards and higher product cost. Theoretically, it might have been possible for Sound Devices to build a 744 that had the potential to be upgraded, later, to a 788. But it would not have been possible to sell the four track machine, compete with upgrade possibilities, at a $4200 price point. And, of course, to accommodate the expected extras, the 744 would have had to be larger and heavier from the beginning. I think the initial product would not have been sufficiently successful to fuel the development of the later one if it had been weighed down with extra size and cost when introduced.

One of my other fantasies of a few years back was to take old Nagra stereo machines, available for a song, and exchange the tape transport for a hard drive. That would preserve the wonderful Nagra pre-amps, the excellent modulometers and so on. I thought the conversion might be accomplished for only, say, $1500. Then Sound Devices introduced the 702T, brand new with a warranty and all-in for $2500. Needless to say, I wasted no more time on plans to retrofit old Nagras.

The need to more frequently upgrade gear is a nuisance but the technological changes have also worked to keep the costs down. Not every time but often. A time code Nagra was $12,000 in 1992 dollars. A Sound Devices 788, with eight tracks, is half that.

If rental rates are reasonable (another thread) and work opportunities come at semi-regular intervals (still another thread) we can afford to make the upgrades.

David Waelder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" modular construction that permits keeping many of the elements that don't change and scrapping only those that quickly evolve is a good way to address the challenge. "

while I believe a number of manufacturers have tried to apply some of that thinking (and not just for sound gear!) it hasn't worked because the technology of the infrastructures has been changing, too.

remember ISA computer cards?? IDE??  SCSI??  SCSI-2??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marc:

This applies not only to the Red (which, IMHO, has caused more delays on set than even the crankiest overpaid actor sitting in their trailer), but also to our recorders as well. I have to admit I yearn for the day that I could use a piece of audio equipment that doesn't have a mouse or keyboard attached to it.

Just in case you think that the "film" business still exists; a friend of mine who is a re-recording mixer recounted a mix session from around 2 years ago. For reasons I don't recall, they were actually mixing to a workprint (how's that for quaint!). At one point, the film broke, and the mixer asked the editor to go up to the booth and splice it. The editor responded "I don't know how, I've never worked with film". The mixer was flabbergasted, and knew at that point that the business as we know it had changed forever.

--Scott

I think the real problem is that cameras and sound recorders have all essentially become computers. (I like one DP who calls the Red camera "a computer with a lens on it.")

And we all know that computers get obsolete in four or five years. Just try to bring your 2004 Dell or Mac back to the dealer and say, "hey, can you let me trade this in for a new one?" Not gonna happen... sadly.

--Marc W.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At one point, the film broke, and the mixer asked the editor to go up to the booth and splice it. The editor responded "I don't know how, I've never worked with film". The mixer was flabbergasted, and knew at that point that the business as we know it had changed forever.

--Scott

I was speaking with a young sound editor, a person who though young still had about 10 years experience, and talking about cutting sound on mag...  "what's mag?" he asked.

-  Jeff Wexler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At one point, the film broke, and the mixer asked the editor to go up to the booth and splice it. The editor responded "I don't know how, I've never worked with film".

I was speaking with a young sound editor, a person who though young still had about 10 years experience, and talking about cutting sound on mag...  "what's mag?" he asked.

Oh, I think I can top these. Or, at least match them.

A few years ago I was starting a small straight-to-video film. The production company had rented some office space in a building on Magnolia Blvd. in Burbank that largely serviced the entertainment industry. The previous client in that suite had been another film production company or an editing client. In any event, the largest room was dominated by a six-plate KEM that had yet to be moved out. I made a comment to the editor about cutting on a KEM and he didn't know what I was talking about, didn't know what a KEM was. I then referenced the gigantic beast dominating the very room where we were sitting. (truly the elephant in the room) He replied that he didn't know what that was.

David Waelder

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...