Bill Davis
Forum Replies Created
-
The overall topic – as well as this 1997 video (one of a long line of corporate “in jokes” on the subject) is so famous that it has it’s own wiki entry…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turboencabulator
-
I find it a heck of a lot faster than before. Now, it’s just launch log and transfer and pop in your CF card. The card files show up in the FCP log and transfer window and allow you to select the clips you do or don’t want to transcode. Mark the files and the batch starts. The new clips show up transcoded right in your designated FCP logging bin.
This has improved my workflow a LOT.
-
Having used both extensively I can say with some authority that there is NO significant qualitative audio difference. If you’d be happy with A – you’ll be happy with B.
I think the RE-50 looks a bit retro these days – and the the Beyer is somewhat sleeker and more modern in design – but that’s splitting hairs and someone could argue exactly the opposite since it’s a taste thing.
They are both excellent, workhorse dynamic interview mics.
Maybe you should make your selection based on whether you’d like to uber-micro-fractionally change the balance of payments between either the US and Japan or the US and Germany?
There’s nothing to HEAR in the choice – either way.
-
I agree.
Somewhere in my heart, I can sense a new approach to information arrangement and display. But the unfortunate choice of example typography and the juvenile twirling/whirling eye candy has obscured that capability so effectively that I didn’t want to spend more time investigating whatever is in the engine behind it.
This reminds me of the RED camera. Somebody decided that the target group for that $20,000-$200,000+ gizmo consisted entirely of people who based their life’s design aesthetic on the movie Alien – and that all the design therefore had to be the coldest possible angular steel, spikey embellishments, and glowing, throbbing red against dingy mud-steel grunge. Look, I admire HR Geiger as much as the next guy – but he was the center of my life’s design aesthetic once upon a time in college. And that was 30++ years ago now.
Similarly, the design of this web site obscures something that might be very practical with a modified ransom note design that looks like the work of a new Mac owner circa 1989 – about 5 years after their personal discover that there are a LOT of fancy type faces in their zippy new computer.
Sigh.
Time to grow up folks.
-
Perhaps the bottom line for all of this is to review the two basic realities of VO.
There are two major aspects of VO quality.
Performance and recording.
The microphone affects ONLY the recording.
Most excellent mics attempt to make ACCURATE recordings of the sounds being presented to them. While they may have “character” – especially when combined with the driving pre-amp and any other equipment in the recording chain – the central fact of VO recording is that no microphone will ever actually make someone who doesn’t sound good – sound good. It won’t make someone a better reader or performer. And all the processing in the world can’t fix someone who splashes sibalent sounds or can’t properly attack fricatives or enunciate vowels or who fails to know when it’s important to glide over elides or to work hard to separate them in order to make inter-word editing easier.
Think about it this way. If you know someone who’s an excellent singer. You can put up an SM-57 feeding a 1968 Wolensack reel to reel tape recorder and the end result will be a pleasing recording that is a joy to listen to.
Put ME singing into a Naumann M-149 through a Grace preamp – and I’ll still scare all the cats out of the neighborhood.
Mics matter a bit. Talent ALWAYS matters more.
-
If you still have the card with the original footage, there’s a new update to the Canon firmware that does the ProRes 422 encode faster and simpler.
You should check that out. It avoides some of the problems associated with multi-step transcoding.
-
My intent was not to critique the article. Only to point out that in today’s rapidly changing world of information, it’s more and more necessary to audit what we send out to insure that we’re not propagating out of date information.
I understand that it’s hard to put a “kill date” on content when we don’t know what a company like Canon plans for future updates. However, the act of sending out a promotional piece DOES imply that the sending organization be mindful of the continued accuracy of that information.
The article in question states somewhat obsolete “facts” about the camera’s capabilities – particularly with regard to essential elements like audio capabilities – which might cause someone to dismiss it as a choice, not knowing that those capabilities have been revised.
Again, I’m NOT taking the COW to task for being “imperfect” We’re ALL imperfect. Just pointing out that the new realities of internet information distribution unfortunately puts a HIGHER burden on those who wish to be considered RELIABLE CONTENT to look at the older ways of doing thing (e.g. simply emailing an article written a month or more prior without vetting the content) and thinking about what this means in the new era.
Again, no snap intended on Bessie. Just pointing out a harsh reality of the new “instant information” mode we all have to live in.
Put another way – the requirements of article vetting are one thing when you put out a paper magazine with a 3 month lead time. But quite another when you have a business plan that includes instant “e-mail blasts” of the same re-purposed content.
It’s impossible to be perfect. But it’s also OK in my view to point out the pitfalls in a workflow in order to help others avoid things they likely don’t actually wish to do.
FWIW.
-
5dMk ii footage keys very well.
I did a project in October where a bunch of product managers demonstrated items going out for retail sales for the Holiday season. Here’s a simple key pulled from the product shoot.
The original is 5dMkii HD video. The video file was brought directly into FCP and it’s internal simple GS keyer used to pull the key. The original background was green, (as you can see at the edges of the widest part of the shot) so I swapped it for garish pink, in order to let you judge the key edges better. I also did a freeze frame of a guy who turned out to be a VERY good sport – he’s a product manager – NOT a video pro and I’m freezing him in a very un-flattering position so the company logo on his shirt is obscured. This is for learning only. Do not copy and past the poor guy all over the internet, please.
Clip is cropped and grabbed from a 100% FCP Canvas Window with a simple screen grabber.
File here: files.me.com/davisbill/79wfqw
That’s a very basic 5dMkii key via FCP.
-
OC White makes the largest selection.
Check in the B&H Catalog.
The type of arm you need is based on the weight of the mic and how you want to mount it.
My TLM 103 which is 450 grams is fine on the medium weight arm.
The Rode NT2 is almost TWICE as heavy. 800 plus grams. So you may need the triple sprung arm.
(I guess the folks at Neumann engineering didn’t feel any extra weight to be necessary in order to achieve quality in mic design?)
YMMV.
GOod luck.
-
Here’s the best trick of all.
Whatever light you set up on the talent….
Set exactly the SAME light pointed directly at YOU the director. If you can’t direct with that sucker shining in YOUR eyes, then how can you expect the talent to do their job under the same conditions?
(can you tell I used to do talent work in my early days?)
That said, one thing that does help. Brighten up the area behind the camera. As a talent there’s nothing worse than being all lit up yourself yet the entire behind camera area is pitch dark. Your iris’s want to open up to see in the darkness – but the bright key lights make them want to shut down to pinpoints. The result is squint city.
That’s also why setting an equivalent light on any off-camera interviewer will make for a more natural interview. The questions will be coming to the talent from a person – not a black shapeless mass.