Todd Terry
1
COW Coin
Forum Replies Created
-
I think before offering a solution, I would ask the question “Why does it have to be wireless?”
I know there are many factors about the job that we don’t know, but I didn’t see anything in the post that would require this to be a wireless situation. Hardwired would be so much easier and free of the numerous challenges that a wireless system would have to overcome.
Can you give us more details? Let’s hear a little more about the job… and what are the needed transmit distances?
T2
-
I agree….
I think step 1 would be to save all your mono tracks to stereo.
Step two would be to make sure all the new tracks you acquire (or replace) are stereo.
You can sit there and listen to mono tracks (via) two speakers and it can sound pretty good… but compare that to a true stereo version of the same cut and you’ll really say “Oh, wow,” especially if you can compare them back-to-back. Even if there aren’t any real discernable left-channel or right-channel instruments, stero tracks will have a much fuller, richer, more open sound.
Since you are talking about music in the film, I think it would definitely be a disservice NOT to use stereo tracks whenever possible.
T2
-
A lot of it has to do with what exactly you are looking for… and what you want your “sound” to be.
For example, yes, Killer Tracks music is pretty darn good for the price. Unfortunately, so much so that you will find their library in just about every production company in the country. Even with hundreds of cuts you end up hearing the same ones over and over. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard Project A (say, an infomercial in California) and been able to instantly identify it as the same music as Project B (say, an industrial film from Florida).
The same is true not just for Killer, but the other big libraries and laser-drop providers as well (Frank Gary, etc.).
I tend to have better luck getting a fresh sound by looking at the more obscure music providers… do an internet search and you will find their are BUNCHES of them.
T2
-
[Steve Wargo] “When you’re using a Hollywood level color timing system, like a Divinci, one can perform miracles”
Yeppers, but it’s not limited to “Hollywood level.” At the post house where we do 35mm telecine, they do tons of tape-to-tape correction in their DaVinci Renaissance suite as well. For some people, even those on a budget, the scene could easily be worth the couple of hundred bucks that it would cost to get a professional colorist to work on it.
I’m all for saving money, and doing it myself… but I also know there are other people out there that certainly more specialized than me and I try to take advantage of that when I can. And sometimes time is worth more than money.
T2
-
Bottom line… this is the director’s problem. AND his fault for hiring the yahoo of a DP. But if he is fine with the work, so be it.
The editor should feel free to express his opinions about the quality or lack thereof… but if the work is ok with the director and/or producer, why beat a dead horse?… cut it, and move on. It doesn’t sound like this is a project that is destined for anyone’s reel anyway, no matter how well the editor (or anyone else) “saves it.”
As for the director… he’s either an idiot, somone who has no business directing, or a wimp. Again, I fault the director for putting up with it. As a director myself, my DP (or ANYONE on my crew) is free to make suggestions about ANYthing. However, that’s what they are…suggestions, which I am free to take or leave. I’ve never had an argument with a DP over which framing (or composition or camera move or whatever) was better for one simple reason: the argument would be a waste of time, because as the director I’m going to win. Period. If Mr. French was working for me and wanted to go on a ten-minute tirade about anything that wasn’t the way I saw it he would be making his argument from his car as he drove away.. for good.
And I’m not a hardass… I’m a peach, actually.
T2
-
Since SOOOO much of this can be done in post these days, if I were shooting any day-for-night stuff I think I might get a few unfiltered normal-exposure takes as well.
Watch the behind-the-scenes stuff from Zumeckis’ “Cast Away.” All of the nighttime “on the beach” stuff with Tom Hanks was shot in broad daylight… harsh sun, in fact… judging from the raw footage it didn’t look like it had any special filtration on it, and it certainly wasn’t underexposed. But dang it if it didn’t look just like moonlight once they finished working on it.
T2
-
I think I’ve tried out most of the “mini” HDV cameras… we finally settled on the Canon XLH1 and have been using it as our primary shooter since shortly after they came out.
I can’t say enough good things about this camera… it is one of the few “minis” that I have ever picked up that seemed like a “real” professionl camera right from the get-go.
I won’t go on and on about its features and capabilities… those details are easy enough to find in reviews on the net… but I’ll just say I have not found a single thing that I really dislike about the camera. I think its only real shortcoming is the viewfinder, but its resolution is as good or better than all other cameras in its category (basically, pretty much all the viewfinders on HDV camera have serious shortcomings, especially if you rely on them for critical focusing when shooting HD). If you could pair an XLH1 with an Accuscene viewfinder, then you’d really have something (but then of course the finder would cost a fair bit more than the camera).
We usually use just the XLH1 body married with a P+S Technik converter and cinema lenses… but even with the stock Canon video lens the picture is abstolutely outstanding.
It’d be worth trying to borrow or rent one for day or two just to play with it.
Just my two cents….
T2
-
I’m sure you’ve thought of this, but by FAR the easiest way to get consistently, good, usable video from a DVD is simply to play it in a stand-alone set-top type DVD player and capture the footage into Premiere.
That sure would eliminate all the hoops that you have to jump through in order to try to convert the VOB files, which are notoriously troublesome anyway.
By the way, does your friend know you refer to him as a “very low level actor”? 🙂
Todd
-
Just thought of another potential solution, depending on the shoot format…
You said this was an HD movie… but I got to thinking that maybe that means you are cutting it in HD, but the acquisition format might have been film, transferred to HD for editing (a couple of your terms like “dailies” and “rolls” makes me think that’s the case).
If so… and you decide that blowing up the frames can help the composition, you could insist that they have the negative re-telecined and enlarge it optically at that stage of the game, rather than enlarging the HD version which would lose resolution.
If that’s the case, you could blow up 16mm or S16mm a tiny bit (although not much) without noticable resolution loss or grain increase. If it was shot on 35mm or S35mm, you could probably blow it up tons before HD showed grain or resolution problems.
Downside: another 10-hour telecine session would be costly… but it might take that to salvage the project.
T2
-
Sounds to me like the director is just as big a problem as cin