Putting advice in perspective

Noiz2

Sound Ninja
An issue that has come up on a number of forums I'm on is the problem with answers to questions coming from very different perspectives.
I'm going to break down the "community" into three broad categories.
Commercial - public
Commercial - private
Non-Commercial


Those are kind of broad but I think they are valid.
Commercial - Public are those film and media projects that are aimed at selling to the public at large. You are going to have a product good enough that folks who know nothing about your project except the "buzz" are willing to pay to see it.

Commercial - private are projects that are pre sold. That would be industrials, even videography, documentaries that are grant funded (though this becomes one of the problem crossover situations, since you do eventually want people to come and see your film).

Non-Commercial are projects like in house films, home movies, student films, etc. This is a category that has a lot of crossover (well more like wanta be crossover) projects.

The problem that comes up is someone needs help with X and three different people give opposing advice and then start to argue over the merits of it leaving the OP in the dark. Many times they are all correct, but only from their orientation.

This comes up a lot in post sound questions because of the different routes the three take to final delivery.

In the Commercial - Public world tasks are all divided up and specialists do everything. It's really the only way to get to the polish of what Hollywood puts out. I did say "Polish" not "Quality". A high polish not so great quality film will out sell a low polish high quality film every time. It's very hard to see quality if it's just not well put together. You wouldn't hire an electrician to do your plumbing, unless you had to.

In the Commercial - Private world your selling before you shoot. You know what is important to the client and what isn't. Your focus is much more selective and your "public" is paying up front so if they are not willing to pay for X it's not going to cost you at the box office. These tend to be small tight crews with a lot of mixed of roles. This is not generally a category of many crossovers to the "big screen" Commercial - Public category.

In the Non- Commercial world there is chaos right now. It was a category that had just about a zero crossover ratio and now has a lot of crossover potential. The workflow used to be kind of a stripped down version of the Commercial - Private one with Very small crews. With the new cameras and the power of modern computers this category has the potential to make the move. BUT it generally doesn't have the orientation. If you want to compete with the big boys you need to bring polish to your projects. And that means you need to start bringing in specialists.

It gets very tricky because you can't afford to do it the "Hollywood" way,but you need to get a "Hollywood" polish. It can be done and I have posted about this before. On the visual side you can read Stu Maskowitz's blog/ books etc. The big hurdle is your orientation. You need to set some high standards and get over the fact that your making a movie. I know it's cool but gloat when it's done. Right now you need to be hypercritical of your polish. I'm going to assume you have the quality because there is no point polishing a turd. If you botched it up chalk it up as a learning tool and start your next film. When your rich and famous you can revisit and release your "directors cut", but right now you need to get a quality polished film out there.

So when I say you need to replace all the sounds and scrub your dialog and it's going to take you at least 40 tracks of sound... I'm talking from my orientation which is pretty firmly in the Commercial - Public world.

If your doing a student film that is more of a test out the camera thing or a learning how to direct short, you most certainly don't need all that. If your shooting a wedding video you, as picture editor, should go ahead and clean up the tracks and do whatever makes it work. You are not sending this to audio post, do what works for where you are.

But if your a crossover want to be, don't ask what plugin is going to make your film sound like a Hollywood blockbuster. There isn't one. You need to bring in the pro's or at least pro's of the future. You need to set your bar very high on the polish and that means sound also.
 
It really comes back to How good is goodnuf. Hearing different perspectives is good, but you are right, it may confuse a person starting out.

Grant
 
The old dictum applies here as well as anywhere else:

Speed / Quality / Cost

You can select any TWO factors at the expense of the OTHER.
Note that some combinations make greater demands on knowledge and experience. (Or access to advice such as this forum.)
 
I'm not so worried about the confusion, it's the arguments that X needs to be done to have a great sound track. Or you always need to do Y. They are generally good ideas BUT they are only good if your aiming at a specific work flow.

For instance on the Pro Tools forum there was a big thread on whether to split out dialog by character. Folks were getting very heated on the topic but they were coming from very different places and were not acknowledging that a big hunk of why they did it the way they did was because of the very specific needs of what THEY were working on.

Event videographers don't mostly need to split dialog at all. Many small projects and even some features don't need to split by character, or only need to split some sections by character. Some folks split by similar "problems". A lot of TV news kinds of stuff don't split at all. etc, etc, etc.
If posters were more specific on the context of what they do and not just saying what they do the information would be more useful. If all you have done is even videography and you are making a narrative short it's really useful to know that you should probably work with a different workflow.
 
For instance on the Pro Tools forum there was a big thread on whether to split out dialog by character. Folks were getting very heated on the topic but they were coming from very different places and were not acknowledging that a big hunk of why they did it the way they did was because of the very specific needs of what THEY were working on.

Personally I wish there were more threads like that here. At least its a discussion about the actual art of creating a mix or at least workflow.
All thats seems to happen in this forum is:
"what kinda microphone can I get for $500?"
"what kind of recorder can I get for $250?"

There is more to sound than the GEAR people!!
 
It's all true what Noiz is saying. If you want to show a "Hollywood" film....It also has to be "Hollywood" sounds which means: production mixer, boomopp, 2nd boomopp, soundassistant, ADR recorder, foley recorder, foley artist, foley editor, ADR editor, dialogue editor, SFX editor, ambiance editor, sound designer (mostly the head of sound), ambiance recorders, SFX recorders (so people who are going to record sounds). And a few assistants here and there.

And about the splitting of the dialogue....I do it when like one is a phonecall-voice... Or when I have to realy de-ess it or so something with it that I don't have to do with the other dialogue.
 
As long as we are bitching a bit about new posters, I suppose what slays me the most are the folks that spend larger money on a cam and then say "I need great sound for $250 what should I buy" Eyes roll.

Grant
 
It really comes back to How good is goodnuf. Hearing different perspectives is good, but you are right, it may confuse a person starting out.

Grant

Back in the 80's, when Mrs Fields Cookies was just about the hottest, fastest expanding specialty retailer on the planet and Debbie Fields was the darling of the media, Debbie voiced the corporate motto of "Good Enough, Never Is!." That became the philosophy that drove the way they did business. The minimum acceptable standard of performance was perfection in all respects. Later on, as the company grew past the point where Debbie and her inner circle could personally oversee everything and the organization became more "corporate," middle management began to compromise and their strict obedience to that philosophy declined. So did the company.
 
Last edited:
Well what I hate the most is "we don't have "space" for a soundassistant...... But then I'm seeing 404604450343540534530403453434343434343 lightpeople..... and 540646040534340537464354534353435 location assistants....
 
The winding road...

To defend those silly posters a bit, that is what they get taught. Film schools spend a lot of time on everything but sound. I also get aggravated by the "I really care about sound but I don't have any money left so what plugin will give me a Hollywood sound track". But really a lot of the blame should be aimed at schools not educating filmmakers and companies like Apple who's PR dept. is busy telling folks that with no training at all if you buy FCS you can be the next big director, and you don't need a crew!

The "good news" is that this is now spreading to other departments and I see ads for editors that sound like ads for sound people. So those shows that aren't putting any $ aside for sound are apparently not figuring on an editor either.

RE: is Goodnuf, good enough. The fact is that all shows no mater what the budget are compromises from the "vision". Ms Fields was setting a standard, it wasn't an uncompromised standard just a much less compromised standard. My point is that "good enough" is usually used as a euphemism for minimum acceptable, but I think the poster was trying to use it in the more accurate meaning of setting an appropriate standard. Most people on this board are shooting video, that is a compromise. So it's never about what the "perfect" thing is because we are not living in that world.

So I agree with what I think the poster was saying. I tend not to use terms like "good enough" exactly because they are often interpreted in the wrong way. Filmmaking is and art and a science. The art part you can set your bar really high and probably make it, the science part you need to take a serious look at what is "good enough" because you can go down an endless sink hole of time and money going for "quality" that doesn't translate to the screen.
 
Back
Top