Question about doing Foley.

[ironpony]

If I'm making short films that I don't plan on selling for distribution, but showing off online and at festivals, then I won't need a clean audio track for the producers, right? If not, do I foley a whole scene? What if an actor is typing on a computer or moving papers while talking for example, and the mic not only picked up his voice but picked up the paper sound clearly? Do I have to redo all the paper sounds? Same goes for drinking out of a bottle, or any other example where the mic picked up what the actor was doing with his hands or even footsteps? Do I need to redo all the foley for that? Or is it essential to redo all of it, to get better quality, since the mic can be aimed differently in Foley? But I do want to build to professional level, but at the same time, since I do all my movies myself, it would be nice to know if there are any acceptable short cuts to get them done quicker.

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

If I'm making short films that I don't plan on selling for distribution, but showing off online and at festivals, then I won't need a clean audio track for the producers, right? If not, do I foley a whole scene? What if an actor is typing on the computer while talking for example, and the mic not only picked up his voice but picked up the typing sounds perfectly. Do I have to redo all the typing sounds? Same goes for drinking out of a bottle, or any other example where the mic picked up what the actor was doing with his hands. Do I need to redo all the foley for that? Or is it essential to redo all of it, to get better quality, since the mic can be aimed differently in Foley?

Having recently shot a short film which had a scene were 'typing' appeared to happen, I asked the actor to 'fake' hitting the keys, and would add in typing sounds later.

For 'drinking'... well actors should not be talking and drinking at the same time... that's called gargling... but if at a table, the actor who is not talking may be eating, drinking, whatevering, should be as 'quiet' as possible while still going through the motions, if the motions are required for a scene, while the dialog actor delivers their lines. Sounds would be added later... same is true for 'background' people in a restaurant setting. The background sounds are added later.

I don't consider 'shorts' to be throwaway projects. They are learning projects, at least for me, and have the benefit that one's commitment is far less than a 'feature', and so one can attend to these details until they become 'habits'.

This sort of approach does have it's consequences. People who want to throw **** up on youtube, and expect the 'project to be done as soon as the shooting stops'... maybe come frustrated and get pissed off and start creating a ruckus...

 

[Alex H.]

Let's clarify a couple of things about Foley first:

1) Please capitalize it before Scott bursts a major vessel in his cranium. It is a proper name.

2) If you're listening to sounds that were recorded with dialog during production, you aren't "redoing" Foley by doing Foley. If it's recorded in production sound, it isn't Foley.

Now, on large production many of the things that you think you hear - things that ARE replaced by Foley and FX - are often padded so as not to create sound that fights with dialog (or gets picked up by the mics, for that matter). For example, shoes will be fitted with felt padding on the soles to dampen footsteps. Planning for these things should be part of pre-production and props, scene, and wardrobe design.

There will always be sounds from actors' movements that will be picked up with dialog. These sounds may make it into the final edit, but on large-scale productions you'll have dialog editors who may piece lines together to clean up those sounds, which will then be replaced by FX and Foley. it depends on the sound, how much it fights with dialog (if at all), if it's important enough to make sure the viewer hears it "larger than life", etc.

On small-scale productions, and on TV dramas, you'll find more of those little bits and pieces from production sound that are used rather than replaced. For your short films, if you cannot work around it then make the best of it. And if it sounds good to you, go with it. But again, some things can be eliminated during production by padding the objects that make noise, allowing you the flexibility to replace them in post without hacking up the dialog.

Perfect example of a quiet set during production: https://vimeo.com/52926080

Pay close attention starting at 4:45 where they talk about the cockpit scene. There's a clip of the raw production audio, and while you'll hear a couple of things outside of dialog, it is remarkably clean.

 

[ironpony]

Okay thanks. I already new about the padding. But I have never done that as people just don't want me padding their things. And the actors don't drink when they talk, the sound is still rolling while they drink in between lines. Let's say all that drinking, typing, paper shuffling, and footsteps got recorded on set, through the same boom mic. Should I just use that if it sounds clear, and will sound the most accurate since it was recorded on set?

 

[Richard Crowley]

... What if an actor is typing on a computer or moving papers while talking for example, and the mic not only picked up his voice but picked up the paper sound clearly? Do I have to redo all the paper sounds?...

If you "picked up the paper [or whatever] sound clearly", and it was in the proper proportion to the dialog, why would you want to redo it?

OTOH, if any (ANY) of the sounds were concurrent (overlapping) with the dialog, then there is no practical way to separate them or otherwise adjust them independently. And THAT is why we typically want to record sounds SEPARATELY, so that we have better control over them during post-production mixing. Now, if you are doing a semi-casual production where "natural" sounds are acceptable, then by all means try to record the sounds along with the dialog. But be prepared to:
1) Live with the proportions of the sound vs. the dialog if they are not appropriate.
2) Take some time to experiment before shooting to get the mic in just the right position to pick up the sounds AND the dialog in the desired proportion.
3) Scrap the audio track and reproduce the dialog with ADR, and the sounds with Foley.

it would be nice to know if there are any acceptable short cuts to get them done quicker.

"There are no short cuts on sound , just audible compromises." - Peter Groom

 

[Noiz2]

Oh got I'm bleeding from my temples......


Ok got a grip now ;~)

As Alex said Foley is a specialized thing not just every FX. Most of what you hear in a film is FX (other than dialog and music) and only a small part is Foley, usually.

And I would say there are short cuts. At least short cuts over what a big budget Hollywood post would do. Big budget filmmaking is very wasteful. It's wasteful because it's cheaper to be wasteful, strange world.

Anyway there is no reason for you to be wasteful.

On low budget films I will use production FX (PFX)(sounds that are not dialog but recorded during production) when the work, or when they can be goosed and I can't remove them. In a lot of cases the lame off mic sound of the FX from production can just have a better sound layers on top.

Say for example you have the bad guy talking while "shooting" some prop gun that just clicks. well you may not be able to get rid of the clicks but if you add a gunshot on top it will drown out the click and presto chango you have a "shortcut" and it sounds good.

It's pretty rare that the production FX sound any good. It's also not so common that they neatly fall away from dialog so you can cut them out.

You are not going to do a DM&E so big deal, you don't have to have an PFX free dialog track.

There is no right or wrong really just what works for the story. IF the paper sound are right, use them. If they could use help, help them by layering some other sounds on top. If the suck and are distracting get rid of them.

The short version is to know what Hollywood would do and then do what is best for you and gets you closest to that high standard in a way that is actually achievable for the time, budget, and skill set. I can probably cheat more than you can because I have a lot more experience but the rule is still the same. Make it sound good, smooth, and professional.

You need to be padding things where possible. You can do that with out harming them and if people have a problem with that you either have not explaind it well or they should not be close to a set.

 

[Noiz2]

...

Perfect example of a quiet set during production: https://vimeo.com/52926080

Pay close attention starting at 4:45 where they talk about the cockpit scene. There's a clip of the raw production audio, and while you'll hear a couple of things outside of dialog, it is remarkably clean.

That was really a nice BTS. A cool side part was that it turns out I know the producer (of the BTS). But Randy was good at talking about the parts. What he doesn't mention is that many years before very early in his career he was one of the recordists for Never Cry Wolf. There is a shot in that where the planes engines cut out. They had time (post on NCW ran about three years...) so they actually took THE plane up and cut the engines and just dived down, for a LONG time, and then swooped out and started the engines again. Then he had to do it again because you could hear the puke bag making noise on the first take. It sounds like everything on the plane is about to vibrate apart. And that is just the actual recording. Very high sphincter rating. So Randy really does know what a crashing plane sounds like ;~)