[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: More Audio & Such

At 06:28 PM 7/07/96 -0700, you wrote:

> The DCT gets a pregraded feed and the SP Beta is
>> one-light from the URSA.
>I'm interested in what you mean by a "pregraded" feed. Is this a feed
directly from 
>the telecine, before the downstream color corrector (either a DaVinci or
the Sunburst 
>you mention later)? 

No, arse-about. By pregraded I mean the colourist is having a first-go at
grading the footage so that the eventual tape compile will look pretty close
to the final. Then they will do a tape-to-tape grade on the master. 

So: The _DCT_ gets the graded footage from the DaVinci. The SP gets a feed
directly out of the telecine, UN-graded, one-light, but set up to a grey
scale shot for each new batch of stock.

> We use a very similar system we call Video Interpositive, with the aim of the 
>system being the elimination of the daily color correction layer [...] as
I've always >felt that the "conventional" video post methodology of two
color correction layers is >an inherently deeply flawed system.

I think we might disappoint you here; our system was set up with the
requirement that the DOP and director get to see one-light footage so that
they can assess their lighting setups correctly. Bear in mind that our shoot
is in Poland and China, and rushes come in twice a week. So the production
sees ungraded one-lights until Online, when they see a graded version. The
decision to do a pregrade was the colourist's. 

Personally I am not yet so sure that the daily "colour correction layer" is
productive. Not so sure that is DEEPLY flawed, either ... just seems a bit
of a waste of time. But the arguments FOR, speak of stretch-grading to
maximise the effectiveness of the tape-to tape session. By putting as much
of the film detail onto a high-bandwidth digital format means you have a lot
more to play with during the tape-to-tape session, reducing the need for a
"second pass" on some of the negative! 

I'd much rather grade in a tape-to-tape session on a final program than take
shots in the dark with uncut footage.

>> Audio comes in on DAT with standard clappers. We stripe the DAT, then sync
>> to SP Betacam, keeping track of the DAT info using SHOTLISTER system. The
>> lightworks sees one set of numbers, the SP code, and we trace the dat code
>> after finecut is complete.
>In what environment do you do the synching? 

DAT, Analogue o/p to SP Betacam. The DAT codes are traced using the
excellent local software package SHOTLISTER which captures all edits made in
an offline cut suite and enables multiple generation traceback to source
codes and logged details.

>I'm also assuming that this is a 
>rather time consuming step that probably doubles the turnaround time of the

Possibly, but synching at telecine stage isn't used much around town here.
Some resistance and/or ignorance of timecode slates, time-of-day code, etc
... and the added complications of location recording.

>If so, is this done to avoid the (assumed) higher costs of doing this
during the film 

Yes I suppose so. With an URSA suite costing upwards of $AUST 700 ($US????)
and the crew o/s, the turnaround time isn't so pressing. Also, I understand
that Australian budgets in general are MUCH inferior to US budgets for the
same type of product!!!

>Here is Los Angeles, the prices for television daily transfers have been set 
>at such an artificially low point ($300/hr. is a HIGH price here) and the
>demands have been made so extreme (nearly everyone wants viewing cassettes
by 9AM, 
>even if the film is not delivered to us until 5AM!) that it is very
impractical to do 
>the synching anywhere other than the film transfer bay, 

Very interesting!!!!!

>even though I feel that the 
>telecine room is probably the most inefficient place to be synching sound. 

Yeah! Yeah!

>We've toyed 
>with the idea of synching in the non-linear editing system (primarily
Avid), but in 
>single camera production the viewing copies are a primary requirement,
making this 
>approach impractical.

Problem with synching in nonlinear is that while synching may appear faster
than tape synching, digitising time is longer (one pass for video, one pass
for sound) and since AVID time is more expensive that SP suite time I'm well
prepared to let an assistant synch to tape. Only print takes need synching,
and you can only really check dailies for technical and performance issuse
in real time anyway! So the rushes can be synched and checked by the
assistant WHILE the editor works in the nonlinear room. Then, there is only
ONE pass for digitising, and the editor can watch rushes at this stage in
real time and at full tape resolution. (important!)

Lastly, and in my opinion importantly, this method gives a high-quality
fully synched HARD COPY (SP videotape!) for reference - VHS copies go to
Exec Producer and to location - and for redigitizing at higher/lower
resolution as needed. Also, hard drives DO crash, and to reload select sync
takes off tape is FAR faster than two passes off tape and DAT and possibly

>I'm assuming all sound is reprinted from the original elements for the
final dub??

yes. DAT codes are traced via Shotlister and recompiled with handles as
required by the Audio Post house

>You might want to send email to Randy Blim at Laser Pacific (he's on the
>list). Pacific Video used to use the Sunburst a number of years ago before
>to DaVincis. He might be able to help you.

I'll try that!

Thanks for your feedback.

Matthew Tucker
Film Australia