[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Broadcast TV vs Home Theatre.
- To: be176 at lafn.org, multiple recipients of <telecine at sun.alegria.com>
- Subject: Re: Broadcast TV vs Home Theatre.
- From: rob at sun.alegria.com (Rob Lingelbach)
- Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 21:17:55 -0700
- In-Reply-To: be176 at lafn.org (Lars Lundeberg) "Broadcast TV vs Home Theatre." (Jul 18, 19:28)
- Old-Return-Path: <rob>
- Organization: Altruistic Intentions, Hollywood, CA
- Phone-number: +1 213 464 6266
- Reply-To: Rob Lingelbach <rob at alegria.com>
- Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 21:18:08 -0700 (PDT)
- Resent-From: telecine at sun.alegria.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"qIKee.A.bPF.6_D0z" at sun>
- Resent-Sender: telecine-request at sun.alegria.com
- Resent-To: multiple recipients of <telecine at sun.alegria.com>
On Jul 18, 19:28, Lars Lundeberg wrote:
} Subject: Broadcast TV vs Home Theatre.
> I'm an audio guy, specialized in broadcast, where we sometimes have to
> squeeze in wide and dynamic sounds from a concert or movie into the
> confined environment of a small speaker, screaming for recognition in a
> noisy home. We often have to sacrifice dramatic/artistic depth for clarity.
This is a really good point.
I often make the comparison between sound mixing and color correction
when explaining the subjective nature of my job to people... and in
the same staple introductory paragraph, I mention the width of the
information from film that we have to squeeze into video's narrow space.
I'll comment a little on commercial work, which is what I tend to do.
Sometimes the transfers are done for clarity, as for example with car
running footage (shots of vehicles outdoors in driving situations). I
just finished a large package of running footage for Nissan and each
shot had to show the car's or truck's color to best advantage, which
at times sacrificed the shot itself-- I couldn't bring out the warmth
of the sun, for example, without erasing the delicate deep green of
the particular truck. The product tends to win in these cases...
> - TV commercials: Do you take into consideration the programming they
> most likely will appear within? (To melt in or stand out?)
No, never. Commercials are meant to make their own statements, for
their creators intend to supercede the surrounding programming.
> Do you sometimes monitor through "soiling devices" in order to
> compensate for what your signal may have to go through later? (In audio
> we do)
I know you do (Auratones) and have always wondered if it might be
interesting to have an array of different 'reference' ;-) home
monitors in the back of the room. But I think the analogy breaks down
a little here; TV's have more variables than speakers.
I used to assert somewhat religiously that there can only be one color
monitor in the telecine bay, but have relaxed to the point of having
my DUI color monitor in the console.. there is only one 'reference'
monitor. Often the most attention to telecine transfer of commercials
is not necessarily given to how the spot will look on the air, but how
it will look on the DP's (Art Director's, Director's) reel. For that
reason sometimes I watch out with saturated reds.
> (P.S. I like blue. Could you crank up the blue..? D.S.)
in the gain, blacks, or midranges? or just secondary blue, i.e. where
there is already blue, saturate it more? or would you like to
tone/tint the shot? ;-)
[Pacific Ocean Post, senior colorist, Santa Monica, CA]
Rob Lingelbach | 2660 Hollyridge Dr., Los Angeles, CA 90068
rob at alegria.com | "I care not much for a man's religion whose dog or
rob at info.com | cat are not the better for it." --Abraham Lincoln
rob at cloister.org KB6CUN http://www.alegria.com
mailinglist digest available......posting guidelines on the webpage
the Telecine Internet Group <http://www.alegria.com/telecinehome.html>