Home

Go Back   IndieTalk - Indie Film Forum > Making The Film > DIY

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-30-2017, 04:25 PM   #1
cgl102770
Basic Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 20
Sound for documentary style horror film

I've heard different things about this. Some youtube videos say its okay to use your cameras mic as long as the subject isnt more than a few feet away. Others have told me, though that I need to use a sound guy. Since this is documentary/Blair With style, a sound guy isn't practical. If I buy an external mic that attaches to the camera (Sony FDR-AX53), do you all think that will be good enough for most scenes, as long as the characters are within a few feet of the camera? Thank you for any feedback.
cgl102770 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today   #1A
film guy
Basic Member
 
Posts: 17

 
Old 07-30-2017, 07:53 PM   #2
FZL
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 3
I dont have much experience about documentary style but I did one short horror film as a sound recordist. For me, a good microphone will never disappoint you, but for some scenes you might want to produce a clear, audible sound.

Last year, a friend of mine shot a short film in the woods. The story was incredible but the audio was very disturbing because it was full of the sound of the actors walking on the grass.

Yes, I agree that in documentary style a sound recordist would be impractical. My suggestion is to find a good microphone for your camera, and have one or two lavalier microphone for your actors. There might be some dialogues, screams, or whispering that couldn't be captured by attached microphone.

That is just an opinion. For me, better safe than sorry. Good luck.
FZL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2017, 09:39 PM   #3
AcousticAl
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: South of the Mason-Dixon
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgl102770 View Post
Since this is documentary/Blair With style, a sound guy isn't practical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FZL View Post
Yes, I agree that in documentary style a sound recordist would be impractical.
At what point did "documentary style" come to mean "sound recordist is impractical"? There are plenty of documentaries out there, as well as doc-style programming, that have used recordists and PSMs. You do what you have to do to get the sound right in production so you don't have to try and polish a turd in post. Plus, keeping your actors within a couple feet of the camera at all times is pretty constrictive to shot selection. That makes no sense.

And Blair Witch had sound support, so...
AcousticAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2017, 11:13 PM   #4
Alcove Audio
Basic - Premiere Expired
 
Alcove Audio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fairfield County, CT
Posts: 7,532
Just to back up AcousticAl, "Blair Witch" used a substantial amount of ADR; about $1million was invested in audio post by the distributor to make the sound palatable to the movie-going public.

As for
Quote:
as long as the characters are within a few feet of the camera
If your shot is over the shoulder your subject is speaking AWAY from the mic.

Start with great sound. That way you have control over what type of and how much you want to "worldize" the dialog, rather than having to fight and compromise to get things intelligible.
Alcove Audio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 05:27 AM   #5
FZL
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 3
I only did documentary once, i just want to put the previous comment into perspective. I think both of you (AcousticAI and Alcove Audio) gave better suggestion. Thanks anyway. Great lessons for me today.
FZL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 07:06 AM   #6
Sweetie
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 4,298
I'm currently editing a documentary with about half of the interview footage having only camera audio. It's terribad.
Sweetie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2017, 10:59 AM   #7
directorik
IndieTalk's Resident Guru
 
directorik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: hollywood
Posts: 9,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by FZL View Post
I only did documentary once,
What did you do for sound on that one?
directorik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 09:34 AM   #8
cgl102770
Basic Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 20
Thank you for the replies, as you can tell filmmaking is pretty new to me. Does PSM have to do with wearing a mic? I think I'd rather do that instead of using a sound guy, if the quality is comparable.

Last edited by cgl102770; 08-06-2017 at 09:39 AM.
cgl102770 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 09:41 AM   #9
AcousticAl
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: South of the Mason-Dixon
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgl102770 View Post
Thank you for the replies, as you can tell filmmaking is pretty new to me. Does PSM have to do with wearing a mic?
Production Sound Mixer

This is the person who handles the sound mix and recording on set and on location. A PSM often works with a larger sound crew that includes a couple of boom ops, so the PSM sits at a cart with a mixer, wireless receivers, cable runs, video confidence monitor. The boom ops, obviously, swing the boomed mics.

On smaller scale productions, you may see someone referred to as a recordist, and that person is likely running from a bag that has a mixer and the wireless receivers and camera hops, and is also holding the boom. Kind of a one-person sound crew.
AcousticAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 12:18 PM   #10
buscando
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: L.A.
Posts: 728
I'm still a bit fuzzy on this after researching mixers. Is using a mixer preferable to having a separate recorder for each mic? Once the mixer sends the signal to one recorder/camera, doesn't that limit being able to adjust volumes of the different elements?
buscando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2017, 07:05 PM   #11
Alcove Audio
Basic - Premiere Expired
 
Alcove Audio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fairfield County, CT
Posts: 7,532
Every situation is different. However, the recent "standard" is for a boomed mic and lavs on each actor with a speaking part. On a "professional" shoot the production sound mixer will record each mic onto a single audio recorder separately, record a combined "mix" track which the editor uses, and will probably send a mix to the video village, the camera (if it is digital) and to the DP & director.
Alcove Audio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 08:36 AM   #12
AcousticAl
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: South of the Mason-Dixon
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by buscando View Post
Is using a mixer preferable to having a separate recorder for each mic?
Well, the two aren't mutually exclusive, but we're not talking about separate recorders. So I also want to clarify what Alcove said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alcove Audio View Post
On a "professional" shoot the production sound mixer will record each mic onto a single audio recorder separately...
If, for example, there are three actors and three wireless systems, plus a boom op, we'd be talking about four individual sound recorders floating around the set. That's too much to handle, and there's no way for the PSM to monitor that many devices in any practical way.

What we're actually talking about here, and what I think Alcove meant to say, was that the PSM will record each mic onto an individual record track. There are a few ways to go about this:

Using a mixer such as the Sound Devices 442 allows the PSM to send a mix of the four inputs to camera, to video village, etc. The 442 also has direct outputs for each input, meaning it has an isolated copy of each input signal that is sent out of the mixer. Those direct outs can be fed to a multi-track recorder like the Sound Devices 744T.

More current offerings from SD (688, 644, 633) combine the mixer and the multitrack recorder into a single device, so you could have 6 mics coming into the mixer, recorded to isolated tracks, plus a mix recorded to a master stereo track pair, plus outputs from the mixer sent to camera, video village, etc.

Those are for bag work. On larger, cart-based productions, you may have a standalone mixer that feeds direct outs to a computer for multi-track recording through a program like Boom Recorder.

There's a catch here, though. Some of the higher-end wireless systems (have like Zaxcom) have wireless transmitters that also record the signal. This provides a failsafe, though, and is rarely used as a primary source. It's a backup in case of transmission interruption.

I see a lot of amateurs, and a lot of low-budget folks who work alone, using small recorders planted on actors, or for weddings on the bride, groom, and priest/pastor, and let them roll unmonitored. This is clumsy and unreliable. I'd never want to trust my sound recording to something I couldn't monitor the whole time. Tascam makes a small recorder that is designed to run as a throughput from some wireless transmitters, between the lav and the transmitter, but again that's just a failsafe and should not be the primary or only source of recorded sound from that mic.

Last edited by AcousticAl; 08-07-2017 at 08:40 AM.
AcousticAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2017, 04:30 PM   #13
buscando
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: L.A.
Posts: 728
Thanks a lot for the info
buscando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2017, 10:34 AM   #14
cgl102770
Basic Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 20
Thanks again for the great replies everyone. I was talking with a friend who's shot decent short films, and he was saying that if using lavs, I should have a professional sound person attach them to the actors? Also, he said this setup may not work to well even if I do use a pro sound person, because if the actors have to move at all in the scene the mic will probably pick up too much noise of their clothes moving, etc. I hope I'm making sense here, thank you for any replies.
cgl102770 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2017, 11:00 AM   #15
AcousticAl
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: South of the Mason-Dixon
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgl102770 View Post
I was talking with a friend who's shot decent short films, and he was saying that if using lavs, I should have a professional sound person attach them to the actors?
If you want good sound results, hire a pro.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cgl102770 View Post
Also, he said this setup may not work to well even if I do use a pro sound person, because if the actors have to move at all in the scene the mic will probably pick up too much noise of their clothes moving, etc. I hope I'm making sense here, thank you for any replies.
If you use a pro sound person, that person will know how to bury a lav in the actor's wardrobe so that it doesn't rub when the actor moves.

Lavs shouldn't be the primary source, though. Wireless transmissions will fail. Sometimes the actor may sweat through the adhesive holding the mic in place. Most of all, lavs have a distinct sound that isn't interpreted as very "natural" by the viewer's ear. A shotgun, or a hypercardioid in some situations, on a boom pole is the first and best option. Lavs and wireless systems are great when the shot makes getting the boom close enough an impossibility, or as a backup if the boom ends up off-axis or for some other reason sucks for a moment.
AcousticAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


©IndieTalk