I'm having trouble storyboarding a movie because of covid restrictions.

[Paul R Johnson]

I really wish you'd use the same terminology. Master shot and wide shot are NOT the same thing at all. A master shot is usually, but not always the wide shot.

Microphones are best considered torches. I've got a nice LED zoom torch and on wide, it's a cardioid, then it moves through hypers and supers into shotguns, then long shotgun.

In my theatre life, I always smile when we get a new follow spot operator. Everyone has told them it's easy. Everyone who says this is an idiot. Once you are good, it's easy. Keeping that circle in the right place is immensely difficult at first - predicting which way the person on stage is going to walk, and worse - the bigger the venue, the further away the spots are, and the bigger they are. Some are big enough to have considerable inertia. You need to keep the person in the beam, and if they walk out of it, you get fired! No joke. Let somebody famous plunge into darkness is the worst thing you can do. Follow spots have a lever - it controls the diameter of the beam. If you use too wide a beam, it lights up everything. Too small and it often lops their head off. Even worse - if they walk towards you the beam needs to be widened and if they go further away, narrowed.

EXACTLY like using a boom. All those things apply. If the boom is too close, the beam is too narrow, and missing their mouth is easy. Move it too far away and too many extra things appear in the beam.

I find it hard to understand you've used one of these booms - they're HUGELY expensive, and it took me a big favour to be allowed to try one out, and I know for certain that enormous amounts of practice are needed. even getting up onto one is difficult. Using a boom pole is not remotely similar. I have a rather neat gizmo that you can put onto the end of a boom pole - that when you twist the pole, it rotates the end. Even that needs good coordination.

You mentioned the lavs making noise - that too is a sound skill. Where exactly are you going to find this competent sound person? Do you have one you can call?

[Ryan Elder]

Well I was the boom operator and the sound person pointed out to the director how they wouldn't have lavs for the day. The director said they would work around it. But the director just did whatever shots he wanted and no matter if they could be framed without lavs or not. So I feel like I should be aware of that based on that experience.

I know a sound person who has lavs but he is not experienced with the boom as much so I would have to find somebody else to do the boom.

Oh and I have my own boom pole which is maybe why they ask me to, rather than me using someone else's. I feel I have gotten quite good at the booming. But when I direct, I prefer to concentrate on that, and find someone else to boom if possible, if they are good at it of course. I don't think the accuracy of the booming was the issue though. In the short film before, did the dialogue sound off axis? I thought the background noise was a problem but I thought that the aiming of the mic and the axis was overall good, unless I am wrong?

Also, I meant master shot, sorry, not wide shot. Sorry if I said wide, I meant master.

[Paul R Johnson]

What kind of people do you work with where the Director is told 50% of the shoot is no good before they shoot anything and he ignores it? You also said

I had the fisher boom one one of my shoots before

So can't you get that person? If they can operate a Fisher an ordinary boom is childs play.

You have to face facts Ryan - you need a real sound op, and you need them to have the right kit. Keep in mind, you were pretty clueless with the boom.

[Ryan Elder]

When did I say a director ignored 50 percent? I said I thought sound was 50 percent of the movie besides the visuals. I didn't use the word ignore at all, nor did I say that 50 percent of anything should be ignored. Oh okay, how was I clueless with the boom before? Did the sound sound off axis with the mouths before, and was not aimed on the mouths enough? I didn't operate the fisher, someone else did. But I operated a boom pole that I lift on some of my shoots, depending on who was there that day.

And yes I can get a real sound op. But I thought I should give them less headroom in the mastershots, so they can get the boom in closer. Unless they are so good they can boom with a shotgun mic that is like three feet away or more and it will still sound good, in some of those master shots.

[Greg Miller]

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder

It was said on here before that if the shotgun mic is aimed accurately enough, then that really helps solve the problems. I was point out how the background noise will still be a problem no matter how accurately the mic is aimed. And then it was said that sound stages help.

Well if you already know that, why did you even bother to make that statement that I quoted above (in post #140)?

A long time ago I asked you a multiple choice question, which is higher priority to you, making a movie or talking about making a movie. Your answer was "making a movie." At the time I said I didn't believe it, and every inane comment you post on here proves that what you really want to do is just talk about it, over and over, same questions, same answers, same excuses.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh sorry, when you say if I already know that, know what exactly? Or what exactly are you referring to?

[Greg Miller]

"That" refers to what was quoted immediately above my question about your knowing "that."

Your statement "I was point out how the background noise will still be a problem no matter how accurately the mic is aimed" and the surrounding context

[Ryan Elder]

Yes I see, but what about that statement was inconsistent exactly? Sorry, it's just I said that no matter how accurate you aim the mic, there will be background noise. I don't see where I said anything to contradict that, unless I am wrong?

[Greg Miller]

Originally Posted by Paul R Johnson

Keeping that circle in the right place is immensely difficult at first -

Not to mention the "good old days" when you had to make sure you had enough carbon.

[Paul R Johnson]

Ryan - it's rather sad that we remember your posts better than you.

We had tales of boom woe for weeks - strange noises, distant sounding, reverberant spaces. We've done it all before.

Read back just a bit - you said you did a movie where the director couldn't be bothered to wait for sound, so 50% of what was shot may well have had good images, but the other 50% had bad sound. The maths is quite simple. You said the director
[quote[The director said they would work around it. But the director just did whatever shots he wanted and no matter if they could be framed without lavs or not.[/quote]
He ignored sound's problem. You said it - he didn't bother. We just read what you say.

Here is a picture from a 3 set UK TV programme - really good audio - lots of actors, plenty of headroom and just 3 booms. No lavs. Made the same way sit coms were in the 60s and 70s and has excellent audio. No shotguns, just cardioids - back in the old days - they used AKG D25's but then lighter weight cardioids became popular (451s). The extra width of a cardioid means they can cover multiple people. Short shotguns work, but they're perhaps a bit too narrow for some uses. long ones even tougher to aim.

[Greg Miller]

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder

Yes I see, but what about that statement was inconsistent exactly? Sorry, it's just I said that no matter how accurate you aim the mic, there will be background noise. I don't see where I said anything to contradict that, unless I am wrong?

As usual, you are missing the point. It's not a question of being consistent.

IF, as you acknowledge, you already knew about mic aiming, how a quiet room (ideally a sound stage) would help, etc. ... then why did you bother, later on, to say "no matter how accurate you are at aiming the mic to the mouth, if there is something in the background that the human ear can hear, it seems the mic will still pick it up though in my tests. Even if the dialogue covers it up from aiming accurately, that noise could still be heard when people are done speaking, and in the room tone."

You're just repeating something we all already knew. Going around in circles. Wasting time and energy. Looking for more excuses. Looking for something to disagree with.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh I said that because it was said before that I wouldn't have had a background noise problem if the mic was aimed accurately or so that's what sounded like I was told. I was just saying that even though I aim accurately there is still going to be noise no matter what in the background, unless I was missing something that maybe I didn't know about. That's all I meant.

[Josh Bass]

That's definitely not what you were told. That's not how mics work. You have to eliminate background noise at the source or find a way to live with it. Sometimes something as simple as putting up moving blankets over the offending doorway or over the noisy machine itself can help greatly.

[Greg Miller]

Where was that "said before"? Do you happen to know the post number? I'm wondering exactly what was said.

[Ryan Elder]

okay thanks. I apologize if I misunderstood. We tried putting up blankets but I think the problem is the sound still travels through the walls and blankets can't be put into the walls of course.

but it was also said before that I should have used lavs to get rid of the background noise. But if the human ear can hear background noise, then wouldn't lavs be able to pick it up though too?