Help on 35mm workflow..

It is my first 35mm to be cut on FCP and there are some snags that I already predict.

The director has decided that in order to save some bucks the sound will NOT be married to picture during telecine.

All sound will be recorded on a nagra instead of dat (pros/cons??)

Every other picture I've cut (16mm shorts) the snd was recorded on dat and has been layed togeteher during telecine. The films have never gone back to Neg Cutting, which is the case here.

What wiil be the step required for the most efficient job proccess from Telecine on? If someone could point me towards the right direction in this project, I'd be quite appreciated.

Pablo.

"The director has decided that in order to save some bucks the sound will NOT be married to picture during telecine."

and how much is your time worth?
i've found that syncing in telecine ads up to about the same cost as syncing in the cutting room,
unless you;re doing it for free, or next to nothing.
great thing about syncing in telecine is you're also LOGGING:
every shot gets logged as part of the process, and you can very simply batch capture back in the cutting room.
saves much time & effort.

Nagra:
wow!
gotta love the retro approach.
(but why? i might ask... or is it Nagra-D?)
someone's gotta get that Nagra audio into a digital form that resides on your hard-drives.
has that been budgeted for?

if your Nagra audio is no more than 2tk,
i suspect it;s a false economy to NOT sync in telecine.


nick

I agree with Nick's analysis. Directors and producers have got to realize that syncing raw dailies really bogs down the editorial department. You end up spending a lot of precious time on the station doing boneheaded stuff instead of editing. The editor (if the editor is doing it instead of an assistant) loses that valuable "fresh eye" when looking at the footage. The worst part is that you have no concrete copy of the sync work on tape.

It is indeed "false economy". Even worse, it's a short-sighted approach that can end up costing much, much more money later. And it makes the editorial department resent you.


www.derekmok.com

I made a movie with my Arri 2c and recorded the sound separately. I wanted to do everything myself and so I had to synch up my entire movie with essentially wild lines. It definitely takes time -- for me, one year. Was it worth it? It's not an easy answer. The reason I'm replying to this post is that this approach will force you to think of sound as a separate element. It's a more cinematic approach and could result in a more artistic movie. ... Just a thought I wanted to share with you.

My trailer is at:

[www.releasing.net]

> This approach will force you to think of sound as a separate element. It's a more cinematic
> approach and could result in a more artistic movie

That doesn't really make sense to me. That's how it was done in the old days because they didn't have a choice. We do now.

You're talking about philosophy, and while it *can* be useful to think outside the box on sound instead of being imprisoned by what's shown onscreen, it's not necessary at all to have no synced master tapes or dailies in order to implement this approach. It's much easier to hit mute on your speakers/TV, or temporarily disable the sound by using Clip Enable/Disable.

On the other hand, the magic of synced sound can't be replaced by ADR or foleying. Try cutting a very intimate love scene, or a fear scene. The on-set sounds made by a good actor in the moment will always trump what you try to put in afterwards if you had filmed MOS. When I'm editing a really good dramatic performance, I don't even want to get rid of the sync breathing and clothing sounds the actor generates, because everything is organic and adds immensely to the realness of the performance.


www.derekmok.com

Thank you all for your comments and perspectives on this issue, but what I am looking for is technical answers such as. How should the sound be brought in. Do I need to change the speed of each sound clip to match each take and by how much. Is it better to edit at 30fps or 23.97 fps, since the purpose is to go back to film.

I completly agree that it is more efficient to sync during telecine and that the cost would be less than me having to do it all myself, but I have to deal with the options given.

Any advise is helpful, Thank you all...

The obvious question to ask your director is does he have access to a 1/4" tape machine that has a lynx or some other way of resolving the sound to video speed. i.e. doing a pulldown of 0.1%. Finding these systems in working order is a bit harder these days as most people just pay the bit extra up front and have the audio synced during telecine. As far as the frame rate to edit in, well that would depend on what medium you are transferring the film to. HD Cam, DVCam, DVCPro, DV? You should also talk to the post sound house and find out what sort of format they will require for sound editorial. Also if you agree that it will cost less to have sync sound done in telecine rather than you doing it later, how is that saving the director any money? I think the right direction to go here would be to hire a knowledgable post supervsior, it could save thousands in the long run, not to mention a lot of frustration.

Do you have an assistant editor who can do the syncing. If not, I highly recommend outsourcing the job to an experienced freelancer. As far as the workflow, assuming you're doing it "old school" (with an analog stereo, timecode Nagra) here goes:

Without question, edit at 23.98 if you intend a film finish.

Have an audio post facility transfer your Nagra rolls.
Option 1 (cheaper): xfer to DAT, and rent a DAT deck for input.

Option2 (expensive): Have the facility digitize audio for you to QT audio files.

You don't need to change the speed of anything. Your picture will be somehow pulled down to 23.98 from the 29.97 telecine video tape - either using a capture card with real time pulldown or with Cinema Tools.

This results in several possible workflows. If your'e capturing audio from DAT and using the Cinema Tools option, then you'll sync audio to the 29.97 video clips prior to doing reverse telecine. But if you're using a video capture card, and getting your audio digitized to 23.98, then all you've got to do is sync the clips and merge them.

All these options need to worked out in advance do design a proper workflow. There are lots of important details, like making sure the sound recordist uses the proper TC rate. Please talk to a knowledgable professional. Someone at the telecine house should be able to help.

Personally, I ALWAYS prefer to manually sync audio in the editing room because it's the only way to get perfect sync. Telecine sync is never perfect and can be out by more than a frame

Great info, Phil. I didn't know any of this. I'm sure that's what Pablo wanted to hear, not my philosophy on editing sound :-)

I'm curious though: is it possible to just transfer the sound from the Nagra directly to the G5 audio input and capturing it in Soundtrack Pro, for example? Would there be synch problems? I'm assuming the sound will be recorded on a crystal synch Nagra also.

I would think that the sound would be automatically converted to 29.97 fps, am I right?

Also, when capturing the 23.98 footage into FCP5, wouldn't the picture play back in the timeline at 29.97? In other words, aren't the 5.9 frames added to the picture in the playback mode?

I know this might sound nuts to someone more versed in this technology, but please forgive my simple questions; I want to know if there is any grain of truth in what I'm asking.

Thanks, and I hope some of this is helpful to Pablo... in case he ends up with the sound out of synch in the beginning. What's the best way he can synch the sound if he has to transfer the sound from the Nagra and then use it in the FCP5 timeline?

Quote

Also, when capturing the 23.98 footage into FCP5, wouldn't the picture play back in the timeline at 29.97? In other words, aren't the 5.9 frames added to the picture in the playback mode?

It'll be 23.98 in the timeline and viewing on your Apple flat. It only goes 29.97 out to your analog monitor. It does add CPU overhead to cut this way but that's less of an issue these days. Use a G5 or faster.

Quote

in case he ends up with the sound out of synch in the beginning. What's the best way he can synch the sound if he has to transfer the sound from the Nagra and then use it in the FCP5 timeline?

TEST THE WORKFLOW!! Can't stress that enough. Do a short clip, do a long clip.

- Loren
Today's FCP 4 / 5 keytip:
Do a virtual Audio Mixdown to lighten playback load with Command-Option-R!

The FCP KeyGuide?: your power placemat.
Now available at KeyGuide Central.
www.neotrondesign.com

> TEST THE WORKFLOW!! Can't stress that enough. Do a short clip, do a long clip.

From different parts of the tapes as well. Beginning, middle, end.


www.derekmok.com

It should be possible to capture audio directly off an Nagra, but not directly into the G5 inputs. You'd need to use a capture card or some other type of analog to digital converter. I've never done it so I can't comment specifically

I've captured analogue directly into the G5 > Soundtrack Pro. It came in clear as a bell. But as for synch, I don't know. I'm assuming it came in at 29.97

That's what I need to find out. And also Pablo, because if that's an option and he gets synch with his 23.98 (should he do it like that) when he lays the track he captured from the Nagra, then it's very interesting.

Hi,

Just saw this.
Something which was asked by Nick and which isn't answered by Pablo: what Nagra?
So NagraV is a digital recorder where files just can be transfered to the Mac's HD as BWF.
Synch and TC/play rate are another thing.
And I stay with Phil: Telecine sync is never perfect and can be out by more than a frame.

Regards
Andreas

philnorden Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You don't need to change the speed of anything.
> Your picture will be somehow pulled down to 23.98
> from the 29.97 telecine video tape - either using
> a capture card with real time pulldown or with
> Cinema Tools.

Phil, I think this is a bit misleading as the film to video telecine transfer is where slowing down the speed of the picture occurs. So to say you don't need to change the speed of the sound is not true.
If you don't slow the sound down it will not sync.

Well you're sort of correct...the telecine process does involve a 1% slow down of the film from 24 to 23.98, but this happens during the telecine session using specialized equipment, NOT in the editing room. The editor or assistant will certainly be involved in some form of reverse telecine depending on the workflow, but will not be involved in manually slowing anything down. The details of all various methods would be too involved to go into here. Just search the web, there's a ton if info availavle

philnorden Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well you're sort of correct...the telecine process
> does involve a 1% slow down of the film from 24 to
> 23.98, but this happens during the telecine
> session using specialized equipment, NOT in the
> editing room. The editor or assistant will
> certainly be involved in some form of reverse
> telecine depending on the workflow, but will not
> be involved in manually slowing anything down. The
> details of all various methods would be too
> involved to go into here. Just search the web,
> there's a ton if info availavle

Just to clarify Phil, it is a .1% pulldown not 1% and yes it does happen in the telecine process which is exactly why I was saying if the audio is not married to the video during the telecine process, then the editor or assistant will have to do a slow down of the audio while importing into FCP.
Reverse Telecine in FCP does not speed the video back up to film speed it is more to do with the matching of keycodes and frame numbers and the 2:3 pulldown required during telecine. Regardless of frame rates etc. The audio was shot at film speed and it will need to be slowed down to video speed so as to sync correctly. One way this is achieved nowdays is to record on DAT or hard disk at a sample rate of 48048 Hz so when it is played back in a 48khz session it is automatically slowed down .1%. In this situation it was shot on a Nagra. If it was a 1/4 tape type nagra then the audio will need to be resolved to video speed. i.e. slowed down .1%!

Why not just bring it in at 24. Why 23.98?