Blog | Titus Films Titus Films Blog 2010-11-21T21:23:23Z http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/feed/atom/ WordPress John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[Increase the artistic nature of your concert films]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2009/10/08/increase-the-artistic-nature-of-your-concert-films/ 2010-11-21T21:23:23Z 2009-10-08T15:07:15Z The Designis.ms blog recently made a post showing the work of Vincent Moon and his work doing, “Take Away Shots,” where he films bands performing on-location. The style of filmmaking is very similar to that of Cinéma vérité, where what appears on screen is largely unaltered from how it occurred. The audio is usually captured on-location, and the camera-work of the performance completed in a single take.

While most concert films are filmed from the front of the stage or from positions in the crowd, Moon is up close and personal with his subjects. This type of access is not always possible when filming concert subjects, but some of his same camera angles and shots can be achieved by zooming. His methods of slowly moving from one subject to another are an excellent demonstration of how to keep a usable shot throughout the entire performance. Pay particular attention to his use of focus, the contrast of light and shadow to create silhouette, and his methods of framing his subjects.

Yo La tengo – A Take Away Show – Part 1 from La Blogotheque on Vimeo.

]]>
0
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[DVD/FLAC of dredg, Live in Kansas City, MO – March 16, 2009]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2009/04/23/dvdflac-of-dredg-live-in-kansas-city-mo-march-16-2009/ 2009-04-24T02:35:29Z 2009-04-24T02:29:03Z John Kary and Tony Ontiveros recently shot a live video of the band dredg on their stop at The Riot Room in Kansas City, Missouri. The show has been made freely available in its entirety both on DVD and FLAC/MP3 Download. Check out a few samples from the show!

DVD Torrent Download
DVD Artwork Download (Thanks bokkers!)
FLAC/MP3 Download


dredg
March 16, 2009
The Riot Room
Kansas City, MO

All work by John Kary unless otherwise noted.

Video Recording: AUD Handheld
Master 1: Panasonic DVX100b > MiniDV Tape (by John Kary)
Master 2: Panasonic HVX200 > MiniDV Tape (by Tony Ontiveros)
Transfer: Panasonic DVX100b (Firewire) > Adobe Premiere 3.1 > CinemaCraft Encoder (CCE) SP2 > Sonic Scenarist 3 > DVD
TV System: NTSC
Aspect Ratio: 4:3 Fullscreen
Video Codec: MPEG2
Video Bitrate: 8000kbps CBR
Video Size: 720X480
Video Frame Rate: 29.97fps (2:3:3:2 pulldown)

Audio Recording: AUD Boom Stand
Master: 9′ Boom stand with T-bar (~20′ from stage DFC) > Studio Projects C4 > Tascam HD-P2 @ 24-bit/48khz
Transfer: HD-P2 (Firewire) > PC > Nuendo 3 (Master) > iZotope RX Advanced (Dither) > Adobe Premiere 3.1 > WAV > Sonic Scenarist > DVD
Audio Channel(s): Stereo
Audio Codec: LPCM WAV
Audio Bitrate: 1536kbps
Audio Bit Depth: 16-bit
Audio Sample Rate: 48khz

Custom static DVD menus
Chapter points set by song

01. Ireland
02. Same Old Road
03. Ode to the Sun
04. Catch Without Arms
05. Saviour
06. Information
07. Sang Real
08. The Canyon Behind Her
09. Down to the Cellar
10. Stamp of Origin – Horizon

00:50:06 Runtime

dredg is…
Gavin Hayes – Vocals / Slide Guitar / Guitar
Drew Roulette – Bass / Samples
Mark Engles – Guitar
Dino Campanella – Drums / Piano

========================

dredg Live in Kansas City, MO March 16, 2009 DVD artwork

]]>
1
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[“The Only Good Indian” accepted to Sundance 2009!]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2008/12/05/the-only-good-indian-accepted-to-sundance-2009/ 2008-12-05T19:17:35Z 2008-12-05T19:17:35Z “The Only Good Indian,” directed by Kevin Willmott, has been selected as one of the 118 accepted entries among 9,000 submitted to screen at Sundance 2009. Our own Tony Ontiveros and Collin Martin worked on the film as Camera Assistant/Loader and Grip, respectively.

The Only Good Indian is “[s]et in Kansas during the early 1900s, a teenaged Native American boy (newcomer Winter Fox Frank) is taken from his family and forced to attend a distant Indian `training` school to assimilate into White society. When he escapes to return to his family, Sam Franklin (Wes Studi), a bounty hunter of Cherokee descent, is hired to find and return him to the institution. Franklin, a former Indian scout for the U.S. Army, has renounced his Native heritage and has adopted the White Man’s way of life, believing it’s the only way for Indians to survive. Along the way, a tragic incident spurs Franklin’s longtime nemesis, the famous `Indian Fighter` Sheriff Henry McCoy (J. Kenneth Campbell), to pursue both Franklin and the boy.” –Synopsis from The Only Good Indian Official Site

The film is the second Willmott-directed picture to be accepted to Sundance, the first being a mockumentary called “C.S.A.: The Confederate States of America” depicting what America might look like if the South had won the Civil War.

Congratulations to all the local crew and friends who helped make this film possible!

The Only Good Indian – Official Site | IMDB

]]>
0
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[The Mars Volta – The Bedlam in Goliath: Bonus Concert Footage DVD Review]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2008/06/12/the-mars-volta-the-bedlam-in-goliath-bonus-concert-footage-dvd-review/ 2008-06-12T16:07:32Z 2008-06-12T16:03:52Z I wrote this post in late January 2008, but it was lost in my archive of saved posts that were once started but never finished. I had some extra time recently and finished the review.

I recently picked up the new album from The Mars Volta called “The Bedlam in Goliath.” After grabbing it from the shelf at my local Best Buy, I was delighted to find that the album came with a Bonus DVD with 20 minutes of concert footage. I have always wanted to shoot a show for The Mars Volta, so maybe this little DVD would fill that void.

Performance

If you haven’t seen The Mars Volta live, let me just say that their performances usually last over 90 minutes, at least half of which will be improved. The 20-minute clip on this DVD consists of about 8 minutes of a “real song” (Cygnus….Vismund Cygnus) and the other 12 are a combination of seemingly random noise and guitar solo. Then again, if you’re a progressive rock fan, or have seen The Mars Volta live before, this is all nothing new.

Video Quality

The video portion captures angles of the band from all over the auditorium. While this is normally one of the safest ways to shoot a concert, the varying quality in the cameras angles makes for a sub-par viewing experience. The bleeding colors and chroma blocking come across as amateur instead of “artistic expression,” and instead make it look like a bad home movie.

The video looks as if it were transferred from a second generation VHS, and made more obvious through the poor-quality encoding of the video. Fitting 20 minutes of video onto a DVD at maximum quality is a trivial task for a seasoned DVD professional. Rather, whoever authored this DVD encoded the video at about half quality.

The quality of the video is not something you would expect from a retail release, and even more so from such a popular band as The Mars Volta. I can’t speak to the conditions surrounding the who or why this video was released, but I come across a better quality show.

Audio Quality

The audio feed with this video is straight from the soundboard. While this is normally a good thing, this feed is in mono. Mono audio is really only good for delivering things like spoken voice and AM radio, where the spatial separation of instruments does not matter. Considering The Mars Volta has many more instruments at any given time than most classic 4-piece rock bands, the mono audio was more disappointing.

While a concert audio recordist will often record a microphone source from somewhere in the room to later mix with the soundboard, this audio mix does not. We are instead left with a lifeless flat-sounding recording.

Overall

While you won’t pay any extra for the DVD packaged with this release, you won’t help but feel unsatisfied by the extra offering. Watching this video is like getting a free ice cream cone while marching across a desert, only to have it melt all over your hand before sitting down to eat it.

Maybe I hold too high of expectations considering the field we’re in. Whatever the case, I would expect higher production value from such a highly acclaimed band.

]]>
1
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[Sigur Ros post feature-length concert film on YouTube]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2008/03/10/sigur-ros-post-feature-length-concert-film-on-youtube/ 2008-03-10T20:10:30Z 2008-03-10T20:09:15Z Sigur Ros have posted their feature-length concert film on YouTube for free viewing in its entirety. You can view the entire film here. (PS: It’s about 90-minutes long.)

Some might say, yay, great, free! But if you saw the HD trailer I talked about earlier, the YouTube video just can’t compete with the real deal. And I might even be pulling a David Lynch on this one and say that this film is not meant to be watched on an iPod or on YouTube, but viewed as a spectacle on the big screen.

I would encourage you to buy the DVD (it’s not available in HD!) and find the biggest screen and the best sound system you can; turn out the lights and turn up the volume. The surreal experience captured in this film is more like a work of art than any concert film I have seen. It was made to not just be watched, but experienced.

]]>
0
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[Grand Central phone service rocks]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2008/03/03/grand-central-phone-service-rocks/ 2008-03-04T04:13:02Z 2008-03-03T21:34:40Z Start-up company Grand Central was bought-out by Google last year. You may have heard last week about how Google Gave All San Francisco Homeless a Free Voicemail through Grand Central. Well, Google recently opened the service as a private beta, and we were lucky enough to get in on it. So what does it do?

Think of Grand Central as like a social security number for phone service. If someone calls you at your GC number, it will ring any number of phone numbers you own, and the first one to pick up takes the call. So if you want it to ring your office, cell and home number when someone calls, it will.

We have setup our GC number to ring all of our staff when someone calls, so when you just can’t wait for us to check e-mail, you can get one of us on the line to answer a question about your project.

Want to give it a try? Call us for questions about our services or just to chat: 785.748.8076.

]]>
0
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[Update on the Concert Taping Guide]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2008/02/17/update-on-the-concert-taping-guide/ 2008-02-18T04:02:26Z 2008-02-18T04:02:26Z Many of you are probably wondering what happened to the concert taping guide I began last fall.

I was in debate when I first started the guide, whether to make it a blog series or to write it as a more in-depth e-book. Since starting it, I realized I wasn’t going into as much detail as I wanted to, so I will be going ahead with finishing the series as an e-book. The topics and breadth of topics will be more complete and written in a bit more of a formal approach.

I will be offering the book through a different domain, which will accompany a blog dedicated solely to concert taping and filming.

If you would like to be notified when the complete e-book is available, leave your e-mail address in the comments below, or you can send it to concertguide@titusfilms.com . I will send free copies to all who leave their address.

If you have any suggestions or questions you would like addressed in the book, please send those along too.

Thanks to everyone that has enjoyed the guide so far, and I thank you for your continued support.

John Kary

]]>
29
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[5 Reasons You Should be Using Flash Video]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2008/02/13/5-reasons-you-should-be-using-flash-video/ 2008-02-13T20:36:18Z 2008-02-13T20:36:05Z The goal of every website is to provide content and services to its visitors. You probably look at your website daily from your computer to make sure it looks great. But not all web browsers display the web in the same way. Little nuances between browsers can sometimes make sites unusable.

Things get even more tricky when trying to implement web video, which unlike HTML, has no “web standard” in how best to present it. You have to worry about users having QuickTime, Real Player or Windows Media Player installed, that their software is up to date, and that it doesn’t crash the user’s browser.

Video delivered through Adobe Flash has quickly become the best of both worlds, thanks to its cross-platform support and extensive developer community. If you are still embedding video using QuickTime or Windows Media Player, you are turning away visitors and potential clients.

1. Flash has an adoption rate of 98%

That means Flash is already installed for 98% of the people viewing your site.

98% Flash
83% Windwos Media Player
68% QuickTime
52% RealPlayer

While your PC viewers certainly have Windows Media Player installed with their OS, Mac users don’t usually have it. Same goes for QuickTime installed by default for Mac, and with some PC users having it.

2. High quality with low bandwidth

You have seen Flash video in use on YouTube. Most of it is a bit fuzzy and the audio might be out of sync. Don’t let this fool you. YouTube serves up millions of videos, and having them all at high quality would drain their bandwidth. But with proper optimization and encoding your Flash video on your own, it can look stunning.

3. Support for multiple video and audio codecs

Codecs are different algorithms used to encode video and audio to a smaller filesize while trying to sustain the quality of the original image. Codec support in Flash is based on Flash version the end-user is viewing with.

Most video codecs play in Flash Player 8 (98% install base) while newer HD video codecs were enabled in Flash Player 9 (95%). Knowing the right codecs to use, and their optimal bitrates is the key.

4. Custom player interface

Skilled Flash developers can whip up a custom interface to load and play your video. That way you’re not stuck with an ugly progress bar detracting from the actual content.

5. It can fit into any workflow

There are several flavors of Flash video encoding software on the market. Luckily, most of them will take any valid video file as input. But not so fast. Not all video files are created equally.

Getting the best quality from your Flash video can take a lot of trial an error if you’re not sure what settings to use. The optimal settings for a documentary are quite different from an action movie trailer.

I’m a visual learner, and I bet you are too. Our Portfolio uses Flash video to showcase our work, and we get a lot of comments on how great the video quality is. At the same time, each of our videos play back in real-time* with no annoying buffering. Because the last thing you want to give your visitors is a “Loading…” screen.

What are some sites you all have found that use Flash video particularly well? Be it in quality or unique presentation.

* = assuming you agree to be gouged by your high-speed Internet provider.

]]>
0
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[How concert films can make more money for musical artists]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2008/01/05/how-concert-films-can-produce-revenue-for-musical-artists/ 2008-01-05T22:52:04Z 2008-01-05T22:51:26Z While 2007 CD sales were down 14% from 2006, digital downloads were up 50%. Record labels continue to struggle to develop new distribution models that take advantage of the digital revolution.

Over the last year, fans have shown they are willing to sink money into digital intellectual property. The success of digital audio in 2007 is paving the way for the comoditization of online digital video in 2008-2010.

Digital Audio is to 2007 as Digital Video is to 2008

As everybody knows, video delivered via the Internet is quickly becoming the future of mass communication. With the success of digital audio downloads in 2007, and with more people than ever knowing how to use online video thanks to YouTube, video is set to be the next major commoditization in 2008 in the same way digital audio took hold in the last 3 years.

Bands can now generate buzz with video on their MySpace pages, YouTube channels and official websites. Promoting a live concert video on these sites can greatly cut down on the cost of marketing across traditional mediums because they are footing the bandwidth bill. All the while you are hitting your target audience and giving them media in a way they feel comfortable receiving it.

Using online video sites to show off a one song clip from the concert is a great way to promote the sale of the full-length show, or the band’s upcoming album release or tour. After viewers watch the video, they will inherently want to see the rest of the show.

Having a professionally-produced concert video on YouTube quickly exceeds the mixed bag of low-quality footage from other amateur videos, immediately making your footage stand out and look even better in relation to what viewers are accustomed to seeing.

The Numbers on Digital Downloads in 2007

While Radiohead stole most of the limelight in terms of independent digital downloads of their newest album, hip-hop artist Saul Williams went the same route, offering his album for download and giving listeners the option to pay or listen for free. Lucky for Williams, his album was produced by tech-savvy Trent Reznor (Nine Inch Nails), who fully embraces the digital revolution in the music industry.

Reznor, unlike Radiohead, recently detailed the results with hard numbers:

[taken from nin.com]
As of 1/2/08,
154,449 downloaded Saul’s new record
28,322 of those people chose to pay $5 for it, meaning:
18.3% chose to pay.
[/taken]

You can take the 18% however you like, but Reznor claims the roughly $140,000 brought it did not cover all costs. Regardless, this was for a relatively unknown artist in the grand scheme of things, and little to no promotional push was made to sell more records via this method.

Possible Cost Breakdown of Producing a Concert Film

How many records did your band push of their last release? How many more do you think downloaded that album online without paying for it, resulting in your real total fan-base? Does your band appeal to people who know how to use online video? Let’s do some math…

20,000 potential sales (a modest first-week sales run for a new album for an indie label band)
@ $7.50 profit per sale ($2.50 to ship it = $10 total sale price)
=
$150,000 total budget

So we have a modest potential budget of $150,000 to work with to produce the show. We have the to take into account expenses to derive a profit.

$150,000 budget
- $20,000 for 25,000 DVD replication w/ standard packaging/artwork/shipping
- $15,000 for Titus Films to record and produce the show (a rough estimate for a bigger show)
=
$115,000 profit assuming all discs sold.

Could you offer downloads of the show as well? You bet. Bandwidth costs would be about 5 cents per download at high-quality, and 1 cent per download at lower quality. Maybe even give people a discount at $5 for the download since there is no manufacturing overhead and they can instantly pay and watch it.

You are then sitting with $115,000 profit. Of course some parties have a stake in that profit, but it’s more than you had before producing the show.

Compared to producing an album, producing a recorded concert is relatively inexpensive, with just as much potential sales revenue. While you won’t make any additional profit from licensing fees of the show, you will be pushing more product into the market for the band and giving fans a more immersing media experience.

Producing the Show

Ready to get filming? If you have a crew ready to go, check out our guide on How to Film a Live Concert, or simply give us a shout about how we can help.

]]>
0
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[The Death of High Fidelity Music]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/12/29/the-death-of-high-fidelity-music/ 2007-12-30T15:52:01Z 2007-12-29T20:30:22Z Rolling Stone recently ran an article called The Death of High Fidelity: In the age of MP3s, sound quality is worse than ever. The article puts the buzz of “The Loudness War” of the audio enthusiasts into a mainstream magazine. While there have been plenty of articles already published in more audio-enthusiasts magazines, this article should run across the desk of every major record label executive in the industry.

The battle between artistic integrity and commercial success is a fine line that can be difficult to walk. Working in the video production service industry, you quickly learn that the client is always right. You could whip up a finely crafted website design, or a motion storyboard of a commercial, and if your vision doesn’t meet the client’s vision, that spot you just spent all night cutting means nothing.

This is the current state (the last 30 years) of the music recording industry. Mastering engineers, who represent the “artists” in this scenario, are the people responsible for putting the technical fine-tunings on every track of a CD. (That description does no justice to their technical knowledge, since most mastering engineers would make your head spin with audio jargon.) These guys are at war with record labels executives over how music should sound, or instead be “experienced” by the listener.

Unfortunately, the article doesn’t shed any new light on the loudness war. The author doesn’t make any call to action, instead letting the engineers do the talking where they talk as if it’s a battle that can no longer be won. There is no reaction from anyone representing a label, making it feel a bit one-sided.

How the article pertains to concert recording

Live music, when experienced in person, does not suffer from the same brick-walling effect that recent CD music suffers from. The loudness is all part of the show, and you are allowed to really feel the music. The instruments sound alive. The experience taps into the psychoacoustic rhythm of the heart. The low-end speakers that hit you in the chest with every thump of the kick drum. This is why we love live music.

As digital media consumption has become mainstream over the last ten years, more labels are finding that concert films and bonus DVDs containing live video are valuable assets to generating not only additional revenue, but gaining additional exposure.

Then comes the task of capturing this live energy and bringing it to web, CD or DVD, where listeners have come to expect to be abused by the loudness of CDs.

When mixing a live show for release, I like to keep the music feeling live. This means mixing in a good part of the room mics and letting the recordings from the console fill-in the clarity of each instrument and to fine-tune balance of the mix.

A lot of concert recording engineers (or their producers at the label) like to shoot for a studio-session live performance, where the “live sound” of the room acoustics isn’t so much added to the final mix. Instead the final mix comes out sounding like a bloated mess.

There are exceptions, of course. Metallica’s S & M live album is one that I constantly reference, as it blends metal and a live orchestra, two genres of music that rarely share the same stage. Then there’s Thelonious Monk Quartet with John Coltrane at Carnegie Hall which is an amazing live jazz recording from 2005.

How our work compares

While we try to preserve as much of the dynamic range as possible in our concert work, it is inevitable that we use compression and other mix techniques to bring up the volume of the music. The release medium is what really dictates the amount of compression and maximization used.

A commercial CD release will require more compression, as people will listen to their music in any number of environments (iPod, car stereo, home stereo.) When we mix for 5.1 surround or DTS, where the listener will have nicer equipment, we can use less compression and let the mix breathe, keeping more of the original characteristics of the recorded audio.

Here is a sample of a live mix I’m working on right now which is intended for being synced to a video mix as a 2.0 stereo track. The band is dredg, and the show was recorded in October 2007 at the Troubadour in West Hollywood, CA.

Download MP3 Here [10MB, 5:26]

]]>
0
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[More details on Premiere’s AAF export functionality]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/12/19/more-details-on-premieres-aaf-export-functionality/ 2007-12-19T17:24:37Z 2007-12-19T17:24:37Z Thanks to user stooovie’s comment in the post where I belittle Premiere’s audio exporting capabilities, I have been made aware that Sony Vegas Pro 8 properly imports Reference AAFs exported by Premiere CS3.

The Reference AAF is created in Premiere by selecting Project > Export Project as AAF… and checking neither of the boxes available in the dialog box. You can then open Vegas, go to File > Import > AAF… and select the reference AAF ceated by Premiere. The project will open in Vegas as fully editable, with infinite handles on the audio and video, just as if you had edited it in Vegas.

After getting the project into Vegas, I was given a glimmer of hope when I found that Vegas Pro 8 can also export AAF! You can choose between the option of an “Edit Protocol Compliant AAF File” and an “Avid Legacy AAF File.” Surely, an old-school Avid-compliant AAF would get us into Nuendo, right?

Sadly, neither AAF options from Vegas were able to properly import into Nuendo. Actually, they showed up just the same as if I had opened the reference AAF as exported by Premiere.

I must humbly admit that after my long triad of unfavorable things said about Adobe’s inter-application support, they are probably not at fault when it comes to exporting an AAF file from Premiere and getting it into Nuendo. Nuendo’s AAF import is either not able to properly read the audio track it’s embedding from the AVI, or is improperly routing the stereo signal from the AVI to a mono track in the mix console.

A software created by Cui Bono Soft called EDL Convert may hold the keys to going from Vegas to Nuendo. Or, since Sony has really expanded the mixing capabilities of Vegas Pro 8, I may decide that it will suffice for doing the majority of audio editing and mixing and stay in Vegas.

Even if this case works for a good number of our in-house projects, it may not for all of our contracted clients. Being able to weave ourselves into their workflows is top priority.

]]>
1
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[Premiere Pro 3.1.1 update released]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/12/06/premiere-pro-311-update-released/ 2007-12-06T21:16:32Z 2007-12-06T21:15:00Z Adobe has released their latest update to Premiere Pro 3.1.1, which now adds support for Mac OS X 10.5 and addresses some “minor” issues with P2 workflow.

Still awaiting an online changelog to see exactly what was fixed, and will again be prodding for any new audio workflow options.

]]>
0
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[Concert Film: Sigur Ros – Heima]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/12/03/concert-film-sigur-ros-heima/ 2007-12-03T19:40:00Z 2007-12-03T19:38:39Z If you haven’t heard of the band Sigur Ros, they make some of the most beautiful music. Hailing from the beautiful countrysides of Iceland, their music itself provokes visual imagery. Listening to their music is like a film for the ears.

The band recently did a small unannounced tour around Iceland, playing small towns all over the country, as a way to give back to their fans. “Heima” showcases footage captured from their Iceland tour, intimate documentary-style interviews with the band members and absolutely stunning landscape photography from all over Iceland.

The nature and landscape photography is enough reason to watch the film. After watching the 1080p HD Trailer, I have no doubt you will want to see it.

StudioDaily did an insightful interview with Director Dean DeBlois on which cameras they used, how they did camera setups for the concert and about what he did to save the initial idea from failure.

The DVD is officially available on December 4, 2007. I would gladly post a review of it, but it’s on my Christmas List so I’m not allowed to buy it or watch it yet :) ? But expect a review of it when I receive it.

Heima – Official Site
Trailer (HD)
Order DVD

]]>
0
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[How to pull off taping a live concert video, Part 3 – Video Production]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/11/25/how-to-pull-off-taping-a-live-concert-video-part-3-video-production/ 2007-11-25T17:45:11Z 2007-11-25T17:39:24Z Capturing great quality video at a concert is more difficult than setting up a camera wherever you can find space and shooting. You have to navigate around the sea of people, find safe spots to setup your cameras and keep the drunk guy without his shirt on from spilling his beer on you after telling you how nice your camera is.

As has been our mantra thus far, Part 3 of this guide on How to Film Concerts will be about planning the video portion of your shoot. I will be going over how to decide where to place your cameras, which cameras I recommend you use and general tips for making the video portion of your shoot go smoothly.

If you have missed a part in this series, or need to know more about another aspect of concert taping, please see the other parts of this guide as they become available.

Part 1, Overview & Preparing for the show
Part 2, Audio Production
Part 3, Video Production (you are here already)
Part 4, Shooting the show
Part 5, Post Production
Part 6, Exporting & Delivery

Where to place your cameras

As I have said before, the venue shape (and sometimes security) will control where you can setup. Some venues have 50ft vaulted ceilings and balcony seating, while others are a flat room with 12 foot ceilings and a stage at one end. No matter the shape of the venue, there is one principal that if you follow, will give your video a more-balanced look when cutting between angles.

Coverage from equal but opposite angles: Cross-coverage

Cross-coverage is being able to cover one part of the stage with two cameras that are the same distance from the stage, but on opposite sides of the venue. This is so different angles won’t look out of place when cut together. It also gives you the chance to film something like a guitar solo from varying angles and closeness. While one person is in for a close-up of the guitarist’s fingers on the neck of the guitar, another could be filming his facial reaction as he is shredding away.

For your primary coverage, you want to have cameras both close and far from the stage. A great rule for establishing good cross-coverage is to split the venue down the middle of the stage all the way to the back wall. If you put a camera on each side of this middle line at varying distances from the stage, you will often end up with a good starting point for primary coverage.

Closer cameras will focus on close-ups on their side of the stage. Sometimes these cameras should be hand-held instead of on a tripod, to allow greater flexibility in the angles they can get. Both cameras should also shoot band members in the middle of the stage, which is often where the singer and drummer are set up.

If going hand-held, try not to shoot at full zoom, like to the opposite side of the stage. Not because the shot won’t look good, but because being hand-held and zoomed in a lot makes the image more prone to an unsteady hand resulting in shaky footage. An unsteady shot can often make your footage look amateur and out of place compared to footage from the cameras on tripods.

Try to find spots with little chance of obstructing your view. This means above the heads of the audience for the back angles, or in front of them against the stage for closer angles.

Safety coverage

After your primary coverage, you need “safety” coverage. The safety angle has two main purposes: to show a majority of the stage in the shot and to have a usable shot 100% of the time. This means keeping the camera wide and not zooming in and out very often, if at all. The camera can often stay fully stationary on a tripod for the entire show as long as a crew member stands with it to make sure nothing drastic happens.

Look for a spot that is elevated and as close to the middle of the stage as possible. You might team-up with your crew member running audience mics and setup near them, as you both need a central location.

Example coverage

Below are images that show how a basic 5-camera shoot might be setup when following the above suggestions. This setup gives us cross-coverage for both the close-up and wider angles and a safety angle dead-center.


Two cameras for close-ups

Two cameras for wider shots

One cameras for “safety”

Best camera settings for a live concert?

I get asked this a lot. Everyone seems to want a magic bullet for camera settings that will work for any scenario, but unfortunately, there just isn’t one group of settings that are right for every venue, band or type of music. I will, however, go over a few of the major camera settings available on the majority of the cameras I am recommending below.

Manual Focus, Manual Exposure

These two are the exception for settings you should use for EVERY concert you shoot: setting focus to manual and exposure to manual (see Shutter Speed below.)

Light changes are sometimes a big problem. During one song, the lights may be very low and subdued, while the next has tons of moving lights and strobe lights going off everywhere. These types of changes would throw any camera’s auto-exposure and auto-focus into a frenzy. Stay in manual and you can change exposure to suit the lighting setup.

Manual focus also helps as in low-light or very bright shots. A camera in auto-focus mode will quickly jump in and out of focus if lighting changes occur. Often times the band members will be moving around a lot and your focal distance will not be constant. Even if they are not moving much, stick to manual focus.

White Balance

Many concert venues will be using colored lights, and often times the lighting engineer will be changing colors all over the place. Trying to manually white-balance will not benefit you at all in this case. We are wanting to preserve those light colors, not cancel them out. Lights are part of the energy and mood of the show.

For indoor venues, the majority of lights will use 3200K bulbs. The lights are colored by gels in front of the lights, which change the intensity and hue of the light. But because the lights are 3200K before passing through the gel, you can usually stick to a 3200K / tungsten preset white balance when indoors.

If the band is playing in broad daylight and the sun is hitting the stage, go for a 5600K / daylight preset. The time of day will slightly shift the color temperature, so if it ends up way off, you can adjust it with color-correction in post production.

The only time a white balance might be a good idea is if you are filming an outside concert the stage is entirely in the shade or inside under fluorescent lighting. In this case you would want to white-balance your cameras to a white card on stage. Being in the shade on a sunny day will reflect a higher color-temperature than the 5600K of daylight and even if you set it to 5600K, your subjects will have a hint of blue. Being under fluorescent lights can bring any range of tints from a pale orange to a sharp green.

Frame-rate

Frame-rate is mostly an aesthetic choice. In most cases, you will either want to shoot 60i or 24p. The nitty-gritty technical differences between the two are beyond the scope of this guide. In short, 60i is what most consumer camcorders shoot in. Unless you explicitly know you’re shooting 24p, you are shooting 60i.

To shoot 24p and maintain a proper exposure, you need more light than if you were to shoot 60i. Many smaller concerts are very low in light, making it a challenge to see the performers on video without boosting the gain (which you should never do, anyway.) Not to mention, most bands seem to like playing in the dark.

If you find yourself having a hard time getting a proper exposure when shooting 24p, revert back to shooting 60i. You don’t have to shoot in 24p to end up with 24p footage after you edit it. Using tools like Magic Bullet Frames or DVFilm Maker can convert your 60i footage to 24p.

Whatever frame-rate you decide to go with, remember to relay this info to your audio recodists crew. If they are using a field recorder capable of recording at a specific frame-rate, be sure they dial it into the recorder. This will allow your soundboard or mic source to perfectly sync to your video without time stretching.

Shutter Speed

This is another subject that is highly technical, but I will forgo the tech talk and suggest the following:

  • If shooting 60i, use 1/60
  • If shooting 24p under normal lighting, use 1/48
  • If shooting 24p under fluorescent lighting, use 1/60

Some people try to get away with 1/24 when shooting 24p or 1/30 when shooting 60i. While this can make the image appear brighter, you will also see more video noise and the any motion in the image will appear more blurry. Avoid lower shutter speeds and don’t stray from those listed above unless you are really sure you know what you’re doing.

Camera recommendations

The video industry is in a stage of transition. Video acquisition and transmission is moving towards HD in both broadcast television and home video. At the time this guide is being written (late 2007) a lot of standard-definition (SD) work is still being done for DVD and web delivery.

I will outline below a set of SD and HD cameras currently available that will fit the needs of shooting a concert. Keep in mind that the format you shoot in should be determined by (1) how you will be displaying the finished product (broadcast TV, DVD, web) and (2) budget.

All the HD cameras listed below are capable of shooting in SD as well as HD. You can also shoot in HD and down-scale to SD after editing.

SD camera recommendations

Panasonic DVX100b (~$2600)

The Panasonic DVX100b has been a work-horse for the low-budget video industry for a few years now, and it is the first camera I look to when doing live concert work. It is lightweight, fairly sensitive to low-light conditions and I really love the look of the image it produces. It has come down in price by quite a bit, making it an even better choice for the money.

The major pluses to the camera are its ability to shoot both 24p and 60i at the flip of a switch, XLR mic inputs, full manual controls and easily tweakable image style via menu options.

The biggest downside is its 10x zoom lens. The image is great, don’t get me wrong, but I wish the zoom were a bit longer. If you are shooting a very large venue like an arena, you will need a camera with more zoom than the DVX has to offer. But for most small to medium-sized venues, it will work wonders for you.

Sony PD170 (~$2500)

The Sony PD170 is probably the best camera for shooting low-light. If you will be shooting very dark shows you will be better off with this camera.

If you want the 24p look, shoot 60i with this camera and process it to 24p in post-production using one of the previous tools I mentioned.

This camera doesn’t allow nearly as much image-tweaking options as the DVX100b, and is more intended to shoot great looking 60i footage, which it does very well.

Panasonic GS300 (~$450)

For those on a shoestring budget but still wanting a decent-quality camera to film concerts, I recommend the Panasonic GS300. It offers manual controls for everything I mentioned above (except for frame-rate, it shoots 60i only) although they aren’t as user-friendly as the DVX100b or PD170.

The camera also has a 10x zoom, but no XLR inputs, so you won’t be able to easily use it to record any usable audio. But for the price, it is hard to beat.

HD camera recommendations

HD (or HDV if you’re being picky) is currently a mish-mash of different codecs and recording mediums. It seems every manufacturer is using different compromises to record HDV footage either to tape or solid-state memory.

CamcorderInfo.com did a great round-up tech comparison of 6 of the most popular HDV camcorders, including the 3 I recommend below. I would recommend checking it out.

I personally think the following 3 are worth considering to film concerts:

Canon XH-A1 ($3350)

The Canon XH-A1 records a 1440×1080 image to MiniDV tape, which is still the lowest-priced recording medium and easily archivable. The camera also boasts an excellent 20x zoom lens?double that of the DVX100b and the HVX200 below?and a small form-factor for easy handling.

As for downsides, again, stay away from the 24f/30f modes that attempt to mimic 24p. They do not use a proper method for handling 24p-like material, and not to mention it decreases the vertical resolution of the image. Instead, use one of the tools listed above to go from 60i to 24p. The image quality from the camera is excellent, although a bit flat, lending itself to be fine-tuned in post production.

Barry Green did a side-by-side comparison (with pictures) of the Canon XH-A1 and Panasonic HVX200 that is worth reading.

Sony Z1U (~$4000)

The Sony Z1U is a bit heavier and bulkier than the other cameras listed so far, but still delivers a 1440×1080 image to MiniDV tape. Like the PD170, the Z1U has a 12x zoom. The LCD flips out from the handle, rather than the body, giving it a different feel in hand-held mode.

The footage from the Z1U has a bit of a contrasty feel to it, and the colors tend to shift slightly to the cool side. If that fits the style you are going for, this is the camera for you.

Stay away from 24CF mode and process it in post!

Panasonic HVX200 (~$5000 + P2 cards)

The Panasonic HVX200 is the big brother of the DVX100-series camera. Most of the controls are identical, but the HVX200 shoots in 1080p, 1080i, 720p, 720pN, 480p and 480i. The different video qualities will take up different amounts of space on the Panasonic P2 solid-state memory cards. All the shooting options/frame-rates are a big appeal to most indie filmmakers, but don’t mean so much to concert filmers.

You can also use the HVX200 to shoot SD to MiniDV tape at 24p and 60i, but the camera itself is less sensitive to light than the DVX100b (about 1 1/2 stops difference) when using identical frame-rate and shutter speeds. When cut with DVX100b footage, HVX200 footage looks a bit darker and shifted more toward red/orange, but matches in dynamic range and overall look.

The major downside to the HVX200 is the additional cost of P2 cards to even shoot HDV footage. Even with one 16GB card (which cost ~$900 at this time, and still not widely available) you can only record 40 minutes of footage at 720/24pN without putting in another card. This isn’t really an ideal solution for an extended live event like a concert. The extra cards up the total cost of the initial investment, so unless you use the cameras a lot, it will be hard to eclipse the savings you would have with buying an HDV camera that shoots to tape.

Depending on what I have available, I usually send out DVX100b and HVX200′s (shooting SD to tape) to shoot most concerts we do.

Overall, if you were buying a fleet of cameras to do HDV work for just concerts, I would recommend the Canon XH-A1 over the others listed here.

There is a lot of specific information to this camera, so be sure to read-up on it before buying it.

Tripods

The tripod head for doing live events is nothing to skimp on. Your footage will look amateur if it is not smooth and consistent. A fluid-head tripod is a bare minimum recommendation for filming concerts, as you can adjust the resistance to panning and tilting to fine-tune how smooth your moves need to be.

Most of all, practice using your camera and tripod to learn how it reacts to force and what you need to do to make smooth camera movements. Practice following birds as they move in the sky, or cars as they go down the road.

Crew

You can have all the best equipment out there, but if you don’t have good camera operators, your footage could end up looking inconsistent and sloppy in the editing room. Find people with steady hands, finesse and an eye for composition, or pay to hire professionals.

As a director you should instruct the operators on the style you want them to use. Whether its all slow camera moves and slow zoom, or crash zooms and fast moves, find people who can operate well and as instructed.

If you are only doing this as a hobby and can’t afford to hire operators, I wish you the best of luck… Often you will be at the mercy of the owner of the camera equipment, as they will want to operate their own equipment–especially if you are not paying them. Just because they own the equipment does not make them the perfect person to operate it.

Regardless of anything, always feed your crew. Even if you can’t pay them in cash. Nobody likes working on an empty stomach. And if you let them go hungry, you won’t have a crew for long.

Conclusion

The style of your show will be found in the style of music you are recording and your own personal quality benchmarks. Pulling off good shows and knowing what to film takes practice. Watch a few concert films and see how others have done it, and try to bring some of that quality to your work.

After reading through the first three parts of this guide, you should now have a full plan on how to document the show. Part 4 of the guide will walk you through the day of filming the show and all the steps and precautions you should take before arriving to the venue, to filming the show, to last checks before packing up and leaving.


John Kary is Creative Director at Titus Films. Having directed and produced over 100 concert films, John is well-traveled in capturing the energy of live music. Having been responsible for all aspects of producing a concert film at varying times in his career, he has emerged as one of the premiere concert filmmakers in the U.S. When not shooting live shows he can be found shooting independent films around his home town of Lawrence, Kansas. For more info visit www.titusfilms.com.

]]>
9
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[Social Byproducts of Media Convergence]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/11/15/social-byproducts-of-media-convergence/ 2007-11-25T17:40:31Z 2007-11-15T23:09:14Z We have been hearing it since the days of dial-up: The Internet is the future of… everything. I am hard-pressed to find anything still unaffected by the connectivity of the Internet. As active members of the media creation industry, it is important to keep up on exactly what is happening today in our world.

This can be difficult because we are “in the now” and it may be hard to see when we are engulfed in it. But if we take a look back over the last decade, we can easily see how convergence has already happened, and begin to wonder what the next big step will be.

It’s affecting the music industry first (Napster first, now the BitTorrent war), the television/film industry (YouTube, and more BitTorrent) and now the Writer’s Guild of America Strike where they are demanding higher pay for Internet-delivered content. But I’m sure you’ve heard enough about all of that already.

Even video games are bridging the gap between console gaming and Internet usage. Bungie, developers of the Halo series, have possibly made THE best gaming platform integration using Halo 3.

With statistics and Internet presence being a living, breathing part of the gaming world, users not only play with each other, but can compare just about any statistic online, watch replay videos and screenshots all through Bungie’s site. The ability to record content from IN-GAME and have it posted to an online website, all while adding a social network spin to it, makes the online site for the game just as fun as actually playing it. I personally don’t even own the game, but I’m still really excited to see such tight integration with the online world. Hopefully this encourages other content creators to take Halo 3 as an example and build similar concepts into future media.

As media scholars have professed, media and the Internet are affecting each other like gravity on an orbiting comet. The days of an end-user are dwindling. Instead, of the TV being the dead-end it was in the 1950s, users are now active participants in what they watch (American Idol.)

But integration doesn’t stop there. Take Facebook, and its open application framework, allowing anyone to write a program that all users can interact with others regarding niche subject matters. Facebook applications have brought interactivity to any topic its users want to build a community around. But what are the most popular topics? Media!

I’m not even going to go into Planet Earth and the type of genuinely reflexivity it presents to us about our own world. The realities of nature, that which live in solitude from our digital world–presented in HD, in its purist form, yet still experienced vicariously. And are you kidding? I can hardly contain myself–I love exploring media from this angle! I think this type of genuine interest is what keeps our of work FUN.

Creating media is more than just pointing a camera and hitting record. It is an extension of the human desire to tell stories. Whether it be carved on cave walls, or in the latest TV episode you downloaded from the iTunes store. I take pride in that our crew at Titus Films appreciates media as more than just content–that this medium was meant to communicate something, and that we love working with people that have something to share with the world.

]]>
0
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[Why Adobe Premiere Pro is not suited for the indie filmmaker]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/11/14/why-adobe-premiere-pro-is-not-suited-for-the-indie-filmmaker/ 2007-12-19T21:09:04Z 2007-11-14T17:02:27Z Update, December 19, 2007: Please see my follow-up post with additional info on how to make Premiere AAF exports work.

I spent about four hours yesterday trying to devise an audio post-production workflow for a client shooting single-system (no audio field recorder) on the Panasonic HVX200 and editing in Adobe Premiere Pro 3.1.0. Conclusion? It’s not pretty.

After a picture-edit is complete, a rough audio mix of sync-sound from production is usually synced to the picture. Most low-budget indie filmmakers will have run their mic into their camera in attempts to save time/money on not buying/renting a dedicated field recorder. If they plan to edit with Premiere Pro, they are essentially locking themselves into frustration when it comes time to do any audio mixing.

While the Adobe Creative Suite and Final Cut Studio packages cater to indie filmmakers by giving them a boxed solution to make their film, Adobe is only facilitating the stereotypical poor audio mix that many low-budget independent films suffer from by not giving their users a solution to a professional audio mix.

Brief History of Digital Audio Post-Production

Digital audio post-production is usually done on a digital audio workstation (DAW) dedicated to sound mixing, not an NLE. OMF files can be exported from the NLE and then transfered to the audio house. These OMF files consolidate all audio from an NLE timeline into a single file, including all the info on the number of audio layers and clip markings, in hopes of recreating the timeline from the video NLE in an audio DAW.

OMF was traditionally licensed by Avid, and was adopted into many other applications, NOT including Adobe products.

Since then, the AAF format has been gaining ground to replace OMF. AAF can embed picture reference data so your picture edits will reflect in your DAW. Many workflows still use OMF files for their tired-and-true results.

Premiere and Single-System Recording Don’t Mix

Premiere added AAF exporting around Premiere Pro 1.5 (if memory serves correct.) But guess what? If you shot your movie single-system you’re still screwed!

Adobe currently has no professional solution for working with audio for a feature film. Audition is a destructive audio editing application, meaning does not support non-destructive audio editing, and the multi-track mixing user interface is not friendly for using a large number of tracks. Please see my update at the end of this post on the improvements in Audition 3.

Soundbooth is simply Audition in easy-mode, so that users without much audio knowledge can clean-up their noisy audio. It does not cater to the professional crowd at all.

The Dynamic Link features of the Adobe Creative Suite really are great. Being able to edit in Premiere, do further effects in After Effects and then bring that footage back into Premiere without re-rendering are truly beneficial. But when it comes to audio, there is no real solution except exporting as AAF.

The problem here is the AAF export from Premiere simply doesn’t work as it should or not at all.

Trying to Export an AAF

I found a workflow on the Adobe Forums that theoretically should work for getting the audio out of Premiere and in-tact in the proper timeline position. If it works, we will still be without handles, but at least we can get our audio into a DAW…

1. Unlink all audio/video in the timeline.
2. Select and delete all video clips from the timeline.
3. Delete all but 1 video track (Premiere doesn’t let you delete them all.)
4. Select all audio clips.
5. Menu: Clip > Audio Options > Render and Replace
6. Save project.
7. Project > Export project as AAF
8. Check “Embed audio.”

The problem? Premiere bombs! It simply crashes after writing the temp XML file for the AAF, which holds all the position/naming information for the files.

Why not just not embed the audio?

If you leave “Embed audio” unchecked, the AAF is written without an error. But if you try importing it into Nuendo 3.2.0, the timeline comes up with the stereo tracks from Premiere split into mono tracks in Nuendo. The files that were rendered by Premiere also are not linked properly in the AAF, as they come up as missing in Nuendo with the path being like “\\?\C:\path\to\file.WAV” where C:\path\to\file.WAV is the real path to the file.

Even if you manually relink the files to where they should be, they don’t resolve properly in the Pool and they don’t play in the timeline. But of course, how could they? The source files are stereo, and the tracks in the timeline are mono. Nuendo wouldn’t know which channel (L or R) to play anyway.

Why not try importing into ProTools?

From what I’ve read, Adobe has only explicitly said their AAF export would work with Avid systems (and presumably ProTools as well?), or into other Premiere projects.

I won’t have access to a ProTools system to import this AAF on until January, but obviously our existing Nuendo workstation isn’t having any part of it. Whether this is the fault of Nuendo or Premiere I’m not sure. The 3.2.0 build of Nuendo is from late 2005, so the AAF standard may have adapted since then. Although I have seen no changelog from Adobe that mentions anything about AAF changing since they implemented it.

If someone with ProTools could try this and report-in on it, that would be much appreciated.

How exporting an AAF from Premiere should work

Whether your audio is Linked with your video in the time-line or not, if you select Export AAF, Premiere should disable everything it can’t consolidate into the file, present the user with a confirmation dialog that not everything will be saved, and proceed with the export.

If you try to export AAF and have any type of Video or Audio Effects enabled, Premiere throws a fit telling you which clips and which effects caused the error in a non-user friendly dialog box. No, it doesn’t give you the option to disable them and continue, it just tells you it couldn’t do it. This is starting to sound like a nit-picky Avid machine.

Premiere should tell the user before proceeding that they cannot preserve effects and that they will be disabled. Once the export begins, Premiere should Unlike all audio and video information in the timeline and make temporary WAV files of every video file. The full temp files should be embed into into the AAF and after everything is written, delete the temp audio.

Or if a user wanted to create an AAF that links to original audio and video, the temp audio files could be written to a new permanent directory where the AAF then sources to those.

Conclusion

If I am giving somebody a consolation and they say they are going to edit in Premiere, I actively advise every one of them that they will run into huge issues when it comes time to do their audio mix.

Even if they want to manually go back and create handles on their audio in the Premiere timeline, that is a huge time-waster for a feature film. Don’t try and save yourself time by editing in Premiere just because you already know the software.

Final Cut Pro exports OMF files that work in every DAW I have tried. While Final Cut Studio’s Soundtrack Pro is making strides to become a professional solution, at least FCP has the decency to offer a working OMF export to bring the audio flawlessly into a professional DAW.

Do yourself a favor and don’t try to edit your feature film in Premiere. You will only end up with a bad audio mix, or a lot of frustration and an unhappy sound mixer.

UPDATE: November 29, 2007

Since this posting, Adobe has released Adobe Audition 3. Audition 3 has finally incorporated non-destructive editing into both the single-file and multi-track editing modes, added a feature-rich traditional Mixer to multi-track mode, and the ability to easily add a video track to the multi-track mode and mix audio to the video. This is a major stride forward for Audition, positioning it as a more-realistic solution to doing post-audio work for low-budget filmmaking.

However, Audition 3 still does not offer support for importing intermediate files such as AAF or OMF. Until this type of functionality is introduced, Audition is still not quite ready for any major post production environments.

What baffles me is why Adobe chose not to include Audition in the CS3 Production Premium or Masters collection, instead opting for the pathetic Soundbooth instead. Why offer tools geared towards a professional production environment (Photoshop, After Effects, Premiere, etc) and hold out on giving them a professional audio editing tool? It’s like using a super-computer to check e-mail.

Regardless, at a $399 price-point, Audition 3 has made some amazing strides since the re-badged release of Audition 2, making it a more usable audio solution. I can only hope that Adobe sees the gaping hole still left in their Creative Suite and replaces Soundbooth with Audition. If they can take it a step further and weave some form of Dynamic Link between Premiere and Audition, similar to Final Cut Pro and Soundtrack Pro, there will be no excuse for setting for a less than stellar sound mix when cutting a project in Premiere. Download the Adobe Audition 3 Demo and see how well it works for you.

Despite these additions, I still cannot advocate editing your movie in Premiere. As of now, there have been no changes in how Premiere handles AAF audio exports.

Update: December 2, 2007

A thread over on the official Nuendo.com forums is chronicling some attempts to import Premiere AAFs into Nuendo 3 and 4, with some users proposing that in Nuendo 4 you must import the AAF before creating a project, then export that newly created project as an OMF, then reimporting the OMF into your already active session. If any of this yields progress I will post it here.

Update: December 6, 2007

Premiere can export a CMX3600 EDL. Nuendo still won’t import it, but an EDL is simply a text document. Aparently Nuendo can import Premiere “Generic EDL’s” originating from Premiere 6.5. If I can find how a CMX3600 EDL differs from the Premiere 6.5 Generic EDL, I could maybe write a program to convert one to the other.

Does anything like this already exist?

]]>
18
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[How to pull off taping a live concert video, Part 2 – Audio Production]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/10/17/how-to-pull-off-taping-a-live-concert-video-part-2-audio-production/ 2007-11-25T17:47:58Z 2007-10-18T00:04:59Z One of the most important aspects of a live concert is the sound quality. Whether it’s the fluidity and balance of the mix that your ears perceive at the show, or in our case, the accurate reproduction of that sound in the 1′s and 0′s of your recording.

In Part 2 of this guide on how to tape concerts, I will be exploring the different options for capturing the sound of the show in the way of microphone setup in the venue, microphone types, specific microphone models that I recommend you check out, soundboard recording and the different recording devices available to make your job in post-production a bit easier. I will also discuss a bit about room acoustics and things you should note about the venue you are taping in order to maximize the potential quality of the recording.

If you have missed a part in this series, or need to know more about another aspect of concert taping, please see the other parts of this guide as they become available.

Part 1, Overview & Preparing for the show
Part 2, Audio Production (you are here already)
Part 3, Video Production
Part 4, Shooting the show
Part 5, Post Production
Part 6, Exporting & Delivery

The Audio Mix

For the purpose of this guide we will assume you will be getting both a soundboard and audience recording. The soundboard recording will be what the sound engineer mixes for the audience, supplemented with an audience microphone recording. It is possible to run an independent output for each channel to the soundboard into a multi-track recorder for mixing in post-production, but we won’t be covering that.

The basis for your mix will be the soundboard recording, as it will be the most clear recording you will get. Factors such as sound reflection from the venue walls and dreaded crowd noise will minimally affect the soundboard feed to your recorder.

Keep in mind that the house engineer is often NOT mixing for your recording! His or her job is to please the crowd with a balanced mix adjusted for the acoustics of the room, not to please you. If you want full control over the mix, you should look into hiring an audio professional to do a multi-track recording of every channel off the board.

The mixing skills of the sound engineer can also be an issue. Most bands on national tours will have a dedicated sound engineer that knows the band’s music, their setlist and the sound they want to achieve. On the other hand, almost every venue has an in-house sound engineer that is responsible for explaining the venue’s setup to guest sound engineers, sometimes running monitor mixes and more often mixing for opening bands on the tour. While the house guy might not know the music of the band, they will often be very in-tune with how to mix for the venue they work at.

In all honesty, sound engineers are hit-or-miss in the small venues across the nation: most are great and will do whatever they can to help you achieve a great recording, while others will be downright rude to you, for whatever reason… ego, hassle, whatever.

It goes without saying that you should always be respectful when coming onto someone else’s mixing console. Be considerate and asking (rather than demanding) for their help in getting patched into the board will help your show go more smoothly.

Room Acoustics & Planning the Audio Mix

We talked about previewing the venue before showing up to tape a show in Part 1. Knowing the environment you are recording in will allow you to plan which equipment is necessary for your show, as hauling a truck of gear to a show and then not being able to use it is simply a waste of your time.

So how big is this place? How many people can the venue house at full capacity? Are you taping a hole-in-the-wall bar or a huge arena show? It is important to know the answer to these types of questions to plan for what type of audio recording you’re likely to get from both your mic and soundboard sources.

Regardless of venue size, you should also run mics in the audience to capture the sound of the room. With room mics you will be able to capture what the sound engineer is mixing for and will usually come away with a very balanced recording. Once we get into post-production, the two recordings will be synced and mixed together. The level of each recording will usually be determined by the venue size, but I’ll expand on that in Part 5.

The Soundboard Recording

Most venues and sound engineers will assist you in hooking into their soundboard to capture the live mix. Hopefully you read Part 1 on how to get permission for all of this, so there won’t be any surprises on the day of the show.

The soundboard recording will be the life-blood of your final audio mix. You will be recording most everything on stage, and getting a recording of how it sounds before it goes through the speaker system, but after it passes through the board’s pre-amps, EQ’s and effects.

How does this benefit you as a taper? To be short and technically concise, the high frequency portions of the sound spectrum have a lesser chance of reaching your microphones in the audience than lower frequency sound. This comes down to the length of the sound waves at different frequencies. If you want a more in-depth technical knowledge on the technical properties of sound, I highly recommend Sound for Television and Film by Tomlinson Holman.

Your soundboard recording will also not be affected by sound reflecting from the walls of the room, which if excessive, can have a negative effect on a recording. Remember, you can always add echo/reverb later, but it’s very difficult to remove ! If you want an example of how bad this can sound, try recording your voice from across the bathroom.

It goes without saying that smaller venues will usually have a less powerful sound system than a larger venue. Now, believe it or not, live music is loud by nature?meaning less of the instruments need to go through the house sound system to satisfy the crowd in a small venue. This means less instruments in your soundboard recording. Sometimes vocals and drums are all you will get through the house sound, and sometimes bass guitar, depending on the size of the amplifier the bass player uses. In smaller venues, the sound for the guitars is only that of the amplifier stack used by the guitar player. If one thing is missing from the mix, it’s probably the guitars.

In larger venues, you can rest a bit easier, as everything is usually run through the soundboard.

Hooking Into the Soundboard

While we’re just about ready to talk about mics, you need to know how to connect from the soundboard to your recorder.

Most soundboards will have a dual-XLR output (one for the left-channel, one for the right-channel.) This output is a “post-fader” output–meaning the audio levels of each channel are affected by the fader and EQ’s of each channel strip on the board.

You will need one of two types of cables to patch into the soundboard: 2x XLR-Female –> 1/8″ Stereo Mini-Jack (get at least 60 inches long) or two separate XLR-Female –> XLR-Male mic cables (the longer the better.) Which cables you need will depend on which inputs your recorder has.

Microphone Types

I’m sure most of you are aware that microphones can be overloaded with loud enough sound. After all, different types of microphones are more sensitive than others.

You are probably well-aware of this if your first attempt at filming a concert was with your video-capable cell phone and all you could hear on playback was “BURMMM BRUMM TIK BURM BURMMM SHHYOW WA SHOW TSSHH TSHH SHHT” at 10 frames per second.

If you are unfamiliar with the different types of microphones, rather than rehash what many others have already explained elsewhere, please visit this MediaCollege.com article, or the more tech-oriented WikiPedia entry on microphones, to find out all about the most common mic-types: dynamic, condenser and ribbon. Pay special attention to the descriptions on condenser mics, as those are what I will be recommending for audience mics below.

I’ll be using terminology explained in these articles throughout the rest of Part 2 and the rest of the guide. Pay attention to the terms “polar pattern” and “phantom power” as they will be coming up later.

Ready to go on? Here comes the fun part…

Recommended Microphones For Concert Recording

First off, I recommend that you head over to the Live Music Archive and check out a few different recordings that were done using different microphones. You can find this out through what’s called the “lineage” where tapers describe the signal path of their audio rig. (Hint: the first piece of gear given is usually the mic model.)

When listening to other recordings, keep in mind that the quality of those shows differs greatly based on the actual location in the venue it was recorded from, and the room’s shape and size, in addition to the mics used. I hope this helps drive home that the point the place you set up your mics in the venue makes all the difference in the final result. That, and it goes to show that it’s not how good your equipment is, but how well you know how to use it.

There are a whole array of microphones out there capable of recording in a loud environment. The following recommendations are based on bang-for-buck quality and geared as recommendations for somebody who just needs the basics for capturing good audio. Make no mistake–the gear recommendations here are all great and will produce above-average results. But as with audio, there are groups of purists and other audiophiles out there willing to spend lots and lots of money for great-sounding audio.

I won’t be going into all of the other type of gear you can add to your rig, so if you’re interested in fleshing out your rig even more, head over to the TapersSection.com Forums and check out some of the additional gear other people are using.

With that, here’s the low-down on which microphones I can recommend for taping your concert on a mild budget (because after all, you need a recorder too.)

1. Sound Professionals CMC 2 (SP-CMC-2)

The SP-CMC-2 mics from Sound Professionals are discreet mic capsules capable of being clipped to just about anything using a normal lapel mic clip.

I would describe their sound quality as very good, but a bit lacking in the sparkle of the high-end of the audio spectrum. The best way to describe it would be like if you listened to the concert with a shirt over your head. You can hear everything just fine, but it might sound a bit better if your shirt… wasn’t over your head. Not to mention people might look at you funny, if they don’t already (you stick out like a sore thumb with that huge mic stand.)

But! This “veil” effect isn’t necessarily a bad thing if you’re taping in a medium to large-sized venue.

If you have secured a soundboard feed for recording, these mics make a great supplement as an audience recording. The soundboard source will dominate over the mic source in the upper-mid range and highs and fill-in where these mics are not as clear. This will leave you a bit less post-production work in the audio mixing stage, but also a bit less control of the final mixed version for your video.

Optimally, you will want to run these up on a mic boom stand and suspend each mic off the end of the stand into mid-air. If the venue you’re taping at doesn’t have room for a stand, or you’re not allowed to put one up, you may have to clip them to your shirt. By suspending the mics you will get them above the crowd noise that may leak in otherwise, not to mention it will free you up to do something other than stand still as a statue during the show.

These mics have a cardioid polar pattern (you read the Wikipedia article, right?), but are still very suspect to off-axis noise because of their small size. Again, elevation is the key to capturing the best house sound in the venue.

CAUTION: Avoid clipping these (or any mic) to something that is libel to vibrate when the band starts playing, as the mics will not only pick up the sound of the show, but any vibrations along the cable!

The mics terminate in a stereo 1/8″ mini-jack (the size of most headphone plugs.) This will be important when we get to the type of recorder you will be using.

NOTE: To use these mics at their full potential will require a battery box. A battery box contains a 9V battery that is used to power the mics over the mic cable. The signal chain for a setup using a battery box would be Mics > 1/8″ stereo input on Battery Box > 1/8″ stereo input on Recorder. As for which to buy, I suggest the SP-SPSB-1 by Sound Professionals for $100.

If you’re interested in other Sound Professionals mics, they have a page dedicated to displaying recorded live music with many different models of their microphones.

2. DPA 4061

The DPA 4061 mics by DPA Microphones are also discreet mic capsules that can be clipped to anything. They have a clearer high end than the CMC-2′s and definitely a lot better low-end bass response. Low-end bass, the frequency range that a subwoofer produces (below ~120hz), can easily be lost in the soundboard feed, yet present in the house sound system. Glad you’re doing a mic recording, aren’t you?

With the DPA 4061′s you will have a much better chance of correcting any lacking parts of the soundboard feed, due to the mic’s well-rounded sound. The bass response is right-on and the highs sparkle clearly. The mid-range is hit or miss depending on the venue, but is most often an accurate representation of room sound at the show.

The cables for the 4061′s, like the SP-CMC-2′s, are held together and can be split to separate the mics from each other a few feet (or more if you desire.) The cable terminates into a stereo 1/8″ mini-jack so be sure to use a recorder that accepts this type of input.

A quality of the 4061′s that may hold them back is that they are omnidirectional mics, meaning they pick up sound equally in a 360-degree radius (but you knew that.) In a medium to large venue, this surround effect will add a lot of the crowd noise and room reflections to the recording, something you might not want depending on the size of the room and how noisy the crowd is that night.

The 4061′s are best used in small to medium-sized venues, and it is ESSENTIAL that you elevate them from the crowd to minimize the distracting noise of people talking during the show. If they are not elevated you will hear people chattering in the far-left or far-right of the stereo-field, and that’s not the easiest thing to fix later!

The mics sell separately at about $400 each (you’ll need two, so you’re looking at $800.)

To power the mics, you can choose to power them over XLR cables, but will need two DAD6001′s that convert from microdot to XLR. They run $100/each.

Alternately, you can also use the MMA6000, a small mic pre-amplifier made by DPA to power the mics. Each mic hooks into the amplifier via microdot connection. This little box runs about $300.

3. Studio Projects C4

The Studio Projects C4 matched-pair of microphones are my favorite to use for capturing live shows due to their well-roundedness, their attractive price point, and they take standard 3-pin XLR cables capable of supplying 48V phantom power to them.

They have built-in 0, -10dB or -20dB pads for extremely close mic’ing of a loud PA system if the venue is small, or handle at 0dB just fine if placed near the soundboard in medium to large venues. They also feature an adjustable bass roll-off at 0 (off), 75hz or 150hz to help attenuate massive amounts of bass if the situation calls for it (e.g. a rap concert.)

Having great control over the sound within the mics themselves is a major benefit, as altering the sound at the input-source is the most effective way of maximizing sound quality in the signal chain, as opposed to using a pad/roll-off on a battery box or the recorder itself like the SP-CMC-2 and DPA 4061 would require.

The sound quality of the C4s is as well-rounded as the DPA 4061′s, but maybe not as uncolored as the DPA’s are. The C4′s have the added benefit of having switchable capsules on the end of the mics that change their polar pattern from omnidirectional to cardioid. Again, the omnidirectional caps work best in a smaller setting and the cardioids in larger venues elevated on boom stands.

Each C4 microphone requires a normal XLR mic cable to run to your recorder, so you will need two XLR-Male to XLR-Female cables. Depending on the recorder you’re using, this XLR-termination may or may not be a good thing. Most professional-quality recording devices accept XLR mic cables, while other smaller recorders accept stereo 1/8″ mini-jack plugs. We’re getting there?hold on!

The versatility and quality of these mics makes them ideal for taping shows in venues that allow mic stands and in which the main PA speakers are above crowd level.

So how much are a pair of these bad boys? You can get both mics for about $400–the same price you would pay for just one of the 4061 mics. If your recorder has the option of supplying 48V phantom power, you can power the mics using that and save a dedicated preamp.

All of the above mics do a great job. I suggest you go with whichever set is within your budget and man-power to operate properly. Please don’t think this list exhausts all of the mics suitable for this type of job. Feel free to check out other mics and try them on your own. If you find a pair of mics that are really amazing, I would love to hear about your experience with them.

Recommended Recorders For Concert Recording

Now that you have an idea on the different recording sources, you need something to actually record it with. Again, I will give recommendations on a few different recorders that are capable of the job and hit several different budget brackets.

Portable recorders keep getting smaller and smaller. Before the advent of solid-state flash media, portable DAT recorders (like the Sony TCD-D8 and Tascam DA-P1) were the primary recorders you would find people using to tape concerts and most other field-recording for film.

If you need a quick-glance reference, the comparison table following the description of the mics will show a more technical-comparison of the 3 recorders recommended below.

1. Edirol R-09

The little Edirol R-09 looks a bit like a cell phone, and is just about the size of one. Now if we can just get our cell phones to record audio at the quality of this little guy.

The R-09 records to SD memory cards at 24-bit/48kHz. It has a 1/8″ stereo mic-input and a 1/8″ stereo line-in input. If you use a battery box, hit the line-in, if you’re rolling without one, chance it with the mic-input. The device connects via USB to PC/MAC and takes 2 AA batteries.

Overall not a bad little device for $400 retail. Depending on your mic setup and other gear you can afford, this might be the right choice for you.

Note: You will need an additional device that is capable of supplying 48V phantom power to your mics, as this little recorder is not capable of producing it!

2. M-Audio MicroTrack II

Again, like the R-09, the MicroTrack II is about as small as a cell phone. 24-bit/96kHz audio records to CF cards. It has a few more inputs than the R-09, including two 1/4″ TRS inputs, along with a 1/8″ stereo line-in input.

The 1/4″ TRS inputs provide 48V phantom power, so you could use the C4s with it.

You will benefit from the internal rechargeable battery over the AA’s of the R-09, and at $100 cheaper ($300 street price) the MicroTrack II should come out ahead for most tapers looking for a small setup.

3. Tascam HD-P2

The HD-P2 is more considered a “field recorder” than just a “portable recorder” like the previous two. It may be like comparing apples to oranges, as I’m offering the HD-P2 as the only field recorder in this recommendation, but that’s because it will do just about everything you need for recording a live concert.

The HD-P2 records to CF cards and uses two XLR’s as its primary inputs. It has no 1/8″ mic inputs, and no 1/4″ inputs, but makes up for it with the two XLR inputs for professional-grade mic inputs. The XLRs can feed 48V phantom power over each line, making it adequate for powering the C4 mics above.

The biggest advantage to you as somebody taping audio to later be synced with video is the HD-P2′s ability to both jam-sync to timecode and to record at the same video framerate you’re shooting. I won’t go into detail on how to do all of this since it’s in the manual, so if you invest in one, be sure to read up on this feature. I will explain the frame-rate issues a bit, though.

If you were shooting 60i digital video (like most cameras do) you would set the reocrder’s frame rate to 29.97 DF (drop-frame.) If you were shooting 24pA with a DVX100, you would set it to 23.976. For just 24p on a DVX100, you would set it to 29.97 and DF/NDF according to your scene-file settings. This will be a HUUUGE advantage for you when you get into post-production and are trying to sync up the audio sources, as if you set the recorder to the correct framerate, you will not have to tweak the audio any to get it to sync with the video.

The major downsides to the HD-P2 is its crazy portable power source: 8x AA batteries. If that wasn’t bad enough, those 8 batteries only get you about 3.5hrs recording time (even less if you need phantom power.) If you can, bring along your AC cable and plug in to power wherever you are. You can also power the HD-P2 over a 6-pin Firewire connection. Because of the way Firewire works, you will need a 6-pin to 6-pin Firewire cable to power the device, not a 4-pin to 6-pin. If your laptop has a 6-pin Firewire slot like the HD-P2 does, you can use that as an additional power source.

Priced at $1000, it might look a bit expensive compared to the other the other recorders recommended here, but given it’s extra features that benefit shooting video in tandem with it, I highly recommend picking one up, as it will save you more time and frustration in the long run. While it is possible to sync audio from the other two recorders to your video, it will take some additional steps (not to mention additional time and software $$$) to get it dead-on like the HD-P2 will.

Recorder Comparison Table

Edirol R-09 MicroTrack II Tascam HD-P2
Highest Bit-depth/Sample-Rate 24/48 24/96 24/192
Highest MP3 Recording Quality 320kbps 320kbps No
Recording Medium Secure Digital (SD) CompactFlash (CF) CompactFlash (CF)
Pro Mic Inputs No 2 1/4″ TRS 2 XLR
Phantom Power No 48V 48V
1/8″ Stereo-Mic Input 1 1 No
Digital Inputs No 1 S-PDIF 1 S-PDIF
Sync to video frame-rate/timecode No No Timecode (XLR & BNC), Most STD Frame-rates
PC Connection USB 2.0 USB 2.0 Firewire (6-pin)
Portable Power Source 2x AA Internal Lithium-Ion 8x AA
AC Power No Yes Yes
Cost $400 $300 $1000

Camera Microphone Inputs

Many professional-grade video cameras have XLR inputs (including some of the cameras recommended in Part 3) These inputs are typically capable of powering condenser mics with 48V phantom power as well. If you plan to have a camera near the soundboard, you could consider running your soundboard patch, or even your mic source, into your camera’s XLR inputs. This method has both some advantages, and disadvantages.

Pros of running audio into your camera

  • The audio will be frame-accurately synced to your video.
  • No need to invest in a field recorder, flash media or batteries.

Cons of running audio into your camera

  • Controlling input levels is not as accurate as a field recorder.
  • You will often hear more noise if the input level is up too high (camera pre-amps are not as good as dedicated pre-amps, or those on a field recorder like the HD-P2.)
  • Phantom power will drain more of your camera battery.
  • Limited to the audio bit-depth and sample rate of the camera, which is often 16-bit/48kHz.

While I don’t recommend using your camera as a recorder if you can avoid it, it is possible. Having a dedicated audio recorder is better suited to record the music than a camera. But if you’ve already got the camera and are on a tight budget, your camera will do an adequate job.

Wrap Up

After reading this section you should have a good grasp on the different elements of your final audio mix (the soundboard and mic recordings) and the different roles they will play in your final mix. If it’s not quite clear yet on how the mic source will sound compared to the soundboard, just wait for Part 5 – Post Production where I’ll go a bit more in-depth on the sound characteristics of each and how to boost the quality of your final mix with a few tweaks to each source.

You should have a better idea of what to look for in selecting a set of mics to use for recording the show and which recorders to run your mics and soundboard patch into.

In the next part of this guide I will be doing the same type of coverage as was done for audio, but focusing on the visual aspect of the concert: your video mix. We’ll touch on camera setups, how to handle the camera, things to consider for planning the look of your video, recommendations on cameras to use and a few tips that will save you time in the editing room during the multicam mixing stage.


John Kary is Creative Director at Titus Films. Having directed and produced over 100 concert films, John is well-traveled in capturing the energy of live music. Having been responsible for all aspects of producing a concert film at varying times in his career, he has emerged as one of the premiere concert filmmakers in the U.S. When not shooting live shows he can be found shooting independent films around his home town of Lawrence, Kansas. For more info visit www.titusfilms.com.

]]>
4
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[“HD” vs “HDV” – What makes your footage one or the other?]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/10/10/hd-vs-hdv-what-makes-your-footage-one-or-the-other/ 2007-11-23T13:17:04Z 2007-10-10T22:25:36Z So the Canon HV20 does 1080p for $900. So why not shoot the next Star Wars: Episode II (1080/24p on a Sony F900) with it? Because of the common misconception between “HDV” and “HD” resolution.

I was reading a thread over at TapersSection discussing the Canon HV20, and a user there was very quick to remind everyone that just because you see the golden number 1080p, doesn’t mean you will have a great image. Here is my response to the post, plus a bit extra, which tackles the issues of HD vs HDV and the problems facing a production when choosing which camera to shoot on.


From what I’ve read second-hand by people like Stu Maschwitz, the HV20 has a lot of little quirks about it that make it a bit more demanding than working with a camera with more intentional features like a DVX or HVX. Things you will run into like the rolling shutter, CMOS artifacts, and using the camera’s photo-button to check exposure make the $900 a bit of a struggle compared to more expensive cameras.The HV20 shoots to 4:2:0 long GOP MPEG2 HDV at 1440×1080/24p. I think what wilsonedits is getting at is that the camera is not “true HD” because it doesn’t pump out and record 1920×1080 native off its image sensor. Where this all morphs into a discrepancy is when talking “HD” vs “HDV” resolutions.One person might argue that anything above above Standard-Definition NTSC resolution of 720×480 is considered HD (excluding PAL’s extended vertical resolution of 720×576, of course.) Then again, another might say that anything that isn’t 1920×1080 isn’t even “HD.” Then what about all of these cameras and TV’s that do 720p? 1080i? 1080p? It’s easy to get confused. Let’s lay out a few resolutions of HD/HDV, disregarding their different frame-rate capabilities:

  • Sony CineAlta/F900 (MSRP $102000) – 1080 @ 1920×1080 1:1
  • Panasonic VariCam (MSRP $45000) – 720 @ 1280×720
  • Panasonic HVX200 (MSRP $5995) – 1080 @ 1280×1080, 720 @ 960×720
  • Sony Z1U (MSRP $5946) – 1080 @ 1440×1080
  • Canon HV20 (MSRP $1099) – 1080 @ 1440×1080

You might see, “oh, the HVX200 has better horizontal resolution than the VariCam, so at $6000 it’s a total steal!” Yet there’s much more to producing a good image than strictly resolution. Differing features, like the recording medium (including color fidelity due to color sampling for compressed storage), codec, frame-rate options, lens-mounts (or lack there of), workflow… the list goes on and on. The decision on what camera to use often times doesn’t rely solely on resolution, and might include:

1. How much you can afford. Either to buy, or to rent.
2. What workflow options you have available (again, dependent on money or software competency)
3. What quality you need the deliver the final product at (a huge movie theater screen, or broadcast television)

Many HDV cameras that shoot to MiniDV throw out a lot of information to be able to fit the image onto tape. This all falls back to chroma subsampling, or how often and to what extent the color of each pixel is measured before being compressed to tape (and if you really want to geek-out on the subject, check out a 2005 American Cinematographer article on color spaces.) Because many small-format cameras don’t have any way to store massive amounts of color and resolution data, they are limited in the quality of pictures they produce.

Different cameras do this in different ways. Some use different compression codecs, while others store the image at a slightly altered resolution, then require the editor to adjust the size of the pixels (pixel-aspect ratio) in the NLE to make the footage “look like” it’s at 1920 pixels wide, when really it’s not. Which camera you shoot on deems which aspect of quality you will be giving up.

So where do you draw the line between “HD” and “HDV”? The marketing hype engine of capitalism leads people to believe that a resolution greater than standard-def is “HD,” while the method you capture and store your footage from the camera might be what gets it labeled as as “HDV” or “HD.”

I will argue that unless it’s 1920×1080 at 1:1 full raster, it’s not HD, and is rather “HDV.” But at the same time, this doesn’t mean HDV doesn’t have it’s place in when and where it could and should used.

]]>
4
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[DVD+RW Burning Speed – Sony DVD Architect vs Ahead Nero]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/10/07/dvd-burning-speed-sony-dvd-architect-vs-ahead-nero/ 2007-11-23T13:17:12Z 2007-10-07T19:37:28Z When I need to make a quick movie-only DVD to preview a project on another TV, I usually author the DVD quickly using Sony DVD Architect 4.0. While DVD Architect has the ability built into it to also burn the disc, I opt to burn my test discs Ahead Nero ROM Burning. Why?

In this post I intend to explore the DVD burning process of Sony DVD Architect 4.0 with Ahead Nero ROM Burning 6.6.0.6. Which one is fastest for burning your data to DVD, and why might it be faster?

Why Test?

The issue has nothing to do with the picture or audio quality resulting from the burn produce, as Architect just weaves the footage and audio into a DVD-Video format disc. That is, unless you didn’t prepare your assets correctly and it reecodes your audio/video for you–something you don’t want to happen, as additional reencoding of the data will lead to decreased picture quality.

Contrary to popular belief, different burning programs and different media take differing times to burn. And I’m not talking about the disc’s rated burn speed (e.g. 16x.) What takes one program 4 minutes to burn a 12x DVDR might take another application 6 minutes using the same media and the same data.

I always do test burns to DVD+RW to preview before committing to a DVD master. Often times the piece is short, like a 30-second commercial spot or a short project that’s only a few minutes long. In these short instances, I noticed that DVD Architect always takes a super-long time (that’s the technical word for it) to write the lead-out and finalize my DVD+RW’s–we’re talking a less than a minute here, depending on the size of the data being burned, but every second counts right? Nero, on the other hand, takes about 5 seconds to do this on a DVD+RW, no matter what the length of the project. Why would it differ in the finalizing stage on such a small amount of data?

The Test

Let’s add some quantitative data for the record.

I have a 311MB DVD that has 2 minutes and 8 seconds of content on it that was prepared using DVD Architect 4.0. I then did burns of the disc at 2.4x write-speed on the same disc using both DVD Architect 4.0 and Nero 6.6.0.6. The disc I am burning onto is a Sony-branded DVD+RW with max burn speed of 2.4x. The disc itself returns a Media ID Code of RICOHJPNW01.

The Results

DVD Architect: 2:36 (1:55 writing lead-in and track data, 0:41 writing lead-out)
Nero: 1:58 (1:54 writing lead-in and track data, 0:04 writing lead-out)

Conclusion and Analysis

In this test, Nero was 24.3% faster at burning the same data on the same disc. While this is a small dataset, it illustrates our point.

So why does Architect burn this extended lead-out?

For backwards compatibility with older DVD players. If you burn a DVD with so little data on it, some older DVD players will read the disc as having no data on it. This extra time during the burning process is Architect writing an extended lead-out on the disc so that when the DVD laser scans the disc for data, it thinks the padded data is part of the disc. It will then scan the disc’s IFOs and load data from the VOBs, no problem.

Architect most likely does this in order to dummy-proof the software for the consumer-level at which it is targeted. Sony Vegas and DVD Architect, while powerful in their respective right, are priced at an entry-level price-point (sub-$1000) and very low on the learning curve, making it a powerful editing solution in comparison to cheap $99 software from your local electronics retailer.

This affinity for consumers is also why Architect will reencode your audio/video if it’s not in the correct format as the disc you told it you want to burn. Customers want a playable disc, period–they don’t care about uncompressed quality–they just want to show the family. Most consumer camcorder users will not know how to specify frame rates and resolutions to fit the disc, so the software handles the transcode for them.

After Thoughts

If you are using a certain program to burn your CDs or DVDs, or a certain encoder to encode your videos, why do you use it? Are you more concerned with quality or time, or both? I ask this because many people do things a certain way, and either stick to what they know because “it works,” or simply because of fear treading into the unknown. I don’t know about you, but I would rather know the best and most efficient way to do something, while retaining the quality necessary for the project.

Think about it. What might you be doing in your workflow that you just “do,” or that you haven’t challenged yourself as to why you do it?

]]>
0
John Kary http://www.titusfilms.com <![CDATA[How to pull off taping a live concert video, Part 1 – Overview]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/10/02/how-to-pull-off-taping-a-live-concert-videopart-1-overview/ 2008-02-10T20:33:15Z 2007-10-02T17:31:38Z With the release of Emery’s “I’m Only a Man” today, featuring a Bonus DVD and 5 Live Acoustic tracks produced by Titus Films, it’s like having another child. Not that I currently have any (ever…?), but I can bet it’s like seeing your son or daughter walk across the stage at graduate.

All posterity aside, in the following posts I hope to present an overview of how to go about producing live concert footage for a 5-camera shoot, showing how to plan the shoot step-by-step, some of the issues you may run into along the way, how you can work around them, and little things you need to keep straight from start to finish.

Please note, this is NOT a guide on how to do bootleg videos. This guide will assume you are pursuing all the necessary channels to legitimately and legally shoot the show you have planned.

This series will consist of 6-parts. I plan to cover everything from pre-production through post-production, with emphasis on planning the production aspects so everything goes smoothly on your shooting day. Here is the outline for what I will be covering:

Part 1, Overview & Preparing for the show (you are here)
Part 2, Audio Production
Part 3, Video Production
Part 4, Shooting the show
Part 5, Post Production
Part 6, Exporting & Delivery

I will answer such questions as:

How do I even get started filming a concert?
How do I gather a crew to operate cameras and run audio?
What is some of the best gear to use on a budget and still produce great results?
What details need to be hammered out before I even pickup my camera?
What should I do at the show to make sure it goes smoothly?

Now that you know what to expect, let’s get down to business in Part 1, with a general overview of the concept behind concert documentation and the steps you need to consider before showing up with a truck of gear.

Overview

You might be thinking, “Oh come on, it’s not that hard to film a live concert… I’ll just round up 4 friends, smuggle in 4 small camcorders, position them around the audience, sync our watches to 11:00pm and then hit record… post the video on YouTube and embed it in my blog (hey, wanna check out my blog?) and I’m on my way to Internet stardom, right?” Not so fast there, grasshopper. Planning your project, no matter what you’re shooting, is the most important part of a live event–especially in a fast-paced one-take event like a concert.

A lot goes into planning a live shoot… we’re talkin’ audio, video, gear, security (the big bouncer guys AND securing your gear), copyright issues, technical know-how, and can I reiterate audio quality (you are at a music concert after all, right?) Keeping all of this straight as a 1-man show can be difficult, especially if you are not as knowledgeable in one or more areas. I’ve found that many people are informed about one half of the equation, but not so much the other half. Better to be a specialist in one area instead of a jack-of-all-trades, though, right?

When shooting a live event like a concert, you are at the mercy of your surroundings. You will often have no control or input on how much light is on the stage, what the audio mix will sound like, where you’re allowed to go or even what you’re allowed to film.

To pull off a live show properly is very difficult to do by yourself. You can’t possibly be manning 5 cameras, all the while checking audio levels on your soundboard and mic-feed. A sad realization, yes, I know. If you’re getting paid by the band, you can probably hire out some people to help or you can find other random crew members with gear and a passion for taping on various online forums.

  • Archive.org ? Free audio files of previously taped concerts. Download a few songs from different artists and see what other people are doing. Also a great resource for learning what gear people are using, as many are detailed accounts of lineage.
  • etree.org ? Live music hub where many people list live shows they have taped or have traded for.
  • TapersSection.com ? Source for live audio tapers to talk gear and about upcoming shows. Lots of help for newbie audio tapers, too.
  • DVXUser.com ? Main forums focus on the Panasonic DVX100 and HVX200 cameras, but has forums for all aspects of production.
  • DVinfo.net – Another great source for info on cameras.
  • craigslist – The red-headed stepchild of all freelancers in many trades

A great way to find people like you that want to tape shows is by going to more shows and networking with people there. You might ask the house soundman (when he’s not running around working) or new people you meet if they know somebody who does video or audio work. Get phone numbers, e-mail addresses, whatever. Look into local colleges for a video production-related major and get in touch with faculty to make an announcement in class or to post a position announcement where students might see it.

Assuming you’ve gotten a “yes” from more people than you have cameras and audio decks, you’re halfway there. Next, depending on the popularity of the band you want to film, you will need explicit permission from the band, or the powers that be, before walking in with a crew and a ton of gear.

Securing Permission

You’ve got your crew and your cameras, so bands will just flock to you begging you to shoot their next concert down at the pub in exchange for a briefcase full of cash, right..? Unless you have previous production experience to show off your polished reel, or at least some friends in high places, you won’t get very far. Chances are you will have to volunteer yourself to do some free shows before you see much real work, as anybody in the film industry will attest to.

When we did the first Emery gig on the Take Action Tour, we were already there to film the band Kaddisfly. We personally wanted to film Emery, both because we enjoy their music and wanted to document a live show of theirs to enjoy later. I explained to Emery’s tour manager who we were, why we wanted to film, and that I would send him and the band a copy of the show once we finished it (which you should always do!) Without seeing any of our previous work, he agreed to let us film. When the band received the show, they were very impressed and got in touch with us again to film another show for them, this time for compensation and a retail outlet. This just goes to show that if you present yourself properly and do good work, people will take notice!

With the age of Internet video and eBaying bootlegged concerts, many of your favorite bands might not be so keen about letting you shoot video of them. Some have been told by their management/label to deny recording, while others just don’t like the idea of giving away their music for free. The band might also be playing unreleased material that night that they don’t want to leave the room. Whatever their reasons, you will have to test the waters to find out how receiving bands are to your requests.

Some bands post their catch-all e-mails on their websites, or you can contact them through their MySpace pages. Whether you get a response or not is hit or miss, so good luck. If you can’t get ahold of them before the show, don’t worry?not all is lost. More on that in a bit.

Assuming you get the OK from the band, you need to get in touch with the headline band’s Tour Manager and/or the show’s Promoter. If you can’t get in touch with these people before the day of the show, you will need to inform them before the show starts.

The Venue

So you have the OK from the band/label to film and the tour manager is ok with it. The next step is making sure the venue is ok with what you plan to do. Most venues, again depending on the size and popularity of the band, will have no problem with you filming. Regardless of what the bands all say, the venue has final say in if you can film or not!

A smaller amount of larger venues?mostly those on the West coast and those owned/operated through Clear Channel (most House of Blues venues and amphitheaters)?charge you on a per-camera basis to film. After all, it costs the venue money to maintain operation, so why should they let you walk into their house to make a profit and they not get a stake in it. If you are being paid, the party commissioning you to film should cover the costs. If you’re financing the show for yourself, you’re on your own. Whether this is worth it is up to you.

Scouting the venue

The other part of venue selection is the characteristics of the venue itself, and how well it lends itself to capturing the band’s performance from an audio and video standpoint. Scout out the local music venues and see what the interiors are like. What shape is the venue interior? What are the walls made of? Is there space for cameras to be setup? The best venues for recording will feature…

  • elevation away from the stage so that your cameras can see over the heads of people
  • non-square rooms, to minimize sound reflections off the walls
  • high ceilings to give a bit of openness to the room sound of your recording
  • a good-sounding house sound system (and a talented house sound engineer to run it)
  • air conditioning (seriously!)

Sometimes you get lucky and a venue with these characteristics is where the band is playing. Regardless of the venue, you will have to make the best of it wherever the band is playing.

Camera and Microphone Placement

After you know the layout of the venue, you should start planning on where to place your cameras and microphones. These decisions will be based on the genre of the show you’re filming, and the style of production you’re going for. Most video setups are similar, placing a few cameras close to the stage to get close-ups, a few a bit further back in the audience to get wider shots, and one covering a stationary shot of the stage. The amount of cameras, your crew and the shape of the venue will determine your setup.

Microphone placement is another subject with different requirements. Microphones will usually pick-up more sound than what is directly in front of them, including a bit behind and a bit to the sides, depending on the microphone type. We will discuss microphone type and proper usage in Part 2, Audio Production.

Scout a place to setup your mic(s), hopefully with enough room to run a mic stand up into the air and it not be at risk of being tampered with, tripping somebody in the dark or being in a camera’s view of the stage. If this is not a possibility for size constraints of the venue, look for a place away from the walls and elevated above the crowd, while still being in-line with the house sound speakers.

Wrap Up

We’ve gone over how to gather the human resources to produce the show and how to lock down permission to be there. I skimmed a bit of the audio/video-specific information because that’s going to be covered more in-depth in the next few posts.

You can head on over to Part 2 for the different types of microphones right for the job, some specific gear recommendations and special consideration given to making sure your audio will easily sync with your video.


John Kary is Creative Director at Titus Films. Having directed and produced over 100 concert films, John is well-traveled in capturing the energy of live music. Having been responsible for all aspects of producing a concert film at varying times in his career, he has emerged as one of the premiere concert filmmakers in the U.S. When not shooting live shows he can be found shooting independent films around his home town of Lawrence, Kansas. For more info visit www.titusfilms.com.

]]>
4
Titus Films http:// <![CDATA[Emery – “I’m Only a Man” Released]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/10/02/emery-im-only-a-man-released/ 2007-11-23T13:17:17Z 2007-10-02T17:27:52Z We are proud to help announce the release of Emery’s new record, “I’m Only a Man” available today on Tooth & Nail Records.

Titus Films had the privilege of producing the Bonus DVD for the Special Edition CD that includes a 40-minute making-of documentary with the band in the studio (produced by Moonrunner Pictures), along with 2 full-length concerts shot at The Granada in Lawrence, Kansas on both the Take Action Tour and Emery’s headline acoustic tour.

The CD is available at all major CD retailers and online at the Tooth and Nail Store

Click here to view a sample of the Acoustic Tour featured on the DVD.

Credits…


Emery – “I’m Only a Man” Special Edition (October 2, 2007)

Available on Tooth & Nail Records

1. Rock-N-Rule
2. Party Song
3. World Away
4. After the Devil Beats His Wife
5. Can’t Stop the Killer
6. Story About a Man with a Bad Heart
7. Don’t Bore Us, Get to the Chorus
8. What Makes a Man a Man
9. Movie Song
10. You Think You’re Nickel Slick (But I Got Your Penny Change)
11. From Crib to Coffin
12. Don’t Bore Us, Get to the Chorus [Acoustic/Live]
13. Listening to Freddie Mercury [Acoustic/Live]
14. Ponytail Parades [Acoustic/Live]
15. As Your Voice Fades [Acoustic/Live]
16. What Makes a Man a Man [Acoustic/Live]

Making of “I’m Only a Man” In-Studio Documentary
Produced by: Moonrunner Pictures
Directed by: Hayne Griffin

Take Action Tour Concert Footage
Produced by: Titus Films
Executive Producer: Tooth & Nail Records
Directed by: John Kary
Camera Operators:
Michael Bales
Brendan Costello
Ron Hernandez
John Kary
Audio Mixing & Mastering: John Kary

Acoustic Concert Footage
Produced by: Titus Films
Executive Producer: Tooth & Nail Records
Directed by: John Kary
Camera Operators:
Michael Bales
Brendan Costello
Ron Hernandez
John Kary
Tony Ontiveros
Audio Mixing: John Kary

DVD Credits
Produced by: Titus Films
DVD Menus: Franco Leng
DVD Authoring: John Kary

]]>
0
Titus Films http:// <![CDATA[Angstploitation – Post-Production]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/09/27/angstploitation-post-production/ 2007-11-23T13:17:19Z 2007-09-27T16:47:05Z Angstploitation is currently undergoing simultaneous in-house color grading and sound design. Coloring is being carried out using Color Finesse in Adobe After Effects and is being supervised by Director of Photography, John Kary, to ensure the desired look is maintained in the final output.

The film is scheduled to make rounds This Fall, with a few festivals in the New England area bidding for the debut. It has done well locally in its rough form, netting a few awards:

  • Best of Show – 2007 Tensie Awards in Lawrence, KS
  • Best Cinematography (John Kary) – 2007 KU Filmworks Film Festival

Director Jerry Koukol wished to shoot additional pick-ups and fine-tune all aspects of the production before sending it out to national festivals.

]]>
0
Titus Films http:// <![CDATA[Angstploitation – Cast & Crew]]> http://www.titusfilms.com/blog/2007/09/27/angstploitation-cast-crew/ 2007-11-23T13:17:22Z 2007-09-27T15:32:48Z Angstploitation (2007)

http://www.angstploitation.com

Angstploitation is a short length psychodrama that explores certain emotional archetypes in three parts. It was shot during late spring of 2007 on 24p video, in a medium sized Eastern Kansas town.

Directed by
Jerry Koukol

Written by
Jerry Koukol
Kai Winikka

Produced by
Kai Winikka
Jerry Koukol

Music by
Andy Koukol
Oophoi
Chris Strait

Cinematography by
John Kary

Film Editing by
Jerry Koukol
Kai Winikka
Franco Leng

]]>
0