Shooting a feature with an Arri IIC

Dave Bourbois · February 6, 2004

I was thinking of investing in an Arri IIC for shooting features. Is there an economical flatbase motor that can be used with an Arri IIC blimp?

-Dave

Mitch Gross · February 6, 2004

Oh God, don't do it! I've shot with a 2c in a blimp and believe me it's a major pain in the ass. Mag changes take forever, lens changes take forever, you can't use modern lenses or modern accessories, the damn thing weighs around 100 pounds, the viewfinder sticks out the back (non-orientable) and is very dim after going through the blimp extension tube, and on and on. You can't use the more modern crystal flat bases because they are too thick to align properly so you have to use the old style ones which are just gear boxes and the stalk motor mounts next to the camera. Most of the blimps were designed to take an external AC power supply, so you'll probably have to have it modified so you can send battery power in to the camera.

Seriously, for the cost and what you'd have to go through, you're so much better off buying an old Arri BL-1 or 2, even with the lens blimp. These cameras are likely to be newer than any given 2c and are so much easier to use and offer so many advantages. There's a lot of accessories available for these cameras and just the fact that you can use 1000' loads instead of just 400' makes it worth it to me. You can get a decent BL-1 outfit for around $10,000 depending on lenses and accessories. By the time you outfitted a 2c with lenses and crystal motor and blimp and whatever you'd need to make them all work together you wouldn't be far behind that number.

Dave Bourbois · February 13, 2004

Thanks Mitch. It's just one of those things where I've been saving up for a while and am only a few months away from being able to get an Arri IIC blimped or a Mitchell BNCR package I've been eyeing for a while. A BL1 or BL2 would be a lot better, but I'd be looking at about a year instead of a few months. I greatly appreciatte your advice in this and other topics.

-Many Thanks

Dave Bourbois

GeorgeSelinsky · February 13, 2004

Mitch kindly advised me on this matter last year.

I heard there is a Cine 60 blimp that's supposed to be much better and newer, and I once saw it on Ebay. Was tempted to bid on it but the blimp was in half disassembled shape. The owner even claimed you could handhold it in that blimp.

I am shooting a feature film on an Arri IIc right now, but MOS. I am post syncing all my dialog. The IIc is a good camera, does the job for me.

- G.

Bob Eckhart · October 25, 2004

I did a fair amount of research on this after buying an ARRI 120 blimp for the IIa/b/c on eBay (before I bought the camera). :huh:

It turns out that (at least for that model) getting a true crystal motor/base combination to work inside was going to require a ton of modifications and compromises re: ftge counters and mirror inching back to the viewing position. The ARRI 120 came with an ac-governed flatbase/motor combo that took a reference tone from the regular (wall) ac--like pre-crystal "pilotone." With luck, the camera may hold sync for short periods, but I'm not optimistic without extensive testing.

Another issue is making sure you have the right (modified) camera door for the blimp's viewfinder extension tube. The IIB and IIC have different camera view ports and optics--a IIB door won't work on a IIC--so (at least in my case, where the blimp I bought included a modified IIB door) that could become an issue if you buy camera and blimp separately.

Finally, the older (ARRI) blimps had a lead-based interior soundproofing material ("barifoil") that deteriorates badly in gear of that vintage. It sheds lots of nasty foam inside the blimp, which has to be removed and replaced to keep the unit clean and quiet enough for sync sound shooting. Even with all of the old material nicely stripped out, I've been quoted $1500-$1800 to replace the interior soundproofing. I've thought about an additional, exterior barney, but that adds another layer of complexity when you're out on your shoot.

I've seen the BNCRs in the price range you're considering--and it looks like to me like size, weight, and portability would be a real problem, severely limiting the number of setups that could be done in a day. These would probably be fine for a studio setup, but I think that out in the field, they'd be murder.

I hope this isn't off-putting--it's just some of the challenges I've learned about trying to do what you want to do. After all, a couple of difficult setups a day beats not doing anything at all! :)

John Sprung · October 26, 2004

.... only a few months away from being able to get an Arri IIC blimped or a Mitchell BNCR package ....
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Having shot with both, I'd say that in general the BNCR is the better deal. You get pin registration and 1000 ft loads vs. 400 ft. for only slightly more weight and bulk. Remember that both are state of the art from 50 years ago, they're antiques, like me. In the old days, the blimped Arri was much cheaper than the BNCR. The BL, on the other hand, is only about 30 years behind the times. ;-)

-- J.S.

Matt Pacini · October 27, 2004

I'm just curious how you guys would compare this against the Kinor or Konvas.

I mean, if you HAD to shoot on one of these, or the IIC, which would it be?

And why is it that almost nobody ever mentions the Aaton 35's here?

Seems like a nice, light, nifty camera...

How much are they, what drawbacks are there to them, etc.?

Matt Pacini

manny · October 28, 2004

Hi Matt,

The Aaton 35 is in a different league, that is no way to compare with an Arri 2 or even 3, that is a hell of a great camera, silent light also pos to 3 perf and not cheap either.

Last time I worked with one four years ago, the DoP owned it and he was very happy.

I think many people don't really know Aaton to be honest. I love em, but most DoP's I work with here in Europe want Arri or Moviecam. Only in England and France Aaton seems to be popular, as well as in the US of course. In Munich, the A-minima is the only Aaton around.

It is a shame.

Chose between an Arri 2 and a Konvas, well I have an Arri 2 so I am biased but there really nice cameras, easy to service, worldwide. Easy to upgrade and compatible.

Konvas cameras, there are some around, quite a few afficionados. but to many dodgy dealers. Depending where you live it might be difficult, no local technical help.

My two cents

Regards

Emmanuel, London

Camera Assistant - Focus Puller

Munich - London +491608036889 - www.suys.de - +447910034443

GeorgeSelinsky · October 28, 2004

I'm just curious how you guys would compare this against the Kinor or Konvas.
I mean, if you HAD to shoot on one of these, or the IIC, which would it be?

I shot with both Konvas and Arri IIc. I like my IIc, got used to it. The Konvas might be a bit better at handheld I think. Otherwise I'd probably take the IIc.

- G.

Webster Colcord · October 28, 2004

Manny,

I agree about the dodgy Konvas dealers. I had an incredibly bad experience with one many years ago.

I just joined this site/ forum and I posted to the other thread about the Arri IIC blimp. Bob- if you are interested in parting with the Arri blimp, I would like to get a price from you. Conversly, I might be interested in parting with the flatbase cinema products sync motor that I mentioned in the other thread. In either scenario, one of use will be giving up on the idea of using the Arri to shoot sync sound. You can write me at wcolcord@aol.com

Webster Colcord

www.webstercolcord.com

November 4, 2004

. . . I am shooting a feature film on an Arri IIc right now, but MOS. I am post syncing all my dialog.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hey! I was kinda thinking of doing the same thing . . . using an Arri IIC and shooting the majority of my film MOS as well. What are you recording your "post-synch" sound (your location dialogue) with? Are synching with just a visual slate? Currently, I'm doing all my soundfx field recording on a non-SMPTE portable MiniDisc recorder, which I think is fine for my application for the benefits that the format offers. If this is too off-topic, or too detailed to post here, an e-mail or call would be much appreciated! Thanks!

Edited November 5, 2004 by NBC Shooter

GeorgeSelinsky · November 20, 2004

What are you recording your "post-synch" sound (your location dialogue) with? Are synching with just a visual slate? Currently, I'm doing all my soundfx field recording on a non-SMPTE portable MiniDisc recorder, which I think is fine for my application for the benefits that the format offers. If this is too off-topic, or too detailed to post here, an e-mail or call would be much appreciated! Thanks!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What I'm doing exactly is shooting with a wild variable speed motor (really wish I had a crystal motor but can't afford it), and having someone on location record a scratch soundtrack. Since we use video cameras with on camera mics (and in a few cases an old cassette recorder) to do that, the quality is absolutely dreadful. I've actually learned that it's of benefit to record sound with a boom even on an MOS shoot because your actors have a bit of an easier time picking up their nuances, and the foley process is also easier. You can try to clean the audio using various fancy filters like on Cool Edit Pro, but I rarely find that useful in my experience.

To sync, I take the scratch sound and sync it up in Adobe Premiere to the dailies, which I get on Mini DV and digitize via firewire to my hard drive. This is a real pain in the butt, because I have to alter the speed of the sound in order to get it to match the picture, and over certain long takes the camera will vary its speed, start fast then go slow, so it can become tedious. There's a great tool in Premiere that stretches or compresses the speed of an audio clip, it's a vertical line with two perpendicular arrows coming out of it. I use that.

I never used real slates, figuring I'd rather save the film. Occasionally I've asked my actors to clap for a slate. What I usually do is I listen for the camera's motor starting up (which on a IIc you can hear pretty clearly) on the scratch audio. You gotta be careful though, you can't sync the first sound wave of the camera starting up to the first flash frame in the picture because the camera motor (picture) was ramping up to speed, while the sound recording device was already at speed. In other words, they're crazily out of sync until the camera ramps up to speed.

You actually have to line up your visual flash frame to a moment in the scratch audio when you can hear the camera motor is already running but before it reaches speed. Same with the tail, the last flash should line up a few frames before you hear the motor actually halts. Even then you won't have perfect sync, that's where the sound stretching and chopping up of the scratch track begins. If you shot with a crystal motor and were recording on a video camera which is also crystal based, you shouldn't theoretically have to do any stretching other than the 0.01% slowdown for telecine.

I've also sometimes lined up the video image from the camcorder being used for the scratch audio to the film dailies, watching for a mouth closing, a very specific jesture, etc.

After the syncing is done I burn a new DV file of each 10 minute flat with the scratch sound synced up to it, also with burn in timecode. After that I go to the timeline and "chop em up" into shots, putting them into bins. I keep the bins by each scene #. I then export these bins and import them into my editing projects as necessary.

There was one instance where I recorded real sync, I was filming two actors speaking inside a Hummer H20. The camera was outside, the actors inside and the windows were closed. That Hummer acted like an inverse blimp, it kept the camera noise outside of the acoustic environment, so I got pretty decent sound (considering it came from a consumer DV camera that was about 3 feet away from the actors' mouths - I repositioned it for every actor's shot).

When I have the scene at a rough cut, I call in my actors and we sit down to dub. I have a condenser mic going into a tube preamp, which goes out to my Soundblaster Live card. Yeah, I know I can be doing 24 bit audio if I sprung for another card but I don't need that kind of sound quality if I'm going to an optical 35mm track in the end. 16 bit 48 khz is fine for me, the extra resolution in my case might cause more problems than benefits.

I create a loop point in Premiere, then I open a sound recording program. The sound recording program records the actor's dubbing as Premiere loops the video output to my TV monitor, along with the original audio via headphones. We do as many takes as I feel are necessary, then when I see a shot that looks promising I stop the actor, I cut out that take that I like, I save it into a file, I bring that WAV file into Premiere, and I sync it up. It takes a bit of work to sync it perfectly (a minute or so of fiddling the sound clip here or there). If it looks good enough to me we move on, if not, we keep going at it until we get it right.

Dubbing is something that is individual with everyone. Some actors are good at it, some have a harder time. One frequent problem are phrases where people break up their speech with laughs or studders, those can be real pains to reproduce especially for the inexperienced. I often try to break up the phrase to be dubbed into as many concrete components as possible. This way there's less syncing elements to think about during each take which makes it easier for the actor to get it right faster. Unfortunately sometimes there are lines that are said in such a manner that it makes breaking them up very tough if not impossible, that forces the actor to strain more.

Another piece of advice is to allow the actor to practice their sync at first by simply listening to their track and whispering along, to get the syllables right. Then when they're ready to do a take, turn the original audio down low (keeps the headphones from introducing bleed into the mic), then turn it off entirely if possible. The reason for this is to keep the performance fresh and prevent the actor from mechanically copying their original audio (which makes it sound very stale and forced).

I've discovered that dubbing allows you to fine tune performances and add other bits of dialog (i.e. during a cutaway). It's really a great chance that you should try to take advantage of. You can't alter the rhythm of speech but you can alter the intonation and volume, and that adds a lot of flexibility. You can even substitute one actor's voice for another, which can be done for practical and/or creative reasons. Also, ideas that come up during dubbing have influenced my editing decisions.

These things are something you miss out on sometimes when doing sync. It's important to note that with sync shoots, adding any ADR/dubbing is always going to stand out, you can never match the acoustic quality of the location audio versus the studio stuff, even when you add reverbs and play with mic proximity. Each room sounds different. With post looped films you have the added flexibility of the consistent quality of the sound. The sound is more comprehensible, which is good (esp. if you suffer from bad hearing like I do!).

My actors actually enjoy dubbing. We watch the scene, we talk about it, I feed them munchies and we have a nice time. I have a cozy little setup in my bedroom, it doesn't have that coldness of a studio. They watch the shot and they strive for perfection, sometimes even more than I do.

I intend to record my ambient and portable foley sounds (that need to be done on location) on those new minidiscs that don't have any compression, and using a dynamic mic. The "in studio" (meaning "in my room") foley sounds will be recorded with the same setups as the dubbing). I started doing some foley work but I'm going to leave most of it for when I have a locked cut, it's the most economical stage to do it in. Check out http://www.marblehead.net/foley/index.html

BTW, I always like to answer questions on a forum versus via private email (unless it is really a private matter), this way what I say is a matter of public record via the internet, meaning anyone with a similar question can read it - and others can contribute to what I have to say and I can learn something that way, too.

- G.

Edited November 21, 2004 by GeorgeSelinsky

GeorgeSelinsky · November 21, 2004

I decided I might as well put up a quick webpage devoted to this subject:

http://www.geocities.com/gselinsky/nonsync.html

I encoded a video that I took of me dubbing with one of my actors just a little while ago, when we had a tough phrase to do.

I start by setting the audio program to record, then going into Premiere and starting the loop. Then the actor watches the loop on the TV monitor and does his dub. He is using a paper here to aid him as this chunk of dialog has a few irregularities.

You'll notice the strobing/rolling on the monitors and shaky camera, apologies this is home brewn quickie stuff.

- G.

Webster Colcord · November 21, 2004

Wow! Thanks for posting that. Do you plan on doing a neg conform -and did you transfer with the edgecode to enable that?

GeorgeSelinsky · November 21, 2004

Wow! Thanks for posting that. Do you plan on doing a neg conform -and did you transfer with the edgecode to enable that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here is where I'm afraid I did a bit of a mistake and followed some bad advice. I didn't transfer with keycode because I was told this was a "waste of money", that negative conforming can be done without it just as well.

I devised my own timecode burn in, however, and will be working from that.

- G.

Bob Eckhart · November 21, 2004

George--

Could you explain a bit more about how you're doing your negative conforming? I'm old school (work print with edge numbers) and don't entirely follow the newer processes.

Thanks!

Bob Eckhart

GeorgeSelinsky · November 21, 2004

It's a bit of a pain nowadays, the problem centering on NTSC's 29.97 frame rate. I hope that in the near future a 24p SDTV format (i.e. the mini DV variant) will be the prime choice for dailies - maybe some of these problems will go away.

The basic idea is that you do timecode burnin along with keycode. The negative cutter then takes your video dailies and "verifies" them, in other words he makes sure the telecine guy didn't stop and restart the machine, which screws up the order of the 3:2 pulldown. For this he needs your video dailies and your negative flats.

Then he takes the EDL that you have from your program and puts it into his program. That gives him the list of cuts he has to make by keycode. If you did something wrong, i.e. didn't allow enough frames for a splice, chose the wrong length for a dissolve or fade, etc. he'll let you know and you'll have to modify your EDL.

Then he puts his cut list together, and takes your negative and starts cutting it by keycode (edgecode) number as his program instructs him to. The program accounts for the 3:2 pulldown.

That's it in a nutshell.

I toyed with the idea of doing it myself, but then I pondered, "Should I take the chance of mis-splicing my own negative?" Besides, it would take me a long time to get it done, he'd do it faster and better.

- G.

Laurent Andrieux · November 21, 2004

The Aaton 35 is in a different league, that is no way to compare with an Arri 2 or even 3, that is a hell of a great camera, silent light also pos to 3 perf and not cheap either.

Do you consider the AAton 35 as a silent camera ?

I mean, much more than a IIc or a BNCR, for sure, but as much as a BL ?