RED DSMC button mics?

[Marc Wielage]

Marc, you are right. But these are only meant as a reference / scratch track to sync audio without having to use a bigger setup.

The problem is: programs like PluralEyes work best when the sound they're syncing to is identical to the reference sound. If it's 15 feet away from the actors, and is 2 inches away from a fan, it ain't gonna work very well.

As it is, PluralEyes is not perfect and gets a little dodgy on occasion. It can work very well with a really good reference track, and I usually do this by sending the camera a wireless hop of the mono mix.

I also think for doco situations -- and by that, I mean "getting shot at in Afghanistan" or "running down the banks of the Amazon" -- slapping a Sennheiser 416 on top is understandable, assuming you're just getting B-roll footage. But again, it's not going to work well with actors' dialog or reporter's commentary.

It does amaze me that people are trying to use a $100 microphone with a $40,000 camera.

[Patrick Grossien]

Good points. Thanks Marc. What wireless system are you using?
About the $40.000 camera... Thats somewhat true but there are also a lot of scarlet users around here ;)

[Victor Lazaro]

The reason why il
mooking to use this is for Music Vdeos. They don't care about the sound, but it can help with lip sync or rrhythm in dancing.

[Marc Wielage]

Good points. Thanks Marc. What wireless system are you using?

For a camera hop, typically two Lectro SMQV's set to 250 milliwatts (maximum for the U.S.), and a Lectro SRa stereo receiver, block 21. I made custom cables specifically for the Epic and Scarlet, and have had good results with both. I've also used Lectrosonics' D4 4-channel digital system, but it sucks twice as much power (as you would expect).

Even with a $12,000 camera, it's sad to slap a $100 microphone on it and call it "professional." For at least 20-25 years, ENG photographers have been using Sennheiser 416's on top of their TV news cameras, and you can get acceptable sound in a riot situation, war footage, background material, and all that stuff. But the moment somebody talks, you really need an external microphone placed close to the person speaking. If nothing else, you have to ride levels depending on how loud they're talking, and solve background noise problems.

My take is, the camera operator already has enough to worry about in terms of exposure, focus, composition, keeping the camera steady, worrying about battery life and storage capability, and so on. The last thing they need to worry about is sound. For that, you really need another warm body.

[Nathan Beaman]

^^^^^
I wish you could like posts on reduser similar to Facebook - :-)

[Ryan De Franco]

Shot documentary footage this morning with separate audio system, no slate, no scratch track. Editor will hate me.

Will shoot doc footage tomorrow, tues, wens with the Olympus everyone says is inadequate. There will be enough for the editor to piece NTG-3, talent's lav, and scratch mic together. Editor will hate me less.

This is the first time production hasn't been able to afford a sound mixer, but it's an international crew in town for a short segment, and I understand.

Some sound is better than no sound.

[Jarek Zabczynski]

No one is talking about using these little mics for usable audio. I use them for music videos as well. I just need to hear "something" like the track playing to help me sync to it. Also, it's nice to hear myself shout like a madman during the takes!

[Marc Wielage]

Some sound is better than no sound.

But... marginal sound is not as good as good sound. And it often costs more to fix marginal sound than to get good sound in the first place. I also think it's fair to say, the moment even non-pros sit down to watch a film with bad sound (particularly dialog), they notice it. I think people will forgive marginal photography more than they can bad dialog. You figure, maybe the DP intentionally wanted that particular look for a creative reason.

I just need to hear "something" like the track playing to help me sync to it. Also, it's nice to hear myself shout like a madman during the takes!

Nothing wrong with that for music videos. But I worked on hundreds of music videos in the 1980s -- including many you have probably seen -- where they were shot on film, and there was no scratch track. We just made sure the camera crew shot a timecode slate, and the editor was able to sync it all up with no problem.

But I agree: assuming digital capture, it's nice to have any kind of reference on the camera. A wireless hop is a much, much better solution, even for a music video. And it need not be expensive or complicated.

[Jarek Zabczynski]

Marc, I fully understand where you are coming from and all your points are valid. But what we're trying to get across is that sometimes all we want and need is shitty and easy audio as a reference and there isn't anything wrong with that. Sure, it would only take me a few minutes to setup a wireless system to a better mic or connect it to the playback setup. But in those few minutes I can also shoot an extra take. When I'm playing thousands of dollars for a location with a limited time allotted, I'd rather have that extra take rather than better sound I'm not going to use anyway. Having a crappy little mic that can live in my mic jack and I don't need to worry about at all makes my life easier.

[Marcos Montenegro]

Yes they do. This is how I record reference audio.

Will this work?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ct_Stereo.html