I suspect that the real foundation for this is the audience's lack of interest in "quality". Production companies know they can get away with shortcuts when the target demographic doesn't care. All you have to do is look at social media and sites like YouTube to see what people are willing to accept. Blurring doesn't matter much if the prime audience for the show is watching on a smart phone while simultaneously texting their friends - while driving, of course.
I'd bet the dialog editors sense the same thing. Why pay a person to carefully edit the ambience under the dialog so it sonically makes sense when you can pay a so-called "sound designer" to amp up the "music" track to the point where a viewer can barely make out the dialog anyway. Cut in enough sex scenes and dialog hardly matters anymore. Many episodic TV shows fall into this category these days.
Yeah the world is changing but will it be for the better?
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, John Moore <bigfish@...> wrote:
>
> Just wanted to run something up the flag pole. On a series I work on the decision was made to have the AEs start doing the blurring. Not to blow my own horn but over the years I've refined my Avid blurring and can do a reasonable job in a reasonable time. No one asked me if I minded having the AEs do the blurs and so it goes. I liken it to telling the carpenter working on your home that he can do the main build but when it comes to the final trim and finish carpentry we're going to bring in somebody with less experience and works cheaper. Now I do resent that my name is listed as the online/colorist and the show now has what are in my opinion sub par blurs etc... Of course it's a money decision made by people who don't pride themselves in the actual look of the show but rather in the bottom line costs.
>
>
> A recent episode was very blur intensive and the AE spent 3 days blurring the show. When we screened it I warned the producers there may be some blur tweaking needed. When we watched it down the Post Super asked if the AE's blurring had gone downhill and then he asked if I would mind teaching him how to do blurs. Well I didn't really respond to that question but I'm curious how other list members handle these types of situations. In essence I'm being asked to train someone to do my job and take money out of my own pocket. The reality is you get what you pay for and after having an AE spend 3 days on work that I had to completely redo, which took me a day to do, the math seems obvious to me but then I have a vested interest. I have always tried to share knowledge with co workers but to be asked by a Post Supervisor to train someone to do the work for less money just rubs me the wrong way. Am I being too sensitive here or perhaps too
> realistic? I see this trend extending way beyond my specific situation and it is a sorry state of the current climate in Post Production.
>
> I'm not slamming my AE but he's put in a situation where he's never been trained and is expected to do a task that despite what management thinks is pretty difficult to do right. Of course lowering the standards along the way to save money is the reality of today's world and I don't see that slowing down. Too bad I gave up drinking now might be a good time. ;-)
>
>
>
> John Moore
> Barking Trout Productions
> Studio City, CA
> bigfish@...
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (6) |
No comments:
Post a Comment