• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

Indie films and 5.1

I’ve read multiple times that true low budget/no budget Indie film makers never have 5.1 sound on their finished films. Why not? Don’t tell me it’s more difficult or costlier, that much I know. But (in general terms) HOW much more difficult and HOW much more expensive is it? And what is the typical financial cutoff that determines whether a film has stereo sound or something at least CLOSE to theater quality? Assuming I’m not reshooting “The Battleship Potemkin” where I'm blowing lots of shit up, but instead something in line with the $400k “Napoleon Dynamite”, can the ORIGINAL budget afford 5.1? We now have 4k digital cameras that cost less than my son’s braces, color correcting software for the price of a good set of tires, and editing software that comes free with your 2 year Vonage contract (okay, that last one I made up). Are we close to taking that leap to the next level of affordable sound recording? And if not, what will it take? Does it call for a staff of 7 and access to a $500,000 recording studio or just another two weeks with a dedicated sound editor and lots of red vines?
 
I’ve read multiple times that true low budget/no budget Indie film makers never have 5.1 sound on their finished films. .. tell me ... in general terms HOW much more difficult and HOW much more expensive is it?

First, you have to change the way that you think about sound.

There are four discrete audio post disciplines - dialog editing (we'll include ADR recording & editing here), Foley performance & recording, sound effects, and rerecording or mixing.

DX editing and sound FX can all be done is small audio editing suites. Foley is usually done on a Foley "stage." Rerecording or mixing is, at least at the budgeted level, done in a room the replicates a movie theatre.


Here's a Foley stage:

SonyFoleyKZ32010-11-08.jpg


Foley pits:

foley-pit_0011.jpg



Rerecording stage at Skywalker Sound:

skywalkersound.jpg



What you will notice first, I'm sure, is the size of the facilities. Now add in the expense of sonically isolating them from the outside world, and then add in the expense of making them sonically balanced. At Skywalker and similar facilities the speaker systems alone will run up to $250,000. On large budget films the sound track can run up to (and sometimes over) 1,000 audio tracks. So there will most probably be four or five full blown Pro Tools systems; figure another $250,000. Now add another $250,000 for the console.... I'm sure that you get the idea. Building and maintaining a facility like this is EXPENSIVE, not to mention the extraordinarily talented personnel.

Now, having impressed you with the mega-budget way of thinking, there are lots of smaller facilities that can do 5.1 surround. The issue is "translate-ability," or how the mix will translate in different venues and, eventually, different consumer systems - everything from high-priced home theaters to lap tops. These smaller facilities are often not certified by Dolby. At this juncture it's all up to the talents of the rerecording mixer(s).

Now, as to how all this applies to smaller budget indie films... If you budget about $50k for audio post you could do a very nice surround mix. Most indie films are going to be relatively "simple" films in terms of audio. They probably are not going to have enormous track counts, they probably don't have an incredible amount of special visual effects that need to be supported by sound effects, they probably won't have a score performed by a full orchestra, etc. So everything can be done on a shoestring. A small but talented audio post crew can do all of the DX editing and sound FX editing, there are smaller Foley houses that do nice work on a budget, and you can mix at a non-certified facility. However, the nature of most indie films does not require a 5.1 surround mix, a 3.0 mix will do just fine - dialog and the bulk of the Foley in the center speaker, sound effects and score in the left and right speakers.

Now, I can do all of the audio post on a feature film - I've done seven (7) features, more shorts than I can remember, animated shorts, some corporate stuff, web series pilots, etc. I'm "bargain basement" audio post, specializing in low/no/mini/micro budget projects. Yet I am still beyond the means of many indie filmmakers - they don't budget for audio post and consider anything over $100 for audio post an outrageous expense. They don't budget the time for audio post. No matter what the level - micro budget indie to mega-budget "Hollywood" production - it still requires a lot of time to do audio editing. It takes me approximately six (6) hours per linear minute to do audio post. So for a 100 minute feature that's 600 hours of audio post work. Even at minimum wage ($7.25/hr) that almost $4,500. And, trust me, I charge more than minimum wage, but a hell of a lot less than the $150 to $500 per hour that bigger facilities charge; that's $90,000 to $300,000 for audio post. Most indie types have already blown their wad before they ask me for a quote. So, it is cost that defeats most indie films from doing a 5.1 surround mix.

You may want to read the following thread by APE (AudioPostExpert/Greg). It explains in detail what goes into audio post, and I'm sure that he'll chime in with more about why most indie types forego 5.1.

http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=45351

BTW, your comment about inexpensive 4k digital cameras is a bit disingenuous; the camera may be relatively inexpensive, but now figure in the cost of the lenses and the lighting that will bring the most out of the camera. And what about the talent of the DoP and camera operator? Just because you have a a nice camera does not guarantee beautiful cinematography.
 
Granted, the $4000 camera doesn't take into account the extra $50,000 in data storage, lenses, whistles and bells, but it's still a far cry from dealing with the $250k truck we use to get from Panavision that required 4 people to maintain. And digital means the 5t grip and electric from Keylite is a thing of the past, as is lugging around the behemoth from Young's Generator. No more sweating 5254 stock versus 5247 and wondering if you have enough to finish the day's shoot, digital has made everything cheaper and quicker (although not necessarily better). I'm not sure it's any more disinegnuous to point out that a basic camera can now be had for $4000 than it is to point out that a finished film is in the can for $7000. I think a prudent person understands there are additional expenses to both. But your comment about "It takes me approximately six (6) hours per linear minute to do audio post." pretty much answered my question to a T. it's not budgeted for because people fail to understand the importance of quality sound.

Thank you.
 
Money

It all comes down to the budget. Everyone needs to get paid and what's left is how many hours you get on a mixing stage. Usually 5 days. After a Dialogue and Fx premix you barely have any real mix days. You just power through and there's no time to pan anything. Plus Dolby 'loan's the DMU (matrixing box) to post production houses, if Dolby doesn't know you, there probably with be less of a chance for a true 5.1 encoding.
 
I did my most recent short in 5.1 sound, however, I only used 3 channels. L,R, C
It premiere at a festival in a couple weeks. I wonder how it will sound? I really have no idea. It sounds good'ish on my home theater system... I don't know yet if the exhibition facility even does 5.1, if not, it should play back in stereo.
 
We now have 4k digital cameras that cost less than my son’s braces, color correcting software for the price of a good set of tires, and editing software that comes free with your 2 year Vonage contract (okay, that last one I made up). Are we close to taking that leap to the next level of affordable sound recording? And if not, what will it take?

No, we're not close and it will take a few million years of evolution or some new tech which plugs directly into the brain and allows us to "hear" digital audio. Unlike with the visuals, as audio technology has improved audience expectation has grown in proportion: Many still prefer the 35mm film look to digital images but a mono soundtrack would be completely unacceptable to modern cinema audiences who expect 5.1 as a bare minimum, in fact 5.1 was superseded several years ago by 7.1 and 7.1 has now been superseded by Dolby Atmos. The problem associated with this ever increasing audience audio expectation is of creating all the content to the required quality and then actually playing back all that audio in the cinema: The basic technology of speakers has not changed significantly in decades but what has changed dramatically is the number of speakers, the overall complexity of the sound systems and the complexity of the room acoustics those sound systems are placed in. The cost of all this has actually increased with the advent of cheap computer based technology, rather than decreased. Sure the audio recording and editing systems are far cheaper and quicker but where blockbusters used fewer than a hundred audio tracks, modern blockbusters often require up to 1,000, even made for TV films often use well over 250 channels! Dolby Atmos can address up to 64 separate speakers instead of just one (!) and the man hours required to create, edit and position all that audio convincingly has if anything increased.

Does it call for a staff of 7 and access to a $500,000 recording studio or just another two weeks with a dedicated sound editor and lots of red vines?

Baring in mind what I said above, the answer is neither! It calls for a staff of 20-50 and a facility with: 20 or so audio edit suites, ADR stage, Foley Stage and a cinema grade mix stage, all of which will cost $10m+ rather than $500k. You could do it in a $500k facility with a staff of just 7 (and indeed that's the sort of work I can do) but it is a real micro budget solution and involves compromise compared to even low budget features.

Plus Dolby 'loan's the DMU (matrixing box) to post production houses, if Dolby doesn't know you, there probably with be less of a chance for a true 5.1 encoding.

Dolby only loans out it's DMU to accredited mix stages and to get accredited for features mixing requires fulfilling a list of construction and acoustic specs which are extremely expensive. However, the DMU is only required for distribution on 35mm film or the new DMU for Dolby Atmos, there is no Dolby encoding for 5.1 on DCP.

G
 
Last edited:
Back
Top