Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: boom mics

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » boom mics (Page 1)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: boom mics

Josh Mitoska
Film Handler

Posts: 59
From: Brooklyn, MI, USA
Registered: Dec 2001

posted 01-27-2002 12:52 PM

Hello again. I have problems sometimes with the boom mics showing on my screens. I have the right lenses on, is this a problem, with the apature keys, or something else I'm not getting? Most of my projectors don't have keys, just tape on the port glass. I just got this theatre a few months ago, and am trying to redo everything, the equipment is ok, but the theatre was built in 1926-, and now has 2 upstairs screens crammed in where the balchony used to be-

| IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 01-27-2002 01:15 PM

Speaking strictly from the audience viewpoint, having a boom mic appear at the top of the screen is a very bad thing. Totally ruins the "movie magic" thing for me. This happened in Jurassic Park at the local Cinemark dollar theater -- was mis-framed. I reported it and they fixed it.

Seems like it could be a simple framing issue, or aperture not right. Someone here will have a better answer for you. But you should try to fix it if you can!

------------------
- dave
Stay away from the meadow...

| IP: Logged

Ben Stephenson
Film Handler

Posts: 29
From: Manchester, England
Registered: Jan 2001

posted 01-27-2002 02:30 PM

I have seen a few films with the not so discreet BOOM MIC but the framing is right, may be cheap film making

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 01-27-2002 03:03 PM

Josh, if this is only happening on "flat" films, you do not have the framing centered. Remember, just because you don't see a frame line does NOT mean that a flat film is properly in frame. Tweek it on a green band for a quick and dirty fix.

I wish the labs would at least hard matte the first reel of movies to help keep presentations as a whole in frame.

| IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 01-27-2002 03:11 PM

I have discovered some (but not all) of the flat movies can slightly be mis-framed (if needed) to hide the microphone without too much trouble. On rare occasion, I have done that.

I agree it is poor editing if a boom microphone or any other scene rigging detail shows up anywhere in the frame.

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-27-2002 03:19 PM

Actually editing has nothing to do with it they can't remove it once it is there. It is sloppy boom operators they are supposed to keep out of the cinematographers frame

| IP: Logged

Ken Lackner
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1907
From: Atlanta, GA, USA
Registered: Sep 2001

posted 01-27-2002 04:08 PM

What does hard matte mean?

| IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 01-27-2002 04:11 PM

Hard matting a flat film refers to blacking out the portion of the frame that is not supposed to be projected.

| IP: Logged

Jerry Chase
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1068
From: Margate, FL, USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 01-27-2002 04:15 PM

"Most of my projectors don't have keys, just tape on the port glass."

Aperture plates aren't all that expensive. You might want to invest in a loop of test film and a few plates. Filing them to size can be tedious, but properly cut plates will eliminate much of the problem.

I don't notice a dedicated manual to filing plates in the tips section. Perhaps someone could do a basic write-up and point out how to avoid the obvious problems - cracked lenses, filings in the works, overcutting, improper alignment, etc.

Alternately, a good tech can do the job of aligning and making plates right in a quarter of the time.

| IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 01-27-2002 04:39 PM

Yeah, Gordon. I used the wrong word. Sorry about that.

Maybe I should have said, "A crew paying inattention to insignificant minor details, in other words, screw-up's by the gross......."

| IP: Logged

Michael Brown
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1522
From: Bradford, England
Registered: May 2001

posted 01-27-2002 05:15 PM

Could there be a problem such as showing Flat(1.85:1) Films in a wrong 1.66:1 or even academy ratio. Josh what aspect ratio do you project flat films at?

| IP: Logged

Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

Posts: 7595
From: Hollywood, CA USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 01-27-2002 05:58 PM

Brad is on to it.... Because the release film format is defined as 1.85/1.66 and the 35mm frame is much higher, you will see all sorts of things on the top and bottom of a mis-framed image. It is sloppy cinematography when a mic or some crew member shows up inside the matt of a properly framed image...and there are several.

>>> Phil

| IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 01-27-2002 08:11 PM

One thing that can really screw you up here is that if the film is a true 1.85 ratio, and the boom mic still shows on the screen, you are basically screwed. If the 1.85 is racked correctly and you purposely mis-framed just a small amount, it would look like crap with a black bar showing on the bottom of the screen.

What really adds insult to injury is that I have seen many flat prints use a combination of 1.66 and 1.85 frames. If you catch a boom mike or some other back-drop rigging in the picture in a 1.66 ratio, you can "tune it out" with the frame knob. But if the next scene comes along and has the big fat 1.85 frame lines, you are simply out of luck.

Same holds true with 2.35 prints, unfortunately. You can't mis-frame to cover those up without the audience howling.

| IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 01-27-2002 08:24 PM

Why would a director or DP *choose* to shoot full-frame and then print without a hard matte? Is it considered a non-issue because proper framing takes care of it in the projector? Seems like it would be easy to use a hard matte when the prints are made and not have to worry about framing issues. I was pretty surprised to see that boom mic in Jurassic Park. Why not hard matte and be done with it? Enquiring minds want to know.

------------------
- dave
Stay away from the meadow...

| IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 01-27-2002 09:07 PM

David, I sometimes think it has something to do with how many martoonies they had. And, the number of boom microphones you see in the movie is probably directly proportional to the number of the martoonies that were consumed.....

But seriously, I just wish the 1.85 format would ride off into the setting sun. It has served its purpose very nicely since it was introduced (I believe I have been told) to compete with smellivision.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.