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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » An open letter to Tyler Perry (Page 1)

This topic comprises 12 pages: 1  2  3  4  ...  10  11  12

Author Topic: An open letter to Tyler Perry Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 02-25-2012 05:09 PM                     Mr. Perry, If you are going to continue to make boring movies that attract a ridiculous amount of customers, could you please at least conform to the audio standards set by the industry? Every-single-movie you make we have to run the volume at 8.5 to 9. Thank you.  |  IP: Logged Robert E. Allen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1078 From: Checotah, Oklahoma Registered: Jul 2002 posted 02-27-2012 04:00 PM                     Hey Brad: I've seen most everything Perry has made and found them both entertaining and inspirational. I was wondering why you called them "boring". As for the sound you still had a couple of notches to go on your fader. Is it that you don't want the operator at the projector (where he/she should be anyway until the feature hits the screen or at least return to it to check focus and sound)?  |  IP: Logged Tony Bandiera Jr Film God Posts: 3067 From: Moreland Idaho Registered: Apr 2004 posted 02-27-2012 04:40 PM                     Robert: While I can agree that the operator should be present at the start of the feature to check sound, focus, etc, it should NOT be the operator's responsibility to make up for the incompetence of the filmmaker/labs/editors. Many years ago when I had to run Academy Qualifiers, a filmmaker came in with his 16mm print and a seven page (!) cue sheet telling the projectionist when to raise and lower the volume, adjust the tone and try to compensate for scenes that were printed too dark. I told the filmmaker that I had many other screens to attend to, and that I would start his film, check volume and focus and that was it, it would run the rest of the way with no more than random spot checks. After his third entry into the booth without permission to whine about his film, I told him in no uncertain terms that his "baby" was just another piece of plastic running through a machine and I didn't give a rat's ass about his inability to have a properly recorded print made. Further, the next time he came into my booth without permission I would have him removed from the property and if necessary, arrested for trespassing. Later that evening I apologized for being so harsh but also explained to him the reality of exhibition in today's (back then) environment. I also gave him tips on what to do when he had a new print struck to avoid the issues he had. The point is, right or not, the reality is and has been for a long time that exhibition has been performed with little or no direct supervision by someone who may or may not be technically competent to provide a "flawless" presentation, with rare exception. I can't believe I'm saying this, but at present, the closest we will ever get is a properly set up, spec'd and maintained digital system....or a film system where each competent operator has no more than two or three screens max to attend to so he/she can be diligent enough to catch any issues rapidly. Yes, a good projectionist CAN handle a multiplex of say 10 screens with success, but my point is that it is physically impossible to closely monitor that many screens at all times. I miss the days of single screen changeover operations where you HAD to stay alert..or totally fuck up the show.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-27-2012 06:51 PM                        quote: Tony Bandiera Jr I miss the days of single screen changeover operations where you HAD to stay alert..or totally fuck up the show. Yup, I remember those days and my boss busting through the booth door when I would "accidentally" let the arc drift too much!  |  IP: Logged Robert E. Allen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1078 From: Checotah, Oklahoma Registered: Jul 2002 posted 02-27-2012 07:28 PM                     I too remember those days fondly Tony and Mike, While I have run multiplexes most of my experiences has been with carbon arc changeovers. I found that far less complicated than xenon automated systems. Digital would probably blow my mind.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 02-27-2012 08:18 PM                     Robert, there are 3 kinds of movies being made today in regards to sound. #1 Tyler Perry movies. We always have to play them about 9 on the fader. #2 Michael Bay movies. These typically play about 4 on the fader. #3 Every other movie. These all play quite perfectly at 7 on the fader. Tyler and Michael need to get their act together, plain and simple. And yes, Tyler Perry movies are quite boring to me with their awful scripts, acting and crank-them-out-like-a-daily-soap-opera production value. In fairness Mr. Bay's crapfests don't do anything for me either. Still, the entertainment value of the movies are only my opinion. The fader issue is fact.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 02-27-2012 09:31 PM                        quote: Robert E. Allen you still had a couple of notches to go on your fader. So it's fine if the sound plays at an acceptable level just as long as it is within the range of "notches"? How much is a notch anyway? I was always annoyed when I was asked to turn the sound up or down a notch. quote: Robert E. Allen Is it that you don't want the operator at the projector Irrelevant with today's automation. The automation is perfectly capable of adjusting the volume to 8.5 or 9. It's just that isn't the standard. This affects both dynamic range and noise floor.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 02-27-2012 09:31 PM                     "Filmmakers" (videographers really) need to get their movies mixed at the right audio level and just stop being assholes. I've never watched a Tyler Perry movie in a commercial theater setting so I never knew about him mixing the movie audio low. Maybe he is doing that so all the people in the movie theater yakking away at each other, on their phones or talking at the screen can hear what they are saying. My biggest gripe with audio still persists with the jerks who create movie trailers and commercials. Those damned things are always more hot than the feature. And it doesn't even make any difference if you're watching something in the movie theater or seeing something at home. The commercial audio is always quite a bit louder. I really would like to be there when the suit wearing executive tells the audio guy to ride that mixing fader hotter and hotter. I'd blind-side the suit with an elbow into his cheek bone. Those guys need an ass-beating lesson like that obviously. They have never taken any of the previous hints in more reasonable tones.  |  IP: Logged Jock Blakley Expert Film Handler Posts: 218 From: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Registered: Oct 2011 posted 02-27-2012 09:42 PM                     Our trailer packs are a good bit of fun that way - start in SR-D at 3.5 for the ads, then over to A-type at 5, then back to SR-D but this time at 4, then mono at 9, and so on. Another year or two of the loudness wars and the ads will hit that magic ~2.5 mark on the CP-500... where 0.1 each way renders them inaudible or deafening.  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 02-27-2012 09:47 PM                     quote: Joe Redifer How much is a notch anyway? Someone from Dolby once told me that each point on the fader translated to a difference of about 3dB SPL. Almost anyone can discern a difference of about 2dB. Audio professionals can often detect a difference of about 1dB. So it depends on who's asking? A pro might only want a difference of 0.3-0.5 but an "average Joe" might need a full "notch" to sense a change. However, I have found that this idea starts to fall apart when you are operating in the lower range -- roughly 4.0 and under -- where a difference of 0.1 can make a big difference between something being too loud or just right. So, if the Tyler Perry movies are working those low numbers, then it takes more effort to find the fader setting that is "just right" -- whereas, if a movie is playing near 7.0, there's more wiggle-room because you'd need a difference of 0.3 to 0.5 to make the same kind of dent. If 7.0 is too loud, I usually try 6.5 first. And if you're really super-picky then you have a few decimal "notches" to fine-tune the level. (But that's not usually necessary.) Not so with the lower numbers -- There's nothing between 4.0 and 3.9 (on a CP650) and, believe me, there can be a huge difference between those two fader settings. So there are, in my opinion, very practical concerns if a film is recorded too loud. And, if we're talking about an optical track, there's a good bet they've got optical clash if it's recorded so hot that we're working the 4's on the fader. Optical clash = distortion.  |  IP: Logged Robert E. Allen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1078 From: Checotah, Oklahoma Registered: Jul 2002 posted 02-27-2012 09:59 PM                     Joe - The last house I worked with automation was a CineMark Tinseltown with Christie projectors and consoles. It did not control either sound level or focus.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 02-27-2012 10:04 PM                        Cinemark is not really known for installing impressive booth equipment. But the projector and consoles are irrelevant. It's the automation that matters.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 02-27-2012 10:07 PM                     quote: Manny Knowles And, if we're talking about an optical track, there's a good bet they've got optical clash if it's recorded so hot that we're working the 4's on the fader. Optical clash = distortion. Does Tyler Perry put a lot of thumping audio into the music mix of his movies? Could he perhaps be mixing everything else really low to provide more room for some booming music at a certain point of the show? Modern movie mixes are made first and foremost for 5.1 digital audio and then compressed downward for the analog optical track, but if someone wanted to save money and try to use the same mix for both digital and analog he would really have to bring down the levels to avoid crashing the matrix.  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 02-27-2012 10:14 PM                     One easy way to tell -- we'll do an A/B comparison of Brad's favorite Tyler Perry movie! Road Trip!!! We're goin' to Texas!!!  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 02-27-2012 10:24 PM                     Tyler Perry did not make Road Trip, although that is a much better movie than anything he has made.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 12 pages: 1  2  3  4  ...  10  11  12

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.