[Konvas] Cinema Digest, Vol 6, Issue 19 Camera decibels

Fri Oct 20 05:37:04 CDT 2006

Steven,

I recently shot a documentary with my S16 Kinor. I made a "soft" barney 
with Strasonic foam. It is an industrial accoustic foam, supposed to 
lower 25 db. It is 3 cm thin. It cost me aprox $60/70.
Well, it worked. I don't know how many db it decreased, but at 2 m (6 
ft) of the man speaking, it was hard to hear camera's noise. Our sound 
guy used a Neuman KM 74 microphone and a tie mic sometimes.

I agree with Rita and Terry, it depends what mic you use, where you put 
it, and how the sounds goes back to you because of the angle of a wall 
or a door in a set.
We paid attention to not shoot in front of a wall, and made some tests 
with the sound engineer.
Of course, in some close shot (2 or 3 ft) the noise was louder. But 
nothing that could not be "de-noised" in post.
I have not exactly measured the db level, but I would say the level is 
close to an ACL I had. I've also shot with Arri SR that had the same noise.

But one thing seems important to me : the camera lubrication. On mine's, 
all the old grease was removed and a new synthetic grease (superlube 
actually) has been put instead. I really heard the difference.
The magazines can also be a source of noise. Of course, the 30 m one is 
quieter, but not convenient in the documentary I shot. But in a fiction 
or a short it's OK.
Before shooting, I opened, checked and lubricated my two 120 m mags. For 
one, it made a difference.

So, sound can be an issue, but can be managed as well ...

Hope this helps ...

Regards,

Florent

Steven Lyle a écrit:

> Dear Rita: Well one good Russian camera called a Kinor 16....sounds like
> a coffee-grinder and is rated at 49 dB....not as quiet as an Eclair ACL
> at 22 dB. The advantage of the Kinor 16, is price. Even with the
> digital revolution, old Eclairs (that may not last another 10 years, and
> parts are hard to get) are still 2500 dollars.
>  
> You are saying that I just use a directional mic??? I have never used 
> sound
> before, because I've only specialised in timelapse and stock footage and
> so I am "green" when it comes to recording sound with noisy FILM camera
> as opposed to the usual digital camcorder which is all automatic.
>  
> Sure one can stand back 20 feet and use a long lens, but hey, for that
> Pennebaker style, that can get annoying after 10 takes.
> I am thinking leather barney....that can cut the noise to 22 db.
> Possible??? Or can a simple directional mic do the trick?
>  
> Thanks for the reply,
> Steven
>
> Adam Frey <thefirstrule at chainsawlinux.com> wrote:
>
>     Welcome Back Rita - you've been missed!
>
>     ---
>     Adam Frey
>     Director/Cinematographer
>     Crimson Chain Productions
>     http://crimsonchainproductions.com
>
>     Get the DVD: http://huntingdragonflies.com
>
>
>
>     On Oct 19, 2006, at 3:53 PM, Speedbirdmgh at aol.com wrote:
>
>     > Hello Steve, You have picked a subject which I am particularly
>     > interested and as I specialise in 'Bioacoustics' It intrigued's me
>     > how you have identified how many decibels you wish to reduce to
>     > reach a satisfied level. Everything actually "Depends" on how you
>     > approach this problem and your method of measuring DB's. So before
>     > I rattle on and everybody "dozes off" in utter boredom, may I ask
>     > what is the problem that your are experiencing with what set up? So
>     > many people reach for polystyrene foam/glass fibre epoxy and box
>     > load of 6" nails when all they had to do was to brush up on their
>     > microphone technique's and use the filters available on mixers.
>     > Mitchell and Debrie pioneered the techniques that proved to be most
>     > effective in reducing camera "rumble" but that was before
>     > microphones were designed to reject sound from behind equal to the
>     > sound absorbed in front. This means they had to identify which
>     > frequencies the microphone had to block, through decades of R&D the
>     > modern mic was born. And very effective it is too if used in
>     > conjunction with a quality mixer. Most unwanted sounds can be
>     > knocked on the head before they reach the recorder. I do understand
>     > that this day and age Directors are always in a rush and never
>     > consider the poor sound crew and to be honest they don't really car
>     > anyway! They rely on the sound editor to produce the master sound
>     > track and by adding another 72 tracks who's to know or cares about
>     > the quality of the original dialogue track.
>     >
>     > Perhaps you can let us know what camera you are having issues with?
>     >
>     > Best regards Rita (I am back, sorry been away since June)
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > Cinema mailing list
>     > Cinema at konvas.org
>     > http://konvas.org/mailman/listinfo/cinema_konvas.org
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Cinema mailing list
>     Cinema at konvas.org
>     http://konvas.org/mailman/listinfo/cinema_konvas.org
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call 
> rates. 
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman8/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39663/*http://voice.yahoo.com> 
>
>
>
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman8/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39663/*http://voice.yahoo.com>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Cinema mailing list
>Cinema at konvas.org
>http://konvas.org/mailman/listinfo/cinema_konvas.org
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman8/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39663/*http://voice.yahoo.com>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://konvas.org/pipermail/cinema_konvas.org/attachments/20061020/a33a8644/attachment.html 