Hello
I became interested in film and video after making a retirement video for a colleague in the day job about five years ago.
I'm retired myself now but unfortunately live around fifteen miles from the nearest movie makers club such that joining one would be problematic. I also suffer from indifferent health such that I would hate to pledge time to a production and be unable to turn up due to health reasons.
I do stills photography when I can and dabble in things like visual / sound effects and animation although I must admit I find CGI a bit of a struggle.
I've had a couple of ideas for simple films and it would be nice to get a group of people together if only to make one film.
An historical question regarding the subject that I have almost become obsessed with is why the amateur film (i.e. cine movement as was) didn't adopt close ("lip") synched sound to any great degree prior to the advent of VHS?
Having read many 1940-60s magazines on the subject there appears to have been a plethora of amateur devices that would have afforded "lip synch" but were not adopted.
Indeed, sound films appear in some quarters to have been derided with silent film seen as being the only "pure" form of cine.
OK, this is probably not a subject that many people lay awake at nights pondering, but it just seems strange to me that there was such a large (if silent) "elephant in the room" that most people ignored for decades.
If anyone can offer any thoughts on this I'd love to hear from them.
My best wishes to you all
James Mitchell
PS: If you're worried about me obsessing "down memory lane" on these forums I do actually use digital equipment (as mentioned above) and am happy to discourse on this!
Lip Synch
-
Dave Watterson
- Posts: 1879
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
- Location: Bath, England
- Contact:
Re: Lip Synch
For both commercial and amateur "silent" movies, music was usually played to give general support to the themes.
The video era made it significantly easier to record lip-synch and - crucially - to play it back perfectly.
It did take a year or so before most amateur film makers came to grips with the aesthetics of soundtracks. Indeed we still see and hear shorts with "wallpaper" music throughout turning up in club contests.
The video era made it significantly easier to record lip-synch and - crucially - to play it back perfectly.
It did take a year or so before most amateur film makers came to grips with the aesthetics of soundtracks. Indeed we still see and hear shorts with "wallpaper" music throughout turning up in club contests.
-
James Mitchell
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2024 11:44 pm
Re: Lip Synch
It's an interesting comment you make, Dave, about coming to grips with the aesthetics of sound.
While the 1940s-50s issue of Amateur Cine World have many practical examples of DIY synchronization hardware, there are also letters that can only be described as antagonistic to the adoption of sync sound arguing in effect that silent cinema is the only "pure" cinema in some way.
Again, I'd be interested to know what other people think.
James
While the 1940s-50s issue of Amateur Cine World have many practical examples of DIY synchronization hardware, there are also letters that can only be described as antagonistic to the adoption of sync sound arguing in effect that silent cinema is the only "pure" cinema in some way.
Again, I'd be interested to know what other people think.
James
Re: Lip Synch
Hello James;
As a sometime worker in 8mm film making. the problems with lip synch appeared at three levels. One recording; how to hold synch between the camera and the tape recorder. there were a variety of mechanical devices but they limited the shooting to controlled situations. Certainly not "run and gun" documentaries. Part two was editing; again a mechanical challenge; finally presentation. Ideally the sound track should be transferred to a magnetic stripe on the film for use with a sound projector; in practice many times the original mechanical system was used for projection. Remember we worked with the camera original so having it striped after editing added a real risk of damage plus the problems of the edit points. I also worked in 16mm where everything was much simpler although more expensive. Eventually, just before the demise of super 8mm film making pre-striped film and sound recording cameras were available. It was the sheer technical difficulty of synch sound that limited its use.
Now with digital systems it is easy to hold synch between a camera and a recorder without physically connecting them. Pus most camcorders have a direct mic input.
I am retired and not in the best of health but have a very active film making community 20 miles away who I communicate with and submit scripts for them to produce. I still shoot and edit locally and enter films in the annual Guerrilla challenges.
Best wishes
ned c
As a sometime worker in 8mm film making. the problems with lip synch appeared at three levels. One recording; how to hold synch between the camera and the tape recorder. there were a variety of mechanical devices but they limited the shooting to controlled situations. Certainly not "run and gun" documentaries. Part two was editing; again a mechanical challenge; finally presentation. Ideally the sound track should be transferred to a magnetic stripe on the film for use with a sound projector; in practice many times the original mechanical system was used for projection. Remember we worked with the camera original so having it striped after editing added a real risk of damage plus the problems of the edit points. I also worked in 16mm where everything was much simpler although more expensive. Eventually, just before the demise of super 8mm film making pre-striped film and sound recording cameras were available. It was the sheer technical difficulty of synch sound that limited its use.
Now with digital systems it is easy to hold synch between a camera and a recorder without physically connecting them. Pus most camcorders have a direct mic input.
I am retired and not in the best of health but have a very active film making community 20 miles away who I communicate with and submit scripts for them to produce. I still shoot and edit locally and enter films in the annual Guerrilla challenges.
Best wishes
ned c
-
James Mitchell
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2024 11:44 pm
Re: Lip Synch
Ned, thanks for taking the time and trouble to post your comments which I found quite interesting.
Although I have to admit to having no experience of editing cine film, I did do quite a lot with sound / tape when I was younger and have edited sound and pictures digitally. This being said, the books I've read on film editing suggest, as you say, that 16mm (negative) was the best option, albeit a more expensive one.
On the subject of cost, while tape recorders were quite expensive pieces of kit, club members could have pooled their resources to buy one. Indeed, given the active tape recording scene in England following WWII one may have envisaged co-operation between cine and tape enthusiasts.
I certainly don't think the lack of synch sound in most amateur films is a technological problem as such given that synch sound was used in professional film making from about 1930 onwards and many workable amateur systems existed in the post war era.
We have to be careful, however, if we accept that it is the practical difficulties of recording synch sound that put people off as this immediately raises questions regarding the commitment of the individuals concerned.
Also, we have to be careful not to judge the past by our own standards; just because something is easy given today's technology this does not mean that it was always so in the past.
The thing is, I've found lots of references to synchronization equipment in the amateur cine press, but very little on it's implementation or indeed criticism thereof.
Regards
James
PS: Regarding your own circumstances, I was grateful for your suggestions re participating in film clubs remotely which has given me something to think about.
Although I have to admit to having no experience of editing cine film, I did do quite a lot with sound / tape when I was younger and have edited sound and pictures digitally. This being said, the books I've read on film editing suggest, as you say, that 16mm (negative) was the best option, albeit a more expensive one.
On the subject of cost, while tape recorders were quite expensive pieces of kit, club members could have pooled their resources to buy one. Indeed, given the active tape recording scene in England following WWII one may have envisaged co-operation between cine and tape enthusiasts.
I certainly don't think the lack of synch sound in most amateur films is a technological problem as such given that synch sound was used in professional film making from about 1930 onwards and many workable amateur systems existed in the post war era.
We have to be careful, however, if we accept that it is the practical difficulties of recording synch sound that put people off as this immediately raises questions regarding the commitment of the individuals concerned.
Also, we have to be careful not to judge the past by our own standards; just because something is easy given today's technology this does not mean that it was always so in the past.
The thing is, I've found lots of references to synchronization equipment in the amateur cine press, but very little on it's implementation or indeed criticism thereof.
Regards
James
PS: Regarding your own circumstances, I was grateful for your suggestions re participating in film clubs remotely which has given me something to think about.
-
Michael Slowe
- Posts: 810
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 4:24 pm
Re: Lip Synch
It is always interesting to us old people when earlier problems with film making are discussed. I started with Standard 8mm film in the 1960s and for sure found audio sync almost impossible. I was fortunate to have an early film screened at the National Film Theatre but that was 'blown up" to 16mm for the screening. The audio on that film (The Mill for those who may remember) was wild sound recorded on location and didn't need accurate sync. On turning to 16mm in about 1970 I found that audio sync was quite easy. There was a method of linking recorder and camera electronically and then the edit was easy with the audio transferred to 16mm size tape and the edit done on kit called pic sync where mag tape can be locked in sync with the picture. Ned will be familiar with this set up. The advent of digital systems was a deal breaker as they say, although I did not give up film for the dreadful VHS until we could at least see the pictures! The youngsters today have no idea what we went through but they can concentrate only on the artistic side of things, as can we today.
Apart from the odd cinema screening, will we ever see our films projected again? All the file based tech. makes the material so mobile and people tend to view just on computers, where, thank goodness, the quality of the screens has improved markedly from earlier days. I know Tom and Ian specialise in monster TV screens but many are much smaller than a projection screen.
Apart from the odd cinema screening, will we ever see our films projected again? All the file based tech. makes the material so mobile and people tend to view just on computers, where, thank goodness, the quality of the screens has improved markedly from earlier days. I know Tom and Ian specialise in monster TV screens but many are much smaller than a projection screen.
-
Dave Watterson
- Posts: 1879
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
- Location: Bath, England
- Contact:
Re: Lip Synch
The longer I reflect on this issue, the more I wonder if it arose because of a long-standing division among enthusiasts. Some love the technical and mechanical side of film making. Others love the aesthetics and art.
This is why many great amateur films included both types of people in their team.
This is why many great amateur films included both types of people in their team.
-
Albert Noble
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:51 pm
- Location: Ashby de la Zouch
- Contact:
Re: Lip Synch
..........and the poor ol' loner has to do the bl***y lot !Dave Watterson wrote: ↑Sun Mar 24, 2024 12:44 pm
This is why many great amateur films included both types of people in their team.
-
James Mitchell
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2024 11:44 pm
Re: Lip Synch
Michael seems to echo the comments of Ned in finding synch sound hard to achieve with 8mm but possible with 16mm; could this be due to both the size of the film and the fact that 16mm was used in a professional / semi-professional way such that both protocols and tools existed to edit it?
For instance, 16mm sprocketed magnetic film was available making it possible to rationalise image and sound recordings so they were of the same physical length and could be locked together and edited side-by-side.
(I have, however, seen a reel of 8mm "fullcoat" magnetically coated film on ebay suggesting that this was at least tried for the smaller format.)
Albert also made an interesting point which may suggest that shooting and editing lip synch may have been simply too much for a lone worker.
When Dave mentioned the division amongst enthusiasts I was immediately reminded of a controversial article by Denys Davis in a 1950s edition of Amateur Cine World which, though not really what Dave was on about, has I believe, some relevance here as sync sound is central to the arguments it raises.
Basically, Mr. Davis suggested that amateurs be divided into two camps which I have termed the serious and the hobbyist.
The serious camp would adopt a common standard for sound-on-film / sound-on-tape and shoot 16mm sound films only, essentially aspiring to a professional standard of work while the hobbyists would be restricted to any gauge of silent film to level the playing field amongst the have- and have-nots in terms of sound.
One of the controversial suggestions is that Amateur Cine World organise the serious competitions while the hobbyist competitions are run by the IAC.
(Note that ACW made quite clear the comments Mr. Davis expressed were his and his alone.)
As can be expected, the article subsequently drew a lot of flak but was a wake-up call to the amateur movement to improve it's standards, noting this could never be done using a hotch-potch of film gauges without sound.
In relation to this post, it proposed a standardised sound system using 16mm film which, by the comments made here and those I've read elsewhere, would have seemed the way to go.
However, I'm aware that this would have involved co-operation (and not competition) between club members both to raise money for the more expensive 16mm equipment as well as in actually making the (sound) films themselves.
Would people, then, have forgone the chance of making their own film in order to take perhaps humble role (say holding a microphone boom) in a group effort that would result in a far better film than an individual alone could make?
For instance, 16mm sprocketed magnetic film was available making it possible to rationalise image and sound recordings so they were of the same physical length and could be locked together and edited side-by-side.
(I have, however, seen a reel of 8mm "fullcoat" magnetically coated film on ebay suggesting that this was at least tried for the smaller format.)
Albert also made an interesting point which may suggest that shooting and editing lip synch may have been simply too much for a lone worker.
When Dave mentioned the division amongst enthusiasts I was immediately reminded of a controversial article by Denys Davis in a 1950s edition of Amateur Cine World which, though not really what Dave was on about, has I believe, some relevance here as sync sound is central to the arguments it raises.
Basically, Mr. Davis suggested that amateurs be divided into two camps which I have termed the serious and the hobbyist.
The serious camp would adopt a common standard for sound-on-film / sound-on-tape and shoot 16mm sound films only, essentially aspiring to a professional standard of work while the hobbyists would be restricted to any gauge of silent film to level the playing field amongst the have- and have-nots in terms of sound.
One of the controversial suggestions is that Amateur Cine World organise the serious competitions while the hobbyist competitions are run by the IAC.
(Note that ACW made quite clear the comments Mr. Davis expressed were his and his alone.)
As can be expected, the article subsequently drew a lot of flak but was a wake-up call to the amateur movement to improve it's standards, noting this could never be done using a hotch-potch of film gauges without sound.
In relation to this post, it proposed a standardised sound system using 16mm film which, by the comments made here and those I've read elsewhere, would have seemed the way to go.
However, I'm aware that this would have involved co-operation (and not competition) between club members both to raise money for the more expensive 16mm equipment as well as in actually making the (sound) films themselves.
Would people, then, have forgone the chance of making their own film in order to take perhaps humble role (say holding a microphone boom) in a group effort that would result in a far better film than an individual alone could make?
Re: Lip Synch
Interesting discussion. In 16 mm we had the Pilotone sync system with a tone generator on the camera and a cable between camera and recorder; usually a Nagra recording a pulse for each frame. Later came crystal sync which dispensed with the cable. All in the realm of the professional and used by a few amateurs; not inexpensive. Editing as described by Michael. I was astounded to find a company presently offering installation of crystal control in legacy Super 8 cameras for $600 each!
However; the majority of amateurs worked in 8 mm, later Super and Single 8 and if members of a club would be involved in club productions. In the 60s I was a member of Epping Forest CC which was divided into "production units" each of 4 or 5 members and we made short films. One problem not mentioned earlier was the sheer bulk and weight of the domestic reel to reel recorder; probably about 15 to 20 kilos. Add the mechanical connection system and the result is an immobile set up very similar to the early days of sound in feature films. We did use my 16mm system to make a short sync film but the cost of filmstock; processing and printing was a barrier to long form productions for young people with families and mortgages. (I say "my" 16 mm system it actually belonged to my employers but I had unrestricted use).
All history in the world of digital production.
Ned c
However; the majority of amateurs worked in 8 mm, later Super and Single 8 and if members of a club would be involved in club productions. In the 60s I was a member of Epping Forest CC which was divided into "production units" each of 4 or 5 members and we made short films. One problem not mentioned earlier was the sheer bulk and weight of the domestic reel to reel recorder; probably about 15 to 20 kilos. Add the mechanical connection system and the result is an immobile set up very similar to the early days of sound in feature films. We did use my 16mm system to make a short sync film but the cost of filmstock; processing and printing was a barrier to long form productions for young people with families and mortgages. (I say "my" 16 mm system it actually belonged to my employers but I had unrestricted use).
All history in the world of digital production.
Ned c
-
James Mitchell
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2024 11:44 pm
Re: Lip Synch
Ned
The weight and bulk of old tape machines is something I'm aware of as I have three 1960s vintage "non runners" bought from e-bay, one of which I hope to get working again. (Note that the emphasis is on "hope" rather than "expectation"!)
In the 1960s I had a portable machine which was quite light although the maximum tape speed was only 3 3/4 inches per second.
The more I go into this and listen to what people have said here the more I'm convinced that this isn't a technical problem but rather one of the effort and perhaps cost involved in achieving lip synch.
I've read of clubs having "production units" as you describe and would think that such examples of co-operation and pooled resources may have produced more worthwhile films than that of a lone worker.
Also, in a more organised situation, perhaps film costs may have been ameliorated by reducing the amount of film shot (the "shooting ratio").
Anyway, I'm drifting off topic here with my thoughts and imaginings!
As ever, I'd welcome the opinions / recollections of others.
The weight and bulk of old tape machines is something I'm aware of as I have three 1960s vintage "non runners" bought from e-bay, one of which I hope to get working again. (Note that the emphasis is on "hope" rather than "expectation"!)
In the 1960s I had a portable machine which was quite light although the maximum tape speed was only 3 3/4 inches per second.
The more I go into this and listen to what people have said here the more I'm convinced that this isn't a technical problem but rather one of the effort and perhaps cost involved in achieving lip synch.
I've read of clubs having "production units" as you describe and would think that such examples of co-operation and pooled resources may have produced more worthwhile films than that of a lone worker.
Also, in a more organised situation, perhaps film costs may have been ameliorated by reducing the amount of film shot (the "shooting ratio").
Anyway, I'm drifting off topic here with my thoughts and imaginings!
As ever, I'd welcome the opinions / recollections of others.
-
James Mitchell
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2024 11:44 pm
Re: Lip Synch
Just a word of thanks for all your replies.
I'll keep looking back at this in case anyone has anything else to add.
I've managed to resurrect one of the old machines I mentioned and can definitely endorse Ned's comments re. bulk and weight. Although I was a bit sniffy about compact cassettes when they first came out ( only 1 7/8 ips, 1/8th inch tape, etc.) I can see why they caught on.
In addition to my tape exploits, I'm also working on a short film which will contain a lot of computer graphics, mainly to justify the horrific amounts of time I spend dabbling in this medium.
I'll keep you posted.
Best wishes
James
I'll keep looking back at this in case anyone has anything else to add.
I've managed to resurrect one of the old machines I mentioned and can definitely endorse Ned's comments re. bulk and weight. Although I was a bit sniffy about compact cassettes when they first came out ( only 1 7/8 ips, 1/8th inch tape, etc.) I can see why they caught on.
In addition to my tape exploits, I'm also working on a short film which will contain a lot of computer graphics, mainly to justify the horrific amounts of time I spend dabbling in this medium.
I'll keep you posted.
Best wishes
James
-
Dave Watterson
- Posts: 1879
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
- Location: Bath, England
- Contact:
Re: Lip Synch
No such thing as drifting off topic so far as we are concerned ... it is all about our hobby/obsession !
-
James Mitchell
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2024 11:44 pm
Re: Lip Synch
I'm just breathing in the heady atmosphere of hot valves and electrical contact cleaner!
-
Michael Slowe
- Posts: 810
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 4:24 pm
Re: Lip Synch
Not so bulky was the wonderful Uher tape recorder, that was what I used for sync sound in the 1970s. Crystal sync with my 16mm Beauliui (never could learn to spell it!) so no physical connection. I had the tape audio transferred to mag film by a friendly Soho post production house, those were indeed the days.