[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Solution for really accurate sync?



>I was transferring a long documentary shoot a few days ago that incorporated
>two different smart slates--the camera operator was doing a lot of running
>around, and cleverly had an assistant on each side of a room to present the
>numbers and clap at a moments notice.
>Clever, of course, until I had to sync it up and discovered, as I had
>expected, that each slate had a slightly different offset AND was drifting 
>out
>of offset in a slightly different direction and at a slightly different 
>speed.
>   I had grown tired of this sort of nonsense long ago, but had resigned
>myself to accepting it as a fact of life----until recently----- when I came
>across yet another advertisement for clocks that continously sample radio-
>transmitted time signals from the atomic clock operated by the National
>Institute of Standards and Technology in Ft. Collins, Colorado.  I was 
>talking
>with a fellow colorist this evening, and he suggested this as a possible
>solution as well.  I promised I would post the question.  Any takers?

Well, Jim, for documentary shooting, Smart Slates are a huge 
inconvenience.  It would make far more sense to use Aatoncode, and 
eliminate slates entirely.  When used with, say, an HHB Portadat with 
Master Clock option, sync remains accurate to one frame for about 10 
hours -- at that point, simply rejam.  Using in camera timecode would 
have eliminated two people with slates, would have been far less 
distracting to the people being filmed, and been far more telecine 
friendly. The cost savings in telecine (ok, you may not like that one!) 
and in crew size would pay for the camera rental.

I don't think that Arri's timecode in the SR3 is as reliable, and it is 
subject to sync problems, because the code is written in the magazine, 
and not the camera gate like Aaton's code.  Besides, most documentary 
filmmakers prefer Aatons.

John Snopes
The First Aaton in Muncie, Indiana