crew problems
grant finlay
I've recently started work on a magazine show, tv half hour, 4-5
stories a week, quick turnaround.... a story a day stuff.
The problem I'm having is after working on docos with a bit more time
to get the story, I'm
now getting flak from the reporters (and somtimes the cameraman) who
don't give a **** about the audio on this show, with comments like
"that take will have to do" "that plane is ok, I'll live with it" "I
don't care about the construction work stopping and starting"
As someone who wants to do their best for every shot, I'm starting to
get annoyed with this,and it takes a lot to upset me! O.K I know it's
quick turnaround but do I have to settle for less? Most problems can
be avoided by a little forthought I know, and most of the times the
"noise" is out of my control , but they don't seem to understand even
basic sound sense at times. I could give lots of examples....
I've already talked to the producer, might have to do that again
soon.... but I don't want to be known as "the nagging sound guy", just
known for trying my best in a bad situation.
So I suppose what I'm asking is... How should I best tackle this
problem?
What do you guys do?
Thanks,
Grant Finlay
Charles Tomaras
"grant finlay" <grant...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
news:779e6f09.03070...@posting.google.com...
If they want to live with planes that's fine with me, I'm just there to
record the dialog or interview to the best of my abilities. I often find
that things usually work the other way around...meaning they hear something
with their naked ears that they think is a problem but it's not so bad to me
when listening thru the recording mic on headphones. Hell, here in Seattle
if we stopped an interview for every jet that flew overhead we'd never make
it through the day.
My job is to agree to the ground rules with the decision makers about what
is and isn't acceptable and then let it go. Production sound is full of
compromises and ENG audio has even more. When I hear extraneous noises that
are borderline bad I make eye contact with the producer, camera person or
other individual running the shoot. If they look to me with that "does this
suck look" I will give them a thumbs up or thumbs down and let them make the
decision. If there's an RF problem, mic problem, subject pounded their lav
problem or other technical issue on my end then I will make the call for a
cut at the first appropriate moment but usually not in the middle of
someone's sentence or thought.
Like I always tell 'em... "I don't edit this stuff and I never see the
broadcast, so whatever you want to do is cool!" :)
Charles Tomaras
Seattle, WA
Scott Dorsey
>I've already talked to the producer, might have to do that again
>soon.... but I don't want to be known as "the nagging sound guy", just
>known for trying my best in a bad situation.
>So I suppose what I'm asking is... How should I best tackle this
>problem?
If they don't care about sound, odds are they don't care much about picture
either. Just ride it out and ask for your name not to be used on the final
product.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
shooter
ONE, talk to the editor. The sound may indeed be good enough. They may
have EQ capabilities you don't know about. They may be laying down
music under that masks a lot of extranious noise. OR, the editor may
have real problems with the sound and thinks it's your fault. You need
to let him know the situation and he will probably go to bat for you
if he feels the need.
SECOND, can you provide a wireless feed to the producer? I bought a
used wireless system for this purpose. I clip the receiver on the
producers belt and give him a good set of cans. It radically changes
the producers outlook. They hear what's going onto tape. Sometimes
I've had producers hear stuff that is not a problem on tape but they
want a second take anyway because they fear there might be a problem
audio missed. And, they do hear just how bad a certain situation is.
After a while, they'll begin to trust your judgement because they
don't want to wear the cans any more!
Also, the cameraman should be wearing phones. If he's making decisions
without hearing the real thing then he's not doing his job right. I
used to be in that camp, now I almost always wear phones to keep
abreast of what's going down.
Hang in there...
Matthew
we go," when you're put in a bad for sound position but don't worry
too much about the ambience. The key on magazine type shows is the
sound bite, and as long as they are understandable in the speech
frequencies and you get room tone if it is a two camera shoot,
you'll be fine. 99.9% of the time the correspondent's schedule
dictates the ridiculously fast pace of the shoot, and if you make too
big a stink you are doing more harm to your reputation than help.
Matt
Steve King
news:OJCdnXi05dA...@comcast.com...
Charlie has nailed it IMO. I'm speaking from having done production sound a
long time ago and now primarily producing corporate video. Before a job
I'll talk with all of the crew to tell them what needs to be accomplished in
what time frame and where we will make compromises if necessary. And, it
seems there are always compromises of some kind, aren't there? More time to
light would always be nice. I'd like to shoot digi-beta even when I only
have budget for DVCAM. I'd almost always like another day or two added to
the shooting schedule. And, I'd like the luxury of never having to accept a
shot that was less than perfect in sound or picture. But, that choice is
very rarely available to me. In your situation, I would recommend a
conversation with the producer. Work out some guidelines for what is
UNacceptable, and what is by routine ACceptable. As Charlie inferred,
whenever you are in other than a sound-stage environment, there are almost
always extraneous sounds. When in doubt... when you feel that a take will
definitely not cut, ask the producer to take a listen. If the producer
consistently, like three times in a row, buys a take that you would have
rejected, then you have to re-think your guidelines.
Steve King
Philip Perkins
This is great advice. Remember, it's their movie....
Philip Perkins
grant finlay
> > ONE, talk to the editor.
> > to let him know the situation and he will probably go to bat for you
> > if he feels the need.
Had a chat to editor today, he's happy and understands my problems.
Says thanks for
reminding reporters and doing retakes!
> > SECOND, can you provide a wireless feed to the producer?
(cut...)
> > Also, the cameraman should be wearing phones. If he's making decisions
> > without hearing the real thing then he's not doing his job right. I
> > used to be in that camp, now I almost always wear phones to keep
> > abreast of what's going down.
> > Hang in there...
>
> This is great advice. Remember, it's their movie....
>
> Philip Perkins
Was thinking of getting a comtek for the directors anyway,so good to
see I was on the right track. Next I think I'll have a chat to the
cameraman about h-phones,wish me luck!
Had a listen back to what I thought were dodgy shots today, Sometimes
I forget that I hear It in more detail than anyone else. All the shots
were passable, well,no one at home will know that take 2 was better
than 1. From what I saw on tv last night in prime time I think I'm
doing ok considering our time pressures. (was watching minidv "real
tv" docos)
hummm, friday night, end of week, time for a well deserved beer I
think.
thanks,
Grant Finlay
Arnoldpew72
The busiest Sound Guy I know (commercial, feature, news mag) never has a
problem, never has a blown take, never interrupts a take, never needs to adjust
anything, and never disagrees with a director or DP or producer. He also never
misses an opportunity to go drinking with the client and has a great
personality and is very charming.
DPs love him. He makes them feel like adored young gods. They recommend him
all the time.
He works all the time. Clients speak of him in glowing tones. He works as
much as he wants to and hands out work to the rest of us poor slobs.
And his sound sucks. It sucks a lot. I have had to help editors fix his
sound. I have made money re-shooting his mess. [The client hired him again
for his next gig.] I'm not talking about sucks a little - I mean not even in
the realm of professional work.
Here's what I'm getting at: Who do YOU want to be?
While I agree with everything said on this thread so far (after all it is
their movie, etc.) I'd like to bring up a related issue. At the end of the
game, do you want to be? A businessman or a craftsman?
To use the extremes as examples, would you rather be the guy who sucks but
works all the time, or the guy who cares about his work and how the work
reflects on him as a person?
I realize these are not mutually exclusive positions. Most of us struggle to
find balance between them.
Nobody wants to work with the prick who stops for every breeze. But most of us
get work based on our name and reputation. There are lots of guys out there
twisting the knobs and pointing the stick. Do you want to be one of those, or a
guy who knows his job and cares about the work he does.
Not an argument. Just additional points to ponder.
A. Pew
Ray Collins
trust.. even when it is misplaced. ;-))
Ray
Stiletto2
between both. A lot of the "complaining" can be re-worded so that producers can
understand how bad it really is or is not.
"Do you realize how much this will cost you to fix?" etc.
Also, I've found that with the phones I use (HD280Pros) a lot of the noise I
hear is barely audible through studio monitors, and even less so on a crappy TV
where things usually end up. This results in a lot of un-needed stress on my
part. I'm learning to recognize what is truly a problem, and what just annoys
me.
ŽobeŽto
> Here's what I'm getting at: Who do YOU want to be?
Be both. Just like that Cameraman, makeup person, gaffer, grip, etc
etc..
> While I agree with everything said on this thread so far (after all it is
>their movie, etc.) I'd like to bring up a related issue. At the end of the
>game, do you want to be? A businessman or a craftsman?
A Craftsman that is sending a nice bill.
>Not an argument. Just additional points to ponder.
I like to add another one, the sound of a warmd-up Laser printer that
puts the paper through the paperguide, and the soft landing of the
bill on the table...
R ( who's favorit steadicam operator is a Hongarian who sometimes
taped a dollarbill on the mattbox...his reminder in hard times )
WINZTON
taped a dollarbill on the mattbox...his reminder in hard times )>>
That's funny. I have a small framed portrait of Ben Franklin from the US $100
taped to the inside of my cart's top drawer. On "those days" I like to see his
face smiling back at me as a reminder.
Some days it's an understanding smile.
Some days he's laughing at me.
- Winston
John Rowley
In the 1700s, a scientist was someone who thought about the way things work
and tried to figure out ways to make things work better. Today, that
definition is still true. Every time Ben Franklin saw a question and tried
to answer it, he was a scientist. Every time you ask a question and try to
get an answer, you too are a scientist. Ben is most famous for his questions
about sound recording, but he also experimented with many other ideas in
nature.
Winston (about Ben)
I have a small framed portrait of Ben Franklin from the US $100 taped to the
inside of my cart's top drawer.
Some days it's an understanding smile
Some days he's laughing at me
John (about John)
When I was 18, I thought about being a journalist. Later I thought better
of it. Didn't stop me from distorting the truth however in replicating the
excerpt above and changing it very slightly. I know exactly what Winston is
saying. Unfortunately, never stopped my obsession.
John Rowley
in...@soundequip.com.au
www.soundequip.com.au
"WINZTON" <win...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030711171017...@mb-m17.aol.com...
John
traffic noise or an occasional airplane is ok.
Then the very next time there is a noise, even if in my judgment it
was livable he or she looks over at me and say's "did'nt you hear
that?"
It's times like these that make me want to be a grip, the c stand is
either in or out of the frame and it's really the dp's job to see it.
John
Steve King
news:8c3cbd11.03081...@posting.google.com...
John, this may just be bad communication, not vacillating standards. And,
never, in my personal experience, any indication of lack of respect for the
mixer's judgement. From my director's POV, there are times when I may tell
sound that I can live with traffic noise or an airplane. I may be thinking
of what else I will have on the sound-track at that point, how the schedule
is going, whether the actor has another good take in him or her, etc.
Later, the circumstance may be different. I might look at the mixer and
raise an eyebrow. If the reply was, "No louder than the airplane you
accepted this morning.", I'd laugh and take time to explain myself. Often,
since I can't hear what the mic hears, I'm just looking for a judgement
call, a 'waddaya think'. If a director took time to explain each time he or
she was being inconsistent nothing would ever get done. LOL
Steve King
WINZTON
From your Director's POV, what should a Sound Mixer do then about notifying you
of "bad" takes? (Mixer's POV)
Should I adapt my level of acceptability to your first indication? What
happens as your level of acceptability changes from scene to scene?
Should I keep my standard and keep telling you all day to let you make the
call? I often worry that my only interaction with the Director is about bad
news.
Part of my frustration as a Sound Mixer is dealing with Directors of varying
sound sophistication. It is difficult to know how much to explain to a
Director without seeming patronizing or disrespectful.
Please don't think I am flaming you or being sarcastic. I am really
interested in hearing a Directors POV on this. It is tricky finding the
balance in the "Hate me in Production - Love me in Post" equation.
- Winston
Charles Tomaras
"Steve King" <st...@steveking.net> wrote in message
news:BnR_a.106884$It4....@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
>
> John, this may just be bad communication, not vacillating standards. And,
> never, in my personal experience, any indication of lack of respect for the
> mixer's judgement. From my director's POV, there are times when I may tell
> sound that I can live with traffic noise or an airplane. I may be thinking
> of what else I will have on the sound-track at that point, how the schedule
> is going, whether the actor has another good take in him or her, etc.
> Later, the circumstance may be different. I might look at the mixer and
> raise an eyebrow. If the reply was, "No louder than the airplane you
> accepted this morning.", I'd laugh and take time to explain myself. Often,
> since I can't hear what the mic hears, I'm just looking for a judgement
> call, a 'waddaya think'. If a director took time to explain each time he or
> she was being inconsistent nothing would ever get done. LOL
>
> Steve King
I sometimes think I'm not a sound mixer but a judge about what extraneous sounds
are and are not acceptable primarily because of the production's value system
which usually doesn't include a rational evaluation of sound when scouting. I'm
a field mixer. I'm not paid to go to the editing room or the sweetening room.
How should I know how bad that jet or truck is in relation to a post process I'm
not privy to? Why is it my responsibility to spend the whole day listening for
jets instead of mixing sound? I don't mind making an occasional call, but when
the location is in a constant flight path, I'm just not into accepting
responsibility for those calls.I'm sick an tired of playing AD trying to get the
set quiet so I can tell when the jet is tailing, trying to second guess if it's
coming or going while listening to a mono mic. At that point, it's a production
and continuity problem not a sound problem
Stiletto2
airplanes, where when they are calling roll sound I'm either just hearing a
plane come in, or just hearing it trail off. Of course, that doesn't account
for the boom cars, mufflerless cars, diesel trucks, busses, marching parades,
crows, dogs, leaf blowers, circular saws, school children, steamrollers
crushing glass bottles, japanese monster attacks or any other extraneous noise
source.
My solution usually involves telling them I'm trying a different mic placement.
Sometimes it works, if nothing else, it gives me a chance to tweak my setup,
and give the problem time to go away. If truely offensive, sometimes we wait,
sometimes we don't. I tell the director this: "I'm recommending that you wait
till the problem goes away, or do something to get the person to stop. You can
say no, that's your call. But I want to be on record about that."
Steve King
I certainly didn't intend any disrespect for your situation or your desire
to maintain professional standards. I know that making compromises on a
shoot is difficult for everyone. That said... I think you should discuss it
with the director if he or she overrides your judgement about extraneous
sound... traffic, planes, clothing noise, etc. I would appreciate it if a
sound person said to me, "I'd be more comfortable continuing to give you a
heads up if I hear something that may cause you problems later. That okay?"
Now, I've got the choice of agreeing and making the calls myself by
listening to playback of the problem or explaining my thinking to the mixer
in enough detail that he or she can make the call. Personally, in those
circumstances I'd also add that I'll back you up if there's a problem later.
My experience is that sound takes can be looked at as okay, iffy, and
unusable--- thumbs up, hand waffle, thumbs down. I'll ask for a playback on
'iffy' if I am under pressure to move on. I'll almost always accept the
mixer's decision on thumbs down.
As far as being the bearer of bad news... On my set you would quickly learn
not to worry about that. Its part of every crewmember's job to find things
that impact the illusion of reality we are trying to create. That's
certainly what the director does. Imagine how we feel on the 20th take
directing an actor that is just not getting it. It is true that the mixer
may have less control over the issues he or she is responsible for than
other crew. By that I mean that, for instance, the grip or DP can spot the
cable in the shot ahead of time, while the mixer cannot anticipate that an
actor is going to poke another actor right in the lav. So, if a director
rants, when he hears "bad for sound", I don't think that you should assume
that the rant is directed at you. It is probably just his or her frustration
with the uncontrollable aspects of the process.
My advice about adjusting to the audio sophistication of the director would
be to not give advice. Ask questions? For instance, "Will there be music or
effects to cover that truck. It's pretty low but you'll hear it if the
dialogue is in the clear." On the other hand, if a director says, "why can't
you use a mic that cuts out that traffic noise?", then you may have to
explain that such a mic does not exist, that it is just one of those things
that are beyond our technology to overcome.
Perhaps because I worked as a recording engineer in studio work doing sound
design for multi-media, mixing music for jingles and records, and a very
little bit of location sound early in my working life, I know that audio
people take their jobs seriously, are attuned to detail, and have very high
quality standards. And for that they deserve respect for their
professionalism, and their advice should be ignored at one's peril.
Finally, if the director is an asshole everything above goes out the window.
I don't know of any magic bullet to solve that problem.
Hang in there ... as we all must,
Steve
Steve King
> I sometimes think I'm not a sound mixer but a judge about what extraneous
sounds
> are and are not acceptable primarily because of the production's value
system
> which usually doesn't include a rational evaluation of sound when
scouting. I'm
> a field mixer. I'm not paid to go to the editing room or the sweetening
room.
> How should I know how bad that jet or truck is in relation to a post
process I'm
> not privy to? Why is it my responsibility to spend the whole day listening
for
> jets instead of mixing sound? I don't mind making an occasional call, but
when
> the location is in a constant flight path, I'm just not into accepting
> responsibility for those calls.I'm sick an tired of playing AD trying to
get the
> set quiet so I can tell when the jet is tailing, trying to second guess if
it's
> coming or going while listening to a mono mic. At that point, it's a
production
> and continuity problem not a sound problem
>
I hang around here to learn from you guys. When I am directing it helps me
do my job better. And, I can't speak for all directors.. or even about all
types of productions at all budget levels, but....
I don't understand your resentment of the responsibility of making judgement
calls on extraneous sound. You imply that a production always has the
choice of finding a nice quiet location where extraneous sounds don't exist.
That is not the case for what I do. We shoot where what needs to be shot
exists, not where we would like it to be. If the wind was from the West,
when the location was scouted and there was zero airplane traffic, that
doesn't mean it won't be from the North bringing the flight pattern right
over the location on shoot day... which wouldn't make any difference anyway
because the factory, work site, new building, hero product or whatever is
where it is and the shoot has to go on.
I assume that I'm just hearing your frustration with the difficulties of
location shooting, but who else is in a position to know when the airplane
is no longer a problem? Would you like me to hire someone to sit beside you
with earphones and make the call? That's not going to happen at my budget
levels. AD? I'm my own AD. I don't know how you expect me make your job
less frustrating. If you said to me early in the shoot, I don't like to
yell at people to keep quiet so I can hear when the <noise> is gone, how can
we keep the set quiet enough so I can hear? I'd figure out a solution. If
you just sit at your cart and fume, I can't help you.
Respectfully, if overcoming the uncontrollable aspects of location sound
recording make you so resentful of the burden, I think you should choose the
jobs you accept with those things in mind.
I feel uncomfortable about my participation in this discussion on this
group. If you want I'll "silently" go away.
Steve King
Charles Tomaras
> I hang around here to learn from you guys. When I am directing it helps me
> do my job better. And, I can't speak for all directors.. or even about all
> types of productions at all budget levels, but....
>
> I don't understand your resentment of the responsibility of making judgement
> calls on extraneous sound. You imply that a production always has the
> choice of finding a nice quiet location where extraneous sounds don't exist.
> That is not the case for what I do.
I can only speak for my own experiences but I don't feel when a production hires
a locations person in Seattle that they ever even think of mentioning "we have a
lot of dialog please try to find a location that meets our needs that's out of a
flight path." I don't think that the photographs the locations people initially
provide for production to look at have any mention whatsoever of the potential
sound issues with that location. I honestly don't think sound issues are
considered as part of the location scouting process unless it's so obvious it
hits you over the head. I am NEVER consulted about sound issues in a manner that
my opinion would influence the choice of location. On the few times I am asked
to go on a scout I'm certain that if I said a location was a problem they would
never consider finding a different location. By the time they think about sound,
they are locked in on the location. I'm just there to tell them how many "sound
blankets" to order. If packing blankets did anything to cover up the sound of
jets, the airlines would have long ago started using them wrapped around the
engines of the planes! :)
>We shoot where what needs to be shot
> exists, not where we would like it to be. If the wind was from the West,
> when the location was scouted and there was zero airplane traffic, that
> doesn't mean it won't be from the North bringing the flight pattern right
> over the location on shoot day... which wouldn't make any difference anyway
> because the factory, work site, new building, hero product or whatever is
> where it is and the shoot has to go on.
I know this and I deal with it, but there are many instances where this is not
the case and sound considerations seem to fall by the wayside.
> I assume that I'm just hearing your frustration with the difficulties of
> location shooting, but who else is in a position to know when the airplane
> is no longer a problem? Would you like me to hire someone to sit beside you
> with earphones and make the call? That's not going to happen at my budget
> levels. AD? I'm my own AD. I don't know how you expect me make your job
> less frustrating. If you said to me early in the shoot, I don't like to
> yell at people to keep quiet so I can hear when the <noise> is gone, how can
> we keep the set quiet enough so I can hear? I'd figure out a solution. If
> you just sit at your cart and fume, I can't help you.
I am very frustrated. I do my job as efficiently and cheerfully as I can but the
truth remains that my real job has become one of listening for background noises
and making judgement calls that have nothing to do with which take was the best
for nailing the dialog. The art of recording dialog is secondary to the act of
telling people when we can or cannot shoot. My memory is failing me with the
onset of age, but it just seems so much worse these days. The way the city of
Seattle lays out with the airports and freeways, just about any urban Seattle
shot that establishes the city is under a very low flight path. It's maddening
after a while. Director after director coming to town to shoot, with thier
frustration level rising as I give them the thumbs down or the opposite when
they feel I'm accepting something marginal because I know they will never get
thier day if we stop for every plane that flies overhead. I've got my air
traffic control explanation preperared and I give it to them at the beginiing of
the day, but there is still some sort of subconcious resentment directed towards
the sound mixer as the day progresses and the jets get worse.
>
> Respectfully, if overcoming the uncontrollable aspects of location sound
> recording make you so resentful of the burden, I think you should choose the
> jobs you accept with those things in mind.
Oh if it were that simple! :)
>
> I feel uncomfortable about my participation in this discussion on this
> group. If you want I'll "silently" go away.
>
> Steve King
I think it's great that you are here and I wish I could always mix for someone
who understands sound issues as well as you do.
Chris Silverman
cool 24dB/octive.
Chris. ;-)
Stiletto2 <stil...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030816002207...@mb-m04.aol.com...
Steve King
>
SNIP
> >
> > I feel uncomfortable about my participation in this discussion on this
> > group. If you want I'll "silently" go away.
> >
> > Steve King
>
> I think it's great that you are here and I wish I could always mix for
someone
> who understands sound issues as well as you do.
>
just not the norm at the budget points that I work under. I haven't had to
take a 15 minutes for $5k project, as I heard a Chicago acquaintance moaning
about recently. But, when I have $50k for 15 to 20 minutes, I'm in hog
heaven. Even at that, there isn't much cushion to scout locations, travel a
crew and talent, and still not run out of money before the 3D animations of
the client's do-whatsis are made.
Steve King
Rusty
In my opinion, your opinion is valued here just as mine. (being a boom op not a
sound mixer)
Recent project 7/03 Idaho: It was obvious that we had sound issues on set.
When the scene was shot the director came up to me and asked me "how was that
for sound." Like, why do they ask when they know there isn't anything we can do
about it? I simply said "OK."
He looked at me and said "you're lying Rusty." I told him I'm letting this one
go (per mixers request). The sound issues were out of our control. That he
would have to live with it." He was fine with that answer.
I am always amazed at how things can "be fixed in post." My point is...Pick
your battles carefully. I find that a director likes knowing that his sound
department are able to kindly communicate without making a huge scene over
something we (sound) know isn't really really that bad.
You might have to let something small go in order to get the big problem
resolved. Not that you'al didn't know that already......
(that's just my 2 cents worth) Hey, what do I know I'm just the boom op :0)
Rusty
(having learned from many of you)
WINZTON
Thanks for the perspective. I did not take your comments as disrespect. I
appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you "off-the-clock". It is not
often that I get to discuss these issues with a Director without the additional
burden of dealing with the who-hires-who issue.
You sound like an experienced guy who knows what he wants and how to get it.
As someone who works with many Directors, let me say they are not all like you.
As far as "advice" goes, I've been doing this long enough to know how to put it
in the form of a question. But it is difficult to help someone who is
unfamiliar with issues like overlapping dialogue and changing performance
levels in a production setting.
Thanks for the feedback. Glad to have you on RAMPS.
- Winston
WINZTON
reputation. I rarely have the opportunity to defend myself when problems arise
from Producers/Directors poor judgement.
Ty Ford
uncomfortable about my participation in this discussion on this
>group. If you want I'll "silently" go away.
>
>Steve King
SHOE SQUEEK!
Regards,
Ty Ford
For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford
Bill Davis
<st...@steveking.net> wrote:
AMEN, STEVE!
> I feel uncomfortable about my participation in this discussion on this
> group. If you want I'll "silently" go away.
>
> Steve King
I expect that all the professionals here will appreciate your input.
I've had precisely the same experiences when directing.
(And I hang around here for precisely the same reasons)
--
Bill Davis
NewVideo
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Simon Bishop
I think that we're all glad to have you here Steve, and you just made many
good points in your last post. Please stick with us.
Regards,
Simon B