"Dave Plowman" wrote in message
...
SNIP (a bunch of reasonable stuff)

I'm talking about the *basics* of making a technically competent
recording. You're bringing production values into the equation.

From my perspective they can't be separated in the real world.

You can
make a technically competent piece in your back room, and have a disaster
shot in foreign climes regardless of budget.

Perhaps you don't see the sort of footage where the pictures are
reasonable but the sound near unintelligible?

You're right. Not on my shoots, save for the time I had to shoot on the
ramp of the Minneapolis, MN airport with an idling 747 in the BG, a
requirement of the shot, and departures overhead every minute in order to
get a 40 second clip of an on-camera presenter. It became my introduction
to ADR ;-)

I'm sure that we are on the same page with this. Sound is important. Good
sound often requires professionally selected equipment and experienced
operators, no less than picture. What I don't get is why sound mixers the
world over are so bloody sensitive, seem to feel as if they are the only
ones asked to make compromises. There must be good reasons, because so many
of you have the same knee-jerk reactions. But, the conditions and treatment
so often alluded to by mixers don't happen on my jobs, nor was I aware of
such treatment or conditions on theatrical, episodic, or industrial shoots
over a 25 year career as a fairly busy on camera actor, who liked to hang
out with the sound guys because of experience early in my career working in
sound studios as a music and production mixer along with some location sound
for film.

*Why is the word abbreviation so long?

Just another thing that I don't know.

Steve King