These numbers for the gender parity of designers in theater seem pretty accurate to me, meaning that in my experience this is about the disparity.
Sound is, and has been for quite some time, the freakin' worst.
What would be in the interest of preventing an otherwise formidable instance without the means.
Sunday, July 12, 2015
Thursday, July 09, 2015
Real Numbers
So here is an analysis of the economics of an indy movie budgeted at a million pounds.
These numbers look real to me. And note that relatively speaking this is a freaking success story. The short answer is that it cost $1.3 million and of that it lost $700K.
These numbers look real to me. And note that relatively speaking this is a freaking success story. The short answer is that it cost $1.3 million and of that it lost $700K.
Wednesday, July 08, 2015
Puppets and Something
![]() |
| I've totally forgotten what this sign says. |
Honestly, we've got a day of additional photography to do. And we can't do that until a day before the whole picture is due. So yeah. We're not going to quite make it.
Otherwise I'm mixing. Mixing mixing mixing.
Tuesday, July 07, 2015
In the Money
Tyrannosaurus Mouse is making money hand-over-fist. Or paw-over-claw. Or something.
Okay, so I get ten bucks. But I think CD Baby only cost $35, so this is a substantial return.
(Notice that $5.80 of the $9.46 is coming from iTunes UK. I'm gonna guess that's a single sale of the entire T-Mouse album.)
The following is from an email CD Baby sent me today:
On 06.28.2015 CD Baby sent you a Paypal payment of $9.46. It was CD Baby payment #VPV02742566.
NOTE: It takes 5 days to transfer funds from our bank to our PayPal account to pay you. PayPal will email you when it arrives.
The Paypal deposit was to pay you:
$0.02 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Beats Music
$0.06 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through MediaNet
$0.04 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Google Music Store
$0.01 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through JB Hi-Fi
$0.01 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through JB Hi-Fi
$0.64 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Amazon MP3
$0.02 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through MediaNet
$0.02 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through MediaNet
$0.01 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Deezer
$0.64 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Apple iTunes
$5.80 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through iTunes-UK
$0.01 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Spotify
$0.06 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Spotify
$0.11 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Spotify
$1.91 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Amazon MP3
$0.02 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through MediaNet
$0.06 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Google Music Store
$0.25 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Spotify
$1.27 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Apple iTunes
NOTE: A $1.50 Payment Fee was deducted from this payment.
Okay, so I get ten bucks. But I think CD Baby only cost $35, so this is a substantial return.
(Notice that $5.80 of the $9.46 is coming from iTunes UK. I'm gonna guess that's a single sale of the entire T-Mouse album.)
The following is from an email CD Baby sent me today:
On 06.28.2015 CD Baby sent you a Paypal payment of $9.46. It was CD Baby payment #VPV02742566.
NOTE: It takes 5 days to transfer funds from our bank to our PayPal account to pay you. PayPal will email you when it arrives.
The Paypal deposit was to pay you:
$0.02 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Beats Music
$0.06 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through MediaNet
$0.04 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Google Music Store
$0.01 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through JB Hi-Fi
$0.01 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through JB Hi-Fi
$0.64 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Amazon MP3
$0.02 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through MediaNet
$0.02 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through MediaNet
$0.01 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Deezer
$0.64 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Apple iTunes
$5.80 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through iTunes-UK
$0.01 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Spotify
$0.06 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Spotify
$0.11 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Spotify
$1.91 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Amazon MP3
$0.02 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through MediaNet
$0.06 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Google Music Store
$0.25 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Spotify
$1.27 for DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION SALES through Apple iTunes
NOTE: A $1.50 Payment Fee was deducted from this payment.
Friday, July 03, 2015
The Future
Every once in a while I look at a new piece of audio gear and think about how freaking far we've come. This Soundcraft UI-10 is a pretty amazing little box. A 16x4 mixer with complete digital control of every dang thing for less than $550. It only records two channels but for a regular rock band gigging situation it really gives you everything between the mic cables and the power amps for the PA.
Wednesday, July 01, 2015
Score!
I'm about 1/3 of the way through the mix on Carbon Copy. Well, maybe more like 1/4 the way. There are a whole lot of little details to be dealt with.
Since we moved to recording 6-tracks of audio for all dialog, it's a bit more of a pain in the tuchus to deal with big dialog scenes. At the same time we're more likely to have good dialog in those scenes.
I cannot tell if I'm doing the right thing with music.
In my mind the whole thing, meaning the whole movie, is in the mind of the lead character. So what is the soundtrack of her mind? I have no idea. Well, I mean I have an idea. Is it too much? I really don't know.
This is one of those thing where, as the director, I really should have a clue. I'm going for an electronic kind of sound with pulses and grooves mostly. I really dug the James Newton Howard score to The Bourne Legacy. So I'm trying to cop some of those feels (uh, phrasing Drew?) in the Carbon Copy score.
| This is, however, a relatively easy scene with only two characters so the extra 4 tracks were deleted in the picture edit and never got dragged over to the audio edit in Samplitude. |
Since we moved to recording 6-tracks of audio for all dialog, it's a bit more of a pain in the tuchus to deal with big dialog scenes. At the same time we're more likely to have good dialog in those scenes.
I cannot tell if I'm doing the right thing with music.
In my mind the whole thing, meaning the whole movie, is in the mind of the lead character. So what is the soundtrack of her mind? I have no idea. Well, I mean I have an idea. Is it too much? I really don't know.
This is one of those thing where, as the director, I really should have a clue. I'm going for an electronic kind of sound with pulses and grooves mostly. I really dug the James Newton Howard score to The Bourne Legacy. So I'm trying to cop some of those feels (uh, phrasing Drew?) in the Carbon Copy score.
Sunday, June 28, 2015
Last day
| Travis Pilar let me take a picture of his groovy shirt. I told him my sister was making a deck of cards based around house cats. |
| Felicia Hudson, Chester Poon, Sarah Schoofs, inside Varl's ship watching the sun rise. |
| Felicia Hudson, Chester Poon, Sarah Schoofs. |
| Sarah Schoofs new dating profile pic. |
| Felicia and Sarah looking out on the desert plain. |
| Laura did this very pretty vertical line of whumpus on Chester. Jason Birdsall's set really held up. |
| Felicia gets shot twice in this movie. |
Thursday, June 18, 2015
Automata
Automata is beautiful.
Automata is problematic.
It's beautiful though. Beautiful. The robots are mostly puppet-ed. The plinths in the wasteland. The dirigibles above. The design of so much of it is just lovely. The old-style fax machines with preforated paper as "email" -- just lovely.
Beautiful.
That doesn't mean the movie doesn't have a lot of problems.
Dialog. Nose-hitting plot points. Embarassing teaching-a-robot-to-dance scene. Oof.
But it sure looks great. And it has great provenience. Some Blade Runner, a touch of I Robot, a smidge of Dark City. I don't quite understand the stakes or why it takes everyone so long to figure out what everyone else is doing. But it's beautiful.
Automata is problematic.
It's beautiful though. Beautiful. The robots are mostly puppet-ed. The plinths in the wasteland. The dirigibles above. The design of so much of it is just lovely. The old-style fax machines with preforated paper as "email" -- just lovely.
Beautiful.
That doesn't mean the movie doesn't have a lot of problems.
Dialog. Nose-hitting plot points. Embarassing teaching-a-robot-to-dance scene. Oof.
But it sure looks great. And it has great provenience. Some Blade Runner, a touch of I Robot, a smidge of Dark City. I don't quite understand the stakes or why it takes everyone so long to figure out what everyone else is doing. But it's beautiful.
Wednesday, June 10, 2015
So many things
Bulletproof is no more. Everything Stu says about this makes sense. I know the feeling of things just not working out. Oof.
Creating a force field in After Effects.
Reloading the AMD drivers in Bootcamp did not solve my crashing problem. But. Oof. Seems like my Focusrite Scarlett might be the problem. That is a bummer.
It's a bit of a process to restart Windows 8.1 in safe mode.
Creating a force field in After Effects.
Reloading the AMD drivers in Bootcamp did not solve my crashing problem. But. Oof. Seems like my Focusrite Scarlett might be the problem. That is a bummer.
It's a bit of a process to restart Windows 8.1 in safe mode.
Tuesday, June 09, 2015
Revolutionary Robots Review
This review of our movie Robot Revolution by The Movie Guy on Amazon is a pretty good review. I mean, I think the review is thoughtful and reasoned and dude didn't even like the movie.
I'm taking this time to comment on a review to see what we can learn from it.
Dang. I felt that part worked in this movie. It's always a problem in low-budget pictures like this that you have a quiet part in the middle. But I thought we'd earned enough with these characters to have that 7 people in a room talking scene.
Somewhat low budget? I think we spent $8000 on the picture altogether. I'm glad he liked the sound and the framing. Ha! I painted out most of the boom mics but the dialog was almost entirely with wireless lapel mics. But saying the cleaner 'bot didn't look CG? That's quite a feather in my cap. It's a CG robot -- it's in the creative commons even -- made by Ian Hubert.
I'm taking this time to comment on a review to see what we can learn from it.
In this case it is best to read the DVD cover prior to watching the film so as to understand some of the background.Oof. If that really is a consensus opinion then we did do too bad a job explaining the backstory. That's a rough line to toe because you can come off way too heavy-handed and "on the nose" if you over sell the backstory. But if you under-explain the backstory it'll irk a lot of people (interestingly, not all people).
The whole idea is that the bad guys don't exist -- they're created by the government in order to keep people in line. Granted, that's explained very briefly at the end of the movie. So I don't know if that was a mistake on our part or if The Movie Guy just missed it.
There didn't seem to be a message or theme to the madness, possibly because the story was poorly developed.
The film wasn't half bad up onto the point they had 7 people in a room basically doing nothing for a far too long period of time. After this the film lost me as far as entertainment value and continued on a downward slide.
Dang. I felt that part worked in this movie. It's always a problem in low-budget pictures like this that you have a quiet part in the middle. But I thought we'd earned enough with these characters to have that 7 people in a room talking scene.
This is a somewhat low budget film, that used some decent effects, including a cleaner robot that didn't seem to be CG. The shooting was framed well, the sound was good, I never saw a microphone.
Somewhat low budget? I think we spent $8000 on the picture altogether. I'm glad he liked the sound and the framing. Ha! I painted out most of the boom mics but the dialog was almost entirely with wireless lapel mics. But saying the cleaner 'bot didn't look CG? That's quite a feather in my cap. It's a CG robot -- it's in the creative commons even -- made by Ian Hubert.
Friday, June 05, 2015
Overwrite
So. I've been working in Blender for a number of years now. And I just discovered something pretty basic.
See, we render frame sequences. This means that each frame is a new file -- typically a .png image. This is better than rendering out a movie in .mov or .avi format because if/when your computer crashes or otherwise stops the render it doesn't automatically destroy the whole render -- you can pick up the render at the last frame the computer was working on.
All this time, though, I was looking in Explorer or Finder for the last frame rendered, and then I would set the first frame to start rendering on that frame, and start up the render again. But it turns out, I don't have to do that!
If you don't check the "overwrite" box in the render panel the render will automatically skip the already rendered frames. The way I thought it worked was that it would render all those frames but put like a "_1" at the end. But no, instead it just does what you want it to do.
Does it make up for the fact that you can't render out shadows without making the thing the shadows are on visible in Cycles? No. No it does not. But it's something.
Under things I must do this weekend:
Render Robot Swarm B
Render Robot Swarm C
See, we render frame sequences. This means that each frame is a new file -- typically a .png image. This is better than rendering out a movie in .mov or .avi format because if/when your computer crashes or otherwise stops the render it doesn't automatically destroy the whole render -- you can pick up the render at the last frame the computer was working on.
All this time, though, I was looking in Explorer or Finder for the last frame rendered, and then I would set the first frame to start rendering on that frame, and start up the render again. But it turns out, I don't have to do that!
If you don't check the "overwrite" box in the render panel the render will automatically skip the already rendered frames. The way I thought it worked was that it would render all those frames but put like a "_1" at the end. But no, instead it just does what you want it to do.
Does it make up for the fact that you can't render out shadows without making the thing the shadows are on visible in Cycles? No. No it does not. But it's something.
Under things I must do this weekend:
Render Robot Swarm B
Render Robot Swarm C
Wednesday, June 03, 2015
Samanas at 40 Knots
Tomorrow night, Thursday June 4th, I'll be sitting in with the City Samanas at the 40 Knots Bar in Brooklyn.
My intent is to play with the Peavey Vypyr amp and my Gibson SG. I'm doing that so I can dial in my sound ahead of time (which, as of this writing, is the "plexi" clean with the preamp and power amp gains dimed with a little bit of Leslie and a big 600 or so ms of delay) and not be stressed about powering up a cranky tube amp and getting the pedals to all work and such. I'm not sure if I'll bring the pedal with the amp yet. Maybe. I have one of those Sanpera pedals (the small one) and with it I can control volume and the like. Maybe. I'll have to experiment with it tonight.
We have no set list. We actually only have the vaguest idea of what we'll play. But that actually works out okay for us, so I'll go with it. I expect we'll end up doing a very long version of Dark Star.
My intent is to play with the Peavey Vypyr amp and my Gibson SG. I'm doing that so I can dial in my sound ahead of time (which, as of this writing, is the "plexi" clean with the preamp and power amp gains dimed with a little bit of Leslie and a big 600 or so ms of delay) and not be stressed about powering up a cranky tube amp and getting the pedals to all work and such. I'm not sure if I'll bring the pedal with the amp yet. Maybe. I have one of those Sanpera pedals (the small one) and with it I can control volume and the like. Maybe. I'll have to experiment with it tonight.
We have no set list. We actually only have the vaguest idea of what we'll play. But that actually works out okay for us, so I'll go with it. I expect we'll end up doing a very long version of Dark Star.
Monday, June 01, 2015
Shadows and you
Ugh. So it turns out you can't just do a shadow-pass on an otherwise invisible plane in Blender anymore using Cycles. This is apparently because Cycles only understands "light", not shadows.
If you enbiggen the image above you'll see that our little robot does cast a shadow. But that square thing is sits on does not belong there. So I'm gonna have to render out all this nonsense and then so a crazytime job of creating an alpha channel and blah-blah-blah. This is really annoying because that's a major bit of functionality which is gone from Blender.
The environmental lighting seems much better in Cycles. But I really wish there were an easier workaround with this dang shadow issue.
If you enbiggen the image above you'll see that our little robot does cast a shadow. But that square thing is sits on does not belong there. So I'm gonna have to render out all this nonsense and then so a crazytime job of creating an alpha channel and blah-blah-blah. This is really annoying because that's a major bit of functionality which is gone from Blender.
The environmental lighting seems much better in Cycles. But I really wish there were an easier workaround with this dang shadow issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)












