rec.arts.movies.production.sound

"Jakob van Oosterhout" wrote in message
news: %jakobvo@ ...
> 01-09-2007 14:12 "Al McGuire" :
>
>> I imagine the real reason is the guy who does the digitizing just
>> wants to put the tape in, push play and go sit down some where
>
> The real reason for continuous TC would be the guy manually having to
> capture each and every clip because crews refuse to take enough preroll
> before they hit the slate, resulting in essential elements missing in post
> (and because NLEs unfortunately still demand the old-fashioned
> preroll&play
> procedure for each new timecode).
>
> That same guy will also have to manually sync picture and sound rather
> than
> using TC (when cam rolls continuous TC), so it's not so much saving time,
> as
> well as it is not wanting to do a tedious, pointless job, yet being
> prepared
> to do anything that has an actual benefit to the production's workflow.
>
> This was a very elaborate way of saying that there CAN be a benefit to not
> doing TOD. Depends on the circumstances. No need to get religious about
> either method, IMHO.
>
> J, NL

Jacob,
What I don't understand is that my laptop has been able to digitize a tape
and automatically divide the tape into clips at each break in TC with free
software that came with it. (no pre-roll needed) Why can't a $100,000 Avid
professional editing system do the same thing? Then auto-sync could sync
up the audio from the batch imported multi-track BWFs from the DVD from the
sound dept. It would only take a couple of steps. Metadata ingest could
replace hours of logging and cross referencing. Why has this simpler
workflow not been adopted?

----Courtney