Jump to content


Sound using Arri IIC


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 Ken Maskrey

Ken Maskrey
  • Guests

Posted 25 December 2005 - 05:52 PM

I've been shooting a lot of 16mm and now going to a IIC. The IIC is always listed as an MOS camera, but I've found that I can use highly directional mikes and get rid of the camera motor noise using SoundSoap2 in PEAK. This works very well with my old ARRI S so that it's as quiet as shooting with my BL. I'm guessing it should work with a IIC as well. Anyone tried this???
  • 0

#2 Trevor Greenfield

Trevor Greenfield
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts
  • Director
  • North Idaho

Posted 26 December 2005 - 01:36 AM

I've been shooting a lot of 16mm and now going to a IIC. The IIC is always listed as an MOS camera, but I've found that I can use highly directional mikes and get rid of the camera motor noise using SoundSoap2 in PEAK. This works very well with my old ARRI S so that it's as quiet as shooting with my BL. I'm guessing it should work with a IIC as well. Anyone tried this???


Well Ive been typically filtering my audio in Vegas with the EQ manually, but I just did a demo of SoundSoap2 on their website and I am very impressed. From what I know if it can work with the BL it should work with anything. Would you mind posting or linking to a before/after of the BL sound for my sake, please? I ask because there is also the Konvas 2m which I am very interested in but most say even with a blimp it is too loud for synch (Id imagine the 50db only comes down to 40 or so with the blimp). If SoundSoap can remove the sound from the BL which is probably nearly as loud, it could work with the Konvas.

EDIT: although this page says the BL is only 39db without blimp and 35 with... so I may still be in trouble.

http://www.cameragui...k_machines5.htm
  • 0

#3 Ken Maskrey

Ken Maskrey
  • Guests

Posted 26 December 2005 - 12:29 PM

Would you mind posting or linking to a before/after of the BL sound for my sake, please?


Sure...I'm gonna do some tests later this week with a IIC (35), S(16), and BL(16) and I'l post or provide a link to the before/afters.
  • 0

#4 Trevor Greenfield

Trevor Greenfield
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts
  • Director
  • North Idaho

Posted 26 December 2005 - 02:05 PM

I've seen the IIC as well and I'm looking forward to hearing your results.
  • 0

#5 nathan snyder

nathan snyder
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts
  • Other
  • Boise, Idaho USA

Posted 28 December 2005 - 07:48 PM

I have a arri-s and a IIC. The IIC is a bit louder. Remember that the 4perf 35mm camera moves four times as much film twice as fast as a 16mm camera. As a result there is bound to be more noise. I have been reorganizing my work space but I will watchout for my sound level meter. If I find it soon I will measure both cameras and post the results.

Also, are you talking about an arri-s with or without the 400ft mag. That mag torque motor mades a huge racket!

By the way I recently made the jump from 16mm to 35mm and don't regret it a bit, especially when I project prints at my local indie theater. Man what a difference!
  • 0

#6 Ken Maskrey

Ken Maskrey
  • Guests

Posted 04 January 2006 - 07:14 PM

Also, are you talking about an arri-s with or without the 400ft mag. That mag torque motor mades a huge racket!


Nah, I don't usually pop on the 400' mags...I've become a fan of the 100' daylight spools for the Arri-S...I got a bunch for free and some for really cheap.

I'm still planning on doing recording the tests with Peak/Soundsoap2 and will post the results here...caught a cold and am just getting over it.
  • 0

#7 Ken Maskrey

Ken Maskrey
  • Guests

Posted 05 January 2006 - 10:47 PM

Okay, at ICEntertainment.us, near the bottom are two tests I conducted in the last hour with an ARRI IIC and (I think) a 24fps xtal motor. One's uncorrected and the other, well, you can guess. Anyway, I only spent about 5 minutes on fixing the sound and I'm no sound expert (remember -- student), and I think I need to still tweak the HF components of my voice a bit, but not bad for 5 minutes. I think I can get it a lot better.

My god..that IIc is noisy.

Ken
  • 0

#8 Trevor Greenfield

Trevor Greenfield
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts
  • Director
  • North Idaho

Posted 06 January 2006 - 01:26 AM

Thanks Ken.

It also sounded to me like your boom was a bit far away from your source, as the level was low. Also, after watching the soundsoap 2 demo, I think you might have more controls to play with to not chop so much treble out of your voice. Nevertheless, a very good first try, I think you might be seriously on to something here.

How far away was the IIc from the mic and how far away were you?
  • 0

#9 Ken Maskrey

Ken Maskrey
  • Guests

Posted 06 January 2006 - 09:45 AM

Thanks Ken.

It also sounded to me like your boom was a bit far away from your source, as the level was low. Also, after watching the soundsoap 2 demo, I think you might have more controls to play with to not chop so much treble out of your voice. Nevertheless, a very good first try, I think you might be seriously on to something here.

How far away was the IIc from the mic and how far away were you?


I think you're right about the treble. I wasn't sure what other controls. I tweaked the noise reduction and activated the preserve voice.

The room was a 40'x20' rectangle, mostly hard walls, with the camera setup about 20' from and pointing to the mike which was on a boom low to the ground and pointing up at about 30 degrees off vertical away from the camera lens. You probably heard I added 20dB attenuation at the mike (an Azden SGM-1X) which was better than 0dB.

I'm thinking about trying a couple other things. Mainly, running the mike into a TASCAM mixer and seeing what I can tweak out prior to recording. I noticed on the spectral response there is a noise peak from the IIc at around 1kHz, I was thinking of notching it with a low Q and seeing what I can get. The second thing is to try a mike with higer directionality. The Azden has some fairly wide sidelobes from 1-4 kHz.

Edited by Ken Maskrey, 06 January 2006 - 09:46 AM.

  • 0

#10 Chandra M.Mouli

Chandra M.Mouli

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York

Posted 22 April 2006 - 06:54 PM

I've been shooting a lot of 16mm and now going to a IIC. The IIC is always listed as an MOS camera, but I've found that I can use highly directional mikes and get rid of the camera motor noise using SoundSoap2 in PEAK. This works very well with my old ARRI S so that it's as quiet as shooting with my BL. I'm guessing it should work with a IIC as well. Anyone tried this???


I don't think its a good idiea.It resricts creative freedom a lot. Arri 2C are too noisy.


I don't think its a good idiea.It resricts creative freedom a lot. Arri 2C are too noisy.
  • 0

#11 Lee Love

Lee Love

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 04 January 2007 - 04:19 AM

Is this thread about SoundSoap Pro or the regular $80 SoundSoap?
  • 0

#12 nathan snyder

nathan snyder
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts
  • Other
  • Boise, Idaho USA

Posted 30 October 2007 - 10:16 PM

It took me a while, almost 2 years, but I found my sound level meter and finally made a short video for you all to check out how loud an Arri 2 really is.


  • 0

#13 Tim Carroll

Tim Carroll
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2165 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 31 October 2007 - 12:14 AM

It took me a while, almost 2 years, but I found my sound level meter and finally made a short video for you all to check out how loud an Arri 2 really is.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpU2eeb8PMg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpU2eeb8PMg</a>



Nathan,

Thanks for resurrecting this thread, I had never seen it. Wow, 72 decibels, that's pretty loud. Thanks for posting that.

I've been looking at ways to quiet the ARRI MOS cameras for a couple of years now. On the web site I have posted different ways of dealing with the sound level of an Arriflex 16S, and have sound clips comparing the sound level of the camera by itself, the camera in a Custom Upholstery Products barney, and the camera in an ARRI blimp. I also have sound clips of the camera in the Custom Upholstery Products barney and then with the camera noise removed using SoundSoap 2 by Bias.

Comparison of Arriflex 16S noise, camera by itself, camera in a barney, camera in a Blimp

Arriflex 16S in a barney with camera noise removed with SoundSoap2

I am working on converting an ARRI Lightweight Fibre Glass Blimp 16 to take an Arriflex 35 IIC with a 400 ft mag and the Cinematography Electronics crystal sync motor. I've gotten the camera, motor and mag to fit and the blimp really does quiet it down a bunch, not quite as well as it quieted the Arriflex 16S, but plenty quiet enough to be usable with a noise reduction software like SoundSoap. The big issue now is the ability to do follow focus, which I haven't worked out yet, as I had to remove the whole follow focus mechanism to fit the IIC.

The nice thing about the ARRI Lightweight Fibre Glass Blimp 16 is that even with the IIC, lens, motor, and 400 ft of Kodak, the whole package still only weighs about 55 lbs. Quite a bit less than the Blimp 120s that was made for the IIC.

Fun times!

-Tim
  • 0

#14 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 31 October 2007 - 11:16 AM

It took me a while, almost 2 years, but I found my sound level meter and finally made a short video for you all to check out how loud an Arri 2 really is.

How do you like the Technovision "Fellini" door on your 2C?
  • 0

#15 nathan snyder

nathan snyder
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts
  • Other
  • Boise, Idaho USA

Posted 31 October 2007 - 01:40 PM

Hey Tim, I just passed through Portland last week. Anyway, you are right the 120s blimp is real heavy. With the long lens extension and camera I think it is heavier that a Mitchell BNCR. I recently lifted both cameras fully loaded and neither are light but the arri 2C blimped up in the 120s is a beast.

As far as the technovision door goes... I love it. I have no reason to go back to the regular 2c door. The 2b door is really bad and the 2c door is a huge improvement but the technovision door makes everything much better. I think it is basically a converted Mitchell viewfinder system. It is just like MKII or a BNCR view finder. It has the two contrast viewing filters and zoom control (2X zoom on the Ground Glass) to enable precision focusing. Not to mention it provides a large and relatively bright image. The eyecup is just like the Mitchell and my camera ops can easily go between my Arri2 and my BNCR. Of course it helps that I have the anamorphic gate in my 2C so the viewing is the same between it an the BNCR. And when I get around to it it will be much easier to put a video tap on than a regular 2C door, lots of room in the viewfinder path.
  • 0

#16 GeorgeSelinsky

GeorgeSelinsky
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 718 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 02:55 AM

I shot a feature with a IIc. We post-dubbed almost everything. I tried using one of those FFT filters for fun, but I never got what I'd consider to be useable audio. MAYBE outdoors if you shot with a long lense, it's doable. FFT filters majorly color the sound if you notice. It takes a lot of work to get it to sound right.

The only time I got the IIc quiet enough was when I had to shoot inside of a Humvy. I was outdoors and using a 50mm lens, the actors were inside with windows rolled up. That WORKED, and no FFT filters necessary.

I really don't suggest trying this kind of technique, at best you're going to get useable dialog but your footsteps and moves are going to get shot. The Arri II's noise pattern is like an air conditioner, it's spread through many frequencies, so it's hard to get rid of it.
  • 0

#17 nathan snyder

nathan snyder
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts
  • Other
  • Boise, Idaho USA

Posted 01 November 2007 - 10:45 AM

George, I think you are right about the sound of the arri being to complex to be able to use the pattern recognition noise reduction algorithms. Theoretically you could do several passes, one for each simple tone, but you still would have the problem of reflected sound from the camera which becomes many more times complex. I think Trevor alluded to this in his post about the proximity of the mic to the camera. I suppose if one were outdoors or in an anechoic room, and the microphone were sufficiently far enough away from the camera them maybe noise reduction would work without coloring the desired sound signal to much.

BTW, I think my camera is about as loud as they get. It has doubtlessly had a hard life. When I got it was full of sand. No kidding. I did a complete tear-down and rebuild before I even turned the frame advance knob. I mean there was not a part of the camera that did not have sand in it, especially the gears. Runs good now though. I suppose if I lubed it up with some heavy grease I could bring the volume down a couple of decibels, but I think in the end an unblimped arri2 is a MOS camera.

Edited by nathan snyder, 01 November 2007 - 10:48 AM.

  • 0

#18 Tim Carroll

Tim Carroll
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2165 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 01 November 2007 - 12:22 PM

Nathan and George,

Did you listen to the clips I posted above? In particular, the clip that had the Arriflex 16S in the barney, and had the noise reduction software added. The Arriflex IIC I am working with has about the same sound level as the Arriflex 16S I used in that test (this IIC has had about 20,000 feet of film run through it in its entire life, it looks brand new, and it has just been overhauled and lubed).

Sound clip of Arriflex 16S before and after SoundSoap 2

The beginning of the take has the camera noise, "Four, mark . . . Arriflex 16S camera running in the background with a barney . . ." at which point I used the noise reduction software. The rest of the take has the SoundSoap 2 noise reduction.

Just curious what you guys think about that solution.

-Tim
  • 0

#19 GeorgeSelinsky

GeorgeSelinsky
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 718 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 02:03 PM

Just curious what you guys think about that solution.


I don't think I would really be too happy with that, Tim. In a pinch it might work, but my advice is for you to try a scene with a few actors maybe ("actors" meaning any people who can walk around and talk), and some moves/footsteps thrown in. Try one with the camera noise and filter, and one without. Do it for a good 15-20 second stretch. Blast it through a high quality speaker system, and see what you think. Ask someone else's opinion. If you really are happy with this, try several different scenarios, approximate what you'd have in the script. Only then proceed with caution.

Btw, I assume the Arri had film running through it? Remember that filmstock also adds noise.

Honestly, I think you either aught to get a blimp, or get a sync blimped camera. You can go ahead and try the setup you like, and if it doesn't work for you, you can post dub. But post dubbing is not to be taken lightly. You have to record dialog, ambience, foosteps, and moves. It takes time to get it right and convincing. So pick your battles...
  • 0

#20 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 01 November 2007 - 02:14 PM

.... It has doubtlessly had a hard life. When I got it was full of sand. No kidding. I did a complete tear-down and rebuild before I even turned the frame advance knob. I mean there was not a part of the camera that did not have sand in it, especially the gears. Runs good now though.

Wow. Where did you get it? Do you know any of its prior history, what it may have shot? Serial number? Any evidence of water damage? These old Arri's are truly amazing.



-- J.S.
  • 0


Paralinx LLC

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

Opal

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Wooden Camera

CineLab

The Slider

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Opal

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio