Jump to content


How loud ARE these MOS cameras?


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
  • Guests

Posted 30 June 2005 - 01:34 PM

I know that MOS cameras generally aren't used because of the noise they make, but, using a good cardioid mic system, COULD you get away with it? How about using a sound suppressor?

I mean, is it possible to record sound with a MOS camera, ATALL.

Thanks for any advice,
Dan.
  • 0

#2 Austin Schmidt

Austin Schmidt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 82 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York, Los Angeles

Posted 30 June 2005 - 02:18 PM

The reason MOS cameras make so much noise is because they don't have anything buffering the sound they make. The reason there is no sound buffering the camera is because MOS cameras don't run at crystal synch, so there is no reason for lowering sound as dialogue can't be recorded and matched up in post. You can record good sound with an MOS easily by just putting a sound blanket over the camera, but your real issue is synching the audio with the visuals. MOS cameras are used alot (ie. Arri 435, 353), but not when dialogue and synching sounds are needed.
  • 0

#3 hugovillasmythe

hugovillasmythe
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts

Posted 30 June 2005 - 02:31 PM

Not exactly...
Many MOS cameras (both 35mm and 16mm) can be outfitted with crystal sync motors and/or camera control units that make them run crystal sync.
All Arri35III's, Panaflex X, Panastar Arri IIc's from Panavision and, later models such as Arri435's are crystal controled.
Of course you can get away with using an MOS camera and record dailogue.
Your sound person will probably have a nervous breakdown but it might work.
Thick padding such as furniture blankets might be helpful. Also, something I did with a BL2 that wouldn't shut up is use longer lenses.
A sound man friend of mine, very savy of post sound gadgets placed a microphone right next to the camera and was able to cancel the specific frequency.
To be honest, if you need to do sync sound, try your very best to have an MOS camera because all else is just sloppy fixes for lousy preproduction.
And, even if you use a quiet camera, always be nice to your sound person and have furniture blankets aroud so your electricians can throw them on HMI ballast or even on some odd functioning blimped cameras.
  • 0

#4 Robert Morein

Robert Morein
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 30 June 2005 - 11:37 PM

I know that MOS cameras generally aren't used because of the noise they make, but, using a good cardioid mic system, COULD you get away with it? How about using a sound suppressor?

I mean, is it possible to record sound with a MOS camera, ATALL.

Thanks for any advice,
Dan.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


No, it's not. To give you an idea, 30 dB is considered right on the edge of sound viability. A 30 dB camera will usually have a barney installed for interior work, except in noisy locations.
By contrast, an MOS camera typically runs around 60 dB, 1000X noisier.
The BL camera mentioned in this thread is actually intended for sound recording, yet the early models, I and II, were bitterly hated by sound departments.
The only way you could use an MOS camera would be to construct a blimp. This is a very daunting task. A blimp is heavy, solid, airtight, and has optical and control ports for the camera contained within.
  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19760 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 June 2005 - 11:47 PM

Well, you might get away with a really telephoto lens and a far-off MOS camera, with a blanket over it, in a noisy location, etc... But for the most part, no sound recordist is going to put up with a noisy camera, not even a noisy SOUND camera, let alone an MOS one. I get complaints from them even if the film is slightly chattering or the mag is slightly squeaky, in a modern sync-sound camera. Mics are better than ever but standards for clean sound are higher than ever.

The lightweight 35mm sync-sound cameras like the Moviecam SL, or Aaton-35III are already borderline too noisy if you are shooting up close in a small location.

Old movies used hard blimps around cameras in order to record sound.
  • 0

#6 Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
  • Guests

Posted 01 July 2005 - 09:06 AM

Oh right ok, that's given me a better idea of things.

Just say an Arri 235, would that be crystal synced enough to put in some sound?

Basically, the story is I really want to shoot this film I'm planning on 35mm, or 16mm if it comes to it, trouble is I can barely afford to rent an Arri 235, let alone an arristudio or lite e.t.c.

I'm just in a film mood right now, I'll probably be back on to digital next week no doubt.. lol

Well, thanks anyway guys.
Dan.
  • 0

#7 oscar jimenez

oscar jimenez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 317 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • PANAMA, REPUBLIC OF PANAMA

Posted 01 July 2005 - 09:19 AM

An Aaton XTRProd may do the job, they are very quiet. I haven use the 235 but 435 it is not as noisy as 35-3 or 2c, why dont a BL 1 with a crystal motor? I have used 35-3 with CE Speed control unit 2, I assume that a BL should work too, anyway is it 24fps? Sound blanket or furny pads work great as blimp, but small locs with not so high celings may be a problem, if cam sound is not so present maybe a lo cut filtering may help get rid of some noise. Talk to the audio guy first
  • 0

#8 Daniel J. Ashley-Smith

Daniel J. Ashley-Smith
  • Guests

Posted 01 July 2005 - 09:25 AM

An Aaton XTRProd may do the job, they are very quiet.  I haven use the 235 but 435 it is not as noisy as 35-3 or 2c, why dont a BL 1 with a crystal motor? I have used 35-3 with CE Speed control unit 2, I assume that a BL should work too, anyway is it 24fps? Sound blanket or furny pads work great as blimp, but small locs with not so high celings may be a problem, if cam sound is not so present maybe a lo cut filtering may help get rid of some noise. Talk to the audio guy first

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Uhhh, I'm not exactly sure about all these different motors, I thought you got a standard motor built for that speicific camera. If you're saying you can get different motors and put them into the camera the that's a bit beyond me at this point, for knowledge and on the finiancial side. Thing is I'm only a student with a summer job, I can barely afford to shoot this film. But, it's a really good film and worth it.
  • 0

#9 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19760 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 01 July 2005 - 10:25 AM

I suspect an old sync-sound Arri-BL3 would be cheaper to rent than a new MOS Arri-235. I've shot some pretty small 35mm features with Arri BL3's & 4's.
  • 0

#10 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 01 July 2005 - 01:40 PM

I think there is no point trying to reinvent the wheel here. If you want to shoot sound, use a sync sound camera. Trying to muffle up a MOS camera, you're only going to shoot yourself in the foot, in the end you'll have so many blankets around the camera that you won't even be able to peak through the viewfinder anymore. Renting an MOS camera will just turn out to be a false economy, in the end you'll spend so much time and money to deal with it that renting a sound camera would have been both cheaper and easier.

As for all these miracle programs that take the camera noise away, one needs to realize that the frequencies they get rid of also are frequencies on which dialogue sounds are, so unvariably the voice and performance of your actor will get dulled down.
  • 0

#11 FilmmakerJack

FilmmakerJack
  • Guests

Posted 01 July 2005 - 02:00 PM

If I'm looking to adr and foley a short, could I use a MOS camera? I know the mouths would move slightly differently, but could I manage with replacement dialogue?
  • 0

#12 Robert Hughes

Robert Hughes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Sound Department
  • Minneapolis

Posted 01 July 2005 - 03:34 PM

Well, I suppose so. European filmmakers have been doing just that for the past 50 years, so you can too.
  • 0

#13 Brad Grimmett

Brad Grimmett
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2660 posts
  • Steadicam Operator
  • Los Angeles

Posted 01 July 2005 - 04:02 PM

Basically, the story is I really want to shoot this film I'm planning on 35mm, or 16mm if it comes to it, trouble is I can barely afford to rent an Arri 235, let alone an arristudio or lite e.t.c.

Well, thanks anyway guys.
Dan.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


You're talking about the most expensive cameras to rent right now. Give a rental house a call and see what kind of deal you can get on a BL-1 or 2 or an Sr-1 or 2. Let them know what your situation is and you'll probably be able to find a very good deal on a camera. You certainly don't NEED to have a 235 or an arricam.
  • 0

#14 Matt Pacini

Matt Pacini
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1246 posts

Posted 01 July 2005 - 05:04 PM

Just forget about shooting with a noisy camera.
It's a freakin' nightmare, and the software doesn't get all the camera noise out, and if it does, the dialog sounds like crap from all the missing frequencies.
Trust me. If you doubt it, watch my film, Lost Tribes, because I made the mistake you're thinking of making.
Never again...

MP
  • 0


Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

The Slider

Metropolis Post

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

CineTape

Abel Cine

Opal

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab