Atmos beds and scene boundaries

[idris]

(Obviously everyone has their own preferences, the style of the piece may dictate a certain method, and as soon as someone is appointed to do the job I shall ask them their preference, but in the meantime ...)
How do re-recording mixers typically like the scene boundaries of atmos beds track laid?

With the exception of scenes where the sound is deliberately meant to bleed from one scene into another, I have been considering two options for a scene change at 01:02:00:10 (assuming the atmos tracks are checker boarded)

Option 1:
Hard cuts on both outgoing and incoming atmos beds at 01:02:00:10
Option 2:
A 1 frame fade out at the end of the outgoing atmos starting at 01:02:00:10 and ending at 01:02:00:11
A 1 frame fade in at the beginning of the incoming atmos starting at 01:02:00:09 and ending at 01:02:00:10

My reason for the latter is that it avoids clicks and pops and the scene changes don't slap you in the face, and in most casses the effective cross fade should be pretty much imperceptible to the audience. But I suspect this may be an unconventional approach.

[paranerd]

Originally Posted by idris

(Obviously everyone has their own preferences, the style of the piece may dictate a certain method, and as soon as someone is appointed to do the job I shall ask them their preference, but in the meantime ...)
How do re-recording mixers typically like the scene boundaries of atmos beds track laid?

With the exception of scenes where the sound is deliberately meant to bleed from one scene into another, I have been considering two options for a scene change at 01:02:00:10 (assuming the atmos tracks are checker boarded)

Option 1:
Hard cuts on both outgoing and incoming atmos beds at 01:02:00:10
Option 2:
A 1 frame fade out at the end of the outgoing atmos starting at 01:02:00:10 and ending at 01:02:00:11
A 1 frame fade in at the beginning of the incoming atmos starting at 01:02:00:09 and ending at 01:02:00:10

My reason for the latter is that it avoids clicks and pops and the scene changes don't slap you in the face, and in most casses the effective cross fade should be pretty much imperceptible to the audience. But I suspect this may be an unconventional approach.

Option 2 is the norm.

Actually, Option 1 shouldn't even be considered.

[potatohead]

I used to do Option 2, substituting 1/4-frame ("perf") for a frame.

Two exceptions were the start of the first scene in a reel, and the end of the last scene in a reel, where I would have both the dialogue and sound effects departments prelap the former and postlap the latter by as much as 1 second, to ensure no holes during longplay construction, changeovers, or cutting pull-ups.

-Phil

[bad jitter]

Originally Posted by idris

Option 2:
A 1 frame fade out at the end of the outgoing atmos starting at 01:02:00:10 and ending at 01:02:00:11
A 1 frame fade in at the beginning of the incoming atmos starting at 01:02:00:09 and ending at 01:02:00:10

I usually do 2 frames crossfade (atmos in different tracks of course) from, in this case, 01:02:00:09 to 01:02:00:11. Not a big difference.

[subbasshead]

Option 3: It depends on the content and context of the cut

Every scene boundary has a cadence and must be considered on its own terms; sometimes you want a hard cut, sometimes you want a scene to ease out, sometimes ease in... other times dialogue may lead the cut (in which case the incoming ambiences should do the same)

[Frank Kruse]

I also vote for Option 3:

Use your ears and not "norm" rules. A scene change can be a part of story telling. If you want a hard transition make it one. If soft is the way to go use that.

I never fade scene changes by some sort of "technical norm". Every sound behaves differently depeding on what you make the transition to. Some transitions sound hard and "slappy" even after you applied a 3 frame cross-fade others are fine with 1/4 frame transition. Sometimes I don´t fade at all if that is what sounds best.

As a side note it´s a shame that 12 years after killing AudioVision there is still no efficient way to do quick fades "centered at cut" across multiple tracks by entering a frame value. It still comes down to multiple mouse-selecting, clicking, re-selecting, adjusting back and forth.
Maybe Avid still has an AudioVision in the storage. They should really drag it out and show some of the features to todays designers of PT.
There´s still A LOT they can learn about a DAW for post from that machine.

Frank.

[idris]

Originally Posted by Frank Kruse

...Use your ears and not "norm" rules. A scene change can be a part of story telling. If you want a hard transition make it one. If soft is the way to go use that....

Note to self, always check you've listed all the caveats.

subbasshead & Frank, I take your point entirely, and wasn't suggesting editing / mixing by numbers, I was just curious to know whether there was a nominal value which was commonly used as a starting point and then qualitative judgements made from there.

It raises another issue though, and that's the demarkation of the editor's and mixer's work : (in a massively over simplified example) I could put a 2 or 3 frame crossfade in that sounds fine with the roungh mix I do in a cutting room, but when the mixer chooses to push the traffic sfx over the seawash, the crossfade may need to be adjusted.

[garnoil]

Depends on each scene, each situation is different. I follow no "frame or half frame fade rules". I think some of that thinking comes from tv land where they mix as a factory "put a 1/2 frame fade on each transition no matter what". It is all about each scene, and how it sounds best. Sometimes an instant cut, fits the scene just right, while other timer a fade is what is required. There is also the relative volume level of the incoming and outgoing material to be considered. For example if you re going from the loud noise of the interior of a factory sound to the quietness of a calm country night, I think a hard cut may play much better than a sloppy fade (because the relative volume difference between the two backgrounds).

One thing you may want to consider is that the automation (all automation pertinent tot he region/transition ) does not have 90 degree changes at the start or end of the region that you are transitioning. If the automation is "correct as in not containing square drops or raises", and your system is set to auto read "non-written fades", you will hear NO POPS expect for some that may appear in LFE. LFE sometimes needs a different discrete fades.

[Frank Kruse]

Originally Posted by idris

Note to self, always check you've listed all the caveats.

subbasshead & Frank, I take your point entirely, and wasn't suggesting editing / mixing by numbers, I was just curious to know whether there was a nominal value which was commonly used as a starting point and then qualitative judgements made from there.

It raises another issue though, and that's the demarkation of the editor's and mixer's work : (in a massively over simplified example) I could put a 2 or 3 frame crossfade in that sounds fine with the roungh mix I do in a cutting room, but when the mixer chooses to push the traffic sfx over the seawash, the crossfade may need to be adjusted.

3 frames sounds like a very long fade for a hard scene change. Personally I prefer hard changes to come in tight and precise but this doesn´t mean I like them "slappy" and harsh. 3 frames in my world is quite long, which doesn´t mean I never use 3 frame fades.
As you can see any starting point could be right or wrong. Find your own. This can´t be developed in theory. I´d say for a hard scene change 1/2 frame crossfade (1/4 incoming 1/4 outgoig) is a good starting point.
I´ve never worked or heard of mixers who dictate fade parameters. Sounds rather silly to me. It´s as if I would tell the mixer that +3dB@6kHz has to be appiled to all dialog tracks regardless of the content.

Frank.

[bad jitter]

Originally Posted by Frank Kruse

Use your ears and not "norm" rules. A scene change can be a part of story telling. If you want a hard transition make it one. If soft is the way to go use that.

I agree and I guess that was clear to everybody without saying. I tough that we were discussing here only about hard scene changes. My method comes from the old 17,5mm perfo days. That principle worked then, and has worked to me also after that.

When story need some other techniques (and often it does), thats a completely different (and more interesting) story.