The math seems pretty simple off the bat - a new paperless process: no printing for the admin group, no paper shuffling for the talent or director or assistants. Just scroll through the script, perform, record, and you're done.
The problem I see is that pen & paper in the Dialogue recording process is not a limiting point or an annoyance, but rather a tool. Each talent has their own internal timing. Their own way of interpreting the director's commentary, their own way of hitting their marks, dotting their accents and crossing out words that may no longer be needed. This means MANY MANY marks which do not exist on a keyboard. Resorting to JPG files and painting applications is not an option for scripts.
Then there is the director. Who also makes all sorts of marks, arrows, highlights, commentary, etc. within his script. And these are different than what the actor needs to see.
The recording engineer also has his own script - marking preferred takes. Many do this within the software they work in, many do this by hand.
Supervisors have yet another way of using the script and making their own marks.
Putting all of these script discrepancies aside, with the new "virtual paperless tool" someone will need to be at the controls typing in changes. Changes that are required by the talent and director at the very least. Leaving our the recording engineer and supervisor for the moment, the first two alone would require another person to be present in the studio, doing this secretarial work. Time required for understanding (through dialogue with talent and director) how the script needs to be updated is also a time hit.
So the question is - does a paperless process with savings in admin costs for printing offset the time requirements and additional staff in the recording studio to run the process?
Perhaps. Depends alot on the workflow.
I would be very interested to find out from The Surround Factory how they've managed and progressed 3-6 months down the line.
No comments:
Post a Comment