Documenting Sound - DPChallenge Forums

04/19/2005 10:51:50 AM · #1

I'd like your help with field recordings to complement photographic documentation and presentations.

On the prompting of David Leeson to expand the sensory experience as well as seeing field recordings being used with some of the Iraq coverage at the VII Seminar this weekend I've decided that I'd like to include sound with some of my photo stories.

If any of you do field recordings, I'd like to know what equipment you use as well as what I should look into to get started. I'm talking about bare bare bare minimums to do low quality work. It would be a test which would help me to decide how I wanted to pursue this in the future.

I'd like your opinions on analog tape vs. DAT vs. Minidisk. From what I gather, DAT is much preferred but I can't really afford it right now. Should I go with Minidisk (much complaints heard here) or should I stick with analog tape for now? Also, how important is stereo recording?

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

04/19/2005 11:08:09 AM · #2

As a long time musician I will say this... $90 bucks for a microphone and about 150 for a tiny 4-track recorder. Any other way and you will wish you could cut out the fuzz with a chainsaw

Gil P

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

04/19/2005 11:33:02 AM · #3

I work for a production company...what I can tell you is that "tape" is king, DAT is a very stable medium...MD's and CD's can skip or have write errors during recording and that can be desastrous.

We record everything onto DAT (DA98)and then (in a more suitable environement) we transfer to the prefered playback system.

Gil P

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

04/19/2005 11:35:34 AM · #4

[quote=Gil P] I work for a production company...what I can tell you is that "tape" is king, DAT is a very stable medium...MD's and CD's can skip or have write errors during recording and that can be desastrous.

We record everything onto DAT (DA98)and then (in a more suitable environement) we transfer to the prefered playback system. as for stereo vs mono... it depends, if your intending in playing around with the sounds in a computer, you can add imaging or phasing to create Stereo enveloppe, if you want to go direct than Stereo is a minimum, it creates depth and dimensions which are very important for our little brain... again it also as to do with your "playback" .

Shure makes a great stereo capture mic.

04/19/2005 11:39:55 AM · #5

this link has everything you need for 140 US dollars

04/19/2005 11:41:25 AM · #6

I own a 4-track already for mixing and such...

Edit: I should mention that the above recorder has a levels indicator...I know it's intended for indoor voice but do you think this will work to start?

Message edited by author 2005-04-19 11:44:02.

04/19/2005 11:48:56 AM · #7

Originally posted by thatcloudthere:

At first, I was thinking of just getting a little M-100MC recorder (about $99 CAD) to stuff into my camera bag until I decide where to invest my money. Would this just be a waste of my money or would it be a suitable start?

I own a 4-track already for mixing and such...

Edit: I should mention that the above recorder has a levels indicator...I know it's intended for indoor voice but do you think this will work to start?

It depends on the sensitivity factor.. You want a mic that will accept sound from a source it's directed at without recieving all the gooblegook in between. Check the ratios and distance it's capable of.

If you have a 4-track just buy a mic with a boom-arm or use an old tri pod instead of the boom arm

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

04/19/2005 11:54:18 AM · #8

Originally posted by magicshutter:

If you have a 4-track just buy a mic with a boom-arm or use an old tri pod instead of the boom arm

I'm confused...my 4-track Tascam is 120v and definitely not portable. I'm looking for something highly portable (like the above Sony) to document ambient and contextual sound.

This won't be so much for interviews and such (although I'll use it for this as well)...For example, if I'm doing a photo story on drilling a well for a community in Honduras I'll record sounds of the machinery, of workers yelling instructions, children musing about the anticipation of clean water, the sound of running water, etc...

Message edited by author 2005-04-19 11:54:47.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

04/19/2005 11:57:44 AM · #9

Another option might be one of the multimedia "jukeboxes" out there. I have an Archos which is already about 3 years old, but it can record directly to MP3 or maybe AVI format, onto a hard disk.

I would call a local newspaper or radio station and ask what their reporters are using these days.

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D IF

04/19/2005 12:13:08 PM · #10

Originally posted by GeneralE:

On the aphotoaday list, many of the pj's seem to use these jukeboxes as well. The only concern might be the quality of the mic's which can be attached to the mini-jacks.

Again, this is just a start so maybe those MP3 players would suffice (and be multifunctional too).

pawdrix

Nikon D700

04/19/2005 01:02:25 PM · #11

I record to my desktop using Sonar Producer Edition and it works great for PC. If you already have a lap top and a respectable mic (Shure, Rode, AKG, Marshall) you can take the show on the road and have everything you need right there. Mixers, special effects, sound effect libraries, access to internet waves and loops, music, mp3 conversion capabilities, video sound mixing and so on...... Very intuitive and easy to use.

Lot's more options for Mac as well.

I'll send you a file of something I did. The quality is amazing and easy to achieve.

Message edited by author 2005-04-19 13:04:12.

04/19/2005 01:09:05 PM · #12

Thanks...again, I'm looking for info on the recorder itself. Portability is key...so taking my laptop is not an option. If it's much larger than a fat lens it's not really an option at this point.