Though audio seems to be the outright favourite, I want to find more and understand more about why video is the dominant output when viewers are concerned. Eric Lamontagne works in the sound department for many big productions in TV and Film, and was interviewed on this topic and I looked into his responses.
"Saying sound is more important is quite a statement! Many storytellers would argue that moving picture started silent and that audiences were entertained. That said, I believe I do understand the need for sound that supports the image but sound must only carry the story naturally."
Lamontagne believes sound is necessary to support the story, if and when its used. He goes on to talk about how many blockbusters now are overshadowing that with their visuals and it can take away from the storytelling. Of course there is ADR and replacement processes but Lamontagne likes to capture the best audio he can, on the day.
"It has been my goal to capture as much live performance on the day of production as possible, a personal and professional goal that I share with many fellow sound crews. At the end of the day though, my role is to do my best to capture the performances to support the story."
This got me thinking about silent films again, and how is the music and score that accompanies the film, necessary to support the story? In many cases the audio can add comedic and dramatic effect with its timing in certain instances. I believe this certainly supports the entertainment of the film, it helps keep audiences engaged, but does it support the story? This gives me three ideas. A silent film that is completely silent with no music, a silent film that is accompanied with random musical score, and a silent film that is accompanied with an original synced score.
The outcome of this will help me understand how audiences will rank the viewings of silent films, and if audio really does matter and support the story of a silent film.
"But for the most part a silent film was silent unless accompanied by live music. But was the music always there? When films were first exhibited commercially, in 1894, via the Edison Kinetoscope peepshow, they were silent. You peered down into the machine, paid your cent or penny, and thirty seconds of so of silent miniaturised action played before your eyes. Edison wasn’t happy with this, and in 1895 introduced the Kinetophone, an adaptation of the Kinetoscope with accompanying (though not synchronised) phonograph recordings. Yet for the most part people started seeing silent films silently."
From the early days of silent film, most of the audiences were seeing them silent and still enjoying them. For a time, unless accompanied by a live orchestra or such, the film you'd be watching was in complete silence. I want to find out why this changed.
Sources: http://www.reelmarketer.com/interview-how-sound-is-everything/
https://thebioscope.net/2011/08/29/when-silents-were-silent/
When researching audio vs video, there is an absolute handful of books, websites and articles that are pushing the point of audio been better. This one is no different. But this one gave me new ideas.
Why Audio Matters Most for Audiences by DaCast.com goes with the argument that "our sense of sound is the most integral when it comes to communication, making audio an essential aspect of any broadcast." I can't debate that at all, it's a hugely valid point. Our main sense of communication is talking to each other, which for lack of a better term, is sound orientated. It only make sense that the easiest way for us to follow a story would also be through sound.
The page goes on to offer a test to any readers that doubt their opinion.
"Don’t think sound is all that important? Try this exercise: pick your favorite scary movie and watch it on mute. Meanwhile, play a nice, relaxing song in the background, or a comedy track from your favorite standup comic. Stripped away of its intended audio cues and music, which are designed to build suspense, tension, and terror, it’s doubtful that scary movie will have the same impact."
This exercise is a great insight into the modern horror film, that features too many jump scares and not enough actual scary footage. Although there are plenty of horror films known for their hauntingly visuals and films such as 2015's The Visit which actually as no score or soundtrack at all. I'm really interested in doing something like this for my experiments. Using some horror footage and seeing how much of the audio actually elevates it from just the visuals. Showing the clip with high quality video and low quality audio, and then low quality video and high quality audio, will show which of the two is more important to the production and the audience of a horror film. Then if in the future if any of us are making a horror film, we'll know to maybe focus or lean towards one because the audience get a bigger kick out of that one.
Sources: http://www.dacast.com/blog/audio-matters-audiences/
No comments:
Post a Comment