this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
27 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
47892 readers
343 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I remember reading something from a sound editor for movies and TV. Essentially no director wants to halt production and re-do a scene because the audio is bad. It's pretty hard to redo a scene if the camera didn't get a good shot, it's even harder if the camera was good but the audio was off. Most directors will just say "Just fix it in post".
But, there aren't really enhancements for audio. A bad segment of audio is always bad. You can't just amplify the hell out of it and have it sound good. So the lower the budget the movie, the more costly it is to redo a shot, and the more likely they'll tell the sound guys that they'll have to deal with it.
Actors used to be on the hook for overdub voice work after shooting wrapped. I don’t know if that’s still the case.
Honestly, I’m more concerned about high budget movies where I can’t understand a fucking word. I know there have been many articles and YouTube videos on the subject, but there’s really no excuse for that nonsense.