This small excerpt is taken from Post Sound Design: The art and craft of audio post-production for the moving image by John Avarese explain really well the logistic problems that inherently come from different workflows and departments inside the post-production phase on a film. Ideally, sound editors want the AAF to be organized as well as for the sounds they select to edit their films. Many times Directors, Producers and Editors don’t take into consideration the hard work driven by the sound department. Sometimes, even sound recordists ignore the importance of making a clean and efficient session out of their job, hoping that any sort of issues might and will be solved in post-production. In the first lecture with Tim Harrisson, he noted down the importance of the relationship director-sound supervisor, and eventually crew-sound supervisor, quote:” You should start doing your sound libraries before production. By establishing a good relationship with the director, you will be able to participate in the pre-production process, alongside the rest of the crew. Later you will be able to hand in your sound library to the editor so they can start using your sounds instead of something that they find.
In Smells Like Sulfur, I’ve had the privilege to start working with the director, Mario A. Arias, a long time before pre-production in February 2021. He showed me the script; we talked about some ideas; made some decisions about some sound concepts we would like to produce. Because it was a small production, I didn’t have difficulties in talking with my other colleagues from other departments. We all knew each other, which made it easier, and my sound recordist, Sergio Argüeso, was very capable and knew what he was doing. We analyse the script together; I warned him about some very important scenes that he would have to make sure sound was recorded immaculately. The film was recorded in Madrid, and by that time I was in Porto, Portugal, with almost no way to be there for the production process and help Sergio with the recordings. He had to “improvise” and be creative as usual. Listening back to production sound I can proudly say that he managed to get a really good result out of the shooting. Nevertheless, the only problem I can point out occurred in pre-production: we started to do sound design for the feature too early. When the film was shot, and later went to post, the sounds we’ve made didn’t match intentionality or concept. I’ll have to redo the sound design for the whisper and a new approach.
For this assignment, I was asked to be consistent with my blog posts in order to report my process. It’s ironic because I’ve never documented my process before when it comes to sound post-production for film. I did take notes when I was in Film School, paying attention to my tutor’s sessions, shortcuts, ideas, workflow, learning as much as I could to be good at it. Now, I’m taking notes on my own process and reading them back looks like I’m writing down a tutorial. In a academic context, studying film can be overwhelming, and sometimes he can erase your passion for it – which was what happened to me. However, now that I’ve put myself again on the processes I was used to, I’ve got my passion for sound for film again, and consequently, cinema. I retrieved my need to express myself through sound and image.
Luckily, the AAF handed by the editor, Angela Delgado, was perfect, very well organized, and the sounds she used weren’t awful. I also opted to redo my Pro Tools templates for either 5.1 and Stereo. I pretended I was ignorant to the eyes of sound editing as a way to refine my ways in the process – I’m available again to learn more about sound for film and its language. I’m trying a new way of dialogue editing organization: separate the tracks for A and B so I can divide sequences and lately have a more organized session when I start mixing.