posted 23 September 2005 11:43            

I am curious to what extent the designers on this group go
to "preauralize" the filmmaking process in a simalar way that a
painter, illustrationist, storyboard artist, etc might take when
first fleshing out their subjects. For me, tossing around a lot of
ideas and being precise as to what I want to gather or realize or
create saves time before going through a a lot of things that are
not what I "hear" but are along the same lines.

This for some reason feels like a truly artistic approach, as
perhaps the modernists,impressionists, and rennaissance painters
might have approached their canvases. Without sounding tooo
academic or theoretical, my hope is that this discussion will
develop into a practical set of approaches for us.

For example: Often, I will be alongside picture editors that develop
temp effects by going through a very labored library audition
process and end up with something that sounds "plastic" or "canned"
compared to what it could potentionally be in my mind...or I should
say, less "tailored" to the film at hand.

It's a very vast subject matter with an intentionally loose starting
point, but to me editing and design often starts in the head and has
say 99 scenarios worked out before the sampling process begins with
actual audio. For some reason, it makes the work "fit" inside the
screen sooner than if I were to do a large audition of effects.

Does anyone have other thoughts on this?

posted 23 September 2005 13:41            

1. Imagined
2. Observed
3. Remembered

and he gives examples of drawings he made (for example, of what he *imagined* a lion to look like, a drawing he made from copying a photograph, and a drawing he did from memory).

posted 23 September 2005 16:24            

Thanks guys!

posted 26 September 2005 17:26            

I put my attempt (imaginaryWaterDrop.kym) here: http://www.symbolicsound.com/cgi-bin/bin/view/Share/Sounds#Synthesis

And I'm inviting anyone who thinks it might be interesting to do the same. (Don't listen to a recording of water droplets first. Try to do it from memory).

Later, if someone has a real world sample of water dropping into a basin, we could compare our imaginary results to "the real thing".

posted 28 September 2005 16:01            

It's not clear where to draw the line between sampling and synthesis, but I tried cutting out one drop + reflection and using it as the Response for a CrossFilter. Then I tried feeding in a PulseTrain and a GrainCloud (See http://www.symbolicsound.com/cgi-bin/bin/view/Share/Sounds#Synthesis

The Sounds and samples are called:
imaginaryWaterDrop.kym
oneDrop.aif
waterdropobserved.kym