Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Do DITs Have A Future?

Michael Panfeld said:
David, those are the same producers who spend most of their budget on lenses/camera and then put an ad on CL for a sound guy at $100/day and who "must have his own equipment".
Click to expand...

Yep. I know. It's the same mentality that thinks high shooting ratios is a better thing, not fully understanding the implications of all of that extra data, etc.

The unions dropped the ball early.

As we move to data centric workflows it's very important to encourage that this be regarded as an important position.

David
 
Dan Kanes said:
^disagree with 75% of this^

This is a typical post-centric mentality.

One reason that production budgets have deflated and post-production budgets have ballooned. "we can fix that later" is not part of my mantra.

In fact it shows a disregard for cinematography in contemporary times, and assumes too much about conditions in a working environment.
Click to expand...

I think I get where you are coming from. That is the simple stuff like a mic in a shot or a lightstand. You want to reduce the number of shots that require VFX or cleanup etc. Sometimes it's best to shott it correctly and keep the images clean.

I think that is where you are coming from.

David
 
Win-win

Win-win

IMO of all the jobs on set, DIT is the least consistently defined.

Efforts to codify the position are problematic due to the wide variance in production strategies across different markets and genres.

The union needs to work with the PGA to reformulate job descriptions to suit the modern production environment in a more efficient way. Video assist in the sound local? Really?

What I have been pushing for is to have the DIT hired by the post vendor. The takeaway for producers is that as soon as the mag comes off the camera its "in post". My pitch is that this is a win-win. The UPM only has to work out meals and logistics for the DIT so their life just got easier - win. The post facility has the greatest opportunity to take advantage of all the things a DIT can do to organize and manage the material to maximize efficiency.

Since time is money this offers the post vendor the opportunity for a better margin on the gig. Whatever was budgeted for the DIT can be moved from the production side of the ledger to the post side. The post supe can make pragmatic decisions about what elements are best done on set vs back at the facility. Back ups, dailies, sound syncing, first light color grading and transmission of DP's intent into the pipeline to facilitate the final color pass, sample comping of plates, etc.

In my world I roll a van equipped to provide a field office for post that can be used for data management, transcoding, editorial, sound syncing and even a full finish when that makes sense. Is this the VANguard of the next logical step in the evolution of how to best integrate production and post? I obviously think so.

Cheers - #19
 
Blair S. Paulsen said:
IMO of all the jobs on set, DIT is the least consistently defined.

Efforts to codify the position are problematic due to the wide variance in production strategies across different markets and genres.

The union needs to work with the PGA to reformulate job descriptions to suit the modern production environment in a more efficient way. Video assist in the sound local? Really?
Click to expand...

All good thoughts.

What I have been pushing for is to have the DIT hired by the post vendor. The takeaway for producers is that as soon as the mag comes off the camera its "in post". My pitch is that this is a win-win. The UPM only has to work out meals and logistics for the DIT so their life just got easier - win. The post facility has the greatest opportunity to take advantage of all the things a DIT can do to organize and manage the material to maximize efficiency.....Whatever was budgeted for the DIT can be moved from the production side of the ledger to the post side.
Click to expand...

Assuming there is a post facility, that's an interesting approach. I think you could also make a case for replacing "post vendor" with "editorial department," although as we both know, that would lead to some questions about physical location and jurisdiction....

As always, I like what you have to say.....
 
Dustin Cross said:
Completely agree Dan. I work for the DP, not post. I support post.
Dusty
Click to expand...

I have had some wonderful collaborations with DPs where they really appreciated having me there to consult with. I can confidently say that on a number of gigs I really helped us get a "fatter neg". On some occasions my input has kept the DP from doing things that make sense on film but are problematic when shooting digital. IF you have the budget, a DIT who stays with camera is a tremendous addition to the camera team.

What if production wants you to make transcoded dailies, verify copies and sync sound while also being at the DP's shoulder by the monitor? Better hope its a light day... ;-)

I get where Dan and Dusty are coming from but the impetus for this thread was the future of the DIT. I am making the assumption (which, like all assumptions can easily wrong) that many DPs will be told there is no budget for a DIT as a camera tech. There may be the option of a DIT who is primarily doing data and dailies who can help set up the camera in the morning and troubleshoot it as needed - a valid option IMO. If all they really want is someone to make copies, then the term DIT is being mis-used and production needs to be aware that a data wrangler is less likely to be able to solve problems on the fly than a proper DIT. FWIW I think there are shows where simply renting enough media so that copies don't need to be made during the production day is a better bet than doing data management on the cheap.

In any case, even if you are hired by the post facility they are likely to want you to keep the DP (and/or the producer) happy anyway, so on set you are essentially working for the DP anyway.

Cheers - #19
 
Mike, I agree with you that achieving an online quality look is not always possible on set due to less than ideal conditions we are often working in. However, that doesn't stop people from wanting looks. Whether it's a DP, a client, etc there are times when this is required, even though we know that it can and most likely will be changed in post. Also, there are DITs still working in the traditional sense. They are baking things in (F900, F35, Varicam, etc). I see DIT as remaining part of the camera department because ideally you are working with the DP closely, but also working with ACs, loaders and utilities throughout the day. At least, the way it stands today.

I think we also have to acknowledge that we are not all working in the same markets and genres. Approaches can be different. I work in commercials, features, and some high end corporate. There are different needs/expectations amongst those three categories. A 5D shoot will be different from a RED shoot. Sometimes we're dealing with RED, Canon, and Arri cameras on same job. Right now our job is still important. If it evolves, so will I.

Maybe I'll try to get the talk I'm doing on October 5th broadcast live on the web. It's all about this kind of stuff and aimed at producers.
 
Every job is a little different. Some jobs I sit right next to the DP, other jobs I am just off set downloading, grading, transcoding, syncing, and making dailies. If DP wants me right next to him and production wants all that other stuff, they need to get me a utility I can supervise to do the other stuff. A lot depends on the camera, post workflow, and requirements.


Dusty
 
Steve Sherrick said:
I think we also have to acknowledge that we are not all working in the same markets and genres. Approaches can be different. I work in commercials, features, and some high end corporate. There are different needs/expectations amongst those three categories. A 5D shoot will be different from a RED shoot. Sometimes we're dealing with RED, Canon, and Arri cameras on same job. Right now our job is still important. If it evolves, so will I.

Maybe I'll try to get the talk I'm doing on October 5th broadcast live on the web. It's all about this kind of stuff and aimed at producers.
Click to expand...

As usual, a reasonable and well reasoned response.

BTW, I really like your company name. Obscure knowledge has been my stock in trade for years....
 
I really do wish that a digital loader position was an apprentice to a DIT. I fell into this role via post production, and there's something about organizing different types of footage, transcoding, building a workflow, logging (all things I currently do on set) that seem very assistant editorish. Now over time I've learned more about the camera and I do assist with creating LUT's and help AC's with the camera menus etc... and that seems more camera dept.

Through this forum and buying stacks of photography books, I feel I'm moving up from a glorified digital loader to being a full DIT. But I have to ask you 600 guys where you go to learn all this stuff. I've been on sets that had upwards of 100 people, and it seems that every other position has an apprentice equivalent save for this one. I went to Cinegear and listened to the guys who spoke from 600 rave about how a DIT was so important, but it seemed like they kept focusing on the data portion of it, and it's clear to me that people who have good reputations as DITs know much more than that.

Now, how this relates to the question "do DITs have a future?" Well, producers are crafty people, and if they see someone just sitting at their DIT station all day they think to themselves "hey, all he does is back up files, anyone could do that." or at the very least, just drop the Red drives/CF/SSD at the post house at night and have them turn it around by morning. I make it a point to be around the camera whenever I can and try to get a feel for whatever the DP is trying to do, so when I see it on my monitor I know what adjustments to make before I show it to him, but I also do my very best to stay out of anyone's way, because nobody likes a DIT who is in the wrong place at the wrong time, so I don't always get to be close to the action. But I try to stay busy however I can.

Outside of managing data, the DITs job involves being able to assist the DP in getting the best possible image out of the camera, and I wish there were more places for people like myself to go to get this knowledge for all this entails. This is also an open invitation to any DIT out there who needs a kickass data wrangler/digital loader apprentice.

I see a lot of ripping on people who are the "Macbook Pro DITs." I bet most of these people fell into the role same as I did with no formal training. I feel on the higher end of the game, DIT's were camera/video techs used to aid DP's who shot mostly film transition to get pretty images out of digital cameras. On the lower end, it seems to me the bigger problem was getting footage from camera through post, so producers came to post people for help. The modern day job is a mix of the two, but people like myself only ever dealt with the data part because nothing more was asked of us, and now that some of us have been doing this for a few years and want to move up, suddenly we're expected to know more about how the camera works than people who have been in camera department their whole life, which of course they don't, which gives the DIT position a bad rap.
 
@Andrew Wilsak - where are you located? I'd love to work with you. I'm in Los Angeles.

To put it in Perspective - before I became a DIT I began in the motion picture business first as a PA, then as a set lighting technician, and eventually I became a Union set lighting technician.

I saw the lighting role as well as my hundreds of hours on set as critical in learning to become a DP. There are "filmschool DP's" and there are people who have put in thousands of hours on a motion picture set, experiencing and learning from everything that goes on.

I began researching as much as I could about digital imaging, I bought a Canon DSLR camera (20D, and then a 1DSMK2) and then an HVX200, and spent time fiddling around with them. I've been a computer maniac my whole life, and a camera maniac nearly as many years. Digital Imaging Technician was a natural evolution of my interests and skills coming together in a cohesive manner.

The thing is, I spend as many free hours as I can reading up, and experimenting with as many new pieces of gear and software as I can - and I love it. I live for camera department now. Shooting is like the rootbeer in a rootbeer float - it makes a good thing even better. So, yeah - it's great that we have a place like this to talk about things and learn from the success and follies of all who dare to share!
 
Last edited:
Andrew,

I wish there was a better way to train up new DITs. I have a super hard time getting a loader or utility on most shows. I search out all the guys in my area (Austin) looking to become DITs and mentor them as much as I can. Help them get jobs, teach that what I can, and answer questions when they have them.

As for me, I have a masters in computer science and starting doing post. Camera was my hobby and as file based cameras became more the norm I was able to use my post and camera and computer knowledge and DIT was a perfect fit. I also spend every free hour learning about new cameras, workflows, and anything that can help me.


Dusty
 
Andrew, I started my career in post. It began in a machine room working with beta decks and 1" machines making dubs, QC, etc. I then started working on Avids as a digitizer and became very good at taking those machines apart, rebuilding them, etc. From there I became an assistant editor and eventually worked my way up to post production supervisor. All along I was involved with the production side as well, working on films, music videos, etc. But post paid my bills for many years. When RED came along I became very excited about the production side again, and bought one. Because of my post background, file based media was second nature. I also had some experience with the technical side of signal processing, reading waveforms and vectorscopes, and onlining. I spent a few months getting to know the RED in and out and then started to go out with it as a "RED tech". That led to taking on some of the roles associated with DIT and eventually it led to what I do now. Almost every job I have done as a DIT has been with a RED One, Alexa, Epic, Phantom, Weisscam,and DSLRs. There have been some Varicam, Sony F3 and a few others scattered in there but for the most part I have been mainly focused on file based cameras. About 80% of my work is RED and Alexa.

So, the moral of the story is there's probably no formal path to get there, but I like Dustin's attitude about spending free time learning about new cameras and anything else you can to get yourself the knowledge you'll need moving forward. Surround yourself with good people and eventually opportunities will present themselves and you'll be on your way. The way things move so fast these days, there is always something new to learn. Knowledge = value. Value = paycheck.

Good luck with everything!
 
My background is from photo and directing. Then I have learned a lot from saying yes to chances I have got and no to what I didn't want to do. Thus I spent a year on compositing, learning enough about it to learn that that is not what I wanna do, quite some absurd time to learn how different formats practically work, aome in online and some in colorcorrecting.

The upside to all this, is that I can talk with and understand the different artists need without taking on an engineer approach.
I know how badly it communicates to tell an artist he or she cannot do this or that for some stupid technical limitation. i rather look for ways to make the wild ideas work.

As I have been producing a bit, too - I even manage to communicate reasonably with the producers...

Setting up solutions that cover needs and create security and a good and fun working environment, and see to that thibgs are communicated, is what I think is ny main function when I set up a production.

But, then again - I don't consider myself nor have an ambition to be a DIT.
i supervise stuff, and solve stuff, but I tend to multiple productions at once in addition to doing photo and my own stuff. And teaching.

The epic is the first in the 2nd gen digital cinema cameras, methinks. Possibly along the F65. Haven't tested thatone yet. But I think the flexibility of the Epic is a sign as to what I am suggesting.
Both as a photographer and as a post person, it is so much easier to work with than anything else out there.
It has some way to go for the operator. But the signLchain has already improved to a level where much of the dit's function is not that neccesary ro stress on set.

This will only evolve, I think.
And finally we will end up with digital loaders, if that.
Datahandling can be pretty much automated...

Not being gloomy here, and having more work than I can eat.
That is not the issue.
But I see a different and not so distant furure approaching as the new tools settle...

Cheers

G
 
Unions in all their glory, almost always screw up hierarchy. It's unfortunate. DIT is the DP of data. Loaders are just that. Loaders. like 4th on the totem pole (a hair above PA)

We treat DIT's as 2nd A/C's and are putting together some SICK ASS KIT to be run by very smart people. Most of the digital youth movement are swiss army knives.

Hybrid Digital Soldiers is what DIT should change their names to!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top