This "I'm a DIT"-nonsense has to stop

[Christoffer Glans]

There's bad trend where many productions I encountered features DIT's doing data management jobs and that's all they do and all they can. During the last years I've heard so many times about productions (in Sweden) where whenever there's a problem with the camera or files the "DIT" can't solve it because they lack knowledge of the camera they are working on. There's this idea that if you can move files and back them up you are a "DIT".
Back when I started working as a DIT (I've moved on from that now), the concept was new and not very defined. But it was pretty clear that whenever there was a problem everyone looked at me for the solution. So I studied both Red One, later Alexa and all digital cameras I would encounter. Whenever there was a new camera on the market or for a project I studied that camera for days or weeks before production. This was fortunate because I could start working as a phantom operator which has pretty high rates whenever they are used.

But the main thing was that when people had a problem and looked at me I damn right could fix it, or knew how to work around it or knew how to come in contact with people and solve it fast.
I've heard stories of productions brought to a complete halt because no one knew how to fix an issue, where there was no DIT or the DIT didn't know and needed to learn on the spot.

So, the "nonsense" I'm speaking of is that if someone don't know every part of a camera, they CAN NOT claim themselves to be a DIT. They can be data managers and handle backups, but they can not call themselves a DIT because it requires much more knowledge.

So this trend of misunderstanding of the role of the DIT must end.

 

[David Battistella]

It's always been so confusing.

Data Wrangler - Backs up data
DIT (Digital Imaging Technician) - Can actually advise on how to use the camera and troubleshoot, can do one lights, dailies, complete production solution, blackout tents, whatever, etc.
Loader - See Data Wrangler
DMT (Data Management Technician) - Very Grey Zone
DMT (Digital Media Technician) - Maybe more like a DIT

All of the above have a wide range from a laptop and a couple of drives to full cart setups servicing every department. Every production places a different importance on this position as well.

Battistella

What are the union rules on this these days?

 

[Mike P.]

Cioni thinks the DIT position is going to have to adapt drastically or die off as quickly as it became relevant... Maybe this is one of the reasons why? Besides, ~50+% of the crew/cast thinks the position is merely dumping cards.

While I half agree with your criticisms, I think it's more the OPs/ACs/CameraDept's job to know the camera inside and out, NOT necessarily the DIT (though inherent camera knowledge is what would separate the good DITs from the bad.) More over, if no one on-set has relevant knowledge of a given camera system, why on earth would they choose to use that camera for the production? Do they just assume someone else on set (in your opinion, the DIT) will be there to make it work? That's assumptive incompetence at its finest.

The other thing I've noticed is that the lack of knowledge of the position runs both up and down stream. It has become an incredibly ambiguous job title not because real DITs don't know what is involved, but because everyone else on set -- including the director, producer, or anyone else "in charge" -- does NOT know what is needed and/or does not know what can be gained from a competent DIT.

It is what it is... Maybe you should be criticizing the person(s) in charge of hiring, and not the kid with a laptop (trying to break into the industry) saying, "yeah, I can dump cards!"

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Data Wrangler - Backs up data
DIT (Digital Imaging Technician) - Can actually advise on how to use the camera and troubleshoot, can do one lights, dailies, complete production solution, blackout tents, whatever, etc.
Loader - See Data Wrangler
DMT (Data Management Technician) - Very Grey Zone
DMT (Digital Media Technician) - Maybe more like a DIT

My opinion is that the DMT is the old name for a DIT, I used it for the first jobs I did but then changed as soon as I saw more and more people using DIT. The DMT doesn't exist or the term is used instead of Data Wrangler. There are in my eye only two parts, one DMT/DW who handles files and backs up data and/or a DIT who overseers the digital workflow, works with LUT's and advanced settings on the camera while looking into trouble whenever they occur (and they do).
In my eyes it's quite easy, the DIT is a modern merge between the film lab guy and half an assistant editor.

Cioni thinks the DIT position is going to have to adapt drastically or die off as quickly as it became relevant... Maybe this is one of the reasons why? Besides, ~50+% of the crew/cast thinks the position is merely dumping cards.

While I half agree with your criticisms, I think it's more the OPs/ACs/CameraDept's job to know the camera inside and out, NOT necessarily the DIT (though inherent camera knowledge is what would separate the good DITs from the bad.) More over, if no one on-set has relevant knowledge of a given camera system, why on earth would they choose to use that camera for the production? Do they just assume someone else on set (in your opinion, the DIT) will be there to make it work? That's assumptive incompetence at its finest.

The other thing I've noticed is that the lack of knowledge of the position runs both up and down stream. It has become an incredibly ambiguous job title not because real DITs don't know what is involved, but because everyone else on set -- including the director, producer, or anyone else "in charge" -- does NOT know what is needed and/or does not know what can be gained from a competent DIT.

It is what it is... Maybe you should be criticizing the person(s) in charge of hiring, and not the kid with a laptop (trying to break into the industry) saying, "yeah, I can dump cards!"

The operators, AC's and everyone included in the camera department should absolutely know about their camera, but they should concentrate on the operation, setting it up for the shot and do all the needed handling to achieve the aestethics of the shot. They should know the camera just as most people knows their DSLR, but most people don't go inside the camera both in terms of software and hardware, they don't microstudy the images for sensor errors etc. That is why the DIT is there, to handle the advanced parts of the camera. It's why they exist, because 35mm aren't complex the way digital cinema is, a technician is absolutely needed on set.

But, of course I'm not purely criticizing the kid with the laptop, it's even more to protect them from getting hurt. Many of them don't have correct insurance and when something actually happens to the files, they get burned, if the camera breaks down and they can't fix it (if it's usually fixable) they are the ones these people in charge will scream at. It's for everyones sake I bring it up, the people in charge must freakin learn how digital cinema is done and the people who call themselves DIT's must freakin know what that means.

If you go onto a set and say that you can pull focus and that's the only thing you can do then I'm absolutely sure that people in charge will bring hell on earth when the shooting day breaks down because that "1st AC" can't do anything else that a 1st AC is supposed to do. Of course people need ways into the industry, but don't risk productions by lying about being the safety net for the technology, NOTHING good can come out of it. If someone don't know what a DIT is and do, then this type of work needs to be specified like any other... it's been years since the first DIT.

 

[Brian Merlen]

I think you summed it up pretty well. PS laptop with RRX and a 10 bit monitor ain't that bad a set up these days is the reality. It would run Redcine pretty well. I think getting a trash can or fully decked PC is more of a resolve issue than redcine issue (one could argue your not a real DIT if your not using resolve, since its ever so much more powerful vs basic one lights in redcine). Inimate knowledge of post and cameras is kind of required to even be adequate at all. Plus if you shoot multiple kinds of cameras you must be savvy with all of them. I am mostly Red focused but have worked with C300, C100, Alexa, F55, F3, Phantoms, its kind of a PIA to keep up, which is why I stay on the forum and others like 6 hours a day... But I enjoy the technology. I think to excel in the position you must really be infatuated with camera technology (and corresponding workflow/ecosystems)

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Well ... you could argue the "I'm a Cinematographer" thing has to stop as well. I'm often shocked how many of the new generation do not even have a clue what a contrast ratio is.

DIT position is a hot-button topic.

Let me put it this way .... THERE IS NO TEST to become a DIT in Local 600. There IS a test to become an AC. That pretty much sums it up.

Also - the scale rate for a Local 600 DIT is equal to the camera OPERATOR who is paid more than the 1st AC.

Now ... depending of what the DIT is doing on the production - this might be perfectly justified. I know some DITs who are worth triple the rate of an operator.

But many people, including myself, have a hard time with someone who is only copying files getting paid more than the person pulling focus. This is why producers and show runners want someone to copy files at the LOADER rate (about 1/3 cheaper than DIT).

Creating looks and working with the cinematographer to leverage the camera technology is one thing - copying files is another.

In the future - the cinematographers will be doing much of what the DITs of today do with respect to looks - as it's all going to be on the camera and not on a cart.

IF the top DITs are smart, and help evolve the position to a "CTO" of the set - the position might have a fighting chance IMO. But the way we do it today - is not going to exist in a couple years.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Well ... you could argue the "I'm a Cinematographer" thing has to stop as well. I'm often shocked how many of the new generation do not even have a clue what a contrast ratio is.

DIT position is a hot-button topic.

Let me put it this way .... THERE IS NO TEST to become a DIT in Local 600. There IS a test to become an AC. That pretty much sums it up.

Also - the scale rate for a Local 600 DIT is equal to the camera OPERATOR who is paid more than the 1st AC.

Now ... depending of what the DIT is doing on the production - this might be perfectly justified. I know some DITs who are worth triple the rate of an operator.

But many people, including myself, have a hard time with someone who is only copying files getting paid more than the person pulling focus. This is why producers and show runners want someone to copy files at the LOADER rate (about 1/3 cheaper than DIT).

Creating looks and working with the cinematographer to leverage the camera technology is one thing - copying files is another.

In the future - the cinematographers will be doing much of what the DITs of today do with respect to looks - as it's all going to be on the camera and not on a cart.

IF the top DITs are smart, and help evolve the position to a "CTO" of the set - the position might have a fighting chance IMO. But the way we do it today - is not going to exist in a couple years.

you could argue the "I'm a Cinematographer" thing has to stop as well. I'm often shocked how many of the new generation do not even have a clue what a contrast ratio is.

But a cinematographer is not a technician per say, he/she is responsible for a creative side and if the director/producer likes someones work, how badly technical skilled they may be, they will still get the job.

Let me put it this way .... THERE IS NO TEST to become a DIT in Local 600. There IS a test to become an AC. That pretty much sums it up.

Not in Sweden, not in many places.

Now ... depending of what the DIT is doing on the production - this might be perfectly justified. I know some DITs who are worth triple the rate of an operator.

But many people, including myself, have a hard time with someone who is only copying files getting paid more than the person pulling focus. This is why producers and show runners want someone to copy files at the LOADER rate (about 1/3 cheaper than DIT).

Creating looks and working with the cinematographer to leverage the technology is one thing - copying files is another.

It's easy, a Data Wrangler or a DMT is responsible for backing up data and file transfers.
A DIT is responsible for the "creation of looks and working with the cinematographer to leverage the technology" and also maintain that the cameras so they run without a problem.
I see no reason why DIT shouldn't be payed more if the production demands extreme precautions by the DIT; like a two, three or more camera set ups, second and third units etc. more advanced cameras like the F65 and so on.
Of course they can earn more, but there must be a reason for it and putting an experienced DIT in the role of a Data Wrangler is as bad as putting a Data Wrangler in the shoes of a high payed DIT.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I think that the DIT label can apply to a broad range of skills. Offloading media is a skill of sorts and there are people who can do it properly, ensure data integrity, keep everything in order, etc.. There are some who don't know any more than how to drag and drop files between folders. As far as the label or position of a Digital Imaging Technician goes, many productions don't need anything more than someone to wrangle the data. Some do need more and the DIT is in charge of managing looks, checking image quality and reporting to the DP/ director or whoever. It just varies.

As with most any other trade, we see a diverse range of skill sets amongst "DITs." To use painters as an analogy... Just because someone is a painter, it doesn't mean that person is qualified or capable of doing restorative work on the Sistine Chapel ceiling, or good enough to forge a passable fake Mona Lisa. Many painters I've encountered over the years are barely skilled enough to put paint on an office wall. But they're still a "painter" and they make a living doing just that.

The DIT who does on-set transcodes, image checks, look creation, etc... is going away. Post workflows are getting easier and computers are better able to handle the 4K+ media and newer file formats. Tech-savvy AC's and DPs are handling many things themselves on the newer cameras and there isn't as much of a focus on the fast turn-around transcodes with the use of compact external recorders or the paranoia over the "does it look OK? Do I have too much noise in the shadows?" or whatever, so most productions just need a data wrangler now, not a full-fledged DIT. If the media were cheaper, we wouldn't even see that, we would just see cases full of cards and no one offloading and screwing with data on-set.

 

[Steve Das]

Cioni thinks the DIT position is going to have to adapt drastically or die off as quickly as it became relevant...

More than that he says Post Houses are going out along with the DIT position by 2021.
Ultimately any position that evolves because of technology is elimated as
that same technology becomes more user friendly/refined or let's say it
becomes idiot-proofed...and a trivial task.

http://michaelcioni.tumblr.com/post/38993994656/the-dit-dilemma

The results are typically plain and simple: economics. Everyone wants more for less. I don’t care if it’s a producer on a film or your mother at the grocery store. There is a perceived notion in the eyes of many producers that the DIT and the Post House are more expensive than the return service they provide. -And for many, that’s not a new perspective, but until now, an alternative simply didn’t exist.

The data that I’ve collected and successfully applied into my business suggests that the post house is less desirable than ever before and in terms of dailies provisions, will not exist by 2017. Mark my words. Likewise, the sophistication of cameras continues to increase and for the DITs who have been in the game for 10 years, you know that many of the tools you used to require to “normalize” images on your cart have been absorbed into the camera itself. In fact, I predict that by 2021, all the capture, transcodes (there won’t be transcodes, but the equivalent of the transcode), sync, color, windowburn, watermarking, versioning, color space conversions and even lined-script notes based on totalcode-timecode during capture will *ALL* be recorded and managed by the camera, saved to an online cloud server and instantly distributed worldwide. In other words, a significant portion of what Light Iron does today to make its money will not exists in 10 years (which is the same for thousands of people around the globe). Again, mark my words.

These predictions are based on following the data that has been compiling for 10 years, analyzing Moore’s Law, talking with targets of manufacturing, evaluating the market evolution and making a few educated guesses. The result: in 2021, we will not have DITs or dailies post houses. -Sure, I’m scared, too, but I know enough of my own abilities to predict the market that I intend to evolve along with it -

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

There was a time when an AC knew how to field service a film camera. The reason DITs exploded was because of the complexity of early video/digital systems. The format was so finicky and fragile that you needed to record it exactly how you wanted it to look with minimal post work. I would argue that with RAW and improved codecs/sensors, the DIT position should eventually evaporate and ACs should learn their tools like they used to be able to do. I get it, a lot of people got into AC positions because they were mechanically inclined but too bad, mechanical motors and spinning shutters are rapidly disappearing. If the ACs won't learn the digital systems then they shouldn't be shocked when the DIT starts making a better rate. If it's "too hard" then that means they deserve the better rate. After all if a really good DIT really understands the tech then they are also qualified for a silicon valley or IT position. Productions are competing for digital talent with Google and their 6 figure salaries. There is a reason ILM and Google are involved in the same wage fixing lawsuit, the VFX industry has had to compete with silicon valley since it shifted from practical into CGI. There aren't a lot of high paying focus puller positions outside of Hollywood. A good DIT though could go work at least as an IT manager and make $150k+ a year (with better hours).

And the only reason digital loaders are still well paid is because we don't have a bulletproof software solution available yet. As sensors improve and technology matures there will be less and less reason to have a highly trained person ensuring that your 99.9999% reliable equipment didn't screw up. We could easily have an entry level position just watching live dailies to ensure every clip is perfect. Even playback could ultimately be from RAW.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

But technology isn't a fixed position, the cameras right now are getting easier, but there are a number of new technologies around the corner that might need new technicians, or the old DIT-ones...

...but, there still needs to be a technician that can support if cameras fail on location, there is no other option cause the more advanced the technology, the more difficult to maintain a secure workflow.
We see it every day, why people choose Alexa over Red... it's easier, Red cameras need a technician, F65 need a technician even more.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

You only need a technician if your product isn't user friendly. Things are getting more and more competitive, if RED still needs a "RED Expert" on a red shoot then they will lose market share until they're cast aside. But the trajectory for every company has been away from user complexity not towards it. Red is way easier than the F900 ever was. Red is 10x less difficult than 6 years ago. In 6 years there will developers displacing DITs entirely, the complexity will be hidden by heavy software dev.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

I agree that Red is easier, but it still has more problems than most other systems. It's more of a computer than a camera even though it's gotten a bit more "apple" last couple of years.
But there are still weird unreliable things happening that I've never encountered with an Alexa. so even though it's easier than before it's still not enough.

I think the reason Red "survives" is that they deliver the most advanced system. And for a guy like me, who used to be a DIT, I know how to tame that power

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Being "computer like" though boils down to insufficient software development. For instance just saving a file to a USB drive is technologically incredibly difficult requiring tens of thousands of lines of code. But we just drag/drop and it just copies over. Cameras can be easy or they can be hard. Loading R3Ds into premiere or FCP used to be hard, now you just import it like an mp4.

 

[Andrae Palmer]

It's hard to argue cutting the rate of a DIT to 1/3 when they are acting as Data Wranglers with very important data to the production thats costs tens of thousands or even millions. Depends how valuable the footage is to the production (which tends to be very valuable even on a cheap music video production).

Do you just want a person with Finder dumping files that is not trained properly? Even a Data Wrangler has to have a good knowledge of computers/technology over all. Just that knowledge alone is worth a focus pullers knowledge or even supersedes it in importance. You can't hire a Data Wrangler that doesn't know the speeds of USB2 vs USB3, firewire 800 vs Thunderbolt 1 or 2, eSATA, etc. RAID 0, 1, 5, 6... GDrive speed vs GRAID speeds... a lot of matrices of knowledge. Bus splitting and how it affects speeds. It goes on and on, Bits vs bytes. exFAT vs FAT32 or MacOS extended.

I don't see how anyone in the camera department has a greater role... knowledge wise.... yes even compared to a good Data Wrangler. Surely that professional knowledge has to be compensated for due to the rarity of the knowledge.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

It's hard to argue cutting the rate of a DIT to 1/3 when they are acting as Data Wranglers with very important data to the production thats costs tens of thousands or even millions. Depends how valuable the footage is to the production (which tends to be very valuable even on a cheap music video production).

And when a loader (who works for 1/3 the rate of DIT) has his hands in the changing tent pulling that roll of 35mm film out of the mag and putting it into a can .... like they have done for decades ...?

I'd argue that managing digital media is EASIER than unloading and canning 35mm film. It certainly easier to fix when you make a mistake.

Again, not saying DITs are not worth their rate - but a DIT is a "imaging technician" - if the person is only copying files - he/she isn't really performing "imaging" duties and I find it hard to refer to a person who is doing only that as a DIT.

 

[Andrae Palmer]

I could argue that its faster to train a film loader than a Data Wrangler. There are not many people that could train a Data Wrangler.... probably thats why there isn't a test for it.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Only because there isn't a good product yet. It should be a one button operation that copies to several chosen formats. It should auto check sum and generate a shot list. It's not like you need to know about the data interface inside an epic or the firmware in a redmag. There are a lot of "sharp edges" in the DIT workflow today. That's an industry omission.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

I could argue that its faster to train a film loader than a Data Wrangler. There are not many people that could train a Data Wrangler.... probably thats why there isn't a test for it.

I'd argue that an appliance can copy and verify files. Hard to find an appliance to unload a 35mm camera

 

[Christoffer Glans]

I'd argue that managing digital media is EASIER than unloading and canning 35mm film. It certainly easier to fix when you make a mistake.

I'd say it's the opposite around. Loading film and handling the tent has been done in the same matter for I don't know how long. You learn and you do. Handling files with all the knowledge it needs is more then just drag and drop.
Digital technology change all the time so the Data Wrangler or the DIT need to stay updated.... by the day. Otherwise they will loose jobs or opportunities to get knowledge of workflows that improve for productions.
Trust me, I've dragged and dropped enough to know there's more than meets the eye. Just try to handle an advanced camera on a remote location with little to no power avalible for the equipment. A tent don't need a power supply.