how to record audio for slideshows?

[Florian1234]

Hey guys,

after looking around for some time and watching some very nice slideshows with audio stuff explaining (you know, like it is now common for internet presentations done by photojournalists doing some new media stuff), I'd like to know how that is done.

What kind of audio recorder should one use (as cheap as possible) 😀 ?

 

[Paul T.]

Have you got an iPod?

I use a Belkin TUnetalk stereo mic with mine for interviews - great sound quality, you can use an external mic, they are saved as .wav files, easily converted to MP3.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Paul's suggestion is a good one. I use a Zoom H2 recorder, but that's a more expensive solution if you already have an Ipod.

 

[Florian1234]

No ipod (yet)... but that's a good idea 😀 :bang:

 

[newsgrunt]

Get the best recorder you can afford, honestly. Cheap is not the route to go and the iPod is in this group. Good quality audio makes a huge difference to the experience. The Edirol R09 and Zoom H4n are very popular with photographers but you're looking at around $350 or so. Lots of control over recording quality though. If you can, make sure you monitor the audio with headphones as it's being recorded.

If you HAVE to go cheap, try Olympus recorders in the $100 or so range (DS-2 ?). Not as many features and on board memory but will be heads above the 'pod.

 

[Mephiloco]

If you're going to be around a computer you can just use the mic in. Plug up a mic to a laptop and record, that simple. You can easily get good quality this way. Another cheap way is using a minidisc recorder (they should be cheap now, not sure if they're still made).

Best bang for the buck would be to plug up a microphone to a laptop if you have one, quality will be dependent on the type of microphone you use

 

[tbarker13]

I'm using a Zoom H2. Actually taking it out tomorrow morning to record some sound for a photo project I've been doing on my own time, but that my paper wants to publish.
My first time to try it, so this should be an adventure.

 

[Florian1234]

Thanks guys for the tips so far.

I'll look around and then decide.

Well, Tim, good to have a paper behind you. I'm not even a pro.

 

[nksyoon]

Try to get close to the source...background noise will be very obvious on your recording. Tried a Zoom H2 but prefer to focus on my photography.

Some interesting resources:
Gear - http://www.apple.com/pro/techniques/richmedia/index3.html
Techniques - http://www.apple.com/pro/techniques/richmedia/index5.html
http://mediastorm.org/submissions/gathering_audio.htm

 

[Paul T.]

FWIW, I've used the Tunetalk for Consumer adsites, that netted me $500 for a two minute audio snippet, twice in the last six months. THe quality exceeds what you need for speech. I've used the Olympus, and a Sony DAT recorder and the Ipod is way less hassle. I've used it for over 300 interviews and it's never let me down (altho the phone mic I use with it has, twice). You will get better quality by using an external mic/s, of course.

But if you don't have an iPod, the Olympus is definitely worth considering.The Belkin works on the 5G iPod; other manufacturers produce mics for the newer iPod versions, which I don't have experience of.

 

[Sisyphus]

Hi, there are some really amzing multimedia pieces here are the things you need:

1) Patience
2) time
3) A recorder: Edirol, zoom, I like the mirantz (more expensive but great!)
4) Programs: you will need to download a prgram called soundslides, and audacity.
5) two-three microphones: This makes all the difference in the world; One for interviews, one for ambient sounds, and the most expensive that you can afford.

I find that it is very difficult to photograph and interview or record the subject at the same time. What I wond up doing is photographing the subject first, then i would go back for the interview at another time.

It is a lot of work to piece it all together, so much so, I decided to scrap the project, although I am 50% there.

the other thing is that you will record for more audio than what you will need, so you will need to spend time editing the audio down, from 60 minutes or more to 2-3 minutes. Most people do not have the patience to sit through a 3 minute or more multimedia piece unless it is really compelling.

Also, the prgrams can be buggy, so make sure you have back ups of your audio.

if you get one together please let us know.

Hope that helps.

:s:

 

[Bob Michaels]

I find the Magnum in motion site http://inmotion.magnumphotos.com/ to have some of the best audio assisted photo documentaries I have seen. There are over 100 of them, each 5-12 minutes long. Pick one with the photo genre or photographer you like. There are widely divergent styles of combining audio and still images.

 

[emraphoto]

I have used the zoom H2, edirol r-09 and the Belkin tunetalk route. I will offer up my thoughts.

The tunetalk is a good solution but it has one major flaw. Recording audio drains the iPod batteries faster than you will ever believe possible. The audio recordings, even wav files, are no where near the quality you will get out of a zoom H2/H4 or the tascam/edirol routes.

The H2 is a very good option for the money and comes with pretty much all you will need. It takes sd cards and a 4gb card will record loads, even wave files. It doesn't have the same sturdy build of the r-09 bit for most purposes it is more than enough. It is also capable of stereo input external mics I believe.

My recommendation with the H2 is to rig up a wrist strap as it is essentially all plastic. Dropping it might prove a problem.

All the tascam/zoom/edirol models have easy and excellent interface with the computers. There is an excellent (free) audio program for cutting/splicing and mixing called audacity out there if you aren't into wrestling with pro tools right off the bat.

I use an edirol and my wife uses the zoom (both daily and for work). Knowing what I know now I would have bought the zoom. Not that the r-09 isn't a great product but the H2 is pretty darn close for half the price.

 

[newsgrunt]

i had a Zoom H4 but upgraded to the H4n when it came out and haven't looked back. Light rubber casing helps cut down on handling noises. Biggest differences for me were the larger lcd display for monitoring levels and I find the pre-amp better when using xlr jacks. It's a beefy piece of tool but well worth it.

As for producing slideshows, Soundslides is very good. Final Cut (Pro or Express) however is where you want to be spending your learning curve if you want to have more control and effects. It's pretty well the defacto program for most photographers that I know who produce mm.

For example, with the Soundslide Pro I was using previously, you had to have a defined audio track to import. Then you built your slideshow around that. If you wanted to edit the audio you had to edit the original file it then import again which throws off your sequence. There is/ was a work around which kept your image sequence intact. The program has probably been updated so take this into acc't.

With FC, import the audio and stills at the beginning and you're set to build. You can add or edit audio clips easily without needing to re-import.

Final cut does have a much steeper learning curve than SS but if you can handle Photoshop and it's many features, it should be less intense. SS is quicker and easier for getting something up and running which is more important for some. Their fora are great for info and the creators are super fast with answers to any questions you have.

But back to the original topic. Nail the audio because great images will not be helped by sub quality audio.

And Patrick has it right, get a good quailty external mike for voice.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

The problem for me is not the Final Cut Pro learning curve but the very high price. Hard to justify it unless you do heavy duty MM.

 

[Mephiloco]

There's cheaper software than Final Cut Pro that'll work just as well if not better. Premiere Pro CS4 is something like $700, Premiere Elements is around $80, Final Cut Express is $200, Sony Vegas Movie Studio (Windows Only) is $80, Vegas Pro is $600, Final Cut Studio is $1300 (and is now x86 only, but there's a workaround to make it install and work on a g5). If you really want to go all out, Avid Media Composer can be had for $1800 and works in Windows and OS X and has a lot of the features Final Cut will have working properly in a couple years now.

For something like you're doing, any of the above would work fine and be more than overkill. Avid would be my first pick, Premiere Pro 2nd, and Final Cut 3rd. Avid has less hardware support (as far as IO and special hardware) but guarantees the hardware that is supported to work and have by far the best support out of the three. With Avid you never get the run around that AppleCare is known for (transferring you back and forth, or being told that you need to call the hardware manufacturer etc), basically if the hardware shows up in Avid and is functioning (nothing physically wrong) they take responsibility.

Premiere comes 2nd because they have the most 'cutting edge' technology and are advancing faster than any of the others. Premiere Pro CS4 with the proper video card can render a sequence in a fraction of the time that same sequence would take in Final Cut (CS4 will offload rendering to the GPU and knock it out in no time, but only with a few select NVidia cards).

Both of the above work in Windows and Os X, and a license of either allows you to use the software in either operating system.

Final Cut is Os X only and as far as I'm concerned the only recent improvements they've been have been buying out other software companies and integrating their software the Final Cut Suite. Unfortunately they stop development. Apple bought out Shake (which was THE best effects program) and then simply stopped developing it. Awesome. They recently acquired Apple Color, which works great, just remember you need a proper display for proper color grading. As far as actual editing goes, Final Cut works fine.

Even iMovie/Movie Maker might work for you, but honestly when I tried to show someone how to use them (I figured it'd be simple) it drove me crazy how ass backwards everything seemed to me.

 

[Mephiloco]

By far the single most compelling reason for not shooting and recording at the same time is the sound / noise of the camera, even a Leica sounds like artillery going off during an otherwise quiet interview. There is a reason some of the current DSLR's carry the name Canon.

There's an easy fix for that if you're shooting with a Leica and interviewing at the same time. One solution is to remove the shutter sounds in post (which is a LOT easier than you probably think it would be) and another is to use a different kind of microphone. A lavalier or a shotgun mic in most cases would not pick up a shutter firing.

 

[Mephiloco]

Unless one is doing heavy duty video effects like Ken Burns, Final Cut Express 4 will usually get the job done, for less than half the price of FCP.

Ken Burns effects are actually extremely simple and basic, and can be done in a lot of cheap software suites. For example, if you're working with only still photos, Boinx FotoMagico produces very good Ken Burns-esque sequences, and isn't too bad for syncing audio up with. Worth pointing out that FotoMagico only accepts images and audio, no video whatsoever. There's a demo on their website. www.boinx.com

 

[Florian1234]

I just discovered that I maybe can borrow a recorder from my university's media-supply for some days. That would be nice and I maybe would have to get myself "only" a memory card for it. However, I don't know the type they have in stock yet. And this would need another scale of preperation then to fix a date for recording or so, since I would at first have the borrow the recorder and have it for some days only.

Definately new territory for me here. But might be good to experience. (I did an interview only once, a year before, but in a different context and on analogue cassette.)

 

[Florian1234]

Well, just coming from the campus where I asked about their devices. I might go for a Zoom H2 now. Maybe I can find one for a good price on the bay.