Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Changing work of a DIT
  • ahblezaahbleza

    I feel a very important topic that is often overlooked, but is essential on every large and small production, is that of the DIT. I was wondering how many people here specialize in this? It's something that takes a lot of the skills of a video engineer, camera operator, DP and colorist, as well as computer RAID engineering and high speed Internet links.

    Will this job still be around in a few years, as camera systems evolve -- or will the tasks just mutate as they've done over the past 20 years that DITs have been around (in one form or another.)

    Here are a few instructive links on exactly what being a DIT entails ... I'd love to hear from others on PV about their DIT experience.

  • 4 Replies sorted by
  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    Whether a DIT is essential to a production has more to do with the filmmaker, DP and camera crew than any real intrinsic need.

  • OedipaxOedipax

    I'm my own DIT, for better or worse ;)

  • ahblezaahbleza

    @BurnetRhoades I don't know if you've ever shot more than a few days, but I've found having at least a Data Wrangler is essential on the shoots that I've DP'ed. Naturally, I've done my own DIT on smaller shoots where the budget wasn't enough. A good DIT will provide the security and confidence that all the media is correctly ingested with multiple backup copies, and will even properly tag and label the clips for import, that saves a TON of time in the edit (especially matching up sync sound.)

    I've not worked on very large productions where a full DIT trolley with all the responsibilities of grading, dailies and director's monitor LUTs is done, but I can see how it would help. And actually, to me the DIT is really the ambassador from the camera crew to the post department. A good DIT will save you time and money, while a bad DIT will fuck you up.

  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    Yes, I've shot a feature. It was low budget to be sure but I've shot fifteen, sixteen, seventeen hours a day for two weeks straight just me and a single AC and a gaffer or two. I'm not saying it's not necessary, or that it's not of value to some folks, I'm saying there are director/DP combos who forgo this position and they're none the worse for it, they don't miss it. Some of the tasks you're describing could fall on an AC's shoulders while some are more influenced by the kind of camera being used and it's own ease or strain on the data being wrangled, or by how multiple vendors will be involved later.

    The folks who tend forgo the position also tend to forgo the whole LUTs on set, video village, engineer, etc. and other bulk that can weigh a production down and choose to shoot in a lean film style, with more confidence than they would have for a typical film shoot because they don't have to wait for a lab. Again though, this is a filmmaker preference where they're likely more comfortable with the technology being used.

    I will agree having a bad one would be potentially catastrophic. That's likely at least part of the reason for deleting this position for some crews since having none would be less of a burden than having a bad one. In this sense you're removing some complexity or at least a potential point of failure.

    Some movies are so big that for sure it's definitely a plus and everyone benefits. I saw a video recently on the setup used for Ender's Game which, when you're talking that scale, yes, definitely yes, a good DIT benefits everyone else down the line. Speaking from years of experience on big films like Ender's Game, where you could not count on notes or any useful data to speak of flowing forward from a camera crew, yes, a DIT would have been grand back then from the POV of someone working at a post vendor.

Add a Comment