Feature Film Deliverables - Client asking for "Master PT Session"

Hey folks,

I’ve been sent a list of deliverables (pasted at the bottom of this post) for a low budget feature I mixed about 6 months ago. I think some of these requests are a little outdated (does anyone use CDs any more?) and I’ve queried most of them just to make sure we’re on the same page as it looks like a bit of a copy/paste mashup to me.

The first request is my main concern at the moment as obviously I’ve done this feature entirely within Nuendo. My interpretation is that they’re wanting all of their subsequent deliverable requests to be popped into a PT session and named / labelled there.

As far as I understand it’s very unusual for studios to ask for the actual session files but I was wondering if anyone else had dealt with this sort of thing? I can’t see an easy way of taking the entire session from one DAW to another (along with all the routing, mixing, plugins, etc). Even if I’d been working in PT from the start giving them the entire session opens a can of worms regarding SFX licensing and no doubt there would be plugin mismatches etc etc etc… Sounds liked a nightmare & I’m really hoping I don’t have to deal with it besides chucking some stems into PT :wink:

List of Deliverables
“1) All Sound Track Masters are required to be delivered as ProTools compatible session conformed to the High Def Masters described above listed in “Video Masters”;
2) 5.1 + LT/RT English Printmaster;
3) 5.1 and 2.0 M&E;
4) Dialogue, Music, Effects Master, stereo and 6 track;
5) 6+2 Foreign Language Mix and the Dialogue track with also a 2.0 Dialogue Stem; and
6) If available, One (1) CD containing the unmixed music score of the Picture."

Make a project with all the masters and stem in a multimono format. Then make an aaf out of that.

Done. It is PT compatible.

OT. Who uses LT/Rt nowadays?

The same people who use audio cd’s?..

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

Yeah I’ve never done an LtRt before so I’ve already questioned whether it’s actually required - from doing a bit of research on Google most people have been saying that it’s an outdated format and that they probably actually just want a Stereo 2.0. It never seems like anyone checks the deliverable lists before they send them out…

Thanks for the help and advice folks, really appreciate it!

We’ve got one client who always wants the “ProTools session” of the mix. As Trumppi stated above, I make an AAF and say “Here you go”. End of story. Never had a complaint.

… but, isn’t the ProTools session “my” property? Do they want to re0mix it? :open_mouth:

It is whatever the contract says it is.

But I think the idea at least some people have is that since it isn’t clearly specified that you actually send the mix with all automation and plugins you instead create your mix and set your PT session up with routing of stems into the desired mixes. No automation, no plugins. They then have what the deliverable spec doc says.

I’m guessing it’s probably just what some people say because they’ve heard it or read it, and in most cases it will never be used.

Exactly.

The way I read it, is the Stems and Master are expected to be compatible to drop in or if you can deliver them in a PT session, Thats what I’ve always done.

Yep

You might consider taking a cue from our video counterparts, The client owns the finished product, video etc. If they want all the raw footage and your edit sessions etc that is negotiated and should cost a fair bit of money on top of what they’ve already paid you. Music Mix engineers have been doing this for a long time too.



The client owns the finished product, video etc.

… and that only!

If they want all the raw footage

They can have that too. They probably would have provided it, right?

… and your edit sessions etc that is negotiated and should cost a fair bit of money on top of what they’ve already paid you.

If they insist, they pay!

Hey folks here’s an update in case anyone’s interested. As I suspected it was a massive copy/paste situation and all that they ACTUALLY want is:
Main Mix - 5.1 + 2.0
DME Stems - 5.1 + 2.0
M&E - 5.1 + 2.0
(All mono tracks)
So I’ll chuck all of those into a PT session and call it a day :smiley:

The specs were asking for stuff in every way possible which seems absolutely mad - we have “5.1” and “6 track” being used interchangeably and “LT/RT”, “2.0” and “stereo” all being used totally interchangeably as well…

The only thing super clear was the number of CDs they wanted the unmixed score on: “One (1) CD”. Of course it turned out that they’d rather have that digitally delivered along with everything else. Who writes these things?!

SMH

Put that on the list of stories for your grandchildren. :laughing: