A small thing that's been bugging me lately -- thought I'd throw out there for consensus.  Been putting together a script with a fair amount of dialogue between characters relayed over two-way radios.

Seen a number of pro-scripts that use 'filtered' as in:

             MALCOLM (O.S.)
       (filtered)
Malcolm to Mobile One, over.

I've currently included it -- then I wondered, is it really necessary?  It'd be obvious from the description what's going on, alongside the (O.S.) in the character cue.  Not to mention I'd be saving a whole bundle of lines cutting it out.

Any thoughts?

I don't even know what filtered is supposed to mean here. Is is supposed to represent radio stactic? I would break screenwriting taboo and use (O.R.) for over radio instead. That way you know the person isn't just off in the corner somewhere off frame speaking through a coffee filter I guess? Still not sure what its supposed to mean here.

If it's obvious from the description what is happening, just whack it as a VO (unless I mistaken, dialogue over phones should be VO and not OS, so the same should be for stuff over a two way radio... not that it really matters too much).

In the past, I've even included things such as 'OVER INTERCOM' or 'OVER RADIO' in brackets after the dialogue, so it would look like:

                TEAM LEADER (OVER RADIO)
    This is the team leader speaking. Do you
    copy? Over.

I mean, I know that is technically 'incorrect' formatting, but if it helps the scene read better, is anything really incorrect? Plus, I have seen so many 'popular'/ championed scripts recently that do not follow conventional formatting, that I have begun to just follow my own instincts of including it if it enhances the read.

Hope my ramblings help           

I would prefer, as a reader, to see it the way Toby suggested.

(filtered) is the proper way in this case.


Phil

Agreed, but understand, it's unlikely it's O.S. - more likely it's V.O.

O.S. means the character is just offscreen.

V.O. means the character isn't anywhere near the scene.

It makes a difference.

Please take a quick look at this link:

http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-screenwrite/

Then evaluate the descriptive thread titles that may help direct someone to a question they might also share -- even months later.

Then evaluate the relative utility of the title to this thread.

Not griping at anyone -- just saying it is something to keep in mind in the future, as there seems to be a small trend developing here.

A good thread title is almost an art form  

All good points.  Been poking around a number of scripts and it’s approached in so many different ways -- in the end it’s a matter of clarity and consistency I guess.  I don’t think its exclusion loses anything.  I’ll take the space.

As to the V.O./O.S. -- yeah my bad, didn’t check my own example.  

Bert -- fair point, duly noted.

Thanks for the replies.