As in "mit out sound." Is this an archaic term or what? If so, what would be a preferable way to indicate no sound... in 2017 :). Almost (*almost*) seems like a good instance to implement the much-maligned "we," e.g. "His lips move, but we don't hear..." Looking for simple responses, not another boring format debate, 'kay, thanks.

Still used on set.

Works for me. Think I'll stick with it. Always thought it was pretty straightforward. Haven't seen it used in ages, though.

Stick with tradition.  Nothing wrong with M.O.S.

Stick it next to the slug, e.g. INT. PLACE - DAY (M.O.S.)? Makes sense to me if the entire scene is silent. I'm using some V.O., but M.O.S. implies no *synchronous* sound. Up til now, I've used it only when a character's speech is meant to be obscured, but I suppose that doesn't account for the other sound effects in a given scene.

Learn something every day on this site - never had heard the term before

M.O.S. is that feom the 'golden era' ? Cappra, Huston days?

Just for the record, the “mit out sound” story is debatable. Most agree it means “motor only sync" or "motor only shot." It's an archaic term going back to the days when sound was first recorded separately and synchronization was much more difficult.

This is also when the term “speed” starting getting used. They had to wait for the sound system to get up to speed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS_(filmmaking)

Interesting. Thanks!