Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unofficial music videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Very true, Mark, that's part of the process. I love coming up with an idea, though. Well, I guess, I love and hate it. It's very exciting because you can see something taking shape in your mind, and that can change at any point, but it's also very frustrating at first because you keep thinking of the stupidest ideas, or worse yet, nothing at all, until you have that AHA! moment. Usually the first few times I listen to a song I picture everything literally, which is in my opinion a horrible way to do a music video, unless it's Weird Al and your music video is White and Nerdy, then it's hilarious. But in general you want to ignore the literal interpretation of lyrics, lest you come up with something unoriginal, derivative, and ultimately nothing that adds to the song itself.

    I would say that alone is a pretty good indicator of a good versus mediocre video. Good videos always have really interesting interpretations of the song that you hadn't thought of before, or that are just wacky and out there but somehow work visually with the music. At least, that's my opinion...

    Comment


      #17
      It IS against copyright laws. I don't know how you think it isn't.

      And taking someone else's work for your own use without their permission is unethical, pure and simple. Whether or not anyone is 'hurt' is not the point.
      David W. Richardson
      Writer/Producer/Director/Editor
      Chapel Grove Films
      Celtic Cross Films
      Bliss Video Productions
      http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1400903/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

      Comment


        #18
        hey lynos. I am a film commissioner for Universal Music Group out of NYC. The general consensus for most "unofficial" music videos is that they are good publicity. However, there may not be a need to do it unofficially. I gather you would like to do it for free. If you reach out to the proper people, a lot of times they will work with you to make the video. At least then you have a good chance of having it promoted and credited properly. The future of music videos are now moving away from the huge directors and looking for the new talent that is out there. All of these extremely talented people who just need the opportunity. The tools are now available to nearly anyone with a modest budget.
        In the coming weeks Island Def Jam, will be holding a series of contests where unknown directors can take a crack at making their own "unofficial" music video. the winners of these contests will then have an opportunity to write for some of premiere acts. For ambitious directors this could be a fast way of moving straight to the top.
        I generally recommend against directing a music video for a local band. Unless it's merely to gain knowledge. if you're confident that you'll deliver a great music video then there are plenty of signed acts, both big and small, that will allow you to do a music video. As long as you make a deal with whoever it is, that it will be properly promoted. That is where the payoff will be.
        Roy LaManna
        CEO
        Trendsetter Marketing & Musicvideosubmissions.com
        To get your music video on MTV, BET, Jams, VEVO and others, just visit:
        http://www.musicvideosubmissions.com/

        Comment


          #19
          Hmm, interesting advice. I think it's fairly difficult to find signed bands with whom to work, though. I'm here in Los Angeles and I haven't had any luck with that, at least. I certainly think I have the quality of work to be doing record label videos now, but I'm sure on a smaller scale, the low budget stuff. I know a few directors who do record label videos and they're quite good, but I think I'm capable as well.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by JonathanLB View Post
            Hmm, interesting advice. I think it's fairly difficult to find signed bands with whom to work, though. I'm here in Los Angeles and I haven't had any luck with that, at least. I certainly think I have the quality of work to be doing record label videos now, but I'm sure on a smaller scale, the low budget stuff. I know a few directors who do record label videos and they're quite good, but I think I'm capable as well.

            do you have a reel? what bands you like? are you looking to do a video for free or cheap? if cheep then how much?
            Roy LaManna
            CEO
            Trendsetter Marketing & Musicvideosubmissions.com
            To get your music video on MTV, BET, Jams, VEVO and others, just visit:
            http://www.musicvideosubmissions.com/

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by chapelgrovefilms View Post
              It IS against copyright laws. I don't know how you think it isn't.
              Wrong. It's only illegal when it's published or distributed, and then it's the publisher or distributor's problem, not the content creator.

              Originally posted by chapelgrovefilms View Post
              And taking someone else's work for your own use without their permission is unethical, pure and simple. Whether or not anyone is 'hurt' is not the point.
              Wrong again. It's fair-use. If you have a problem with fair-use, then that's your little hang-up, not anyone elses.

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by DVXguy View Post
                do you have a reel? what bands you like? are you looking to do a video for free or cheap? if cheep then how much?
                Yeah I have a reel, the last music video I directed, Winded, was about a $10,000 shoot, which is kind of insane for an indie video but to me it was worthwhile. It won an Honorable Mention at The Accolade Competition and was an Official Selection at Planet Ant Film and Video Festival last month and is also an Official Selection at Action on Film International Film Festival and Hermosa Shorts Film Festival. It was only rejected from one festival thus far, but we'll see how it does in the future.

                Because I'm trying to put together this "Making of" indie music videos project, gathering interviews from some of my cinematographer / director connections, providing information throughout that I wish I had when I was starting out, tips and tricks for low budget music videos, and advice about how to do bigger stuff too, I am looking to do two more music videos for free because I need the behind-the-scenes footage, like I had a DP film for Winded (he's a DP normally, of course just a camera guy on Winded). The idea, though, is to divide my DVD project into three parts, beginner, intermediate, and advanced, basically. The last video would be the advanced video, because it was done with a crew and on a level similar to a low budget record label video, or very high indie anyway. The next two are supposed to be cheaper, to demonstrate that you can still do really solid work on lower budgets, but you need smaller crews and more favors, etc. So the idea is to do one video for about $4,000 that will be the intermediate video, and the beginner video will be a crew of just 3 of us probably, really low budget, something your average high school student or film school student could do with a few friends and a few hundred bucks. Now, of course we're idealizing this, because I will in fact have a DP who has done more than 25 music videos, several features, commercial work, etc. He is very experienced. My editor is a professional too, and I'm a professional director, so we are going to be able to get a better result than what our viewers would probably get but the point is only to show what's possible. [And as a side note, of course I have to pay my DP and editor, etc., but the idea is that if you did this with your friends you would keep costs low].

                I still expect both of these next videos to be very good and high quality, otherwise they are useless to me. If either one of them wasn't good, it's basically going to convey the message that you can't make a great video if you don't have tons of money, which is a message that will kill my product. I want people to see that you can make a really neat, enjoyable music video for cheap with a small crew, but you just have to be more creative with how you use your resources and contacts, and you can't have the same type of production value that a larger video would but you can do other things that still make for a great result. So the goal is to have each of these levels have a good video, but each one different, with more complication added as you move up the ladder.

                The irony is I did the advanced one first.

                Anyway, I could send you a link to a few of my videos if you want. I want to do these two videos for free, but the only condition is the band has to agree to allow me to place the finished video on this DVD and use the behind-the-scenes footage. That's the only "catch," which for many bands wouldn't be a catch but another promotional opportunity. It just depends how they see it.
                Last edited by JonathanLB; 07-02-2008, 06:41 PM.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by pmark23 View Post
                  Wrong. It's only illegal when it's published or distributed, and then it's the publisher or distributor's problem, not the content creator.
                  It's illegal to play copyrighted music on a stereo in a restaurant unless you have a license to do so. It's illegal to copy CD's that you have bought, even if they're for your own use.

                  The poster indicated he wanted to be able to screen his video. That is clearly a violation of copyright.


                  Wrong again. It's fair-use. If you have a problem with fair-use, then that's your little hang-up, not anyone elses.
                  My understanding of fair use is it principally applies to material used for news, documentary, or sometimes parody work. This does not seem to be any of the above. Perhaps you could quote the relevant part of the law with regards to this?

                  And there's no need to be derisive. It's the law, not my 'hang up'.

                  No one has yet addressed the question I've asked. If it's YOUR work -- a film you've produced and are making profits from -- will it be alright with YOU if someone takes it IN ITS ENTIRETY and puts it into their own film, which they then distribute for free? If it's my film, you can bet you're going to get sued if you didn't ask for and receive permission.

                  Best advice for the original poster -- consult a lawyer before proceeding, if you want to be sure you're protected.
                  David W. Richardson
                  Writer/Producer/Director/Editor
                  Chapel Grove Films
                  Celtic Cross Films
                  Bliss Video Productions
                  http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1400903/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Fair Use

                    Section 107 of the Copyright Law allows for the "fair use" of a copyrighted work for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. Additional guidelines (H.R. Rep. No. 94-1476, and The United States Copyright Law: A Guide for Music Educators) permit multiple copies for classroom use under certain circumstances.

                    The following four factors, taken together, determine what constitutes fair use. The first three factors are usually important in determining the fourth.

                    1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether it is intended for commercial or non-profit educational use. This provision permits certain duplication of library materials for the purposes of scholarship, research, and teaching in all areas of music study. Students and faculty members may make copies of protected materials for such uses, and librarians are permitted to make one copy of protected materials for a user upon the submission of a signed request with the adjoining copyright disclaimer statement. Section 107 applies to all copyrighted works. Certain specific uses not in the non-profit educational domain can also qualify under this provision, for example when a paid reviewer quotes briefly from a copyrighted literary or musical work in a review.

                    2. The nature of the copyrighted work. In evaluating this factor, case history has taken into account whether a work is published or unpublished, factual or creative. In general, unpublished and creative works have been given more protection by the courts than published and factual ones. MLA takes the position that most tools of music learning are creative works in themselves and therefore cannot by their very nature be appropriately evaluated on the factual or creative criterion. In addition, an evaluation of fair use should acknowledge that reasonable use of unpublished sources is critical to the advancement of music research.2 Conversely, fair use does not apply if a copyrighted work is intended to be consumed in the course of a class assignment (such as in the case of workbooks, text books, musical exercises, etc.).

                    3. The amount and substantiality of the portion to be copied as it relates to the work as a whole. This factor is related to the purpose of the use (no. 1 above), and is usually relevant in determining the degree of harm to the copyright owner (no. 4 below).

                    4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of the copyrighted work. Criteria used to determine adverse market effect include (a) accessibility of the work, (b) date of its creation or publication, (c) economic life of the work, (d) price, and (e) evidence of abandonment.

                    Source: http://www.uwm.edu/Library/Music/copyright.html
                    David W. Richardson
                    Writer/Producer/Director/Editor
                    Chapel Grove Films
                    Celtic Cross Films
                    Bliss Video Productions
                    http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1400903/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

                    Comment


                      #25
                      § 106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works

                      Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:

                      (1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;

                      (2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;

                      (3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

                      (4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly;

                      (5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and

                      (6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.

                      § 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use

                      Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include —

                      (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

                      (2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

                      (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

                      (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

                      The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

                      Source: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#106
                      David W. Richardson
                      Writer/Producer/Director/Editor
                      Chapel Grove Films
                      Celtic Cross Films
                      Bliss Video Productions
                      http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1400903/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Did you even read what you just pasted?

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Thanks everyone for your advice.

                          As for the copyright issues - again - I am well aware of that. If I'm going for this, I have no intention of doing anything beyond putting it online and adding it to my reel.
                          As for someone else stealing my work - if someone takes my short film and puts it on their website without paying me I will consider it a huge compliment, but of course it's not the same, since I made this short film not to make money but to create a presence, which is different from established artists who are doing it for the money...?

                          But are established artists REALLY doing it for the money?

                          I bet that if I contact the artist himself/herself/themselves they wouldn't have any problem with me making an unofficial video from their work and may even consider it a compliment. After all, I'm getting out there, spending money, working hard, not only because I want to add it to my reel but because I'm a FAN and have a good idea for a video for a song I LOVE and to which no official video was ever made...

                          The only ones who will have a problem with that aren't the artists - they don't give a **** - it's their lawyers and their record labels. They don't care about art but only about the bottom line, which is the money.

                          The challenge to getting that kind of permission is going above the heads of all the lawyers and agents and reaching the artist directly. If the artist says yes, then all the lawyers in the world won't be able to say no.

                          That's the beauty of it, and I'm at least gonna give it a try.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Hey Lynos... I'm in Toronto too. Seems like there's tons of us. I made this super lo-res fan video in 2003ish and sent it to the artist when it was done. He liked it a lot and it went on his label's website, Genetic Music in Germany.

                            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iV3htvGE1E

                            If he hadn't of liked it, I wouldn't have put it online. That said, I say go for it. But I don't agree with you that the artist won't give a ****. They might not like it and they might have a problem with it being online, especially if it's good quality and looks official. Fortune favours the brave, though, and I wouldn't worry to much about copyright. As chapel pointed out, you aren't even allowed to copy your owm music by the letter of the law, and no one's being hauled to court for that.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by Lynos View Post
                              Thanks everyone for your advice.

                              As for the copyright issues - again - I am well aware of that. If I'm going for this, I have no intention of doing anything beyond putting it online and adding it to my reel.
                              As for someone else stealing my work - if someone takes my short film and puts it on their website without paying me I will consider it a huge compliment, but of course it's not the same, since I made this short film not to make money but to create a presence, which is different from established artists who are doing it for the money...?

                              But are established artists REALLY doing it for the money?

                              I bet that if I contact the artist himself/herself/themselves they wouldn't have any problem with me making an unofficial video from their work and may even consider it a compliment. After all, I'm getting out there, spending money, working hard, not only because I want to add it to my reel but because I'm a FAN and have a good idea for a video for a song I LOVE and to which no official video was ever made...

                              The only ones who will have a problem with that aren't the artists - they don't give a shi* - it's their lawyers and their record labels. They don't care about art but only about the bottom line, which is the money.

                              The challenge to getting that kind of permission is going above the heads of all the lawyers and agents and reaching the artist directly. If the artist says yes, then all the lawyers in the world won't be able to say no.

                              That's the beauty of it, and I'm at least gonna give it a try.
                              But putting it online is exactly what violates the copyright laws.

                              Sure, if someone copied your SHORT film you'd be fine with it. Nobody makes money on a short. But taking someone's MUSIC is like someone stealing your FEATURE film -- one that you are trying to make money from. Would you be okay with that too?

                              This isn't about whether or not the artist cares if you steal their work. It's about whether or not it's LEGAL -- and whether the people who OWN the work care if you use it. It's their right, not yours.

                              And you're wrong -- it doesn't matter what the artist says, it matters what the copyright owner, which is usually the record label, says.

                              Do what you want.
                              David W. Richardson
                              Writer/Producer/Director/Editor
                              Chapel Grove Films
                              Celtic Cross Films
                              Bliss Video Productions
                              http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1400903/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by pmark23 View Post
                                Did you even read what you just pasted?
                                Sure did. What part of that makes you think that making a music video qualifies as 'fair use'?
                                David W. Richardson
                                Writer/Producer/Director/Editor
                                Chapel Grove Films
                                Celtic Cross Films
                                Bliss Video Productions
                                http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1400903/?ref_=tt_ov_dr

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X