Just got my spot in Full Sail

HDkilledFILM. said:
I am of the opinion that film school is the long way into the industry
Click to expand...


Now I understand why you think film school is a waste of time — you think that this whole thing is a race. That's the fundamental difference between your opinion and mine. You think it's a race, and I think it's a process.

Ever read "The Tortoise and the Hare"?

I readily admit that what I'm doing is not the fastest or easiest approach, but rather than take my chances in the wild, I chose to take the steps that I see as necessary and don't even bother looking for shortcuts to the top, because I am of the opinion that if I take my time, pay my dues, and prepare myself, then I'll benefit in the long run as opposed to right here, right now. If you've found a faster and easier approach, then more power to you, but I'm perfectly happy going slow and steady.
 
No.. lets look at this practically. This DVXUser community has been around for
more than two years.

In that time, in this group, have we seen more people buy cameras, shoot their
own stuff, then and move into the entertainment production field? Or do have
we seen more folks graduate from programs and go directly into internships and
or more work with a network of contacts and in most cases, alumni support.

You went the school route... you're basically an example of MY point and
the opposite of what you're advising. You're pointing to a RARE exception
that happened a decade ago as career advice.

Once again... I've worked on features for the last 10 years... camera union,
vfx and lately previs. I work with TONS of grads from the big film schools,
SCAD, AFI, Full Sail, the Art Insitutes, Columbia, Gnomon, Ringling and Art
Center... OR they grew up in So Cal and have relatives or a connection to
the industry.

I still haven't met *anyone* on set or in a post house, that just sorta did
it themselves... and the topic of how people learned what they know comes
up a lot.

Here's how the whole school-no school thing NEEDS to be handled, cause
it gets tossed about at least once a week here.

Fill in the blanks:

I (did or didn't) receive formal production training. I (am or am not)
currently working in the field. My current job is (blank).

Here, I do mine.

I did receive formal production training. I am working in the field. My
current job is vfx supervision and previs for theatrical features and
broadcast commercials.

I stand my schooling and formal training being the 'easier' way in. PS,
hehe... I'm a film school dropout as well.
 
Greggl said:
You went the school route... you're basically an example of MY point and
the opposite of what you're advising. You're pointing to a RARE exception
that happened a decade ago as career advice.
Click to expand...

First off I went the school route and felt that it was and is not the best way into the industry. Secondly I'm citing two examples of people who have made it huge, for the most part today reel and work experience is what counts and for the average working joe in the industry a degree means little to nothing, unless you want to teach. I made a career for myself without the aid of school only by being the B***h on a ton of small productions. My advice to those who are considering going to collage as a way into the industry would be to first intern at a production company for a year. But once again I concede that I could be dead wrong.
 
You went to school.

Rodgiguez did get into the film program at Texas and made 'Bedhead' there.
Smith went to Vancouver where he dropped out, but did meet Scott Mosier there.

Once again, how is school not the best way into the industry?
 
Hey Greggl,

I will take your word for it that most people go to narrative production schools to get into the 'industry'.

I find what is generally output from the 'industry' is usually very non-creative and redundant. Fordism really helped the 'industrial' process. People could now produce faster and more efficiently AND there was a need for more jobs. Does this 'industry' have much room for creativity?? HMMM.....

This is my opinion though. You know, we all have opinions... but none of us really know much of anything. To pretend otherwise is only to fool yourself.

Now, I do find your comment "there are plenty of art departments at
your local community college that will GLADY teach that" to be quite demeaning. It sounds like your subjective stance is clearly that 'industry' production is more work, more 'serious', and just 'better' in general. It is probably just as rare to find a good film program based on more independent, creative work as it is to find one based on more 'industry' based work.

Now, given I am a little insulted and defensive because I graduated from Binghamton University's experimental film department. But, amidst the fact that we are have our inherently subjective and discriminant sides, I try to stay objective when the time feels right to be.

I make my own films that have nothing to do with a large production crew or a narrative script. Yes, a camera can truly be used for anything...

As for 'jobs' or 'money', there are plenty of avenues to handle those details without needing to get into the 'big industry'. Many artists create their own new niches in the world and live sufficiently off of that. Right now I make creative shorts for a national publishing company and I make enough to live comfortably. But thats just how I make my money... a small small fragment of being a human and an artist.
 
I spent time in the experimental program at UW:Milwaukee... actually learned more there than at FSU when it comes down to it. Only two of my peers from that
program are working in the industry in any finacially meaningful way however.

What you see as 'ford-ism' is actually employability. There is a technical
underpinning of the production world that is a trade. You have to know the
jargon, the safety issues, the structure of a set and who hires whom. The
experimental program didn't teach that... it taught only the 'art' of cinema.

It did the students a disservice in that. When viewed in that light, it is
dooming a student to a weakend, totally independent film existance unless
they pick up those skills themselves, something extremely difficult to do
and frankly, the reason that a lot of pro's view average 'film students'
so poorly. They lack the technical foundations of the craft, but know a
heck of a lot about film theory. Get in the business of cinema creation.
Surround yourself in it, and its SO much easier to get your personal
projects made. Much easier than trying to hold down a 9-5 job and
do this stuff at the same time.

The point is that a true film school is expensive. You go there and expect
to recoup that investment at some point. A good program gives you the
tools to do just that. The same can be said of a film trade school, like
FullSail. You expect to be entry level employable, right out the door. The
film/art departments are better than nothing, at least you have that
competitive atmosphere, but its a shakier investment. They do tend
to be cheaper though, so its not as great of a finacial risk.

The guy that owns a camera, figuring it out on their own has so many
marks against them. Heck, right now I know at least two dozen people
that are already in industry positions that are working on side projects.
They own DVXs, FX1s, HVXs...

They have distribution contacts, technical help and all the support you
could ask for.... 'cause their 'day jobs' are in the industry as well. THATs
what you can leverage if you're trying to create art, from inside the
system... and school/school contacts are key if you weren't 'born into it'.
 
There's a difference in what, say, Kevin Smith did and someone working at a post house - that is, Kevin Smith just ran up a bunch of credit cards and made a film and got a distribution deal (not an easy thing to do!). He didn't try and get a job at a production facility doing compositing or vfx or anything like that. When he made his first feature, he had a DP that knew what he was doing as well. It's almost arguing apples versus oranges.
 
I agree.. but the indie thing isn't only happening from 'outside' the industry...
everyone in LA has an indie project in the works. Hehe, if the 'consolation prize'
is working on someone else's features every day, thats not a bad thing. Look
at it from the other point of view... who got the better deal out of going to
VFS... Kevin Smith or Scott Mosier? I'd say Scott got a great 'contact' out
of the place.

I guess I just don't understand the 'all or nothing' element that seems to
run rampant in the non-school, indie scene. They want to direct, or that
seems to be it. If their short doesn't take the world by storm, there really
isn't a plan B... or at least one rarely sees it vocalized.
 
If you're as talented as Smith or Rodriguez, whether you go to school or not is trivial. people end up with a job editing commercials or gaffing because they're not great at telling a story efficently and visually. School is a gateway, as well as credit cards. If you're not up to industry directing talent, in other words THE BEST, you're better off doing DI's and da vinci work at a production house- it's where you'll end up eventually anyway. I'm not putting those people down- it's just everyone who goes to film school thinks that it's their ticket to becoming the next kevin smith or ryan fleck.

I am an undergrad in a film conservatory, and it's depressing how bad 75% of the work is here. it's just ****ing terrible. Just search NYU Film in youtube, or Columbia Film in google video. Most of that crap is GARBAGE.

You'll be released into the wild production world anyway- and you'll still only be 22!
but the friends and concepts i've learned here, already in my first SEMESTER, have been invaluable. If you're smart, you can pick out the people who are talentless, you're able to learn what NOT to do. By studying film and film theory, you learn what MORE you can do on the big screen.

It's really incredible how many people underestimate how hard it is to make a GOOD short film, a short film someone doesn't want to fast forward through online. It's near IMPOSSIBLE. Now think about making a FEATURE FILM on your own. A GOOD one. The people who "make" it are masters of the craft; they are extroverted, leaders, and above all of immaculate talent and artistry. It's like writing a book or painting. If it's sh!t, you're screwed and you probably won't ever know it until it's too late.

People like HDkilledFilm are just like Greggl explained: "They want to direct, or that
seems to be it. If their short doesn't take the world by storm, there really
isn't a plan B... or at least one rarely sees it vocalized."
 
Last edited:
Apples versus oranges... agreed.

Greggl, I see what you're saying. Although at the school I went to there was quite a bit on the technical end of things tied in with the ideas. But the tech we dealt with was geared more towards someone like me who would do everything solo or with a very small crew. A school like the one's you speak of would be dealing with 35mm, 2/3"HDs, pro jibs, pro cranes, and a plethora of other things that one person couldn't (typically) operate or pay for alone.

Why do you call schools based more on large crews "true film schools"? This terminology has no meaning for me. I mean, they are films schools of one type... I went to a film school of another type. They both talk shop and all that, but are just geared towards a different type of film making. Also, why does it matter that I paid $20,000 compared to $70,000? Price difference usually has no correlation on program quality, outside of maybe having the lawn cut more often and a few more fancy cameras. Major factors are big-name reputations and whether the school is private or state.
 
That's true. Everyone I know here in LA does have something that they're working on as an independent project, including myself. And I would say that if Kevin Smith were to disappear, Scott Mosier wouldn't have any trouble finding employment.

School does give you a chance to look at more aspects of the filmmaking world than just directing, and that's a plus for that format. For someone that hasn't gone to school, cinematography is going to be harder to start with for a career path.

And I'll agree that whether you go to school or not, if you don't have the talent to make good films, then you'll most likely wind up working in a production house doing something other than directing / dp / whatever else you went to school for.
 
tommyinla said:
you'll most likely wind up working in a production house doing something other than directing / dp / whatever else you went to school for.
Click to expand...

great DP is just as hard as directing a good film.

Oh yeah, if anyone is familiar with The Shooting Gallery, (yes, and it's infamous downfall) you'll know how great film school networking can really work out. (hal hartley, bob gosse)
 
Last edited:
Yaa... but believe it or not... there are people who dont think life is a race. They also don't want to step on people in the search for who is "talented" so they can get to know them and rub themselves on them. They are also not freaking out over not making it 'big' or being 'unsuccessful'. There are many artists tend to see past the idea of being 'successful' by it's general conception. They see that this is a relative term that people embrace the mainstream interpretation of with white-knuckled, clenched fists. There are people who consider themselves already successful because they are enjoying exploring and making art, whether they ever make it 'big' (as defined by mainstream society) or not. There are those who would resent making it 'big' at all.

Many of these people are great artists and successful in their own right.

They exist, I swear. It's not just in fairy tales...
 
There are only a handful of 'film schools' worldwide. Most have their own deans, curriculum and a core track. Heck, at FSU, you didn't take a standard physics
class, you took Physics of Light and Color. On an interesting note, most of the
campuses with film schools, also have seperate film and or media departments
that share some classes. I consulted on a UCLA media department 35mm short
a few years back... I think only one person on the crew was from the formal
program. If you haven't done it.. tour one of the big programs at USC, NYU
or FSU... hehe, you'll see the difference in moments :)

Then there is the contact and alumni networks. The big schools have really
robust programs. There are is an FSU group out here in LA, same with
Full Sail. The UWM program doesn't have the resources, and frankly, doesn't
have the volume of students out here to make it worthwhile. I was there
there while Borchart was trying to make Northwestern the first time 'round.
It hasn't changed all that much... though there are one or two instructors there
that are truly world-class.

I'm also confused with this 'different type' of filmmaking that people are
referring to? Are we talking theatrical vs TV? Narrative vs documentary?
Network vs cable access? Really, there is only seen and unseen :)
 
tommyinla said:
That's true. Everyone I know here in LA does have something that they're working on as an independent project, including myself.
Click to expand...

Hehe... you guys would flip out if you knew some of the people that have seen
DVXuser work, especially in the early days of the camera. indie stuff with minimal
gear gets talked up on sets all the time. Next thing you know, the links to stuff
starts flying back and forth.

My camera is in the middle east right now... buddy of mine is spec-ing
out for a documentary and wanted to shoot some reference. He's a studio
producer by day, but is directing 'on the side' as thats what he really wants
to do :)
 
Michael Summers said:
great DP is just as hard as directing a good film.
Click to expand...

I agree. I was just saying that cinematography is a more technical field and you're more likely to benefit from a school than if you chose directing.
 
"If you haven't done it.. tour one of the big programs at USC, NYU
or FSU... hehe, you'll see the difference in moments :)"

You act like I would be blown away by how grand spain is compared to the ghost town I live in with a population of 3. Yes, I have seen big campuses. They have bigger cameras, more equipment, more people. I am sure they have good professors and film makers teaching as well. Sure, I could have taken any one of these options, but did not by choice. There are also plenty of smaller schools with "world-class" (societally defined term, once again) professors. The one I went to had great professors. Are they 'not as good' because they didnt make the latest hollywood guns-and-gore sell-out film? Hardly.

The "different type" I am referring to is... anything other than the hollywood narrative niche. The medium is limitless... there are always an abundance of unchartered territories to explore. A piece does not need to fit the typical genres of 'narrative' or 'documentary' at all. It is like reproducing last years cool car design versus trying to built a new one, regardless of whether it will be popular or not. You can't explore new grounds and play it safe at the same time... If you are a true artist and are on the edge of your own perception of your chosen medium... there is always a high risk of not being 'popular'. The differences in films can be defined in an infinite number of ways... One small one being "seen and unseen", by which I assume you mean broadcast on television or printed en masse for many to see.

On a side note, many famous painters where never "seen" until after they died :)






</IMG>
 
Seems as though contacts are more important than anything, whether they be through family or school. But if you manage to get contacts other ways than that (through a related industry or through simply working in the trenches), it is just as likely you'll work in "the business."
 
where people get it wrong is thinking "it's who you know, not what you know."
It's more important to know how to NOT make films than learning how to make films.
 
HDkilledFILM. said:
I am of the opinion that film school is the long way into the industry, if you think thats wrong then thats your opinion. For me an internship would be free and more worthwhile. Hell buy a camera, lighting package, editing system, sound package and start shooting for two years. I can understand that some people get into the industry through film school and thats fine. For me I know that I speak for a ton of "Real" film school grads when I say, man I wish I would of made a film, started a production company, etc.. with that money. Once again just my 2 cents not trying to piss people off.
Click to expand...

Where is this mysterious money coming from for equipment? If people had 70,000 dollars of course they'd buy equipment. But people going to school are taking out loans. The difference between school and interning is that interning involves working your way up the ladder while school has an established network of peers and alums and the expectation is that you'll use the films you make to bypass that bottom ladder.

And if you go to a goodschool it will definitely open doors. I'm at NYU and there are a ton of great opportunities that just don't happen when you're interning. For example, John Sayles spoke tonight. I saw Jodi Foster give a masters class on working with actors in January. Paul Haggis is coming in a few weeks. Yes it's expensive, but I'm learning from working professionals, and I've learned a ton this year. When you're in school you're focusing on film 24/7 seven days a week. I remember a year ago I was writing and also working fulltime. It requires a lot of willpower to balance a life with pursuing a film career. Focusing intensely on film for a few years is really valuable, and if you take advantage of the opportunities and equipment you will find work in the industry.

There are elements of filmmaking you can't get from DVXuser. The business side, how to market your film in festivals overseas and in the US, how to production manage your film, getting insurance, dealing with contracts, proper lighting safety, these are just a few things you'll get from filmschool. Could you get all of this working professionally? Of course. But to say that filmschool is a waste of time is totally subjective and should be taken with a grain of salt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top