Raising money for Indie film company... first feature!!
- Thread starter crzyns
- Start date
jls4
Veteran
Parents, Brothers and Sisters, Credit Cards, etc.
Many people on their first feature have to self fund it. Without a track record investors may be hestitant to invest in you. You can make a small feature for less than $15K US. Then take that movie and try to sell. If you sell for at least $21K you'll make most of your money back and you can use that film to go after the $200K budgets.
Make a small business plan and do some research in festivals and distribution. After you raise the money, make a small short with the equipment (3 to 7 minutes) this will teach you how to use it properly (unless you already have equipment).
You'll need $8K for Camera $4K for Audio, $1K for Cheap Lights (this is your first movie) and $2K for food to feed those who are working for free.
It'll take at least 7 to 8 - 16 hour days to complete, if not 11 to 14 - 16 hour days.
The editing with me, generally takes another 2 to 4 months:
Basic Edit, Master Edit, Color Correction/Grading, Sound Editing, Foley, Sound Mix, Titles
Hope this helps.
Many people on their first feature have to self fund it. Without a track record investors may be hestitant to invest in you. You can make a small feature for less than $15K US. Then take that movie and try to sell. If you sell for at least $21K you'll make most of your money back and you can use that film to go after the $200K budgets.
Make a small business plan and do some research in festivals and distribution. After you raise the money, make a small short with the equipment (3 to 7 minutes) this will teach you how to use it properly (unless you already have equipment).
You'll need $8K for Camera $4K for Audio, $1K for Cheap Lights (this is your first movie) and $2K for food to feed those who are working for free.
It'll take at least 7 to 8 - 16 hour days to complete, if not 11 to 14 - 16 hour days.
The editing with me, generally takes another 2 to 4 months:
Basic Edit, Master Edit, Color Correction/Grading, Sound Editing, Foley, Sound Mix, Titles
Hope this helps.
crzyns
Active member
DavidG
Active member
This is a very popular question on the forum, try searching 'funding' or something. There are many useful books on funding as well. Try Amazon, for example this book. I honestly don't feel like you would need a large budget on your first feature. You have to see how you can save money all over the place, there is not a set way of raising the cash. It could be a piggy bank with a "Movie Fund's" label slapped on the side or an account you put so much of your paycheck into every month. But either way you would want to be saving, ask friends if they will help you out for free etc, do as much of the filming as you can without a large crew etc. I think the majority of the fun on working on a feature is actually using your imagination to cut corner’s or create expensive looking scenes on a very small budget. What genre is your film? I personally wouldn’t advise diving into a Action/Thriller for your first film, unless you do have extra ordinary talent's. It depends on how serious you are with the film, do you want it to get distributed etc? If you haven’t read Adam P. Cultraros’ Adam Cultraros Blog on his film Corrado I would very much suggest you do.
Good Luck.
Good Luck.
crzyns
Active member
Thanks! Yeah, I've read the blog (it's great!!!). And no, I'm not doing an action/thriller. It kind of a parody musical. The money is just for props, costumes, equiptment and food. Free crew!!!
dougspice
Veteran
You should probably try using sites like Facebook, Fundable, IndieGoGo, etc. to reach out to your friends and family. People take you a lot more seriously when you've set a clear goal and see that others are helping you reach it. Really it's exactly the same thing as finding sponsors for a marathon. If you know a couple hundred people, and have a strong core of people who believe in you, it should not be very hard to raise $20,000... $20 to $100 at a time (also known as The Obama Way).
Of course you'd want to have a finished script and a budget for it before you did any of that. Otherwise you're just wasting peoples' time, and they'll remember that.
Of course you'd want to have a finished script and a budget for it before you did any of that. Otherwise you're just wasting peoples' time, and they'll remember that.
egyptianboxer104
Well-known member
I must disagree with Matt above.
And here is why.
Being an indie filmmaker means you need gear. If you spend the extra money on owning the gear rather than renting it, you will have that stuff ready for your next production. That will save you a lot of money when getting ready for your next shoot.
But just my opinion. Take how you like.
Also, if you sell your script to a production company, you could force them to write in the contract that you get to direct or produce etc.
And here is why.
Being an indie filmmaker means you need gear. If you spend the extra money on owning the gear rather than renting it, you will have that stuff ready for your next production. That will save you a lot of money when getting ready for your next shoot.
But just my opinion. Take how you like.
Also, if you sell your script to a production company, you could force them to write in the contract that you get to direct or produce etc.
Mattykins
Cute Member
Well, you could buy an HVX and get it set to go for 15K with everything you need. Or get a HPX500 for 20K pimped ready to go. Or you can rent a Genesis or a RED.
I still own equipment. An HV20. Serves me for what I need it for. Small things. Film projects, I rent. I would much rather rent an Aaton XTR Prod than buy it for 100,000. Or rent an F23 than buy it fully set up for 500,000.
Sure, you can buy your stuff and turn a good product. But for short shoots. Renting saves money and allows you to use the latest gear. Including renting lights, audio gear. You could buy it, and be out that money. Or save money for that production and use it to get that extra shoot day rather than use it on an HVX. Depends on what you need to do though. Either method will work for different people.
And you can't really force anything in a contract. 99.999% of the time, when you sell a script - it's gone. Vaulted. If it's made instantly, you won't have anything to do with it unless a producer personally picked up the script and thought you had skill. IE. Saw
RandomHero
Well-known member
I have to politely disagree as well. I would recomend while fundraising that you get the camera, then when you're finished you can sell it if you have to, as a "used one production" thing, or just bite the bullet, hang on to it and have it when you're ready for next time. But either way, renting on your first shoot would probably be more expensive. Just my input.
Mattykins
Cute Member
I just don't understand how renting would be more expensive? Where is your math here? Lets say - you did shoot with an HVX. Since I don't think you would buy a digital cinema camera.
HVX fully set up with adapter and whatnot, monitors, sticks will go for 20K.
Renting the same would go for. $1,575 a week
Check this out: http://www.zacuto.com/hvx200.htm
So if you plan on shooting straight for 20 weeks. Then it's cheaper to buy. For a two week shoot. You are looking at 3k. Which is less expensive that just buying the HVX. Then you need to buy lights. Audio gear. Monitoring. 35mm adapter if you want. Lenses (High quality glass = $$$). The costs add up exponentially.
The base package for an HVX kit is 700 a week. So, even that way, you need to shoot roughly 11 and a half weeks to get up to 8000 in rentals. How is that more expensive?
HVX fully set up with adapter and whatnot, monitors, sticks will go for 20K.
Renting the same would go for. $1,575 a week
Check this out: http://www.zacuto.com/hvx200.htm
So if you plan on shooting straight for 20 weeks. Then it's cheaper to buy. For a two week shoot. You are looking at 3k. Which is less expensive that just buying the HVX. Then you need to buy lights. Audio gear. Monitoring. 35mm adapter if you want. Lenses (High quality glass = $$$). The costs add up exponentially.
The base package for an HVX kit is 700 a week. So, even that way, you need to shoot roughly 11 and a half weeks to get up to 8000 in rentals. How is that more expensive?
jls4
Veteran
This is what they are saying. And you can take it from me since it's already worked for me.
My first movie: Investment $15K (Bought DVX. Movie sucked because I made mistakes, Practiced with Camera in spare time, got better, had to do reshoots [more money on rental], Sold the camera for 60% of what I purchased it for. Bought other equipment - didn't sell anything)
Second movie: Investment $25K (I owned about $12 previous) - new equipment budget adjusted for what I already owned - $37 to $40K (I bought some stuff along the way)
If you buy, you get to play around, learn, and worse come worse you rnext project will only be as bad as your last. And NO one, No one can stop you from shooting a movie, because you're not dependent on equipment. (You own it)
Also in renting, Say you rent a Ex1 (it's not a RED, but a good cam) - Approx $400 a day in Georgia, about $1.5K with weekly discounts. 3 weeks shoot = $4.5K. A fully outfitted Ex1 is probably $8500.
Say after the shoot and the movie is complted, you need to make your money back. You sell the Ex1 package (the cam only has 50 or fewer hours on it.) this allows you to rcoup 80 to 90% of your money back. So now buy purchase, make movie, sell camera you saved over $3000!
And don't forget you can RENT your equipment if you own it. At the end of my last movie I put the word out that I would rent my equipment to people I knew. I was able to raise money for post production software that I didn't think I'd be able to purchase. And even after the Rental the cam still had less than 100 hours on it! I could rent it 10 times and still have less than 500 hours which is super accpetable for a used camera and getting up to 75% of my money back on the purchase!
There's a reason why people like Donald Trump become rich by owning things and renting those things to others.
Mattykins
Cute Member
Well to each his own.
All those hollywood film makers renting Panavision's are stupid.
It's simply business. I can buy a F23 for 500,000. It rents for $3,200/Day for a full setup. It takes 156 days, with no discounts to make that money back. Good idea if you can afford the camera up front.
I can buy an HVX set up for 20,000. Everything I need and more. 13 weeks of renting to get back the investment. If you can find renters. But then you have to take insurance into account.
You have a budget of 50,000. Two week shoot lets say. Spend 20k on the entire camera setup. You have 30,000 left. Now we need to buy good audio gear, lights, grip stuff, We are now down to 20,000. 40% of your budget just went to camera gear. The same would cost maybe 3000 a week for everything you need. Maybe 4000. Lets say you rented everything you needed. Audio, lights, everything for 3000. That is 6000 for the two weeks. That is only 12% of the budget on gear. Leaving 28% more, 14,000 dollars available for actors and everything else you might need.
Maybe you can turn around and sell the 30k you spent with a return of 70%. You made back 21,000. Basically spending 9,000 for the two weeks. If you can sell it at 70%. But, here is the kicker. That money comes back after the production is done. So you won't have it when you need it the most. Sure, buying makes sense in some cases. The market is flooded with HVXs, and REDs. The rental pool is smaller. If you have an F23 or a 35. Then the market widens. I know of people who made the full investment on an F23 back within a year.
An HVX is a different story. If you need the money for the production. Rent. If you don't care about the money tied into the gear until you sell. Then buy. But that extra 28% can get you that additional day. Or that name actor you need to sell the film.
Something to think about.
All those hollywood film makers renting Panavision's are stupid.
It's simply business. I can buy a F23 for 500,000. It rents for $3,200/Day for a full setup. It takes 156 days, with no discounts to make that money back. Good idea if you can afford the camera up front.
I can buy an HVX set up for 20,000. Everything I need and more. 13 weeks of renting to get back the investment. If you can find renters. But then you have to take insurance into account.
You have a budget of 50,000. Two week shoot lets say. Spend 20k on the entire camera setup. You have 30,000 left. Now we need to buy good audio gear, lights, grip stuff, We are now down to 20,000. 40% of your budget just went to camera gear. The same would cost maybe 3000 a week for everything you need. Maybe 4000. Lets say you rented everything you needed. Audio, lights, everything for 3000. That is 6000 for the two weeks. That is only 12% of the budget on gear. Leaving 28% more, 14,000 dollars available for actors and everything else you might need.
Maybe you can turn around and sell the 30k you spent with a return of 70%. You made back 21,000. Basically spending 9,000 for the two weeks. If you can sell it at 70%. But, here is the kicker. That money comes back after the production is done. So you won't have it when you need it the most. Sure, buying makes sense in some cases. The market is flooded with HVXs, and REDs. The rental pool is smaller. If you have an F23 or a 35. Then the market widens. I know of people who made the full investment on an F23 back within a year.
An HVX is a different story. If you need the money for the production. Rent. If you don't care about the money tied into the gear until you sell. Then buy. But that extra 28% can get you that additional day. Or that name actor you need to sell the film.
Something to think about.
Rubbersquare
Well-known member
if only the camera were the only expense in making a film. 
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
As far as I can tell, most people here are not 'in the business', or if they are, they do not command the funding that 'all those hollywood film makers', for almost any value of that term, have.
So, here's the deal with the Panavision... that is not a camera that you problable personally will operate. So in addition to the rental on the Panavision... you'll also be paying a DP, Camera Operator, Focus guy, and a couple of others to use that equipment...
What this means, is you are in a different budgetary world than the rest of us...
One of the issues that I have with rent/hiring a DP is that I can not afford to rent the equipement nor hire the DP that I think would do what I think ought to be done... so, yeah, I'll take my own crappy efforts over some joker who may have a bit of experience on certain equipment, but a blind person could light a scene better, and the same blind person could frame the shot better...
On the other hand, had I a film that someone could see themselves puting in 100K, 1M, whatever(*)... I would think about hiring a DP, spending months perhaps to find the person who has the price and the capabilities I would look for in a DP, etc... Don't have that kind of budget now... so it is buy equipment, and learn to use it effectively... and oddly, then be able to see through the snow blizzard when someone shows up with 'their' Demo Reel... well not 'their' demo real but they WERE third assistent caterer for the snack table for the shoot...
*As a note depending on the tax situation, for a 'real' production company to actually buy equipment puts the expense in a Capital Equpment bin, and only so much of that expense can be taken out in a given year. Whereas a rental expense is fully deductable in the year the expense was taken. This is the usual reasoning for almost any consideration for 'buy' vs. 'rent' in any current business. For example, sales people will lease a car, because the lease expense is fully deductable, whereas the purchase price of the car is not. The 'added' benefit is the ability to 'switch' sooner to a newer car more frequently is sort of secondary...
With that in minde, an investor in a film is not investing in Capital Equipment for the production company, but in the film. Hence many production companies have assets like "scripts", or "rights to stories", but not equipment, unless of course, they are a rental house as well... which of course is what some of the big studios do with their lots and stages...
Last edited:
dougspice
Veteran
You can absolutely find very talented DPs willing to do feature work for very little money. I have just recently convinced a friend not to try to shoot the movie himself, even though he is a competent shooter. This is a film with a $30,000 budget.
If you're directing, and DPing, the quality of the film suffers, in all aspects – and if this is your first film I wouldn't even consider it! If you're doing a film at this budget level you already have enough on your mind. Why would you want to clutter it up with even more stress, time demands, and things to keep track of?
If you're directing, and DPing, the quality of the film suffers, in all aspects – and if this is your first film I wouldn't even consider it! If you're doing a film at this budget level you already have enough on your mind. Why would you want to clutter it up with even more stress, time demands, and things to keep track of?
Otis Grapsas
Carbonite Member
Hi crzyns,
When do you plan to begin shooting?
When do you plan to begin shooting?
egyptianboxer104
Well-known member
working on music this early? most people won't even think about music until the picture is locked in post...
unless of course, this is a musical.
And as for renting... If i only were planning to use the equipment for one production, then yes, I would rent. However, I plan on holding onto it, and using it for many more productions ahead. This would make renting not worth it.
Thus, I have the camera always ready, and don't have to wait on a rental company or worry about different aspects in that sense.
unless of course, this is a musical.
And as for renting... If i only were planning to use the equipment for one production, then yes, I would rent. However, I plan on holding onto it, and using it for many more productions ahead. This would make renting not worth it.
Thus, I have the camera always ready, and don't have to wait on a rental company or worry about different aspects in that sense.