48 Hour Film Festival - Tips?
- Thread starter Sunk99
- Start date
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
I've only done informal 48-hour films at Burning Man... but I think the principles are the same... know your equipment, and get every one's commitment to the project 'guaranteed' before hand, especially talent...
While according to the rules you can't film material before the event, you can 'practice' with the group, and see how everything works out. If you end up fighting with each other on a practice weekend... rough seas ahead for the Fest weekend...
The other aspect is how much to do... I think planing something that can be shot in a time frame of 10:00 AM to 4
M, unless night scenes are 'absolutely' required is what you should aim for. Basically go for the jugular of the story... get the quality 'clean', and if any pickups are required shoot 8-10 AM Sunday, with almost everything else locked... because if you are still editing at 2 hours before the drop off deadline... you screwed... Remember that once a film is edited, there's rendering to DVD, or similar media.
homestar_kevin
Well-known member
Have fun, sleep in shifts, and keep going.
The only 48 I've ever done we used stop motion and green screens to make a hybrid animation, crazy **** to do for a 48 but really really rewarding.
Know your equipment, don't fight with each other and just roll with it.
The only 48 I've ever done we used stop motion and green screens to make a hybrid animation, crazy **** to do for a 48 but really really rewarding.
Know your equipment, don't fight with each other and just roll with it.
ErikTande
Well-known member
Yep, keep things positive at all time. Little or no sleep can make people a little on edge.
1. Get a sound guy. I've done quite a few 24 and 48 hour fests, and most of the films you'll see at the screening are barely understandable because the audio is so bad. Get a boom operator and a decent mic.
2. Don't use the maximum runtime. The minimum is 4 minutes, don't make your film any longer than that. Keep it tight and the plot/action moving.
3. LIGHT YOUR SCENES I can't stress this enough. 1 or 2 cheap soft boxes can make a world of difference.
Oh, and give yourself plenty of render time.
Good luck and have fun!
Sunk99
Well-known member
Thanks for the comments so far - good points.
Any comments on speed editing? For example do you shoot an hour and send those disks off for editing?
I know you can't write a script in advance - can you outline a story idea in advance? (Want to play fair)
I know you are allowed to scout locations, but if you don't have a story idea, I don't see how that is possible.
Any comments on speed editing? For example do you shoot an hour and send those disks off for editing?
I know you can't write a script in advance - can you outline a story idea in advance? (Want to play fair)
I know you are allowed to scout locations, but if you don't have a story idea, I don't see how that is possible.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
You should always have 'story ideas' popping into your head all the time... A location may be more appropriate for certain stories, or genres... etc. but just sit in a Starbucks for an hour and 'imagine' what each person, couple, group is 'doing' in terms of a story...
There's also the issue of genre, which is part of the 'assignment', so you need to have ideas that translate well from one to another... so one could have
Story: Boy Meets Girl (or Boy Meets Boy, Girl Meets Girl, we live in a modern age...).
RomCom -- Boy/girl through a series of stupid complications looses, but then gains girl/boy
Melodrama -- B/G break up in tortured relationship distress.
Tragedy -- B/G break up and B takes out a McDonald's worth of customers.
Horror -- B/G turns out to be a serial craigslist based killer...
Porn... wait I don't think that's allowed... and who thinks about story when there's sex to be watched anyway...
and so on...
That being said, I think 'comedy' tends to be more popular with viewers... but often is only comedic to the makers...
OK, I've done about half a dozen 48 hour projects. Never got anywhere though, so maybe if you do the exact opposite of what I'm suggesting, that will be better for you!
Anyways, some quick thoughts... Feel free to ask about anything or send me a message...
* Make sure you have reliable people. Actors, in particular, are pains in the butt. We've had actors dropping out an hour before shooting starts, etc.
* Food is going to be one of your main costs.
* Don't make rookie mistakes like forgetting to include a required element, not getting copyright clearance for music, or forgetting to have a form signed. Might even be worth nominating a person whose sole job is to make sure that all boxes are ticked.
* Anything you can do beforehand, do beforehand. This includes filling out paperwork, prepping all your gear, and rendering out the required intro. And it definitely includes testing your complete process, from shoot, to edit, to render.
For instance, one thing that stuffed us up last time: I thought it would be easier to dynamic link from Premiere to After Effects, then render out from Premiere in one go. In hindsight, I strongly suspect it would have been faster to do three separate renders. We also hadn't properly tested how to collate edits into the one project when you've got a number of editors working on different machines.
* Stay in the same location, or in locations very close to each other. We've made this mistake many times, trying to shoot in a bunch of locations, believing we can do it quickly, and it's always caused problems. Time in transporting equipment and setting up, people getting lost en route, parking, lighting conditions changing...
But, if possible, try not to make your main location a house (every film looks like it was shot in a house). If you can arrange sleeping at that location, that's definitely helpful as well (a bunch of mattresses or air beds).
* In terms of casting... I don't know. Your guess is as good as mine.
There are two main methods. Either you have a number of actors on standby, with the understanding that you might or might not use them, they might have small or big roles, and you notify them on Saturday morning. Or you cast a few people, and write the script specifically for them, making sure everyone gets a role. There are pros and cons to both.
In terms of having a range of ages/genders/nationalities/types to suit any possible script... You can drive yourself crazy thinking about this stuff. I think you should have at least two older actors, one of each gender, and two younger actors, one of each gender. Other than that, don't worry about it too much. (Note: part of what will make most teams' films look studentish is that all the actors are teens or 20somethings.)
I've sometimes done open casting calls, looking for people. But then, I've got people who weren't reliable. Plus, it's very hard for there to be any sort of audition process. All you've really got to go on are your impressions of them and their resume. Much easier to work with people you know and can trust.
Note: some teams have actors who are happy to be involved with the process, and don't mind sitting around all day to speak a line. I've never been that lucky. Always had to try to organise time so that, if you only have a small part, you can come at a specific time to play that part, and then can go. But this sort of thing of course complicates your scheduling... (have a good first AD).
* In terms of scheduling...
Your basic plan should be to write Friday night, shoot Saturday, have it edited by early Sunday, reserve Sunday for post-production and, if necessary, reshoots or pick-ups.
We've sometimes tried to start shooting fairly early. Meaning 6am on Saturday (script written by 4am). But there's a bunch of problems. For instance: (1) shops in our area don't open till 10am on Saturday. So, if you need to buy props or rent costumes, you can't; (2) public transport in the morning is non-existent here; (3) actors might need to be given at least two hours notice. Some people might be travelling a long way to get to you, they might need to go through their wardrobes looking for costumes, they need to get themselves ready and look at the script, etc. But if your system is to have a lot of actors on standby, not knowing whether they're going to be in the film, then you're inconveniencing a bunch of people by making them stay up all night, on edge, waiting to hear from you.
* In terms of writing...
Firstly, writing is the main thing that will make or break you. Some teams are pretty professional -- the winner of Sydney last year had celebrity actors and access to television studios! But don't let this sort of thing faze you. If you can use your DSLR properly, if you're recording good sound, then your raw material isn't going to be so much different from theirs... They're not about to throw hundreds or thousands of dollars at production value any more than you are. The key differences are writing and acting.
Our current process involves having four writers working at the same time on different scripts, pausing every hour to discuss and compare, with convergent evolution of scripts. It's inspired by Kurosawa's method. The main difference from previous processes is that we seem to be able to reliably churn out decent scripts in a few hours this way. But, you know, it really depends on the particular people and personalities involved...
Main writing problem we've had -- making the ideas clear. Having a firm spine to the story.
The majority of teams will have some sort of day/night continuity problem, or will shoot mostly on Saturday night. If you can write a script to get around continuity problems, you're already doing well.
Erik's advice about sticking to minimum length is gold. Much, much better to have a tight four minutes than a crappy 7 minutes. That said, a tight 7 minutes might well be better than a tight 4 minutes... The films that win aren't the shortest ones.
Yes, you can have ideas beforehand. It's sort of against the spirit of the rules, but what can anybody do about it in practice? Even if you didn't think specifically about the competition, you would bring story ideas you've dreamt up through all the years of your life to the table. So, I've got a feeling that pretty much everyone at least thinks, "OK, if I get Western, what sort of story would I tell?"
Some teams do this sort of thing in a more... formal way than others. Previous winners I know for a fact have outright cheated and written a number of scripts beforehand, to cope with any potentiality. If you look at the categories carefully, you'll find that you can reduce all the possibilities of genre down to 3-5. A story could be a period/romance/comedy at the same time, or horror/thriller/sci-fi at the same time.
* In terms of shooting...
If you shoot fewer rather than more takes/angles, your editor will thank you, and you'll thank your editor -- sorting through footage is one of the most time-consuming things to do... If you can do a one-shot scene, that's also useful...
Documentary-style shooting is best, if you can build a story around it. You know -- handheld, less worry about lighting, etc. It'll save you a heap of time.
Most teams will shoot very quick and nasty, often full of camera problems (overexposed, boom shadow, etc), but they'll get a lot of shots, and this will add to the production value and make the story feel more expansive. We've tended to the opposite -- spent far too long obsessing about lighting in a particular shot, when no one really gives a crap. Look at the winners -- do you think they're amazingly well shot?
Having multiple camera units -- we've rarely successfully done this. The fact that you probably have only a few actors, and they need to be in every scene, is a big limiter. But if you're really ambitious, see if you can arrange multiple camera units across different countries, to get footage that will make you stand out.
* In terms of editing, the most organised teams edit as they shoot. If, alternatively, it's going to be an edit early Sunday morning/late Saturday night, for God's sake make sure your editor has been sleeping all day and won't drop the ball on you and conk out and start drooling on the keyboard.
Dedicated data wrangler? If you can, do get someone for it.
Also, don't skimp on budgeting time for a full sound edit and sound mix (meaning, preferably, by someone who actually has a degree in sound, someone good -- it'll make a hell of a difference). And don't skimp on budgeting time for a colour grade.
If anyone says "VFX", your first instinct should be to punch them. Most of the winning films have limited VFX, or use techniques that you don't need to go to After Effects or Maya for. If you need effects, definitely try to get your effects in camera.
Anyways, some quick thoughts... Feel free to ask about anything or send me a message...
* Make sure you have reliable people. Actors, in particular, are pains in the butt. We've had actors dropping out an hour before shooting starts, etc.
* Food is going to be one of your main costs.
* Don't make rookie mistakes like forgetting to include a required element, not getting copyright clearance for music, or forgetting to have a form signed. Might even be worth nominating a person whose sole job is to make sure that all boxes are ticked.
* Anything you can do beforehand, do beforehand. This includes filling out paperwork, prepping all your gear, and rendering out the required intro. And it definitely includes testing your complete process, from shoot, to edit, to render.
For instance, one thing that stuffed us up last time: I thought it would be easier to dynamic link from Premiere to After Effects, then render out from Premiere in one go. In hindsight, I strongly suspect it would have been faster to do three separate renders. We also hadn't properly tested how to collate edits into the one project when you've got a number of editors working on different machines.
* Stay in the same location, or in locations very close to each other. We've made this mistake many times, trying to shoot in a bunch of locations, believing we can do it quickly, and it's always caused problems. Time in transporting equipment and setting up, people getting lost en route, parking, lighting conditions changing...
But, if possible, try not to make your main location a house (every film looks like it was shot in a house). If you can arrange sleeping at that location, that's definitely helpful as well (a bunch of mattresses or air beds).
* In terms of casting... I don't know. Your guess is as good as mine.
There are two main methods. Either you have a number of actors on standby, with the understanding that you might or might not use them, they might have small or big roles, and you notify them on Saturday morning. Or you cast a few people, and write the script specifically for them, making sure everyone gets a role. There are pros and cons to both.
In terms of having a range of ages/genders/nationalities/types to suit any possible script... You can drive yourself crazy thinking about this stuff. I think you should have at least two older actors, one of each gender, and two younger actors, one of each gender. Other than that, don't worry about it too much. (Note: part of what will make most teams' films look studentish is that all the actors are teens or 20somethings.)
I've sometimes done open casting calls, looking for people. But then, I've got people who weren't reliable. Plus, it's very hard for there to be any sort of audition process. All you've really got to go on are your impressions of them and their resume. Much easier to work with people you know and can trust.
Note: some teams have actors who are happy to be involved with the process, and don't mind sitting around all day to speak a line. I've never been that lucky. Always had to try to organise time so that, if you only have a small part, you can come at a specific time to play that part, and then can go. But this sort of thing of course complicates your scheduling... (have a good first AD).
* In terms of scheduling...
Your basic plan should be to write Friday night, shoot Saturday, have it edited by early Sunday, reserve Sunday for post-production and, if necessary, reshoots or pick-ups.
We've sometimes tried to start shooting fairly early. Meaning 6am on Saturday (script written by 4am). But there's a bunch of problems. For instance: (1) shops in our area don't open till 10am on Saturday. So, if you need to buy props or rent costumes, you can't; (2) public transport in the morning is non-existent here; (3) actors might need to be given at least two hours notice. Some people might be travelling a long way to get to you, they might need to go through their wardrobes looking for costumes, they need to get themselves ready and look at the script, etc. But if your system is to have a lot of actors on standby, not knowing whether they're going to be in the film, then you're inconveniencing a bunch of people by making them stay up all night, on edge, waiting to hear from you.
* In terms of writing...
Firstly, writing is the main thing that will make or break you. Some teams are pretty professional -- the winner of Sydney last year had celebrity actors and access to television studios! But don't let this sort of thing faze you. If you can use your DSLR properly, if you're recording good sound, then your raw material isn't going to be so much different from theirs... They're not about to throw hundreds or thousands of dollars at production value any more than you are. The key differences are writing and acting.
Our current process involves having four writers working at the same time on different scripts, pausing every hour to discuss and compare, with convergent evolution of scripts. It's inspired by Kurosawa's method. The main difference from previous processes is that we seem to be able to reliably churn out decent scripts in a few hours this way. But, you know, it really depends on the particular people and personalities involved...
Main writing problem we've had -- making the ideas clear. Having a firm spine to the story.
The majority of teams will have some sort of day/night continuity problem, or will shoot mostly on Saturday night. If you can write a script to get around continuity problems, you're already doing well.
Erik's advice about sticking to minimum length is gold. Much, much better to have a tight four minutes than a crappy 7 minutes. That said, a tight 7 minutes might well be better than a tight 4 minutes... The films that win aren't the shortest ones.
Yes, you can have ideas beforehand. It's sort of against the spirit of the rules, but what can anybody do about it in practice? Even if you didn't think specifically about the competition, you would bring story ideas you've dreamt up through all the years of your life to the table. So, I've got a feeling that pretty much everyone at least thinks, "OK, if I get Western, what sort of story would I tell?"
Some teams do this sort of thing in a more... formal way than others. Previous winners I know for a fact have outright cheated and written a number of scripts beforehand, to cope with any potentiality. If you look at the categories carefully, you'll find that you can reduce all the possibilities of genre down to 3-5. A story could be a period/romance/comedy at the same time, or horror/thriller/sci-fi at the same time.
* In terms of shooting...
If you shoot fewer rather than more takes/angles, your editor will thank you, and you'll thank your editor -- sorting through footage is one of the most time-consuming things to do... If you can do a one-shot scene, that's also useful...
Documentary-style shooting is best, if you can build a story around it. You know -- handheld, less worry about lighting, etc. It'll save you a heap of time.
Most teams will shoot very quick and nasty, often full of camera problems (overexposed, boom shadow, etc), but they'll get a lot of shots, and this will add to the production value and make the story feel more expansive. We've tended to the opposite -- spent far too long obsessing about lighting in a particular shot, when no one really gives a crap. Look at the winners -- do you think they're amazingly well shot?
Having multiple camera units -- we've rarely successfully done this. The fact that you probably have only a few actors, and they need to be in every scene, is a big limiter. But if you're really ambitious, see if you can arrange multiple camera units across different countries, to get footage that will make you stand out.
* In terms of editing, the most organised teams edit as they shoot. If, alternatively, it's going to be an edit early Sunday morning/late Saturday night, for God's sake make sure your editor has been sleeping all day and won't drop the ball on you and conk out and start drooling on the keyboard.
Dedicated data wrangler? If you can, do get someone for it.
Also, don't skimp on budgeting time for a full sound edit and sound mix (meaning, preferably, by someone who actually has a degree in sound, someone good -- it'll make a hell of a difference). And don't skimp on budgeting time for a colour grade.
If anyone says "VFX", your first instinct should be to punch them. Most of the winning films have limited VFX, or use techniques that you don't need to go to After Effects or Maya for. If you need effects, definitely try to get your effects in camera.
Sunk99
Well-known member
Good idea on the premise being able to span genre.
No porn? Darn!
Agree on the comedy. Thanks.
Sunk99
Well-known member
Your info should be a 48 hour sticky.
HOLY CRAP! I feel like I struck gold! Thank you so, so much for all the tips. It's evident you spent a lot of time compiling these.
It's not relevant you haven't won. You had fun right, kind-a? I'm in it for entertainment. No dreams of Hollywood here. I'm an old buzzard about to retire.
I was surprised that full scripts were written. I would have thought you create a basic outline, a few words from the director and writer to the actors on dialouge and ad-lib from there.
Guess that relies heavy on the actor talent. I was going to use our local community theater - all ages and many quite talented. Commitment is the tough thing I understand.
Thanks for the warning on the multi-units. I was going that path to expedite. More is not always better. I'm old enough to let somebody else learn via the school of hard knocks.
I can't think of anything else to ask at the time, but I will take you up on your offer. I'll probably ask for a response here as I'm sure others will benefit from your experience.
Again, I really appreciate the help.
Tim McCarty
Tim, thanks for your message. But I think everything I've written could have attached to it "It just depends" or "But there's another way of doing this". There really are a lot of variables, and I have no illusions that ours is in any sense the best way to go about things.
Multi camera units going off to different locations -- I'm sure you could get away with it! It's not so much that we've had problems doing this, but that the scripts, and our particular circumstances, haven't lent themselves to multi-units being useful. I think by all means prepare to shoot with multiple crews, but don't feel you have to write a script to accomodate this.
Having multiple cameras on a single scene I'm sure would be useful and save a chunk of time; it's just we haven't in the past had the luxury of having two matching cameras. Limitations on numbers of cameras are also more relaxed this year, so that will make things easier...
Scripts vs improv -- maybe improv is better. It's never really occurred to us to try, to be honest! If you have experience with improv, I'm sure you could make it work. And, of course, what people unexpectedly bring to the film is part of the joy of it. There are bits and pieces we've improvised, but they've more been of a montage nature -- montage of person getting dressed, montage of trying and failing to catch cricket balls, etc. And it depends also on the nature of the film -- I've seen plenty of good 48-hour films that are mainly visual and less talky.
Also raises the question of storyboard. We tried once or twice to do this, but it was a fairly useless task. However, we've always done some sort of previsualisation, even if it's the director sitting for an hour or two just imagining the shots and imagining the locations.
One thing I do think makes a big difference is finding a single interesting location (somewhere with character -- maybe an old church, a big warehouse, a desert, etc), and camping out there, and shooting and editing the bulk of it there. At the end of the day I guess I still think, for most scripts, a single interesting location shot carefully and well, with some attention paid to set, or even a single room, is better than a dozen locations shot less carefully.
Whether it's fun, I don't know. I've got a friend who finds them creatively frustrating and stifling, because of the time limitations; and there's often been arguments or bad blood on set, for one reason or another. And if you get a problem actor, it's too late to fire them. For me personally, it's a sort of an adrenaline-junkie experience; makes me feel alive; and being on a set, making a film, facing creative and logical problems, is exactly the sort of thing I like. It's satisfying to have created this thing that didn't exist two days ago, and the party and discussion afterwards is as good as any wrap party. But then there's two weeks of nail-biting waiting for results, and the disappointment if you haven't won anything, and bitching about the people who do win. But, yep, we'll be entering again this year.
Multi camera units going off to different locations -- I'm sure you could get away with it! It's not so much that we've had problems doing this, but that the scripts, and our particular circumstances, haven't lent themselves to multi-units being useful. I think by all means prepare to shoot with multiple crews, but don't feel you have to write a script to accomodate this.
Having multiple cameras on a single scene I'm sure would be useful and save a chunk of time; it's just we haven't in the past had the luxury of having two matching cameras. Limitations on numbers of cameras are also more relaxed this year, so that will make things easier...
Scripts vs improv -- maybe improv is better. It's never really occurred to us to try, to be honest! If you have experience with improv, I'm sure you could make it work. And, of course, what people unexpectedly bring to the film is part of the joy of it. There are bits and pieces we've improvised, but they've more been of a montage nature -- montage of person getting dressed, montage of trying and failing to catch cricket balls, etc. And it depends also on the nature of the film -- I've seen plenty of good 48-hour films that are mainly visual and less talky.
Also raises the question of storyboard. We tried once or twice to do this, but it was a fairly useless task. However, we've always done some sort of previsualisation, even if it's the director sitting for an hour or two just imagining the shots and imagining the locations.
One thing I do think makes a big difference is finding a single interesting location (somewhere with character -- maybe an old church, a big warehouse, a desert, etc), and camping out there, and shooting and editing the bulk of it there. At the end of the day I guess I still think, for most scripts, a single interesting location shot carefully and well, with some attention paid to set, or even a single room, is better than a dozen locations shot less carefully.
Whether it's fun, I don't know. I've got a friend who finds them creatively frustrating and stifling, because of the time limitations; and there's often been arguments or bad blood on set, for one reason or another. And if you get a problem actor, it's too late to fire them. For me personally, it's a sort of an adrenaline-junkie experience; makes me feel alive; and being on a set, making a film, facing creative and logical problems, is exactly the sort of thing I like. It's satisfying to have created this thing that didn't exist two days ago, and the party and discussion afterwards is as good as any wrap party. But then there's two weeks of nail-biting waiting for results, and the disappointment if you haven't won anything, and bitching about the people who do win. But, yep, we'll be entering again this year.