Do you draw a line with the use of stock footage?

[Brian_Rice]

Most us at one time or another will use stock footage for basic establishing shots. Especially for things taking place in a large, busy city.

But where do you draw the line? For instance if you want your character to be taking off in a plane and you can find stock footage (or a 3D render) of that POV shot, will you use it or will you demand from yourself and your team to create that shot?

Personally I'll use as much stock footage as is necessary to tell a story effectively and to get the thing finished within a decent timeframe.

Where do people stand on this?

 

[BLahey]

I work in the realm of infomercials, and there is no line. Narratives on the other hand, I'm sure theres a city shot here and there

 

[Saharanturtle]

Don't mind me, just subscribing to see what others will say


Edit


I think you said it pretty well yourself, if it will help "transport" your audience to the location of the film, whether its Egypt, Tokyo, Paris or where ever, than definitely use it

 

[Hawk Teflon]

I really don't use it simply because I can't afford it.

Although, I would like to see if someone could make an entire short out of nothing BUT iStock footage. Granted, to cut costs, it would have a giant "iStockphoto" with a big X through the entire thing.

 

[Butcher]

Ever watch Tom Lowe's stuff on Timescapes.org? I've seen some of his shots pop up in a couple of movies - you can buy them from GettyImages.com

Hawk - I think there have been a couple experimental films made with "found footage" (old, free archive stuff). I imagine a VO driven short could be made with stock footage.

As for me - if stock footage works and it's cheaper than shooting, I'd use it. If not, shoot it.