filmman launches GOLD DIGGERS on KickStarter.com

[filmman]

taormina wrote: You can scan it in at any frame size you want, but it will cost you all kinds of money. Stick with plain old 1080 HD

Holy Toledo, I talked to a couple of labs! it's going to cost a fortune, and things are changing so fast that they asked me what are you outtputing to? DVD Blu-ray Broadcast or 35mm release? It's really complicated!

But you're right, the basic way for DVD and Blu-ray is 1080 HD (1920x1080 Flat).

 

[filmman]

there is some essential knowledge missing regarding the appropriate formats for various venues

there's iTunes, Broadcast, 35mm releasing, Standard DVD, Blu-ray, Internet streaming, DOD (Download on Demand), VOD (Video on Demand), iPod, iPhone -- what are the appropriate formats?

which cameras to shoot with?

which computer software to edit with?

which computers to buy?

which digital formats to output to? HDCAM, HDCAM SR, DV, DVCAM, D5?

A lot of info when you pick up a digital camera and shoot....

 

[Gary Huff]

Not really...once you have a 1080 master, it's a simple matter to create deliverables from that.

 

[taormina]

there is some essential knowledge missing regarding the appropriate formats for various venues

there's iTunes, Broadcast, 35mm releasing, Standard DVD, Blu-ray, Internet streaming, DOD (Download on Demand), VOD (Video on Demand), iPod, iPhone -- what are the appropriate formats?

which cameras to shoot with?

which computer software to edit with?

which computers to buy?

which digital formats to output to? HDCAM, HDCAM SR, DV, DVCAM, D5?

A lot of info when you pick up a digital camera and shoot....

You don't need to worry about most of what you wrote. Like the poster above said, once you have a 1080 master, all the downconversions will happen from there - many of them directly between the distributor and the post house (at your expense, of course).

As for a theatrical release, I'd say get it out of your head. Not happening without any serious name cast, Vic. That's just the way it is. I've got all kinds of cast and Lionsgate still drags their feet on even the smallest release. You just have to dispense with the notion of a theatrical release.


As to Camera - Use the one that delivers an acceptable resolution for the output medium you have in mind. That's it. That's all you need. Many cameras far exceed your requirements, and that's okay. Better more than less. You also really ought to consider shooting sync sound as it will save you tons of money in the long run and also will up the production quality of the picture. You'll need your actors for literally half the time.

Ad to the rest - It's simply not that important. Infrastructure and workflow goes with the camera. You aren't really breaking any new ground here. Don't overthink it.

 

[Gary Huff]

As for a theatrical release, I'd say get it out of your head. Not happening without any serious name cast, Vic. That's just the way it is. I've got all kinds of cast and Lionsgate still drags their feet on even the smallest release. You just have to dispense with the notion of a theatrical release.

This needs to be drilled into everyone's head. Your chances of going theatrical are almost like winning the lottery. I laugh at those questions about cameras like, "will it look good when transferred to film?" Odds are very good that you'll NEVER have to do this, even if you get into a festival. Most festivals now are fully digital anyway.

 

[filmman]

taormina wrote: many of them directly between the distributor and the post house (at your expense, of course).

When I distribute my movies, the territorial buyer pays all such expenses. Otherwise, the master could be twice the amount of the territorial rights. The buyer always pays for whatever format the buyer orders. He may ask for a duplicate negative of a 35mm movie print. If it costs me $2,500, that's what I charge.

As for a theatrical release, I'd say get it out of your head.

I know, that's how the US market is (with few -- I agree -- very few exceptions); however, there are a few foreign buyers that request 35mm prints, and if the distributor has them they will pay for them, otherwise they don't pay the big bucks for their territory (and the distributor won't tell you that) because then they're not buying "All Rights", just "Video Rights." Big difference in price. Nobody will tell you that, especially as few indie filmmakers have been distributors.

You also really ought to consider shooting sync sound as it will save you tons of money in the long run and also will up the production quality of the picture.

To tell you the truth I made a mistake with "Butterflies", I shouldn't have shot MOS, because there was a lot of dialogue. It ended up costing me one year in synching up the dialogue and because I was working alone and worrying about framing the whole time, there was a lot of dialogue that is different between the sound take and the picture take. I did the best with it.

However, with movies with less dialogue, such as dance movies (which I love to make,) MOS is the best way to go. It's also how my movie hero Federico Fellini liked to shoot. When the actors asked, "what shall I say," he said, "count -- one, two, three." The visuals were the most important element for Fellini. Anyways, by the time he got to the dubbing, he had changed his mind about what they should say also. He loved to create the dialogue and the narration (sometimes the story itself) after he'd finished shooting. Therefore, even the Italian versions of his movies were dubbed.

Actually, I have a blimp for my Arri 2c and I could always rent or buy a BL, so I probably won't be shooting MOS on most of my projects henceforth.

subtleinspiration wrote: I laugh at those questions about cameras like, "will it look good when transferred to film?" Odds are very good that you'll NEVER have to do this, even if you get into a festival. Most festivals now are fully digital anyway

Your chances of being accepted by major festivals are enhanced if the movie was shot in 35mm and you can provide a 35mm print for screening.

It's true, however, for most of the smaller festivals, it's cheaper to screen DVDs. They select a handful of features from the thousands of submissions of digital movies. It's hardly an ideal situation for the indie filmmaker.

 

[taormina]

Your chances of being accepted by major festivals are enhanced if the movie was shot in 35mm and you can provide a 35mm print for screening.

It's true, however, for most of the smaller festivals, it's cheaper to screen DVDs. They select a handful of features from the thousands of submissions of digital movies. It's hardly an ideal situation for the indie filmmaker.

What's your definition of enhanced? I submitted a short I shot on 35mm to a festival, and it didn't get in anywhere. Repeat after me: Capture medium doesn't guarantee success!

Shooting on 35mm doesn't make your project commercially viable any more than shooting on RED does. No one cares.

I sat at AFM for 7 days this year and did over $1.3M in presales on my next film - sold it to two studios, and took probably 50 meetings. Not once did anyone ask what the film was going to be shot on.

Capture medium is an artistic consideration. It was when Lynch shot Inland Empire using cheap PD150 camcorders. It was when Soderbergh shot Che on RED. It was when Nolan shot portions of Batman on IMAX. It is simply a tool!

I shot Corrado on HVX200s because that's what I had available. If I would have had better cameras, I would have used them. But honestly, even though I had the distinction (Notoriety?) of having one of the first feature films in the country that got conventional distribution shot on the prosumer HVX, no one cared. The capture medium was irrelevant to those that bought it. It met a certain technical standard that could've been achieved shooting Super 16, 35, RED, 7D, cell phone, whatever, and that was enough for the distributors.

 

[Gary Huff]

It's true, however, for most of the smaller festivals, it's cheaper to screen DVDs. They select a handful of features from the thousands of submissions of digital movies. It's hardly an ideal situation for the indie filmmaker.

And shooting on 35mm won't make a bean's worth of difference.

But if you want to shoot on it, and can afford to, then who cares? So far, your Kickstarter page still hasn't garnered anything, so you need to focus on that.

 

[Azmyth]

I concur with this. ^^

I think its silly to get so bent out of shape about shooting in 35mm. As has been noted, noone who will be watching your film cares what medium it was shot on, as long as it looks "good" and has a good story to tell. If we all had unlimited resources we'd all be shooting on 35mm film, no question.. because nothing beats it (yet). It just seems like your still making excuses to why you MUST shoot on 35mm, instead of just wanting to do so because you "like" it. As stated above, shooting on 35mm isn't going to enhance anything if you have a terrible story, unbelievable characters, or something that noone wants to watch. And as someone else mentioned a theatrical release is nigh near impossible anyway without "stars" in your film. The best you could hope for is a local theatrical showing, and expect DVD or possible Blu ray release.

If you want to shoot on film, do it and stop explaining to everyone "why" its better.. because none of that matters. Its the best.. we all know that. But, not for most of the reasons you've mentioned. It will not help you get into film festivals, and it will not help you get into theaters, or get distribution. Name actors, Great storytelling, Great camerawork.. however.. will. And you can get those things with ANY camera on ANY medium.

I could go shoot a feature right now on my iphone, and you could shoot a feature on 35mm film.

My film has Denzel Washington, Bruce Willis, Will Smith, Meryl Streep in it. Yours has indie actors noone has ever heard of. Which one do you think is going to get distribution first?

the camera is just a tool, and the medium you shoot on is just the type of paper your drawing on. Pictures can look great on any type of paper, if your a good artist.

 

[Nathyn]

And I have to co-sign on this. 1080/24p is the way to go. Even 720p can get you a deal. But Vic is right about one thing, films do go to the big screen in other countries that will never make it to a screen here. But if you have some names, no one cares, particularly if you're doing a genre piece. In fact I still have a chance to go with York on my last film, I'm just trying to think is it worth it. I will have to do an M&E track and that will cost money. I know I won't get anything but my mug on a few TV screens in some places. That's worth something, I just need to know what. And guess what, that movie was shot on the DVX, but quality distributors who pay money want 720p at least. 1080 is best. 2k and beyond starts to be overkill for a straight to DVD deal even if it goes to Blockbuster or wherever because even on Blu-Ray if you shoot Red, it's getting downrezed to 1080. And even for overseas theatrical 720p and above is fine. This is simply because everyone shoots 1080p now. If you can shoot a feature on the HG10 and get 1080p there's really no excuse in the eyes of the distributor.

But like everyone is saying, if it fits their criteria, they don't care what it was shot on. Now some films still get through being shot on DV, but the markets Vic is talking about want HD at least for possible theatrical releases that you may never know about. Things have changed a bit, in 2003 "The Fourth Beast" made it to parts of Asia, Africa and Europe. Go figure. in 2007 "Wages of Sin" lost out because it wasn't HD. So once you shoot with names, a hot genre (zombies are still hot) and in HD, you're golden. The question is do you have names.

Now if you're still in the self distribution market, I suggest you get an old DVX100a or b and have a ball. You'll have less trouble and headache. If you shoot HD get a tape based HDV camera. LOL. HDV is done like DV used to be on most modern cameras and your waiting is mainly realtime, not like the AVCHD cameras. (And I believe the cure for ACVHD is keeping scenes under 3 minutes to keep down conversion times).

-Nate

 

[filmman]

taormina wrote: Capture medium is an artistic consideration. It was when Lynch shot Inland Empire using cheap PD150 camcorders.

Lynch wanted that video look. He really did, and I can understand it, because it's surrealistic -- when video is distorted in a certain way, especially at night and with neon lights on the streets.

Nathyn wrote: But Vic is right about one thing, films do go to the big screen in other countries that will never make it to a screen here.

Well, that was my point -- and you got it, Nate. Some territories in the foreign market won't buy unless 35mm theatrical is included, and they're not going to pay for a blow up to 35mm and they don't have enough theaters in most countries that can show digital features.

subtleinspiration wrote: But if you want to shoot on it, and can afford to, then who cares? So far, your Kickstarter page still hasn't garnered anything, so you need to focus on that.

Do you think I'm alienating the digital people by saying I'm shooting 35mm? I wonder what will happen if I say I've decided to shoot in Red. Do you think Red has that magic? Just wondering why no one has even risked a dollar.

Azmyth wrote: And as someone else mentioned a theatrical release is nigh near impossible anyway without "stars" in your film. The best you could hope for is a local theatrical showing, and expect DVD or possible Blu ray release.

Yes, but a small theatrical release adds considerably to the value of a DVD release. It may be the difference of getting the movie carried in Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Target or not.

 

[Azmyth]

Lynch wanted that video look. He really did, and I can understand it, because it's surrealistic -- when video is distorted in a certain way, especially at night and with neon lights on the streets.

Right, and artistic reason is as good a reason as any to shoot on any medium you want to. The fact that he could do what he did on a PD150 is the point trying to be made. You can shoot on DV, Film, HD, RED, DSLR, Iphone.. etc. As long as it comes under the standards for the market you are trying to hit, then it really matters little.

Well, that was my point -- and you got it, Nate. Some territories in the foreign market won't buy unless 35mm theatrical is included, and they're not going to pay for a blow up to 35mm and they don't have enough theaters in most countries that can show digital features.

If your targetting foreign markets as your main market, and that is something they want standard (I don' t know personally), then you have a point on that front. How much of the foreign market would make up your total profit margin in the long run? (Just curious). I can totally understand if its a huge margin, why you'd shun everything but film from a business aspect. For me, I'm aware of my boundaries and realize that a theatrical release US or foreign is nigh impossible. It will probably show at many local theaters simply because the people in this region get behind stuff like this. I would however state that this would be the only valid reason other than preferring to shoot on 35 that holds water. Everything else is just dodging the bullet.

Do you think I'm alienating the digital people by saying I'm shooting 35mm? I wonder what will happen if I say I've decided to shoot in Red. Do you think Red has that magic? Just wondering why no one has even risked a dollar.

Your alienating people by not giving them anything in return. A kickstarter page with pretty much nothing on it, isn't going to entice anyone to give you anything. The idea behind these fund raiser sites is for you to show your market or potential investors, that you are willing to go above and beyond to get them to invest. You have a video of some chicks babbling on a beach, and a book long description which basically says "give me money, and I refuse to shoot on anything but film because its amateur". You have to make people believe in you, and your project. Right now you have a blank slate. Whats in it for them? Sure, you've got rewards.. but I can wade through 10 random kickstarter pages and find rewards all more creative and enticing than what you have. Its almost like you believe that shooting on film, and being a "pro" should automatically mean people will just give you money. Doesn't work that way, unless your name is Steven Spielberg. I'm not trying to rag on you, but you just keep coming back with the same excuses everytime someone tells you exactly what you need to do to make a real run with this kickstarter page. They've showed you examples, and provided you with real world advice on how to make it a success. Have you started on your proof of concept? Have you thought about doing an interview video discussing your goals and aspirations for the project and why people should be on board too? Have you thought about trying to find a freelance artist to create some eye catching images for you? I mean, you started this thread on April 22nd...nearly a month.. and you have the same image, same description, same video.. all of which are not doing anything for you.

Here's another example of a "good" kickstarter page.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects...ependent-horror-feature?pos=5&ref=recommended

Its got all the essentials that you need to start producing results. Well outlined goals, catchy and informative video to put you "in the project", and rewards that actually make sense to the production. Tangible stuff.

If you really want to make a go at kickstarter, I'd start following through with the suggestions everyone has made.

Yes, but a small theatrical release adds considerably to the value of a DVD release. It may be the difference of getting the movie carried in Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Target or not.

It may very well be so, but who is the authority who decides that? And you also need to look at all the multitudes of other factors that play just as large of a role in determining that. Its not quite as clear cut as "you won't get into best buy unless you get a theatrical release". I have seen friends films in bestbuy, walmart, and blockbuster, and netflix. None of them were ever released theatrically. I agree, that it would "help" but if you don't have the means to do it why fret over it when there are so many other ways to get your film out there and capitalize on it? Otherwise you have no film at all.

Sorry for the long book. I think you just need to look at things from a different perspective if you truly want to make this project a reality. I showed about 5 random people at my work your page, and the page I linked and asked them if they had to choose between the two to donate to.. which one would they choose? All 5 of them chose the other one. Reason? Because it looked more professional and actually gave them info on what they were donating to.

 

[filmman]

taormina wrote: I sat at AFM for 7 days this year and did over $1.3M in presales on my next film - sold it to two studios, and took probably 50 meetings. Not once did anyone ask what the film was going to be shot on.

First of all, congratulations and thank you for sharing precious knowledge: presales are possible when a filmmaker has proven themselves; one movie in distribution and two in pre-production -- very solid, Adam. I'm honestly impressed and very pleased for you.

 

[filmman]

Azmyth wrote: If your targeting foreign markets as your main market, and that is something they want standard (I don' t know personally), then you have a point on that front. How much of the foreign market would make up your total profit margin in the long run? (Just curious).

100% -- as far as I know; that's been my experience. I always made money in the foreign market; nothing in the domestic market. Maybe it's because I don't want to make genre movies. I find them boring; I've never watched a single one of them -- honestly. I shut off the TV when I see one, especially if it's horror. I also don't watch exploitation violence movies. Sometimes the opening of a movie looks intriguing (typically everything of production value is put in the first ten minutes; that's how they sell the genre movies to the foreign buyers and to the domestic schlock distributors), but then as soon as the opening scene is over, I can spot a genre movie within a second and I scramble for the control stick and I try to avoid breaking things on the coffee table or spilling every drink on the table. LOL. I have to shut off the TV immediately. I walk away and don't watch for a few hours, until I recover my sensibilities and then I approach the programming very carefully: first a news story or two and then maybe a sports program ... before I look at any story programs. That's how much I avoid watching genre movies; but that's just a personal thing.

However, if someone wants me to DP a genre movie, I don't mind. I can work on one -- if I'm paid.LOL As a job I will take on any type of film except for porn.

The example of the movie you showed me the link (The Feed), I watched it. I agree: very well presented, and it looks like they will get funded. I think I'm going to put another project on Kickstarter, because this first one I wasn't sure how it works and I chose the wrong project. I didn't have everything planned for a typical Kickstarter campaign. I have a bad habit of jumping the gun. Oh, well, thanks for the critique.

 

[Azmyth]

100% -- as far as I know; that's been my experience. I always made money in the foreign market; nothing in the domestic market. Maybe it's because I don't want to make genre movies. I find them boring; I've never watched a single one of them -- honestly. I shut off the TV when I see one, especially if it's horror. I also don't watch exploitation violence movies. Sometimes the opening of a movie looks intriguing (typically everything of production value is put in the first ten minutes; that's how they sell the genre movies to the foreign buyers and to the domestic schlock distributors), but then as soon as the opening scene is over, I can spot a genre movie within a second and I scramble for the control stick and I try to avoid breaking things on the coffee table or spilling every drink on the table. LOL. I have to shut off the TV immediately. I walk away and don't watch for a few hours, until I recover my sensibilities and then I approach the programming very carefully: first a news story or two and then maybe a sports program ... before I look at any story programs. That's how much I avoid watching genre movies; but that's just a personal thing.

However, if someone wants me to DP a genre movie, I don't mind. I can work on one -- if I'm paid.LOL As a job I will take on any type of film except for porn.

The example of the movie you showed me the link (The Feed), I watched it. I agree: very well presented, and it looks like they will get funded. I think I'm going to put another project on Kickstarter, because this first one I wasn't sure how it works and I chose the wrong project. I didn't have everything planned for a typical Kickstarter campaign. I have a bad habit of jumping the gun. Oh, well, thanks for the critique.

What sells the best in domestic and foreign markets? Not, basing this on whether what sells is "good" because thats opinion. But what sells the best in all markets?

 

[filmman]

Azmyth wrote: What sells the best in domestic and foreign markets? Not, basing this on whether what sells is "good" because thats opinion. But what sells the best in all markets

My direct market experience is somewhat dated. Adam is the one to ask, because he has made an action film with a lot of blood and gore (from what I can tell of the trailer).

From my experience in the three major markets (CANNES, AFM, MIFED), I can say that all action genres sell pretty well -- Germany, Spain, Korea, Japan, Philippines, Hong Kong are great markets for action. The UK, Australia, South Africa, Middle East are ok too. My memory isn't good -- it's been a while and I'm not referencing anything.

There are too many horror movies in the market right now, so you're a bit late, but you'll be able to sell your movie anyway -- there's always a market for action movies. I think horror is kind of like action.

Still, the foreign market is the best market, because buyers come from all over the world to buy movies and you can make some money. If you approached only American distributors, there is a chance that you won't find even one distributor willing to buy your movie for domestic release. The same movie you will make a minimum of $150,000 in the foreign market with the very first market you're represent it in. The problem is that distributors take too big a percentage and often times don't pay you anything. That's why I take my own movies to the market whenever I can, and if I can't, I'd rather leave them on the shelf and watch them myself ... or now, I prefer putting them up on Amazon.com via CreateSpace.com

I'd rather make $500 on a movie than get ripped off. And I have been ripped off. I don't like it. But, hey, that's just me. LOL

 

[Azmyth]

Oh I wasn't talking about my movie, I was just talking in general.

There's always tons of horror movies on the market thats nothing new.

 

[filmman]

Anther issue is that after 40 years of filmmaking (even after twenty) you begin to wonder just what type of filmmaker you are, and all the dreams you had of making those films that you always wanted to make and kept postponing because somebody always said, "they're not commercial, make the movies that people want to watch and then after you've made a few millions go and make your art films."

But you know in your heart it's a cop-out. So it's ultimately better not to make the films that some distributor wants you to make nor make the movies that everybody is making and selling straight to video. After you've made a few movies and you realize that you don't want to show them to your family or friends, because you're embarrassed, then you come to the realization that you should do the movies that you always wanted to make.

Perhaps if we're honest with ourselves, we can find success much easier. At least it's a worthwhile quest. So this means do better presentations of what I want to make. That means more honest trailers and simpler art work.

And what I'm learning also in this thread is that most digital cameras are about the same: digital is digital and film is film. Sometimes it's more cost effective for me to shoot digital and sometimes it doesn't matter if I shoot 35mm.

I've gotten some pretty good info on formats here. I have a lot to learn about lighting for digital and photographing faces using digital cameras. It's so different.

 

[taormina]

Oh I wasn't talking about my movie, I was just talking in general.

There's always tons of horror movies on the market thats nothing new.

Vic's advice is still pretty relevant. Let me add to that.

Make a genre pic. Genre pic means just what it sounds like. An easily definable genre. Acceptable genres you can sell are Horror, Thriller, Comedy and Action. That's basically it. Someone asked me on another forum...I have a "Thriller Suspense Family Drama". I plainly told him that wasn't a genre! You can hyphenate two of the genres, but not more. If you need more than two genres to describe your movie - it's either not genre or you don't know what genre your own movie is. Stick with this if you want to sell.

The film must have cast. You won't ever execute a presale without a well known cast member. No one will finance your film without cast. You will never achieve conventional distribution without cast. You can debate this and give me the ten examples you know of films that "made it" (blair witch, paranormal activity....blah blah) but those are exceptions, not rules. No cast = no appreciable sales.

Minimum capture spec: You must at a minimum capture in HD, Super 16, or 35. You will not sell a standard def pic anymore unless it has A listers in it or you are famous.

Cast must be internationally appealing. Play to the foreign market as well as domestic. A good sales agent will confirm the value of names for you.

Budget is important. Needs to be made for a good enough budget to attract cast unless you know them personally and they will work for free. That fable you hear about...."He loved the story so much he did it for scale" is exactly that - a fable - up there with unicorns and pots 'o gold. Nothing attracts cast like cubic dollars.

Hook up with a reputable sales agent. You cannot expect to pre sell your own film without knowing about how this is done. You have no contacts, and you need someone that does. A good sales agent will rep your picture throughout the year, not just at the big markets.

That's basically it. I may have forgotten a thing or two, but that's the big stuff.

 

[El Director]

a fable - up there with unicorns and pots 'o gold.

Actually, the Bible mentions unicorns. They're real, just not a horse with a horn like we think. lol. Just saying....