Getting access - how do you make the pitch?

[custerc]

Generally speaking, unless you're filming your mom, getting access to your subjects is going to be a key issue that can make or break your doc. Obviously, this can depend a lot on the subject in question, but I thought this could be an interesting thread for people to share techniques....how do you convince people that they should get in front of your camera? what doubts do you usually run into, and how do you get potential subjects past them?

The film I'm currently working on is a quasi-charity sort of thing, so we're trying to convince subjects to talk to us by explaining how the film might help them after it's finished, and also how it can help them in the short term as we promote their cases and increase their visibility via our website and media connections. It's a bit of a unique situation though.


Also, when do you generally get them to sign a release...before the shoot or after? If you're shooting someone for a prolonged period of time, do you do it at the very beginning or at the end?

 

[jwmemmer]

Doing some research and watching some documentaries on Netflix, I was just wondering the same thing. I recently watched King Corn and was taking notes on some aspects of how the film was shot. I noticed that on at least 3 occasions, it appeared as though initial introductions, or first meetings between the documentary team and subjects, were done on camera. I was wondering how the approach would be for setting something like this up? Is there some kind of awkward moment when you hand some subject a release form and they then decide to not sign because the language within is somewhat confusing? I'm really hoping some of you can respond this thread and help us out by providing some guidance on this subject.

 

[custerc]

Doing some research and watching some documentaries on Netflix, I was just wondering the same thing. I recently watched King Corn and was taking notes on some aspects of how the film was shot. I noticed that on at least 3 occasions, it appeared as though initial introductions, or first meetings between the documentary team and subjects, were done on camera. I was wondering how the approach would be for setting something like this up? Is there some kind of akward moment when you hand some subject a release form and they then decide to not sign because the language within is somewhat confusing? I'm really hoping some of you can respond this thread and help us out by providing some guidance on this subject.

I have wondered about that too. It probably depends on the subject, but I think if you're doing anything at all sensitive, you don't want to approach your subjects for the first time with cameras on. It could spook them and creep them out that they haven't even met you and you're already shooting them (without their permission). In the case of the film we're shooting, there's no way we'd have any subjects if we had first approached them that way.

There probably are subjects where that would work, but I wonder if those "meetings" aren't staged after the fact by just explaining why the film needs that sort of an introduction and asking the subjects to play along (assuming they don't do anything more than meet + greet, I think most people would be OK with a scene like that being in a documentary even though it is technically staged).

I do wonder how the release form thing works for long-term docs, though. Do most people give it to their subject at the beginning? At the end? After every shoot? We're planning to just get one form from everyone at the end of our last shoots with them, but we're also shooting in a place where we don't have to worry about the potential legal repercussions if we don't have the right signed documents. If we were shooting in the US, I might try to get them to sign a form that was just for that shoot at the end of every day's shoot. Sit down with them at first and go over the terms; then after that every day it's just a quick signing and it becomes a routine thing. That's how I would approach it, not sure about whether people do that or not though. A different form for each day of shooting probably isn't necessary.

 

[Giganova]

My experience is to NEVER show up with a camera for a first meeting or if not exclicitely agreed upon. This can shut doors forever.

 

[Greg Smith]

The rule I've always lived by is to obtain signed releases from each subject in a project before you first turn the camera on them, but only make them sign one release per project -- no need to repeat every day.

The most delicate situation I've been in was shooting a series of training videos for clinical psychologists in a working mental hospital. Not only could many of the patients be embarrassed by their recorded actions after they recovered, they were mostly, by definition, incompetent to give their own consent on the release forms. We had to track down family, state-appointed guardians, parole officers, all kinds of folks to get the releases signed for fifty subjects or so, and you'd better believe they had to be in perfect legal order before the programs could be shown, to protect the university that was paying us all.

Even in that case, one release per subject for the entire series of programs was deemed appropriate by our very careful attorneys.

- Greg

 

[jwmemmer]

I have wondered about that too. It probably depends on the subject, but I think if you're doing anything at all sensitive, you don't want to approach your subjects for the first time with cameras on. It could spook them and creep them out that they haven't even met you and you're already shooting them (without their permission). In the case of the film we're shooting, there's no way we'd have any subjects if we had first approached them that way.

There probably are subjects where that would work, but I wonder if those "meetings" aren't staged after the fact by just explaining why the film needs that sort of an introduction and asking the subjects to play along (assuming they don't do anything more than meet + greet, I think most people would be OK with a scene like that being in a documentary even though it is technically staged).

I do wonder how the release form thing works for long-term docs, though. Do most people give it to their subject at the beginning? At the end? After every shoot? We're planning to just get one form from everyone at the end of our last shoots with them, but we're also shooting in a place where we don't have to worry about the potential legal repercussions if we don't have the right signed documents. If we were shooting in the US, I might try to get them to sign a form that was just for that shoot at the end of every day's shoot. Sit down with them at first and go over the terms; then after that every day it's just a quick signing and it becomes a routine thing. That's how I would approach it, not sure about whether people do that or not though. A different form for each day of shooting probably isn't necessary.

I decided to email one of the filmmakers of King Corn, Curt Ellis via Facebook back in mid April, and today, I found that he sent a very thoughtful and thorough response! It was really quite surprising and enlightening as to what he had to say on this subject.

 

[jwmemmer]

My initial message to him via Facebook:

Hi Curt! I recently watched King Corn and thought it was awesome! I have an interest in the Ag industry and would like to do some short documentaries on local farmers in my area (Columbia, MO). I noticed in the film that it appears as though you met with some of the people for the first time on camera, such as Al Marth. This made me very curious as to how you went about arranging the meeting and your approach with them so that they would agree to be on film? Would you mind giving an aspiring documentary film maker some advice on this? Did they agree over the phone beforehand to be on film (I'm assuming?). I keep reading on forums and in books that you should have a release form signed from everyone that appears in the film? Were you able to accomplish this with your film? If so, would you mind sharing how you approached those that showed up in the film and their overall reaction when seeing the form? Did anyone give you any trouble or would not sign and then you had to scrap some of the video? I know you're probably extremely busy, but any advice or help would be greatly appreciated.

Curt's response:

Curt from King Corn here... so sorry to take this long in responding to your note. Things have been a little crazy.

I'm so glad you enjoyed the film!

Columbia's a great town. Love the True/False Film Festival especially, and hope to make it out your way again soon.

You're right that it can be challenging to get people to agree to be filmed. Representatives of big companies are particularly hard to get access to these days... Michael Moore kind of ruined that for the rest of us, despite his contributions to the documentary field. With those folks you have to spend a lot of phone and email time convincing a PR department that you'll give their company fair (or better) treatment, and even then it's best to have an introduction from someone high-up on their team who you have a relationship with.

With that exception, we've found most regular people to be really open about being filmed. Sometimes we call ahead, but usually less warning is better... otherwise people wear weirdly fancy clothing and spend the week leading up to the shoot getting nervous about it. With Al Marth, for instance, we just rolled up to his office and sent one of us in to say hello, explain our project, and ask if we could have his help telling this story on film. He agreed, and we were shooting in ten minutes.

Release forms are definitely annoying, but we got them from everyone who appears in King Corn. Those we usually bring up only at the end of a shoot and explain them as a formality (which they are) -- a piece of bureaucratic paperwork needed by broadcasters to prove we had the subject's permission to film them. People generally aren't surprised by them, but it can get awkward if subjects ask to see an advance copy of the film to approve what clips we used. That violates journalistic ethics, and we explain as much and people are usually willing to let us go on ahead.

Anyway, that's our basic approach to that challenge

 

[oldjello]

Generally speaking, unless you're filming your mom, getting access to your subjects is going to be a key issue that can make or break your doc. Obviously, this can depend a lot on the subject in question, but I thought this could be an interesting thread for people to share techniques....how do you convince people that they should get in front of your camera? what doubts do you usually run into, and how do you get potential subjects past them?

The film I'm currently working on is a quasi-charity sort of thing, so we're trying to convince subjects to talk to us by explaining how the film might help them after it's finished, and also how it can help them in the short term as we promote their cases and increase their visibility via our website and media connections. It's a bit of a unique situation though.


Also, when do you generally get them to sign a release...before the shoot or after? If you're shooting someone for a prolonged period of time, do you do it at the very beginning or at the end?

I have my subjects sign the release before the first camera is switched on.
I make sure that they have a clear understanding on what I'm shooting, and they can also have access to my proposal. Like most documentaries, it's an evolutionary process. the huge thing to write into your releases are just not only the right to film the subject-- but the right to EDIT content. This is extremely important. I have seen documentaries fall flat because the latter was not included on a release. Giganova posted about having a meeting. This is very important too. The subject has to understand where you're coming from. I have to make sure my ethical nature as a filmmaker is very clear to my subjects. If they specifically state that something they say is between you and them (and the crew), honor that request.

 

[oldjello]

I am currently working on a very sensitive subject for my MFA thesis at DePaul.
http://charitydoc.posterous.com/
I had a friend of mine create the blog, but the mistake I made initially was not to include the wording on how this documentary will be balanced (a failure of proofreading on my part). I ended up receiving some ill emails from victim's family members misunderstanding my intent on the film. I have since mended those bridges, but it's very important to lay out everything you intend to do.
Some subjects will warm to the idea, while others will keep the door shut.

 

[jwmemmer]

Great advice oldjello! I'm expecting to pull everything together that I need with regards to release forms, setting up a LLC, and insurance within the next few weeks to work on some short documentaries this summer. I'll make sure to verify the EDIT aspect of the release form. Setting up a blog sounds like an awesome idea as well. What did you do to setup your blog?

Just read the link and will check out the video later. What a very bizarre coincidence - I am a lucky survivor of a triple murder experience in Indiana from an August 2002 incident where another woman, Rose Marie Sowders, killed her boyfriend, his son, and then her ex-husband.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx95cCA2F9A

Hey, we're also both IU Alum! I'll definitely go back and check out all of your work and ask for some more advice as I move forward in my project.