music doc, Current TV

W

watson

Well-known member
hey everyone, a few weeks ago i finished a short doc (6min, 30secs) for a network called Current TV. Its up and airing on their site as well as on the network (direct TV, and a few other cable provioders). Here is a link to the video. Shot with the DVX, stock f5 setting. Still photos were shot with a Canon10d, mostly a 24mm lenses. Check it out.

http://www.current.tv/studio/media/1337091

tagline: Starting simply as a hobby and using a church basement as the main venue, R5 productions has quickly become one of the leading rock concert promoters in Philadelphia.

Andrew D Watson
www.andrewdavidwatson.com

UPDATE: i just changed the link, i dont think it was working right before
 
Flat out loved it.

Great idea. Great choice of interviews.

I'm not really a fan of this format of story telling but you kept me interested with the content and execution.

Killer job.

-rook
 
that was really great .

i could definately see that on national television.

too bad they dont want to go big, cause they could be there easily a) fun music b) great demo vid.

actually i shouldnt say "too bad", cause its probably a better thing, much like being an actor, success is want i want, but fame scares the **** outa me, and its definatel not a good direction to head.

a++ video man.
 
That was really awesome. It kept my interest the whole time. I used to go to shows at the church all the time and still get emails from R5 about whats coming up. Sean Agnew rules.
 
Very nice...

I've thought about submitting some stuff to CurrentTV, but their contract flat out sucks IMO. So, you basically had to sell them all of the rights for EVERYTHING related to that piece for $500 and you're left with nothing? And they have the right to re-edit/re-cut it and do whatever they want to it, plus they get the first right to buy/option any other piece you might put together with the same raw footage? Do I have all of that right? Seems like a raw deal to me.

I see a lot of benefits to getting the exposure and all, resume building and whatnot, and in this case, those dudes are pretty cool and their getting more exposure too because of being on Current, so that is all cool for sure. There's no doubt I liked the piece a lot, and the indy music scene is something dear to my heart (I do more "audience taping" -- audio only -- than video these days), so don't take this personally, but I'm not so sure about Current's setup. I mean there'ye paying people peanut-money to create content that would cost them thousands to do themselves if they could even come up with the story to begin with. Seems like they are ripping off the indy/guerilla content makers in that deal, but maybe I'm wrong on that view? I mean, I LOVE the whole concept behind Current, but it seems that their terms don't fit very well with the spirit of their content model.

As someone who actually has sold something to Current, I'd love to hear your opinion and take on this...
 
hey guys thanks for the comments. Sorry for not replying earlier but i was actually in the process of moving from Philly to Rome, Italy where i will be staying for the next 4 months while studying aboard. but anywho i really wanted to answer Tainted's questions.

I have a very healthly working relation with Current TV. I am conmissioned by them to do peices. So when i shoot and edit a piece i am doing so with the intent of it being on TV. Yes, the pay is not great, however the pay scale does increase. I dont feel that they are ripping off indie film makers at all. For the most part they seem to be giving them a vioce.

Take me for example., I'm still in school yet i am able to make some money while shooting stuff that is really fun to do. How many other networks is going to give some kid who is 21 a chance to shoot pieces. Not many, and thats why i really like Current. I do think though like if you got some badass idea for a longer length doc or feature, then maybe you shouldnt submit the idea to current. but in general i think its a cool network.

As for the contract and copyright issues, they really do need permission to re edit it. For example, the last piece i sent in i spelled something wrong and didnt realize it. If they didnt have the premission to re edit then it would have went to air with the mistake. They do this so they can make sure everything clears on a legal issue as well. From the two pieces i have done, they have aired exactly how i intended for them too. And hey, if they are willing to take your piece and it needs re editing, then you should be happy that someone is willing to take a piece that is poorly edited.

Anyway, if anyone else has any questions let me. I would be more then glad to answer, but for now i'm off to ride around the streets of Rome and try not to get hit by a scooter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top