So, how many crew members do I need for an indie feature film?

About five years ago, I made a 95 minute crime drama with a crew of six including myself. crowdfunded $50k budget. Distributed domestically by Gravitas Ventures and internationally by Paramount (no, I can't believe it either). We shot 24 locations over 36 days. Cast did their own make-up and donated some of their clothing to wardrobe. Everyone wore many hats. This was the crew breakdown...

1. Writer, Director, Cinematographer, Fight Choreography, Effects make-up, Wardrobe (me)
2. Producer - handled locations, rentals, food, negotiations, put out fires, and was preparing for the next two days while we shot
3. First AD - made the schedule, ran the set, kept us on schedule
4. Asst Camera/Grip/Gaffer/2nd Boom Op - the person who can do all this well, and is willing to do all this, is hard to find. I have a good friend named Sam who was indispensible.
5. Sound mixer/Boom Op
6. Production Asst - ran errands, drove the truck full of gear, picked up food, made sure everyone was drinking water, kept the sets tidy.

In post, it went to my wife. She's a professional editor. Music from an electronic artist named Deklun. Then I did all the finishing work including sound effects and dialogue editing, color, and did the 5.1 mix in my living room. Taught myself protools and would take sessions over to a real stage to listen and make notes before going home and adjusting. Turned out pretty well.
 
Great thread. I'm thinking about how I can get my comedy indie in the can.

It's mostly simple but requires two sets to be built and the climax of someone
Dangling on a rope in the alley of a building.

One thing to add. Even though I can DP and light if needed, (as I often do)

in the instances I've had A DP or at least operator, I find my directing get considerably better.

There's nothing like just looking at the monitor with no other concerns than evaluating

Everyone else's work and thinking about how to encourage them to make it better.

having to perform yourself (and even shooting is often a performance) tends to pull me out of the moment.
 
emailists said:
in the instances I've had A DP or at least operator, I find my directing get considerably better.

There's nothing like just looking at the monitor with no other concerns than evaluating
Click to expand...

I've actually had the reverse experience. There's something about being behind the lens that makes me feel more connected to the actor, like we're in a dance together. I feel 200 percent more focused and inside the scene. When I'm just sitting behind a monitor I often get more distracted and not in the moment. My mind can wander too easily.
 
When I've had to direct and DP on the same job, where I think the greatest loss occurs is between setups where I have to put my attention into camera and lighting concerns, rather than work with the actors, chew over characters concerns and dialogue punch-ups etc., or simply take a minute to escape and think about the big picture or how to re-organize the approach etc. Many of the notable directors who also shoot their films rely heavily on their gaffer and operators (amongst others) to do much of the heavy lifting for them (I've heard the stories firsthand). The last project I directed required all of my attention since we had so much to shoot, so I really switched off my DP brain and allowed my DP to do his thing (I didn't pay attention to the lighting at all that day).

Small crews can be very efficient. For a larger crew to function, communication is key. If one person is unable to articulate their needs and requests well, they are probably better off doing the other person's job for them. But ideally, they should learn how to communicate and delegate the work, and then they will have the flexibility of being able to fit in on crews both large and small.
 
The smallest smallest possible crew:

One person. (director/sound/camera/everything!)

But realistically speaking, that is nuts! But it totally is doable. (but the film will suffer, either in quality, or dragging out in the length of time it takes to make it. Or more likely, both!)

You need a dedicated sound guy, as sound is "half the film", and without someone good at that and focused on that exclusively, then you're setting yourself up for failure!

You need also a dedicated cameraman/DoP, as unless you're not only a good director but also a very good DoP too, then you will massively struggle to both well.

Then of course the 3rd person: "you", the director. But really, you need to also be some kind of superman too! Picking up all the slack in all the other areas too: AD/MUA/catering/producing/etc... and you'll need your two crew members to be understanding and pitch in too.

More realistically, I see the minimum as four:

Sound.
DoP.
Director.
1st AD.

And the 1st AD is your "superman", who basically is also a line producer etc and just in general picking up the slack everywhere it is needed. Such as helping the DoP setting up lights, rounding up actors for the soundie to lav, etc. And as the director you'll still need to do a lot of that too. You probably should give your superman 1st AD some kind of "producer" credit too (even if just a small "assistant producer" one) as they'll be your right hand man.


The kind of film you're doing will also dictate the "minimum crew" you need.
Want to shoot multi camera? You'll likely need a B cam op, or at least a 1st AC doing double duty.
Want to shoot with an Arri Alexa Classic? Going to need a 1st AC at least!
Want a highly crafted lighting look to the film? Going to need at least a gaffer!
Have a large speaking cast? Going to want a boom op or two! Can't expect the mixer to do it all by themselves.
Have complex wardrobe requirements? (like you probably would for a fantasy film if you have anything more than a small cast, but likely wouldn't on a low budget contemporary film. As with a small cast or/and a modern film, then you might leave it up to the cast themselves to manage their wardrobe on a low budget shoots. Perhaps with help from the 1st AD) Then you need a wardrobe person to manage this.
Have complex make up needs? Same, you need a MUA (although on small/low budget productions, you might often get MUA / Wardrobe / Props all combined into one person).
Has the cast and crew numbers starting creeping up into the dozens?! Then you need catering. (but on micro budget shoots with small cast/crew sizes, the 1st AD / producer / yourself would probably just do this themselves! Or you might rotate it around, taking turns)
 
If you're shooting on weekends or sporadically and have time to prep Between shoot days it may allow for a smaller crew. That may be a factor to consider.
 
combatentropy said:
Fast, cheap, good: pick any two.
Click to expand...

Not really - clever can get all three - was with a director last night and he mentioned "finding" shots.

We are doing a project - now some will be fast cheap and good - some "portraiture" at a grungy street location - the director is happy to "just find somewhere cool"

The next section of the video is a kitchen - he wants a push in and morning light (even if we shoot midday or in the rain)

It becomes clear that for some of the project we can operate with a scratch Crew but for the (rented) kitchen location we need the full banjo of G and E.

The skill is matching the crew to the directors vision.
 
morgan_moore said:
The skill is matching the crew to the directors vision.
Click to expand...

^ (+and budget !) I fully concur with this. As long as I've been in the "business" - and here I'm talking about commercial / corporate work as much as I am about indie features - having a frank discussion with director (or "client") about the various ways to achieve that vision is a skill set we should all strive to learn as much as the workings of our camera gear. "Finding somewhere cool " is often not fast - but can certainly save lots in G&E...but could (or should ) mean lots of pre-pro planning if the crew will be minimal. For me, what bigger budgets & crews allow for most - is showing up to location and creating that vision (almost from scratch if necessary). Low budget / no crew means you better hope that vision is almost complete in your picked location.
 
morgan_moore said:
You could hitch down route66 with a hot girl and a digital bolex and come back with a feature, no crew.

If your story has animals/kids/extras/explosions then.. you might need 30+ people.

So how can one answer.

Let say a typical narrative. Like 2/3 actors doing simple stuff..

The barest bones is probably..
Camera Dept 2
Sound 1
Art/Costume 1
AD 1
Runners 2 (one can cook, the other can move a Cstand)

Features and crew size is really a money game..

Because an under staffed department keeps everyone else waiting - which costs.. so save money by making that department bigger and therefore faster - but then your crew just got bigger, daily cost higher,and you need more catering and accommodation so the pressure mounts to cut days so you expand another department to handle the pressure.. which I call 'Pop Will Eat Itself' (for no logical reason).

Balancing the tail with the dog is what an experienced producer can do, get the ratio right.. not over blow, but not skimp.

The thing eats itself when the costs get so high that there is no time to concentrate on performance and you end up with no story!
Click to expand...

It is funny how you can find yourself in a scenario where spending MORE money ends up *saving* money! As it speeds up the process, or avoids mistakes which would be even more expensive.

For instance on an ultra low budget film with a tight crew, no one is going to have a dedicated script supervisor. That is the role of the director to handle instead, and perhaps the 1st AD too (maybe even the actors/DoP need to keep an eye out for this too).

But when you're burning tens of thousands of dollars a day, then the extra cost of a person who is there purely as a script supervisor seems like small loose change, if it helps make sure you don't need to come back for a reshoot

morgan_moore said:
I guess therefore it is about balancing the departments.
Click to expand...

Agreed. In fact I find it kinda annoying when I go on a shoot to discover that they've got make up + wardrobe + locations + 1st & 2nd ADs + grips + a whole lighting team & trick + DoP with 1st/2nd/3rd AC & grips + etc.... but just little me doing all of sound!! Errrr.... a little lopsided?! Shouldn't I have at least a boom op to assist me.

morgan_moore said:
An AD is (IMO) not really an assistant to the director.. often the director and AD are pulling different ways.. the AD wants to move on, as soon they have gathered a coherent and cuttable sequence that is in focus and wont need ADR, and hit the schedule.. the Director wants another take or a whacky angle that takes an age for the camera department to pull off.
Click to expand...

There is a joke which goes something like: "at the end of a successful shoot a good 1st AD should have everyone hating him", or "a 1st AD is not there to make friends".

While they're said jokingly, they hold an important grain of truth in them!
 
I was on something where the AD was weak and it lead to a lot of tension.

A strong AD is certainly my friend.

As camera dept I hate being rushed, much better the AD saying 'we are tight for time.. go with sticks' than the entire crew/cast humphing while you try to lay some track or balance a steadicam two minutes before lunch.

Absolutely no reason for the AD not to be your best chum and the crew hero. (He/She will get you fed and home for some sleep)

I think all department heads need an overall vision, somewhat rendering the scripty not needed, but on a biggie they are indeed vital.

On said production we had a soundie (sitting at a cart) and boom op, he was very over the script and crossing off all the lines as he got good audio of them, can I ask.. as I guess you are a soundie, if you are not swinging a boom could you script on a lowbudget? aka actually be given that job in terms of lines and the DOP be on line crossing and other visual continuity?

While thinking of small budget next week my lights/grip man will swing the boom.. the boom is only needed as we are rolling, lights will not be moved while rolling so it seems a sensible doubling up.

S
 
lambert said:
It depends. I know a filmmaker that does everything himself on his features. He does work in the family friendly genre but his Films look and sound good and work and make money. I couldn't do it myself but he's made almost a dozen features. He shoots quickly , usually in two weeks and doesn't have long days (sometimes half days). Minimum light set up, mostly amateur cast with an occasional name actor. Does all post himself. Camera is locked down, mike is painted out and scenes are rerecorded after the scene immediately like a radio play. None of this is what you see on "real" sets but it just illustrates what can be done. Some will poo poo the techniques as unprofessional but his last movie did very respectable theatrical box office .
Click to expand...

Could you share a link to some of his work? I'd be very curious to see it.

morgan_moore said:
A strong AD is certainly my friend.
Click to expand...

Yeah my comment earlier was meant be viewed from the perspective of said half jokingly. (because there is a small grain of truth in it)

The 1st AD on the feature I did last year I certainly grew to be good friends with. And I recognised him as the amazing asset that he was! (I doubt the film would have got made, if not for him)

morgan_moore said:
While thinking of small budget next week my lights/grip man will swing the boom.. the boom is only needed as we are rolling, lights will not be moved while rolling so it seems a sensible doubling up.
Click to expand...


:-( :-(

Would you ask your caterer to pull focus too? (as they've finished their cooking duties already for the day....)
 
Last edited:
I’ve been the grip/electric/boom on plenty of small corporate shoots. Not uncommon or a big deal. If it’s some big budget thing where they’re expecting Hollywood audio, different story.
 
Of course, Robert Rodriguez proved the minimum crew is one, but that was with him doing ADR later. The minimum in my mind is two, one for sound and one for camera. And ideally, three: one for sound, one for camera, and one for everything else. I just shot my first feature length film and did everything pretty much myself. I had people helping out here and there, but nothing consistently. The biggest limitation was for sound. Since we didn't have a reliable sound guy, I had to put the microphone on a boom stand, and this limited my range of motion with the camera because we could stray far from the microphone, which was stationary. But we got it done. On my best days I had two people helping me (one for sound and one for calling slate), and those days went fairly smooth. That's why I say 3 is the minimum. Also, if you can, it's nice to have a person watching for continuity. When you do everything or most everything yourself, it is a bit much to keep track of everything.

Any way, best of luck.
 
This also depends on how "amazing" you are. There are plenty of professional director-DPs in town here. I've seen them work. Somehow they can do both things. I'm pretty sure I couldn't (without lots of eff-ups). I'm pretty sure a lot of us couldn't. So you might need at least an extra hand or two depending on your personal limitations.
 
morgan_moore said:
As camera dept I hate being rushed, much better the AD saying 'we are tight for time.. go with sticks' than the entire crew/cast humphing while you try to lay some track or balance a steadicam two minutes before lunch.
Click to expand...

Oof. I have to go with "nope" on that. While it is the AD's job is to keep the director and department heads informed of the passage of time and what factors are affecting the schedule, it dances a dangerous line if they start telling the crafts how to go about their jobs. "We are tight for time, can you go with sticks?" would be more like it.

It is the DP's job to manage time and make decisions within their departments. If the director asks for a Steadicam shot without warning and it's not built, you can politely explain to them and the AD what the time hit would be, and hopefully offer a faster alternative on how to get the shot.

I could go on forever on this subject but I will end with: the AD job is an extremely tough one to pull off well. A good one keeps things running smoothly and helps navigate through the rough patches. A poor one will inspire stress, chaos and may actual create the rough patches.
 
Josh Bass said:
This also depends on how "amazing" you are. There are plenty of professional director-DPs in town here. I've seen them work. Somehow they can do both things. I'm pretty sure I couldn't (without lots of eff-ups). I'm pretty sure a lot of us couldn't. So you might need at least an extra hand or two depending on your personal limitations.
Click to expand...

Likely they are very talented DoPs and a very talented director. Would put you and I to shame.

But they would still need to compromise their work to do both at once, but the thing is they're so good that even when doing each at just 70% effort (and putting in an amazing 140% total performance) they're still outshining many others who just do one or the other!

CharlesPapert said:
Oof. I have to go with "nope" on that. While it is the AD's job is to keep the director and department heads informed of the passage of time and what factors are affecting the schedule, it dances a dangerous line if they start telling the crafts how to go about their jobs. "We are tight for time, can you go with sticks?" would be more like it.

It is the DP's job to manage time and make decisions within their departments. If the director asks for a Steadicam shot without warning and it's not built, you can politely explain to them and the AD what the time hit would be, and hopefully offer a faster alternative on how to get the shot.

I could go on forever on this subject but I will end with: the AD job is an extremely tough one to pull off well. A good one keeps things running smoothly and helps navigate through the rough patches. A poor one will inspire stress, chaos and may actual create the rough patches.
Click to expand...



Well put. Is rare the skills of a great 1st AD who can:
1) talk the language of all the departments, to keep communication flowing between departments and anticipate their needs
2) push hard for the time schedule, while still keeping the balance of respecting the crafts as they're the experts in their fields not him
 
A "Feature film" is a movie which has been guaranteed theatrical release, your movie does not fit into this category. A short film is Forty Minutes or less. A Long film is longer than Forty minutes. Nobody shoots film so these creations should be called 'movies'. The number of Crew depends on your script and blocking and sets and location. You can make a 120 minute long movie with just one person. That person could be both the lead actor and camera operator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top