Study directing or cinematograpy (first) ?

J

Jerryv

Active member
I am 20 years old and want to go to the filmacademie.
I want to direct, i like the whole proces of making movies, there is not 1 thing were iam really good at, i know a little bit of everything.

I am thinking: would it be better to study cinematography instead of directing? Reasons: there will be more work (likely), you learn a lot about filming and got to work on many projects for wich you gain set-experience (by directing you work a very long time on your film, the DOP 'jumps' to many more projects. This is even said by students on the filmacademie).

I want to direct, and i know the filmindustry is not easy to come in, and i know we are not doing it for the money. But we dó need to make a living: and as a cameraman/D.O.P. you have very more change of working than a director (not as a DOP, but as assist functions by the camera departement). -A person with a eduction in Directing cannot do very much on other people's projects-.

The benefits are: you are making a living, work on different projects -for a shorter amount of time than the director-, gain a lot of set-experience, and work in the filmindustry (as a D.O.P, or maybe just as a assistent).

Then, in your own spare time, you can work on directing skills.

After i worked a couple of years, i can use my set/film experience and try to get work as a director.

It seems like a far better option than study directing, and trying to get work in the industry as a director. As a cinematographer, the changes of work are far better and i can try to become a director myself.

What do you think about this? I dont even know if i agree with the above my self :) .

The other thing is: iam not a techniqeal person, iam not very handy and not good in matmatics... So iam worried cinematograpy is a LOT harder than directing!!!! or am i way of?

Jerry
 
My advice is work in all depts. It will help your overall directing chops. Also I know DP's that find it hard to get work, it just depends on how good you are :)

J.P.
 
I'd say you need to be at least reasonably technical to be a good DP. But it's possible to overcome that with vision, determination, artistry, of course. But that assumes you have the drive to create images. No one likes a DP who not-so-secretly wants to be the director. A DP is there to do a very important job, but it's a hard, all-consuming job. I'd consider it one of, if not THE, most demanding jobs on a production. But if you have that drive, then you're right... it's a good way to see how other people operate, and learn from the inside.

Personally, I went to USC, and my favorite thing about the program is how it is all-immersive. They absolutely require you to gain at least a minimum education in all aspects of film production, from editing, to sound, to camera, to directing, producing, design, and more. A lot of people complain, saying "I already KNOW I don't want to be a sound designer! I just want to direct!" But a lot of those people, after a few years, discovered they really weren't cut out for directing after all, or liked another job better. In any case, the job of directing is in large part built on understanding how all those puzzle pieces of production fit together, how to make the most of your crew, and how to speak in a language they can understand.
 
Dougspice, could you pm me about your experiences at USC, both in terms of admissions and the eduction you received there? I'm working my ass off to get a BA from one of the top undergrad film studies departments, but ultimately I want to go into production. I get good grades, but I've heard I don't stand a chance at USC since my family is too poor to pay for it; they want me to cover the whole cost myself. But I don't really believe this is insurmountable problem I've been told it is, and (even if money is an issue) I'll take out loans/prostitute myself/do literally whatever it takes. Were you MFA or BA, by the way? Was it worth it to you?
 
Actually, it's telling me your mailbox is full. There's nothing particularly secret in what I've written, so here it is:


Lots of questions there. I'll try to answer as best I can.

First, I also come from a poor family... my parents ended up contributing almost nothing to pay for my education. Fortunately, I was in the top 5% of my high school class and was awarded a half-ride scholarship. The rest was covered by a few small scholarships from my high school/town, but mostly from loans (which I've paid off about half of now). It is an expensive school, for sure... but most of them are, these days. Anyway, make sure you explore all scholarship options. I couldn't have gone otherwise.

I graduated in 2002 with a B.A. in Cinema-Television Production. My opinion of the education varies a lot. There are things I don't like, for sure. (please note that this is all based on my own experiences, or any recent info I have... things might have changed) For instance, the film program makes you wait at least a year and a half before you can begin any sort of production classes. In retrospect, I can see the wisdom of this... you get your GEs out of the way, not only having a broader experience of the world before you start making films (and I think this is CRITICAL), but also clearing up your schedule to focus entirely on the work of making movies. That's important. So now I see the point. At the time, it annoyed the hell out of me and most of my classmates. UCLA and NYU let you dive right in, for instance.

The actual education is pretty solid. Nothing that you couldn't learn through real experience, of course, but as I mentioned the real benefit is the wide scope of education they force you to take and the wide variety of people you're forced to meet. This can lead to a lot of opportunities. I own my own production company now, and I can say first-hand that you can't underestimate the benefits of being connected to so many people who are by nature driven to achieve some sort of success. Anyway, I could talk more about this if you want, but that's basically it. It's a solid education, but the real benefit is from the networking that you do. Some of the faculty are amazing, some aren't, but there's no denying it's a serious place to be.

As far as admissions, I would imagine they are as tough as ever. At the time I applied, they accepted 50 out of I think 1500-2000 applicants to the production program per year. The writing program was even tougher. The critical studies program was more open, I think more like 300-400 people per year, and those students also take some of the production classes. There is a bit of a bitter rivalry between some of the crit studies people and the production kids; a lot of people are in critical studies only with the intention of transferring into production. The production program does open up to transfer students in junior year. But a lot of that is politics, I guess. A lot of crit studies people were just bitter hacks who were convinced they were the next Rodriguez with no proof, but some of them were extremely good filmmakers as well. Just as there were a few people in my production program who clearly weren't living up to the standard. So there you have it.

Hope that helps! Good luck!
 
My inbox literally filled up just minutes before I wrote that post; sorry about that.

Anyhow, thanks a ton for the advice. I'm in a tricky situation in that I'll either be in minor debt or have no money coming out of undergrad, but I'll also be independent of my parents and thereby unable to get money for grad school. Of course, my film studies/english double major is utterly worthless in helping me geta "real job," so my options are limited on all sides by different problems. But whatever; they're not that serious, I guess.

Anyhow, your experience sounds pretty good, similar to what I've heard from others, and definitely very encouraging. If you think waiting a year to produce films is tough, though, try waiting two to three years, and only being allowed to take one basic production class (plus an optional thesis). That's the "fun" of film studies. Although, to be fair, I kind of really like it.

Anyhow, thanks again; I appreciate the advice and will definitely keep it in mind. Now back to writing an essay that, if I don't finish it in a couple hours, will prevent me from going to grad school at all.
 
dougspice said:
I graduated in 2002 with a B.A. in Cinema-Television Production. My opinion of the education varies a lot. There are things I don't like, for sure. (please note that this is all based on my own experiences, or any recent info I have... things might have changed) For instance, the film program makes you wait at least a year and a half before you can begin any sort of production classes. In retrospect, I can see the wisdom of this... you get your GEs out of the way, not only having a broader experience of the world before you start making films (and I think this is CRITICAL), but also clearing up your schedule to focus entirely on the work of making movies. That's important. So now I see the point. At the time, it annoyed the hell out of me and most of my classmates. UCLA and NYU let you dive right in, for instance.
Click to expand...
Not true. I went to UCLA, and they wouldn't even let you apply for the film program until the end of your second year, which is essentially the same as your experience at USC.

dougspice said:
The actual education is pretty solid. Nothing that you couldn't learn through real experience, of course, but as I mentioned the real benefit is the wide scope of education they force you to take and the wide variety of people you're forced to meet. This can lead to a lot of opportunities. I own my own production company now, and I can say first-hand that you can't underestimate the benefits of being connected to so many people who are by nature driven to achieve some sort of success. Anyway, I could talk more about this if you want, but that's basically it. It's a solid education, but the real benefit is from the networking that you do. Some of the faculty are amazing, some aren't, but there's no denying it's a serious place to be.
Click to expand...
My opinion of it is: go to college for something ELSE, and make films with the money you would otherwise have spent on the film program. You get the life experience of college, the real-world experience of making films, and the opportunity to network.

If you go into a film school, also know your film program's policy on ownership. Some schools automatically own any film made through their program.

I really believe that the only reason to go into a film program is for screenwriting, and then not so much for the quality of the instruction as the fact that THEY WILL MAKE YOU WRITE EVERY DAY, which is the only real way to learn.

Actually, let me contradict my last statement: cinematography is a good reason to go to film school as well, as long as it's a good one. They will teach you a lot of technical stuff you need to know that's much more difficult to pick up just by screwing around with your own shorts.
 
Heey, this discussing is getting to take controle of my topic!

dougspice, thanks for the advice.

How do others feel about study cinematography, and wanting to become a director? vbmenu_register("postmenu_864753", true);
 
I agree with Dorkmanscott...

I think some film schools are jips... I wanted to go to one... But the way it seemed... I was like... "eh..." They'll tell you something like, "We're a production company in the film school" They'll help you make your movie... Than try selling it to you haha... And on the DVD, they print the schools name and number...

I wish I went to college for business administration, marketing, or journalism... You can meet more people and get more help there... If I was in college maybe I would have made 50 short films now... (Maybe evan a few features)... Instead I made 0 (well, 0 that I'd show since they were all on consumer cams)...

Also, with the technical stuff of filming and editing, you should work with somebody with expierience, ask them questions about settings and stuff... For camera motion, if your the director... You should decide how you want the camera to move for this particular scene... Writing scripts comes natural... Nobody can give you dialogue or action... Because than thats them writing the screenplay...

Than again, I'm really nobody to take advice from because I have nothing to show but a bunch of questions of my own I post around the site haha...

Anyway, definantly better off going to college for something else... Directing is a vision... It's really nothing somebody can teach... It's just the way you see a script being finalized... Because just like the, "writing a script" thing... If somebody else is telling you how to direct your movie, than they're the director...

Good luck
 
Last edited:
FutureDVXUser said:
Writing scripts comes natural... Nobody can give you dialogue or action...
Click to expand...

Couldn't disagree with this statement more. Sure, there's a natural talent for writing that some people have and some don't, but the ins and outs of writing a script are largely technique, which is definitely learned through hard work. Nobody has ever walked off the street and written a brilliant screenplay on their first try.
 
Okay, but are you sayin', if you give me dialogue and action.. I'm writing the script?

Maybe the technique like the format is something to learn... But the way you want to express things can't be taught...

I don't really care if we disagree or not... I'm not tryin to start a big debate, it's just the way I see things...

Sorry...
 
FutureDVXUser said:
Okay, but are you sayin', if you give me dialogue and action.. I'm writing the script?

Maybe the technique like the format is something to learn... But the way you want to express things can't be taught...

I don't really care if we disagree or not... I'm not tryin to start a big debate, it's just the way I see things...

Sorry...
Click to expand...

Your post is beyond comprehension. Anyone with a bit of common sense would disagree with you. Read Robert McKee. Read Syd Field. Hell, just watch a movie. You can't ignore that there are structural elements at the heart of every "conventional" screenplay, and these same elements exist in every unconventional screenplay as well, they are merely being worked against. If by "format" you mean story structure, writing style, vast knowledge of genre, characterization, etc. then I could almost forgive your comment.

But no. Not even then. There's wrong, there's very wrong, and then there's your post. Sorry. It's just true.
 
Michael Ventura, a very accomplished poet, novelist, journalist and screenwriter just might agree with him.
"Workshops are (often but not always) a hustle, supplying tidbits to paying customers. Would-be writers attend workshops for reinforcement. Helps them feel like writers. But if your life doesn't inspire you to write, a workshop won't. Not for long. What you most need to learn about writing is how language resists specific expression and how to shape it into what you must express, and this is learned through years of writing and in no other way. Close the door of your room behind you, sit down to the task, and stick to it – that's the only workshop that finally counts."
This is from a very interesting article - www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/column?oid=oid:406104
 
No. He wouldn't. Don't be a reductionist devil's advocate because you think it's cute. Just because one guy of whom I've never heard says something against "workshops" doesn't mean he (or anyone with half a brain for that matter) feels that there's no formal basis to screenwriting. Hell, I didn't even mention workshops, although McKee does give them (and the vast majority of people who go to them are impressed.)

So workshops may be of varying quality, true. So inspiration may be something that's impossible to teach. I'll buy it. But there's a narrative structure to the screenpay, there are genre conventions, and you need to be cognizant of them if you want to write successfully. Can you learn them from a workshop? Maybe. From a book? Maybe. From watching hundreds of movies closely? Maybe.

But if you remain ignorant, your work is going to suffer. Invariably.
 
Amulet Man,
Did you read the article? I'm very familiar with Ventura's stance on this subject and it doesn't pertain only to workshops. I chose not to include everything he states in my post in the spirit of brevity, not reductionism. FutureDVXUser clearly states his basic premiss - "Maybe the technique like the format is something to learn... But the way you want to express things can't be taught...". In my mind he's on the right track and I wanted to point him in the direction of someone who can very clearly articulate ideas that may be similar to his.

Ventura has worked with Cassavettes in the film world and psychologist James Hillman in the literary world, both highly regarded unconventional thinkers in their fields, to name just two.
 
Last edited:
I haven't read the article, but I will when I get the chance.
Still, I'll stick by what I wrote:

"If by "format" you mean story structure, writing style, vast knowledge of genre, characterization, etc. then I could almost forgive your comment."

Everyone has a unique writing style, sure...and maybe you can't teach that so much as it's something that develops through your own work and through reading others'. And everyone perceives things differently; I'll grant you that, too. But to have a writing style, you need to be able to write (and within a given medium, too; screenwriting has its specific formal stipulations whether you're consciously cognizant of them or no) and to write about something, you need to know something about it. It's that simple.

I'm not saying everyone needs to go to film school. I'm saying you need to know what a screenplay is before you write one. Simple as that. I'm not saying this to be a jerk; I'm saying this because there are countless people wasting their time trying to write something they think is a screenplay, without even realizing they don't know what they're doing. By encouraging this you're actively wasting people's time. If you're not going to invest the time watching and analyzing hundreds of movies, at least read a book on it. It can't hurt.

I'm not saying there's one way to go about learning to write, I'm just saying you do learn it. Certainly there are intuitive aspects to any art, but they are ultimately secondary, although also invaluable if you want to make something great.
 
Be forwarned, the article is not about writing, but he touches on the subject a few times throughout. It's about making a living in the arts.
 
I'm sorry... I don't know much... But I do know that not everybody can hit the ball the way Derrek Jeter holds his bat... Everybody has to find their own way of doing things that works for them... If ya think film school is your way, than go for it...

I personally never liked school. And in some way I regret it, but I if I was to do it over again, I still wouldn't like it... haha... Well, it's actually nothin to be happy of...
 
Jerryv said:
I am 20 years old and want to go to the filmacademie.
I want to direct, i like the whole proces of making movies, there is not 1 thing were iam really good at, i know a little bit of everything.

I am thinking: would it be better to study cinematography instead of directing? Reasons: there will be more work (likely), you learn a lot about filming and got to work on many projects for wich you gain set-experience (by directing you work a very long time on your film, the DOP 'jumps' to many more projects. This is even said by students on the filmacademie).

I want to direct, and i know the filmindustry is not easy to come in, and i know we are not doing it for the money. But we dó need to make a living: and as a cameraman/D.O.P. you have very more change of working than a director (not as a DOP, but as assist functions by the camera departement). -A person with a eduction in Directing cannot do very much on other people's projects-.

The benefits are: you are making a living, work on different projects -for a shorter amount of time than the director-, gain a lot of set-experience, and work in the filmindustry (as a D.O.P, or maybe just as a assistent).

Then, in your own spare time, you can work on directing skills.

After i worked a couple of years, i can use my set/film experience and try to get work as a director.

It seems like a far better option than study directing, and trying to get work in the industry as a director. As a cinematographer, the changes of work are far better and i can try to become a director myself.

What do you think about this? I dont even know if i agree with the above my self :) .

The other thing is: iam not a techniqeal person, iam not very handy and not good in matmatics... So iam worried cinematograpy is a LOT harder than directing!!!! or am i way of?

Jerry
Click to expand...


why do you want to go to the film academy? all that you can learn it on your own. Even a person have talent or not, a film academy will not make you a good director or DOP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top