where have the filmmakers gone?

The re branding thing would be a tough call. The site was probably named DVXuser because that was the hot camera at the time. In the car world this would equate to a site called "Pontiacdriver" or "Oldsmobiledriver". Quite current 15 years ago, not so much now.
 
Ted Ramasola said:
I recently visited Austin and dropped by Stephen Mick's place where we had a short chat about the direction this site was, is now, and pondered as well where it will be, to stay relevant.
Having given it a bit of thought, I also think the site has become a mirror of ourselves as a collective. When it was started, it was sort of a club of excited and empowered group of new and some veteran film makers/cinematographers, events shooters, the DVX and XL cameras were giving "cinematic" tools to us who never thought we could afford them.

As years went by, we grew with the site, our skill set, our projects and jobs, some went on to greater heights faster than others, some stayed on doing what they do, albeit, more experienced and older than when they started. As more years passed, more and more new and younger members came in, and they are in where we were years ago, it was the dvx for us, then for them they came in with the canon/nikon dslr/ much later we now have the mirrorless crowd. That's 3 generations or even more.

I think we have, what family and society would call, a generation gap. It's always gonna be there. Older members would have different interests and goals than the "hungry" for success and idealistic young ones. I recall the path I also took when starting, I'd go for whiz bang glitter of effects and later went for subtlety and character driven materials, be it corporate or narrative. I think the film makers that started here are still around, there just not that noisy and impulsive as the younger new ones who are as excited with their new interchangeable/mirrorless/cmos bla bla bla toy as we were with the DVX/XL1 camera when it was new.

And as far as making films, we just screened a 40 min short I shot and edited to a paying audience, to a sold out theater, in Dallas last Month, and I have 3 scripts for consideration for early next year.

I wouldn't relegate the technical stuffs "to a corner", the toys will always be a fun and exciting part of the game, and we like toys, young and old. But I agree the areas for cinematography/lighting, storytelling, etc might need some injection of adrenaline.
Perhaps a reformat or a redesign of the site? I'd even dare to add, perhaps a re-branding of the site? DVXuser, is just a tech/camera centric name, so its expected to draw in crowds looking for info about cameras and tech than those looking for the other stuff involved in making films or videos.

Just my thoughts....
Click to expand...

mainstreetprod said:
The re branding thing would be a tough call. The site was probably named DVXuser because that was the hot camera at the time. In the car world this would equate to a site called "Pontiacdriver" or "Oldsmobiledriver". Quite current 15 years ago, not so much now.
Click to expand...

i think of generational rifts like older people not liking rock n roll. Then later it was hiphop then Dubstep. But going from indie films and short films to vines, YouTube make up tutorials, and reality based tv is more of a societal shift not just a generation gap.
 
Gillvane said:
i think of generational rifts like older people not liking rock n roll. Then later it was hiphop then Dubstep. But going from indie films and short films to vines, YouTube make up tutorials, and reality based tv is more of a societal shift not just a generation gap.
Click to expand...

Well... that's only if you see 'hiphop/dubstep' as the only alternative to rock-n-racket... I stopped listening to 'rock' in the early 70's, and only started listening to it again in the late 90's... and I never did like most 'pop' music which I would call 'hiphop' the modern version... then there's Ramstein... but I digress...

The only time I listen to 'oldies' is when in LA and occasionally tune to KRTH... but I just noticed a few days ago when I was passing through LA... KRTH is now playing mostly 80's pop... so now 'My Generation...' is shifted off into the mists of time... and there is no Lawrence Welk of Rock and bubble backgrounds to send aging hippies into their retirement years...
 
j1clark@ucsd.edu said:
there is no Lawrence Welk of Rock and bubble backgrounds to send aging hippies into their retirement years...
Click to expand...
The Stones? They've been together since 1962, over 50 years, still fill 80,000 seat stadiums, survived the 45 single to vinyl album to 8 track to cassette to CD to mp3 (hah! Back to singles!).
Just replace the champagne bubbles with coke and booze... but I digress.

The only constant is change. Change the sections, change the format, change the content, just don't change the name.
The DVX, after all, was the game changer... even if it was 2002. So it's an archaic name... so what? Would you change your name that everybody knew you by just to try to remain relevant???

Even though the DVX is almost as old in the tooth as Keith Richards, both keep ticking...
 
Gillvane said:
The short film has been replaced by the Vine.

Click to expand...
Funny how all the pixel-peeping and debates about cameras on forums and these Vines have zero attention to technical detail. Typically poor cellphone video with with bad stabilization, exposure all over the place, poor framing, etc.. completely about the content.

The audience doesn't have the attention span anymore. If a dramatic and slow intro to a film started playing on YT, audiences would hop through it to get to any good parts. OTOH, a cat video delivers the satisfaction right away. Same with music - a drawn-out/classic rock type intro versus an in-your-face beat with vocals and a hook right away.

My biggest culture shock this year was seeing news of a "Vine star" at a major awards show.. a woman who's a worldwide celebrity for making short vines.
 
Like many of you, I have been on this site for quite a while and enjoy the site and community very much. I have learned a lot over the years from participating.
I have done everything from festival shorts (like many of you), to PBS documentaries (like some of you), to commercials and other types of production. Managed to make a living doing it. I am in advertising (Executive Producer at McCann-Erickson Advertising) and am now freelancing. I would desperately love to use this site for some honest feedback on my films. For example (again, like many of you), I poured my heart and soul into one of my recent short narrative films and I LOVED it. It came out exactly the way I wanted it to. I thought that this particular film was a great success. Then I screened it. Everyone I showed it to HATED it!!! And I can't understand why. No one I know will give any specifics, other than to let me know that it just doesn't work on any level (for example, i realize that the actors aren't professionals and that takes points off; and that probably also reflects on my direction). These reactions seem to point to a large hole in my understanding of narrative filmmaking. I would LOVE to get some honest feedback - but like others have said, people feel obligated to say nice things, or they talk about how THEY would have made the film, or they often get personal.
My Suggestions:
1. (as others have mentioned) Change the name of the site to make it more relevant to current times.
2. (also, as has already been mentioned), move the "Screening Room" category to the top, where people can link to their films for discussion.
3. before anyone can comment, they must also post one of their films for review.
4. list all of the other categories later on the site.
My 2 cents.
 
Interesting idea. I don't know if triggerstreet is still a thing, but they had a rule that for every short you posted you had to review two others. Maybe implement something like that. Or maybe that's unrealistic and too hard to police. I don't know. Just an idea.
 
I like what DPstewart said.

Technology has made it so easy to put the ability to make films in everyone's hands that 1.) people have learned how hard it actually is to make a film, but also 2.) for the teams who can actually make "good" films it's become increasingly competitive and difficult to make money at it, at least on the indie film level.

For me this is why in the last 2-3 years although I still really love to obsess over camera tech, I've been more worried about honing my craft with good film/movie style lighting and post grading, and even story telling and learning about good narrative structure when it comes to screenplays and reading them and being able to filter through and identify the good and the bad.

A cheap way to shoot something that looks like film has been over for about 10 years now. Actually longer given the advent of 35mm adapters and even larger format digital broadcast camera's.. so these days perhaps filmmakers are hanging out more in cinematography forums, screenwriting forums, colorist forums, or other aspects of the filmmaking process rather than DVXuser where really it still is one big support group on camera tech and related post processing discussions.

Who knows.
 
It also seems that on many of these forums people will post a well produced short or a trailer, and it gets a few comments. But then there will be some test video with a bunch of cats and a lens flare that will have PAGES of comments.
 
That just comes back to what everyone's been saying about this board being tech-centric/obsessed vs filmmaking-centric. . .
 
Josh Bass said:
That just comes back to what everyone's been saying about this board being tech-centric/obsessed vs filmmaking-centric. . .
Click to expand...

True, but I would think that a narrative or doc piece would make people ask questions (How did you get the lighting like that? Which lens did you use on this shot etc etc) rather than the boring test videos that seem to give everyone a hard on.

It also likely has something to do with the deluge of the crap that you have to wade though to get to something decent and people's exceedingly short attention spans.
 
Last edited:
robmneilson said:
It also seems that on many of these forums people will post a well produced short or a trailer, and it gets a few comments. But then there will be some test video with a bunch of cats and a lens flare that will have PAGES of comments.
Click to expand...

That's because it's harder to critique a short film. Compared to a 30-minute meditation on lens flare from a candle, even a newb's short film has a million things going on at the speed of light.
 
I'm finding this discussion very interesting. In the past I've seen similar discussions and self questioning on other sites about non video/film topics. Assuming those that run this site want to attract more readers I concur with the idea of renaming. As a newbie I'd never heard of DVX so DVXuser was meaningless. By reading somewhere else I came across a link to here. But for that I might never have found the DVXuser in my quest for info on film making.

I'm a hobbyist who started out with typical entry level equipment. I read about cameras of interest and my chosen NLE. Also got into the pixel peeping realms while I lusted after a better video cam. Delving into techno-babble is part of the learning process which is valuable. Taking that to the extremes of abusing those who don't use the same gear isn't. Camera operation is one step in the film making process but the majority of online discussions I've seen begin and end there. (Just think how great Hitchcock could have been if only he'd had a ...). Of course holding forth about cameras and sensors and whatever is a lot easier than creating a film. Finding info beyond the camera and lighting how-to stuff has been challenging.

Often the behind the scenes films and/or discussions are useful to me because they reveal details about the actual process of making a film. But I suspect most Indies don't have the time or resources to make those. Finding practical info for one man bands (like me) has been tough. I've read many times that film is a collaborative art - implied in those statements often is that if you don't have a crew this ain't for you. I'd love to see discussions (or tutorials) about how the solitary film makers work. Occasionally I've seen feedback and ensuing discussions that are useful but far too often feedback consists of useless comments like "awesome" or "that rocked" etc. or equally uninformative negative comments. And then there's the 'Like' button. Imagine someone watched your opus was so moved that they clicked their mouse once on Like.

I haven't been through enough of the site to have any opinion about site moderation. Seeing the large number of members and topics I'm under the impression that the moderators are most likely getting it right most of the time. As for the democratization of video it seems to me that this has its downsides like Vine with fools who'll stick rockets up their backsides or other stupid pranks. Despite those crazies I think the small fraction of 1% of the video making public who have what it takes to be outstanding film makers are still out there. The old needle in a haystack metaphor springs to mind.

As for attracting and keeping the filmmakers a good first step would be to make it obvious that this site is for, by and about them. As suggested I agree with adjusting the topic listings to emphasize more of the art & craft of film making. Putting Screening Room and Film Making at the top of the menu would help. In line with comments others have made about feedback (the real stuff), I was active on a photo site where the members were strongly urged by the moderators and other members to post at least 3 feedback commentaries for each one of their own images posted. Most of the members followed that guideline and the result was that there was lots of good feedback: both positive and negative critiques with clear explanations of why the reviewer thought that way. The result was that new members stayed active because they got help and praise as needed and experienced members could offer advice and council and know that it would be listened to. It takes a bit of time and effort from all to make it work but the results are worthwhile. That site has been growing for about 15 years.

So these are a few rambling thoughts from a neophyte.

Ed
 
ED299 said:
I'd love to see discussions (or tutorials) about how the solitary film makers work.
So these are a few rambling thoughts from a neophyte.
Ed
Click to expand...

Maybe a "neophyte, but you've obviously been around the block and given this good consideration. I really like the idea about input for the solitary filmmaker. Never really thought about it before, but that is actually what we all are these days. Back when I shot film (I still have my 35mm Arriflex 2C, my Spectra light meter, and Pentax spot meter - sold all of my 16mm and Super 16 stuff), you needed collaboration. Not any more. We can and do make entire films by ourselves (by that, I mean by ourselves 'behind the camera') Great suggestion!
 
Renaming DVXUser would be a big mistake. The name has transcended its literal meaning and has years of baggage, I mean history, for the many long-time members ;)

Rename it to something bland and generalized, like Video Production Community, and you start all over again, as just another video production community.

It takes about eight seconds to discover that DVXUser is not mainly about DVX users.

In fact it's apparent that it's nowadays just a lot of DV Excuse-ers :D
 
combatentropy said:
Renaming DVXUser would be a big mistake. The name has transcended its literal meaning and has years of baggage, I mean history, for the many long-time members ;)

Rename it to something bland and generalized, like Video Production Community, and you start all over again, as just another video production community.

It takes about eight seconds to discover that DVXUser is not mainly about DVX users.

In fact it's apparent that it's nowadays just a lot of DV Excuse-ers :D
Click to expand...

But most of us aren't DVXusers anymore. Granted, there is equity in the brand and the name and you don't have to throw it all away.
It could be called DVXevolution or something that, indicating that DVX was the roots, but also that we have evolved. The DVXuser URL would have to be kept up and running for a year or two to redirect to the new site.
 
combatentropy said:
That's because it's harder to critique a short film. Compared to a 30-minute meditation on lens flare from a candle, even a newb's short film has a million things going on at the speed of light.
Click to expand...

I posted my submission for a 48-hour-esque film project a few weeks ago. I've seen it on the Big Screen, as the local screening was at a 'real'(tm) theater... I was impressed with the Blackmagic Pocket and was not embarrassed on that point...

But back to DVXUSER and user film posting... not a single comment with 100+ views... Not even saying 'can't see the video'... or what a s*%tty video why don't you take up knitting... and then there's the sound...

Nix...

I looked at the other submissions and there were frequently few if any responses to a posting.

As a note, same response on BMCUser as well... to use a more current set of initials...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top