Hello, I just joined D-Word. I have a question. Does anyone know of footage of Nice, France in the mid- to late-1920s? Also, footage of the Ottoman Empire in the early 1920s? I am looking for these to incorporate into a planned documentary on the life of the Ottoman Royalty when they went into exile. I can be reached at arvindach[at]gmail[dot]com. Thanks in advance. This looks like a very supportive community, judging from the answers to various questions asked by others.
Hello All: Can anyone recommend a good, inexpensive video stabilizer for my Canon t3i? I've been looking at the Dot Line DL-0370 Hands-free Video Stabilizer but don't know anyone who has one. Thanks!
Lillian, you'll find this and a lot more in this article from Chris Jones, 'The Perfect Guerilla Film Makers Camera Kit For Under Â£1k':
Hope this helps,
Thank you very much Yacine!
In reply to Arv Acharya's post on Sun 5 Feb 2012 :
i was just watching the bbc doc the first world war. lots of stuff from the ottoman empire – might want to see their sources and see what else you can dig up.
the episode is jihad – its also on youtube
I'm in a very similar situation to Mike above. I recently filmed a short doc about a small-time rock band in the UK, the first half of which was filmed in a rehearsal studio that they frequently use. I phoned the managers of the studio prior to filming and they said that they were happy for me to film there and take shots of their building.
However, during the first day of shooting there, they refused to sign a location release. They said that they were still very happy for me to film there and that I could film what I wanted and do what I liked with the final film. They didn't want to sign anything however, as they felt this would, potentially, leave them exposed to me later using the footage in a way that was damaging to them. I've spoken to them a couple of times since filming, as have the band, but they're sticking to this line. Apparently bands film at their studio quite frequently and this is the stance they take in all cases. I'm a stickler for crossing t's and dotting i's legally, so am not comfortable accepting verbal consent alone.
I'm planning on putting the film up on Youtube and Vimeo. I have no current plans to send it to festivals or secure broadcast distribution. Is this lack of a written location release something I should be worried about? My specific questions are:
Could the studio hypothetically take legal action simply because I have filmed on their premises, or would they need to show that I have damaged their reputation in doing so etc?
Would it be possible for me to put the video online and ask them to sign a release form just for that edit of that film (ie so that I'm covered, but they are also reassured that I can't then go and re-edit the rushes into something damaging to them).
I am in the UK and the doc was filmed here. I have signed releases for the other locations, all identifiable contributors and all the band's music.
Any thoughts would be hugely appreciated – this issue's held the film up for too long! Thanks a lot!
Personally I'd put it on the web and forget about it. Secondly, I think it's only broadcasters that require such extensive paperwork, not even festivals, generally. However, hypothetically any studio or any person could take legal action at any time for any reason whatsoever.
If it were me, I wouldn't worry about it a bit, Damien. But if it's keeping you up at night, you might want to get something informal with them via an email, even if it's just to explain their rationale as to why they don't want to sign a formal release. At least it's something where they state it's ok for you to film. But it's very unlikely they'll now turn around and sue.
Thanks a lot Jill and Doug, I really appreciate your thoughts.
I doubt this makes a difference, but I forgot to mention that I did not include the studio's name anywhere (eg interviews, on-screen text or shots of signage). It would be recognisable only to those who are already familiar with it.
That's very useful info (and good to know) about festivals Jill, thank you.
Thanks a lot for that suggestion Doug. I'm planning to email each contributor/location individually as soon as the film is uploaded with a link and message of thanks for their help. With the studio I thought I'd add a note saying that I appreciate their desire to look after their reputation and invite them to watch the film and let me know immediately if they have any objections. If they do not have any then at least I can move forward with evidence that I've taken reasonable steps to consider and account for their interests even without a signed release.
Thanks again both!
With the studio, I wouldn't rush to send them a link. But if you do, I'd absolutely never invite them to raise any objections.
Damien, you also may want to consider an on camera release where they just tell you on camera that it is cool for you to shoot there. Not sure how that will hold up, but it's something and might make you feel better. Also, if you are worried about legal action, which seems unlikely, you could just take the video down if that happens or put it on a private site with a password. Best of luck!
Thanks Doug, I certainly take your point. The studio were friendly and helpful throughout filming, and polite in their refusal to sign, but no need to open the door to problems! Maybe just a general email if any then.
Thanks as well Jill M. Filming is complete (and they're miles away from London!) so I think the window for an on-camera release is unfortunately closed. Thanks for the suggestion – I was actually curious as to whether taking the film down if trouble ever arose would be enough to solve the problem?
Thanks very much again everyone, I appreciate this is a lot of attention to be paying to what is essentially a long Youtube vid, but I can see this being a recurring issue in the future and for others!
I would like to submit my first very short film that I finally completed to my satisfaction yesterday for the comments and hopefully withering criticism of various mentors here.
I have generally found that the harsher the criticism, the more I can learn from it and because I am able to take such criticism with a minimum of disappointment, I have been able to substantially improve this film from the miserable state it was in last year.
This short is entitled "Twitter Time" and it explores possible responses to the exponential acceleration of our experience as discussed in Raymond Kurzweil's book "The Singularity is Near".
Here is a link to the film, best viewed in HD.
What follows in the next post is my discussion I intend to include in the "Director's Cut" DVD of the film for submittal to film festivals.
I look forward to your comments and criticism and, again, your discussion of the worst aspects of this project are most welcome.
Below is the discussion I intend to provide for the "Director's Cut" portion of my short film Twitter Time, as discussed in my immediately previous post:
Way back in the 20th century, a sound bite was used to refer to an abbreviated form of communication that became a widespread shorthand used to communicate more quickly and efficiently in an accelerating world.
Since that ancient day, nobody really has time for lengthy sound bites anymore, instead preferring to communicate in short, 256 character Twitter feeds.
As we connect the dots from the now archaic sound bite to the much shorter Twitter feeds of today, what may we look forward to in the future when nobody has time for Twitter feeds anymore?
I describe this trend as the exponential acceleration of human experience and it closely mirrors Raymond Kurzweil's discussions of the "coming singularity" when future information flows collapse into a black hole of ever accelerating processing machines that he claims is our destiny.
How can we respond to these cultural trends? Is it our lot to simply embrace, welcome and accelerate them, or are there alternatives that may provide more comfort, humanity and, ultimately, sustainability to our lives?
Mahatma Gandhi once said that there is more to life than simply accelerating its speed.
That's what this film is about.
The theme of this film is that the medium is the message, as Marshall McLuhan told us before Facebook went public.
The first part of the film deals with the inherent limitations of text-based communication systems such as email, Twitter and Facebook. Communicating in such media is inherently myopic and limited, as nuances of relationship, irony and subtlety are inevitably lost in the mad rush to discuss our world through the narrow prism of no more than 256 characters for a Twitter feed.
We are bombarded with so many fragments of messages and heavily commercialized memes that this tends to shorten our attention spans and harms our capacity to remember. It has been said that the United States is the complete opposite of the Balkans because nobody remembers anything. I'm persuaded that aphorism has the ring of truth due, at least in part, to the acceleration of our existence intensified by expending ever-increasing amounts of our time immersed in a strictly alphanumeric-intensive domain. It's a zero sum game.
The various data streams in the first portion of the film are exemplars of the phenomenon of information overload that we all face in this medium.
How can we respond to this spiraling, meaningless complexity that saturates this domain?
It is the function of the second part of the film to discuss this.
The second part of the film explores other media distinct from alphanumeric, textual formats, in increasing order of richness and resonance.
The medium of still photographs is presented in the second part of the film as an initial contrast to alphanumeric text-based communication software systems discussed previously.
The photographs are generally "letterboxed" in this film, which means they are surrounded by black horizontal and vertical borders to denote that the subject of the film not only contains references to the actual contents of the photographs, but also to the medium of photography generally, which is richer in its content than a life devoted to alphanumeric text processing only. One photograph is worth a thousand words and can convey nuances of emotion, humour and relationship typically lacking in Twitter feeds from cultural icons such as Justin Bieber.
Another medium covered in the film is that of film itself. I introduced the film with numeric countdown leaders and make liberal use of pure black visual spaces to indicate that I ask the viewer to not only immerse themselves in the various moving images presented in the film but also to explore the relative merits of the medium of film and video itself. The medium is once again the message here and the communicative domain of film can show subtle emotive and perspectival shifts over time not easily obtained from solitary photographs alone.
Finally, although constrained by the diegetic space of the film, I ask the viewer to contemplate what I call direct experience, be it the love of a woman, a walk in the woods, an exercise in tree planting, gentle conversation or whatever.
I find these final examples of more direct knowing to be a wonderful antidote to the exponential acceleration of human experience most clearly amplified by a life saturated with the endless task of processing alphanumeric text messages that are often, ultimately, trivial. A response to a life lived in "Twitter Time" if you will.
I posit that tree planting is just one of a myriad of options we have to stretch out, enjoy, celebrate and learn from our beautiful lives. Planting over 100 trees has clearly made me a better person and this will be covered in my next film "100 Trees", which describes the current benefits we enjoy around the world from various tree planting programmes instituted from the 12th century England, 16th century Tokugawa, Japan, to the 19th century projects of Johnny Appleseed and Golden Gate Park in San Francisco on to more recent tree planting exercises that I have been fortunate enough to participate in.
That film is described here:
Thanks for viewing the film and I look forward to any thoughts you may have.
I can be reached through the incredible, untapped potential of email at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Looking for a Native American Documentary-maker
A NYFA thesis student from Bulgaria will soon begin shooting a doc about an Omaha Sioux family who are trying to maintain and nourish their traditional ways against rather daunting societal, economic, and now medical odds. She and I would both like to get her connected to a Native American documentarian for mentoring as she goes. It could be as significant or minimal as anyone is willing to do. She has great craft mentors through the school. And she will have the guidance and advice of several Omaha people. Still, while some of her faculty have made docs with and about Native Americans, none of the Omaha advisers knows anything about filmmaking and none of us has the prospective that an actual Native American might lend her. She'd love to find someone Omaha but will thrilled with anyone who could combine some knowledge of film making with a Native American personal perspective.
Please email me at email@example.com if you, or someone you know, might be willing to help.
I have a few questions to ask. I'm working as a producer on my first Doc Feature "Two Blind to Ride" and I need to create a budget for grant writing.
We're thinking the length of the doc would be 60 minutes to 90 minutes.
1) Is 60 minutes better or 90 minutes? We're hoping for Cable, VOD or a content provider like Hulu as distribution.
2) What camera system would be good for this. Our DP wants a Red. We have DSLRs, but we don't think that's a good system for a project like this.
What would you recommend? I'm thinking of a Canon C300 since the output format is Mpeg-2. Would this be a good format for deliverables? What format/codec requirements is most common? Quicktime ProRes?
HDV? This would help us in choosing a camera.
3) What would be a good ballpark figure in budgeting for Post Production?
Can only address your first question, Ferdinand (which, of course, impacts the 3rd). If you're not looking for theatrical, you're far better off with 60 minutes in terms of being able to sell it to cable (and for international broadcast, as well). It will also cost you considerably less to make.
In reply to Ferdinand Casido's post on Mon 26 Mar 2012 :
re: your second question – i'd really hesitate to use RED for ANY doc project, and especially one where you'll be in remote/difficult locations for any length of time. you certainly don't need 4k for cable/hulu, and the cost of all the extra cards, hard drives, and costs in post production just aren't worth it, imo.
c300 makes a lot of sense for a project like this, as the image can be just as beautiful as the RED (but at a much more reasonable 50 mbps) making it possible to shoot on cheap CF cards, and less hard drive/power concerns while in the field)
but there is also something to be said about having a solid 1 piece camera that is compact, and doesn't need to change lenses. something like a Panasonic hvx 200, or hmc150, or ... will stand up to abuse in remote spots, and won't break if there is excessive dust, snow, etc... C300 is great, but it remains to be seen how well it will stand up to abuse in the field.
don't worry about delivery format until you are getting into post production. just acquire the best images you can now with the budget you have.
I'm in the middle of my first crowdfunding campaign on my first film entitled "Granny's Got Game". It is a sports doc with a twist – the athletes are seventy year old women who have been playing basketball together for almost 20 years. It is an inspiring story.
I've learned a lot in the archived "Crowdfunding" topic here on D-word. I did a month of prep before launch and reached my first goal in just 10 days. That was awesome. But contributions have dropped off dramatically the last couple of weeks despite have a surge of publicity and views on the campaign page. I'm wondering what I'm doing wrong. I'd really appreciate any feedback and suggestions people are willing to give. You can view the campaign here:
Angela, as a Professional member you don't want to be posting in the Mentoring Room, which is dedicated to Enthusiasts without access to all the other topics. Besides, Professional members rarely check out this topic – some do but most don't. We never encourage people to double post, but in this case you should re-post this in the Fundraising topic.
Thanks Doug and Riley,
I think we're moving away from the RED. Anyone with experience on the Sony FS100? That's a camera system we're looking at. Seems to have everything we need. Any pros cons and using that camera?
Too many buttons. Otherwise a nice camera.
i haven't used it – my big concern would be ergonomics. i'd make sure i tried it before committing.
Yes – you certainly can't hand hold it without some sort of stabilization (which I'm still working on). I think you can get used to the buttons – although in cold weather, I'd probably find it impossible to use. Just like with the DSLRs you'll need to transcode the footage, which is a pain. You'll need ND filters since there isn't one built in. I'd also probably (and am planning to buy) the Atimos recorder – so you can record in Prores and or have a back up to those flimsy cards.
Compared to the cameras you guys have been talking about, I feel foolish asking about the ones I'm looking at.... but I'm going to do it anyway.
I am going to start my first Feature Doc this fall if not sooner, but I honestly only have about $5000 in my bank account and have no car, need to pay for food, rent, etc. so I'm looking at most in the range of the Canon 5D Mark II or the Pentax k-5... Snapsort helped me narrow it down to those two, but something about it makes me feel uncomfortable. I know it's my first doc but I feel like these cameras are just unprofessional. I don't want to be seen as a student making a movie, but I also don't have a car so getting my gear from place t place needs to be a compact operation and I can't afford anything nicer... any suggestions?
Ps. here's the Snapsort comparison: http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_II-vs-Pentax_K-5
In reply to Kevin Hallagan's post on Wed 2 May 2012 :
If price is a constraint and you want to use a dslr, I would suggest one of the cheaper dslr's. I love my 5D Mark II, but something like a 60D or t3i would work just fine (and have an adjustable lcd screen). Also, the Panasonic GH2 can produce a wonderful image – you have to take the crop factor into account, but it's a nice doc camera as well. For all of these you'll need an external audio recorder – Zoom H4n is great.
I would recommend a shift in thinking over whether a camera is professional or unprofessional. They are tools – if you can get something cheaper that helps you do what you need to, get it. People take cues from how you conduct yourself. And often times, using a dslr helps on a doc shoot because you are hassled less from police, guards, etc because it's unassuming...
What Kevin says is right on. I shoot a 7D and love it most of the time. But the 60D and t3i is nearly as good as the 7d. Spend your money on audio. Get a good mic. Good sound is probably more important to seeming professional. Ultimately its not the camera that will make things look and sound good. Its you. Good luck.
thank you, Kevin and Peter. time for me to redirect my camera research.
I shoot with the 60D and vintage Soviet lenses w/adapter (which are not the most versatile, and not image stabilized, but all I could afford). The camera is great. Like you, I have no funding at the time and largely shoot/edit/produce alone. You will have to put the most thought into stabilization and audio recording.
For sound, I wear a small 4-channel field mixer around my waist where I can run a shotgun mic (mounted to the camera hotshoe) and wireless lav, then output via stereo cable to the camera input. It'd be better if I had a separate sound person but I usually don't, and after a lot of trial and error this seems to be working best for me.
As soon as I have a spare $600 or so I will get an image stabilized lens, but I have no idea when that will actually happen. Get one of those if you can. I rely on a combination of tripod, monopod w/feet, gorillapod, and rail system shoulder mount (which causes so much pain after using for a couple of hours that I rarely use it).
Also I found with the 60D it's much better to work with one of those magnification mounts you clip on to the LCD screen, this helps you see much easier if you are in focus. I guess you could also use one of those small LCD field monitors if you have somewhere to mount it.
Get a 60D instead of 5D and invest the savings into the other things you'll need.
Get some credit cards. Buy the camera you want used. Make your movie. Sell camera. Pay off card. Thats what I've done for 10 years. Will be worth having a camera with XLR inputs – I synced 100 hours of 7d footage. It sucked. Bad.
so what are everyone's thoughts on a Pentax K-5 with a BeachTek adapter for XLR inputs?
I had a Beachtek for a while. I never found the monitoring level to be very good, nor the level indicators to really work. The right channel blew out not too long after I got it. I get much better results using a 4 channel field mixer in a shoulder bag.
On the topic of price constraint equipment I was wondering if you guys would have a mic suggestion. I am currently using a 60D and need to buy a mic to accompany it. I do not want to have to sync audio :( and do not have a huge budget (but a semi flexible one). I will be doing almost entirely interviews both indoor and street interviews.
A friend suggested the MKE400 but I thought you guys might have some thoughts as well.
In reply to Matt Dubuque's post on Fri 2 Mar 2012 :
Your mindset is on the right track. There is nothing harder than patiently soaking criticism from your peers. Tears flow inside my helpless smiles when somebody bashes my works. However, what you're doing is the best way to deal with the harshness. All the confidence you need comes from you and your loved ones.
I'll watch the short film later on and give my comments soon. Keep that philosophy in check bro!
In reply to John Burgan's post on Sun 18 Sep 2011 :
Aside from the informative "THE CUTTING EDGE" documentary, there is also a film made my Gabriele Voss titled "Cuts in Space and Time". It's in German with English Subtitles.
The DVD is the link
It's great for both narrative and documentary editing! The director Gabriele Voss (along with her husband, Christoph Hubner) have been doing amazing cinema verite works. And they are also exceptional mentors!
In reply to Raymund Gerard C. Cruz's post on Mon 21 May 2012 :
Raymund, I confess I don't always read this topic but was v. glad I did today when I saw your glorious turn of phrase, "tears flow inside my helpless smiles." It inspired me to write a poem.
Apology Not Accepted
by Mrs. Wm. Carlos Wms.
When I opened
So sweet and so cold.
In reply to Margot Roth's post on Mon 21 May 2012 :
I didn't know my anxiety could produce such deep poetry. haha! Thanks for sharing. That energized up my day.
What Margot said, Raymund.
In reply to Doug Block's post on Tue 22 May 2012 :
She turned a simple phrase from my reply to Matt, and turned it into a poignant poem. Brilliant!
lol. Doug was refering to the hidden section of my post, Raymund. We're happy to have you. :) (Altho your selfless read of his comment further seals your reputation as the kindest, most sympathetic D-Worder of the incoming class of 2012. Congratulations!)
In reply to Margot Roth's post on Tue 22 May 2012 :
Haha! thank you for selecting me in the All-Rookie team. :) I will avoid these hyperlink turnovers soon.
Great poem by the way.
Hi, I'm a documentary filmmaker working on a business plan for the first time. I'm trying to find some good sources for finding out the marketing research data on the documentary film industry (and ideally broken down further to the LGBTQ documentary film industry). I'm trying to answer questions such as size of the market, demands in the market, trends in the target market etc. Does anyone know of any good resources?
In reply to Matt Dubuque's post on Fri 2 Mar 2012 :
I'm confused. I watched your short, "Twitter Time" on Youtube (about 7 min 45 sec). It has excellent production values: camera technique, sound, color, sountrack, editing, mixing, credits, etc. I saw close to three minutes of text crawls around and across a black screen, with an engaging drum sound track. This was followed by a series of colorful and well shot stills mixed with video of people planting small evergreen trees in a forest, and a large oriental (Buddha?) mask, without any dialogue and with the same engaging drum track. This was followedby about a minute of very nice credits rolling. I didn't see anything remotely connected to singularity or Ray Kurzweil or Twitter.
I am new to D-Word and not sure the mentoring forum is the right place to send my query into the d-byss, but it seems like a good place to start ...
I am producing a documentary about a young Iraqi girl who has been in the US for 5 years (thebeautythatremains.com). I am eager to get footage of her village (in Diyala Province) as well as interview some of her family members, etc. I will not be able to travel to Iraq but am looking for a trustworhty, streamlined team (perhaps Iraqi filmmakers or reporters who speak English, or independent journalists, writers, etc who are still over there?)
I have traveled down many paths already – connections through American news stations, reporters, etc. – but have so far come up empty-handed. Does anyone have any thoughts or advice, or know anyone I could reach out to directly?
Any input would be greatly appreciated.
In reply to Kevin Hallagan's post on Wed 2 May 2012 :
I agree. The 60D is actually pretty good. Most filmmakers here in Asia use it for independent film that have widescreen releases. What you should invest on are the lenses.
Hello, all! I am a newbie documentarian..My film, The Strength of Strings: Appalachian Music at Rocky Branch, needs funding. I just made a Kickstarter pitch video..but I will need more than that> I am thinking of having a Bluegrass concert, the proceeds of which will go towards continued shooting. Anyone out there good with Fuindraising suggestions>? I'd love to get a pro onboard..like Steve Martin..Jackson Browne.. or other local musicians! Am I just dreaming..again? Thanks for input,, much-appreciated!
In reply to alyce ornella's post on Thu 3 May 2012 :
I'm very curious to hear more about "vintage soviet lenses" and see what the results look like.
Hi Laura, getting a "name" onboard is always a good idea. Definitely pursue them after composing a compelling letter. Best of luck!
In reply to Errol Webber's post on Tue 8 Feb 2011 : The Canon XHA1, and the XHA1s are cheap now used on ebay, just get one that doesn't have a problem with the firewire port so you can ingest the video into your editor, or get an HV 10/20/30 or 40 to use as a tape deck and maybe a stationary camera. I've also seen the flash memory card replacements to the XH series going for 1/2 of the new price on ebay.
I haven't heard about the color issues, no one has complained about the 70+ interview type business owner commercials I've made with mine. I try to white balance on a grey card which is closer to skin reflectivity that a white card or other white object like a shirt.
My podcast is called "The Real Stuff" and it's a series of interviews with the makers of unscripted tv and film. And it's FREE!
A new episode is posting today – I hope you will check it out and tell all your friends to do so too!
This episode, my guest is Tyler Mathers. Tyler is an Associate Producer living and working in Washington, D.C.
Please check it out at my site:
OR subscribe to it on iTunes. You have to search a little for my page, but it's there!
Im a producer/editor and working on directing/editing my first feature doc. I edit my own film as well as client projects using FCP 7 on my old mac book pro and i need to replace computer. Question is whether to get a new Mac Book Pro or an imac. The Retina doesnt seem to be a good option for me bc it doesnt have firewire ports and all my footage is on LaCie drives w/Firewire ports (no thunderbolt port). Retina also lacking a dvd drive – so not gonna work for me. I love the portability of my macbookpro which is why im tempted to get a new one – w faster processor, more RAM, etc.... But the imac is tempting bc processor is SO much faster, more RAM, higher graphics card, than the MacBookPro. specs on macbookpro are as follows:
2.6GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
8GB 1600MHz memory
750GB 5400-rpm hard drive1
Intel HD Graphics 4000
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory
Whereas specs on imac are:
3.1GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
2560 x 1440 resolution
4GB (two 2GB) memory
1TB hard drive1
AMD Radeon HD 6970M with 1GB
BC Im not a full time editor – i do a lot of producing – can I go w MacBookPro or would it be a mistake? Also, is FCP7 going to be extinct soon? I need to finish cutting my film on FCP7. How will this effect me? For new projects, should I be cutting on FCP10 instead? Are bugs worked out?
In reply to ilona zonnenfeld's post on Sun 5 Aug 2012 :
Ilona, you might look at the Apple refurb 17" MacBook Pros. The express card slot, which was only on the 17", lets you add additional firewire or ESATA connectors. I don't understand why they discontinued the 17" – it's a great editing platform. I think the October 2011 model was the last one before being discontinued.
In general, an i7 processor is faster than an i5 processor so don't go by the Ghz rating of the processor – you have to find independent speed tests. And even then take them with a grain of salt. Disk access speed is as important for video than raw processor speed (as long as it's a reasonably fast computer.)
I don't think you can buy Final Cut 7 any more, but it still works fine if you've already got it. FCPX can be useful for short web work but is not what you want for a feature film. I don't think you can get by anymore with just one editing program....
In reply to Chuck Fadely's post on Sun 5 Aug 2012 :
Thank you Chuck! Very helpful feedback!
When you say, " I don't think you can get by anymore with just one editing program...." what programs are most editors working on these days? And would you say most editors are working on a desktop or laptop?
In reply to ilona zonnenfeld's post on Mon 6 Aug 2012 :
In terms of the programs editors are working on--I'd say that in my experience, up until the introduction of FCPX, the vast majority were on FCP7. But now that Apple has stopped supporting FCP7, we are in a weird in-between stage where there are still a lot of projects cutting on FCP7, but there is a sense that as the OS continues to get updated, at some point you just won't be able to run FCP7 anymore. So I think a lot of people are transitioning to Avid or Adobe Premiere (in my experience, mostly Avid).
Also, I am not sure that 5400rpm will be fast enough--I've always done 7200.
Right now I am cutting an HD project (FCP7) on a 2010 15" MacBook Pro, and it is working fine (although I should note it is a short, and I'm able to do it using one FW800 drive). If I were you, since you have to finish on FCP7, I might look into getting (or borrowing) a used system, possibly a desktop. My top concerns would be connectivity and drive speed. Because desktops have more connectivity options, and they are just more powerful than laptops, I'd say that usually a desktop model is preferable for cutting features.
Hope this is somewhat helpful.
In reply to ilona zonnenfeld's post on Mon 6 Aug 2012 :
I'm currently on a 27 inch iMac running Avid Media Composer 6. I'm a big AVID booster as it has been and remains a robust and reliable editing platform for over 20 years. You can download a trial version of Avid off their web site. Having the i7 top iMac 2011 model makes editing easy with all the different versions of HD out thee today.
Hello to everyone,
I see Apple stopped to support final cut studio, Most professional editors use Final cut studio since many years ago, why don't we bring our voice up to tell apple our wishes (and now we are suffering into other software) ? I suggest the host of D-word can help us to gather our wishes and voice. May be Apple thought we don't need it any more.
Waiting to hear from you
In reply to Rebecca Rolnick's post on Tue 10 Jul 2012 :
Have you considered reaching out to Kuwait film makers? There's a lot there and they have visa permission to go into Iraq.
Other than that, one might contact and Iraqi Student whose home for Ramadan?
I'm sure this question's been answered several times: What's the best way to secure permission to film a documentary? On screen Ok's. Since mine includes a lot Veteran Support groups, I'm running into an issue.
I'm documenting my experience getting help/lack of help. But the moment I call mention I'm making a documentary, they roll out the red carpet. The Military has always been like that. If it's going to go public, you're the star Soldier.
Can I just shoot first ask later? No pun intended.
You don't need permission to film a documentary, unless you're on someone else's private property. You'll need permission from the people on screen if you want to distribute it. To get distribution and the E&O insurance that's required for it, you'll need to have written release forms from your subjects. Google "appearance release" or "talent release" and I'm sure you'll find some boilerplate versions. On-camera releases may be better than nothing, and they're probably fine if you don't have big distribution plans, but I doubt they'll be sufficient to get E&O for a broad distribution.
Andy's right if you intend to ask a festival , theater, or broadcaster to show your film. However if the extent of your ambition is to show it on the web or private screenings, written releases are not required. In the US, you have the First Amendment right to shoot anyone you want in public. It's the insurance companies that demand releases (which can also be gotten after the fact). If you are in the beginning of your filmmaking don't get too hung up on getting written permissions for every little thing or person.
Others may disagree, but I advocate for exercising our rights to the fullest extent, particularly if the film isn't going to be on a big screen or broadcast.
Marcus, be careful about recording phone conversations. Depending on the state you're in (including California) it can be against the law to record someone else without their knowledge. I don't know about Arizona. However, while it may be illegal in such situations to record someone else, that doesn't necessarily mean it's un-ethical. If you're phoning a health care provider, and you need to document the poor level of care they're providing to you BEFORE you tell them you're making a documentary, then I can see an ethical argument for doing so. You have to weigh that against the likelihood of criminal prosecution, which I would guess is small, but I'm not a lawyer.
In almost every other situation where you're filming someone (short of some crazy hidden camera scenario) they're going to know that they're being filmed, and will behave accordingly. They may or may not be willing to sign an appearance release, but that doesn't impact your right to film. Of course, if you're trespassing on private property, they can try to bust you for that, but the camera doesn't change that one way or the other. And of course, US military property is public, not private.
I agree with Mark that if your primary goal is to get the film made, then you should try to get a release, but don't be stopped if you can't get one. For professional documentary filmmakers, who are motivated by trying to earn money to pay the lease on their Volvo station wagon, it doesn't make sense to film someone without a release. Because they need that release to get E&O insurance, which they need to sell their film to PBS or HBO. But if you're motivated by a passion to document your own experience, then you can still make a film that people will see someday, even if not on HBO.
Hi---I am working on a short documentary that has 4-5 talking head interviews. After putting up graphics to identify who is being interviewed for the first time---how often (if ever) would you "re-identify" who is speaking? Is the viewer supposed to remember the name if they haven't seen them on camera for a while? Should you identify them say the first two times they are on camera and then none after that?
What is the rule of thumb so to speak on putting up titles on interview subjects? I keep going around and circles between identifying my interview subjects too much and not enough. Thanks so much in advance for any feedback or advice you can give me. I appreciate anyone taking the time to respond with advice!
In reply to Todd Johnson's post on Sun 14 Oct 2012 :
Todd, if I ID with a lower third I do it on the speakers first or second on-screen appearance. Sometimes a film may have a montage of opening comments and then the IDs come in after the opening as the narrative opens up.
The old rule of thumb was the ID should be on long enough to read twice but that has gone out the window with lots of other thumb rules. I prefer 4 seconds at least. I've seen many only 2 seconds.
If the piece is long enough, say over 25 or 30 minutes, you can ID again if necessary especially if the person hasn't been on lot in the first section. Sometimes you can get away from on screen IDs by having people introduce themselves or have a narrator introduce them (if there is a narrator).
Ideally the film should give you a sense of who they are because most viewers won't really remember the name but need to know what they do or how they fit into the narrative. Hope that helps.
Thanks, Tom---Appreciate your taking the time for that feedback!
I think I'll go with the "old" rule of thumb, and do them twice. That seems to fit mine, which is about 24 minutes or so.
In reply to Lynnae Brown's post on Wed 4 Feb 2004 :
Try synergy transcription services for all your transcription needs. Synergy transcription services providing accurate transcription at affordable price.
I'm going to be shooting a project on a canon XA10 and a Canon 5d.
I will use one camera for certain applications, – the xa for run and gun, the 5d for interviews and tripod shots.
I'm confused by all the available formats, and wonder what formats would be ideal that would allow all the footage to be dragged to the same timeline in FCP7 and edit with a minimal amount of render time.
Right now I log and transfer footage from both cameras to Prores422.
The XA10 offers this option of quality:
Mxp (24mbps) FXP (17mbps), XP+(12mbps) SP (7mbps) and LP (5mbps).
Frame rates are 60i, PF30, PF24, and 24p
The 5D has a choice of video system NTSC or Pal
If I use NTSC, the
Movie Rec size options are 1320x1080 (30) and 1320x1080 (24)
(it also has SD NTSC)
If I use video system PAL, the
Movie Rec size options are 1320x1080 (25) and 1320x1080 (24)
(it also has SD PAL)
So the question is: What settings for XA10, what settings for 5D, so they cut together as well as possible.
And BTW, what is the difference between PAL 24 and NTSC 24FPS on the 5D?
If this question is off the mark, of if you can point out something I am misunderstanding, please do.
In reply to Daniel McGuire's post on Mon 19 Nov 2012 :
No reason for you to film in PAL unless you're shooting specifically for European delivery. Standard here is NTSC. Regarding the resolution, I think you mistyped â€“ it's 1920x1080. Also, the PAL option would be 25p, not 24p, correct? Either way, shoot NTSC.
I would definitely suggest continuing to transcode both sources to ProRes â€“ 422 is great, but you could probably do 422 (LT) to save space (if needed). Shooting 24p or 30p is a completely aesthetic choice. I personally dislike the look of 30p and shoot 24p almost exclusively. Just make sure to pick one and stick to it on both cameras.
You're right about that typo. But if PAL and NTSC are both 1920x1080, and there is a 24 fps both NTSC and PAL – what is the difference?
And what about data rate?
Unless you have a reason to film PAL, have it set to NTSC. I don't know the differences between their 24p â€“ for simplicity sake, use NTSC. It's not worth the time researching, testing, looking up the difference, when you have no reason to film in PAL.
For data rate, always shoot the highest possible you camera allows.
Hey Dan, there's no difference between the NTSC and PAL 24p. They are both exactly the same – 1080x1920. And both record at a truly cinematic 23.976fps.
It's just a confusing menu interface. There is in fact no such thing as PAL 24p or NTSC 24p. 24p is 24p. To be more precise, it's 23.976p. Which is what film runs at.
Your statement is incorrect. A camera set to PAL and recording in 24P will record at a frame rate of 24 frames per second. A camera set to NTSC and recording in 24P will be at a frame rate of 23.976. Film runs at 24 frames per second flat.
The problem will not be in picture but in sound. If your editing system is operating on 60Hz power then you should use the NTSC setting otherwise the sound will drift out of sync.
If you are doing double system sound the issue becomes even more important if you want to have the sound stay in sync.
It may not seem like a big difference but a .004 frame difference over 10 minutes is lip flap and a post production nightmare.
My name is Tymon Ruszkowski and I am a journalism student at Edinburgh Napier University in Scotland in my final year.
I am writing a dissertation on monetizing non broadcast documentaries.
I was wondering if I could ask you some questions about your projects and how posting video online can bring profit to filmmakers.
I am also curious about how audiences had changed and what does it mean for filmmakers.
Is it possible to send some filmmakers few questions over an email?
Try asking the people who created Distrify. You can find them through their website. Peter designed the current D-Word website and he and his partner in Distrify, Andy, are filmmakers. Their toolkit was created for especially for filmmakers. Also, look at the http://www.onlinefilm.org/ – and ask the same questions there perhaps. Onlinefilm grew out of the initiatives of some people associated with AGDOK (the association of doc filmmakers in Germany). They were thinking about this many years ago.
I have a mundane question, but one I don't the answer to (I am a first time film maker and first time festival participant). What is the purpose of post cards ? What goes on them?
Hey Ellin, Postcards are usually made up for screenings. You do all the regular stuff: Title, directed by, artwork/photo, website, sponsors, etc and then leave room for a sticker.
(The economical way to do it) The stickers will change with each screening. This way you can use the same postcard for festivals as well as theatrical screenings or even if it will appear on cable. You can just put the info on the sticker and make a new sticker when the info changes.
You might redo the card later with reviews, festivals your film has played at, etc. When you go to a fest, you see a lot of people handing out postcards or postcards in the local restaurants, hangouts, etc. I used to get them at 1800Postcards, but not sure where the best place is these days. Hope that helps!
In reply to Jill Morley's post on Tue 5 Mar 2013 :
Ellin, in the future no need for you to ask questions in the Mentoring Room as you're a professional member. This is more for "enthusiasts" who don't have access to most of the topics. And professional members rarely come here to answer questions (Jill being a very nice exception).
In reply to Doug Block's post on Tue 5 Mar 2013 :
OK. Thanks, Doug. I didn't realize that.
That said, feel free to come back here to answer questions asked by enthusiasts.
In reply to Doug Block's post on Wed 6 Mar 2013 :
I have a few questions surrounding footage ownership and distribution of a documentary.
Two years ago I was hired as a DOP to shoot a bullying documentary in a high school for two days. Letters were sent to all the parents by the school and approval from the teachers, school and families was full. The goal was to follow one student who was popular until an accident forced him to see bullying from the other side. Everyone involved expected the project to be screened in the school, broadcast, provide to other schools around north america who showed interest in the story. The documentary was screened and there were teary eyes everywhere at the school. But the school thought that the different groups being critical of each other (i.e. cheerleaders being critical of another group), and some other factors I'm not aware of created a rift between the school and the student and his mother (protaganists).
I am not aware of any model releases held by the production company.
I was never paid for the work I performed and don't expect to. I did not sign any contracts and still have the original footage.
My question is, what are my options in distributing or broadcasting this documentary if I edit a new one that is.
We had open access to any student who was willing to talk. I could possibly secure model releases from some of the principal characters as I would see them being supportive of moving forward.
Thanks for the ongoing support.
I'm curious, Sam, did you speak to the parents of the student? I wonder if they agree with the school that the film caused a rift. If not, is there any reason the film can't be distributed as is? After all, everyone has apparently signed off on it.
Hi Doug. Thanks for taking the time to respond, and so fast!
I haven't spoken to the students mother since the shoot. I don't have the full story on the rift and I have tried to investigate it further with the Director. Both of us are in the dark as we found the production company had not been honest on several issues.
That being said, after I wrote my post I thought to myself there shouldn't be any barrier to them signing a model release. Or any other students for that matter if that is the barrier to broadcasters and distributors.
The barrier to releasing the current version is that there is no master copy. I didn't edit the original and identified many issues with the final product.
Recently I captured the footage and began editing to re-tell the story.
I could distribute the new version to YouTube for example as per some previous posts without the model releases. I'm curious what other options there are for that scenario.
In reply to Marianne Shaneen's post on Sat 29 Dec 2007 :
Hi Marianne, I was wondering whether you found/designed an exclusivity agreement. I'm looking for precisely the same thing, also having no luck and was hoping you could perhaps point me in the right direction?
Hey everybody I am in the U.S. Navy and I am about to deploy for 6+ months very soon. I came up with the idea to shoot a documentary over the course the entire deployment from a sailors perspective. There isnt any films that have showed what life aboard a ship of over 5,000 people is actually like, that I know of. I have a few friends that I will show they're stories and what its it's like to leave wives, friends and loved ones behind for an unknow period of time. This has come from an idea to actually shooting in an extremely short time and I really am looking for advice. I do not have very good camera equipment nor do I have the money to get any on such short notice. Does the quality of the video really matter when the film is supposed to be the good, bad, and ugly of a real deployment? Most of it will be impromptu and on the go. I have a vision of how it will all come together to tell a great story but I don't want the lack of video quality to overshadow the story. I currently have a GoPro and a canon sx160. Any tips would be very helpfull. Thank you!
Daniel, I would suggest to capture the best quality video you can afford. The quality really does matter, especially if you would like it to screen in a theatrical setting one day. But, even if you decide image quality takes a backseat, you MUST have decent audio. You need a real microphone, possibly from a separate sound recorder, depending on how cheap a camera you end up using. I'm sure there will be all sorts of wind noise aboard, plus many other distracting sounds. You want to be able to isolate your subjects' voices as best as possible. Hopefully some others will chime in on the best way to achieve that.
Another idea--consider this deployment as like a scouting trip. Shoot some stuff with your current gear and use that as a guide for what you'd like to do on your next deployment when you've had time to raise some funds. Possibly having the scouting images will help funders see the potential.
Also, remember that the weak link for any film is often sound.... try to get the best quality sound you can.
also, reach out to contacts within the military who make promotional films and ads for the navy and they can help you greatly as well and perhaps fund you.
In reply to Daniel harren's post on Tue 19 Mar 2013 :
First and foremost is to consider a core question: what is the story you wish to tell? Two or 3 people can be on that same ship for those same 6 months and emerge with completely different films. What's your purpose in undertaking this challenge? Is it merely to document? Or to do something like reality tv shows? Or is it to probe a bit further into questions such as: how do people negotiate difference? assumptions of masculinity? sexuality? how are 3 people changed/impacted over time by the experience of...
In reply to Daniel harren's post on Tue 19 Mar 2013 :
Daniel,Have you seen the 10 part PBS series "Carrier?" It was shot on board the Nimitz in 2005. The series is a documentary with some reality show drama but the character development is pretty good. http://www.pbs.org/weta/carrier/
Having served on an aircraft carrier in Vietnam I was fascinated by what I saw on the Nimitz, both good and bad. Showing my age since I left the USS Oriskany CVA 34 in September 1972.
Jill, Matt and Vivian have offered really important advice. I might add that on one hand you have incredible access and on the other hand you are so close to the story that you may not see the forest from the trees.
I'm wondering if you have considered talking to the ship's public affairs officer or your supervisor. Have you poked around the ship's tv facility to see how they might help? Perhaps loan you a microphone.
Lots of potential directions for you to take the story.
One shot I would try to get is a zoom out from the deck of the ship so that at the end the entire carrier is in the field of view.
Zoom outs are awesome. Bring a wide angle.
Thank you to everybody for all the help! I wanted to try and work in the industry when i get out and seeing as this is my last deployment I just wanted to take advantage of the opportunity and make a positive of it. What I wanted to show was how people interact with one another and mainly the ups and downs and overall change in attitude and mood. After last cruise I was a little different for a while for some reason that I couldn't even figure out and I want to explore that (and throw in some action shots from the cockpit and flight deck of course!). Ron, I have seen "Carrier" but it didnt really like it too much honestly. I wanted to do something with a more insider feel i guess. Another problem I started to think of is the whole legality thing. I will actually be going out on the Nimitz too and I don't know if the Nimitz would be too happy with me showing the not so great aspects of everything! I think this deployment I will look at as a opportunity to get some good practice and learn how and what I want to do when the time comes for me to get out. Thank you again everybody for answering me back so quickly and helpfully!
Hi everybody :)
My name is Sara. I'm a grad student of the Master of Business, Entrepreneurship and Technology program at University of Waterloo. My start-up is about promoting documentary films online. I'm interested in your views on online documentary films promotion and consumption. Please take a moment to fill out this survey. Your participation will be much appreciated.
In reply to Daniel harren's post on Fri 22 Mar 2013 :
Shoot first and let them ask questions later. The thing is, you have to shoot A LOT for people to forget you have a camera in front of your face. In the first week of shooting people will either be hamming for the camera, doing all that stupid clowning most people do when someone points a lens their way, OR being stiff and official, like you're filming a training film. In order for people to let their guard down and act naturally, they need to get all of that out of their system and not think it's strange that a camera is pointed at them.
Good point Mark makes here.
I've been thinking of using a teleprompter hood to obscure the camera and the lens from the interview subject. From that perspective, I think Errol Morris has a leg up on making people feel comfortable using his tech-laden interview rig.