Are we Artists or Techno Nerd / Computer Geeks ?

Im thinkin here, am I am artist or a Techno Nerd / Computer Geek ? Is a filmmaker both or do you have your specialty ?

I was a watchin a documentary on Mr David Lynch and he seemed so much more an Artist than a Techno Nerd / Computer Geek type....I saw where an assistant was telling him about some simple settings on a camera. I also watched a video where Walter Murch complained about some issues w/ FCP X when it first came out and he said " I cannot use it "... Walter went on to say that he felt stuck since they closed the older version of FCP when they released X.

Do we need to focus so much on the technology or the art ? what is going to get our message across ? I fully understand that i have to have basic knowledge of the tools in order to create. Im thinking I shall have more fun being truly creative and focus on the art and the expression and shall try and advance what I want to do more artistically and let others focus more on the technology.

I understand that in order to get a decent picture, you must shoot at 18,000,000K 3D at a bit rate of 345,000,000,0000,000,0000 megabits to make anything useful nowdays but, Im thinking I need to focus on getting the basics down and get help where I need it and use my bizarre imagination and creativity to make my visions come to life.


What is more important for you ? Art or Tech ?
 
Last edited:
If you're self funding or hustling and barely covering expenses you're creating art. If you're getting paid by someone else, it's not art.
 
I see both can guide us in our path. We each have our niche. Im thinking I must focus on my unique skills and go / grow from there. I want to utilize my skills in getting others involved in a project and getting them to perform their skills. I see I must know enough on how to get others to perform tasks that Im not totally skilled to do as well as others.

I feel more now than ever that I need to focus exclusively on the art and use my skills in organizing and leading to get others on my team to make my visions come to life.









.
 
Last edited:
My intuition and experiences lead me to believe that many filmmakers would say you have created a false-dichotomy. I think many people might say that there is no reason why you can't be both -- artist and technician.

I am not one of those people. I think you raise a good point. Though, I don't think it's a black/white issue. These qualities are of course not mutually-exclusive. An artist can have technical expertise, and a technician can be a beautiful artist.

I do agree with you, however, that it is not just our time that is limited, but also our creative energies. You can only learn so much, and you can only focus so much of your creativity on so many things. So, I actually do think that the more time/energy you spend on one will come at the detriment of the other.

Me? Well, I'm not much of a technician. So I hope I end up being seen as an artist, cuz otherwise I ain't got crap. I think it'd be pretentious to outright say that I am an artist, but I don't mind saying that that is how I hope to be viewed. :)
 
This is why you have a DP to get the shots you want, a Production Sound Mixer to assure excellent production sound, a Script Supervisor to keep the story organized, a 1st AD to keep the cast and crew organized, a Production Designer responsible for the look of the sets and cast, and a Post Production Supervisor responsible for all aspects of post production like editing and sound design. These are your key people. These are the professionals who worry about the technological side of filmmaking, allowing you to be the visionary artist.

And that is what defeats so many indie filmmakers; they take on too many responsibilities. It is extremely rare that an indie filmmaker can execute all the technical aspects of making a film and still remain an artist. The reverse is also true; the filmmaker expends so much time on being an artist that they become sloppy with the technical aspects.

Now, I grant you that to "do it right" is expensive. But, as I so frequently preach, you can expend prodigal amounts of time (time = money, right?) to make up for a lack of funding. And that's the problem with DIY - you can't do a great job at everything. There are just too many details for one person to deal with.

That's why there are specialists like me - we're the ones who expend the time and effort to be good, even great, at one small aspect of filmmaking. I can tell you every piece of gear to get, and exactly how to do what I do, but the quality of my work will always be far superior to your own. Not because I'm better than you or smarter than you, but because I'm trained differently, have better equipment, and lots more experience. But most importantly, sound-for-picture is my my whole life, my passion. And the same holds true for every specialist. That's why we're here, to help the director bring his/her vision to life, to take the technical burden off of their shoulders and allow them to be an artist.
 
I have always marveled at how when you are watching the end of a good movie, there are maybe 100 names listed. Each name is someone who brought their artistry , their talent at doing one thing to make the movie happen.

A mentor of mine described genius as the ability to focus on the task at hand.
 
If you're self funding or hustling and barely covering expenses you're creating art. If you're getting paid by someone else, it's not art.

This concept does not bear even the loosest of critical thinking.

Following this standard, few of the great works of Beethoven or DaVinci would be considered art. Your thought denies the artistry in every craft.

You can find many examples where art was not recognized at the time of its creation, this is true, however this does not mean that the all art that was recognized and paid for, is somehow NOT art.
 
This concept does not bear even the loosest of critical thinking.

Following this standard, few of the great works of Beethoven or DaVinci would be considered art. Your thought denies the artistry in every craft.

You can find many examples where art was not recognized at the time of its creation, this is true, however this does not mean that the all art that was recognized and paid for, is somehow NOT art.

The OP was talking about filmmaking, not art in general. Filmmaking has this bit of warped weirdness not often found in many of the other forms of art.

However, your objection is noted. :cool:
 
I think I got it now. Thanks for the clarification, G-Angel.

Not Art:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiyA70jAL14



Art:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raIm1w2yrPc
 
And that is what defeats so many indie filmmakers; they take on too many responsibilities. It is extremely rare that an indie filmmaker can execute all the technical aspects of making a film and still remain an artist.

Yep, a big problem. I've been working on micro budget short and at one point I was simultaneously directing an actress, trying to act, and holding a reflector. Other moments of ignominy: simultaneously holding a boom pole while directing two actors. It's not a recipe for success.

Two ways to make things easier on yourself is get a great location and trained actors. The cool location will take some of the pressure off lighting and the trained actors won't need as much direction. They'll have their own ideas, an awareness of wardrobe and make up continuity, they'll know their lines and things will just flow easier.
 
Indiebudget, my fellow filmmaker... We've talked and shared each other's work. Interesting topic and thread.

Nothing is so simple as "are we artists or techie geeks". I think that is self grandisement within either term (or, some might consider a put down). The tech are the tools of the trade like paint brushes or guitars (sometimes bigger is better), keeping up on the latest tech can be expensive and time consuming...

My two cents, I am not rich or famous. Please excuse my brief, senile history...

I do not think of 'myself' as a techie or a nerd, don't think any would call or think of me as such. I do ask many techie questions on IndieTalk and other film making boards due to my ignorance on tech issues, (while fascinated by technology, it is so expensive to keep up with what the market demands).

Artist? I kind of hate the term, cause everyone considers them self an artist, (and they might be) however if everyone is an artist...

Instead of artist or techie-geek... think along the lines of knowledge, practical and creative with purpose or goal.

I'm not an artist or a techie nerd... just someone having fun making stuff.
 
I couldn't disagree more. If Conrad Hall isn't an artist (and you are)… well, then I'm a banana.

Ollie, if you're a banana, then I'm a monkey's uncle.

No... wait... I'm a banana, too.

487837720_70ef24d1aa.jpg
 
I couldn't disagree more. If Conrad Hall isn't an artist (and you are)… well, then I'm a banana.

Here f'in here. If you get paid to do something you're not an artist?

Count me in for being a cheese danish.

And to the OP's original question:

I don't spend much time thinking about it. What I do know is I have to be on top of my game in all areas to excel because I don't have money. Some people are more fortunate, some people are less, that's just the hand we've been dealt. IMO If you don't know tech in 2012 and you aren't already rich OR have someone behind you that knows the tech, you aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

Me personally, I don't care about labels: I am doing, that's all that matters.
 
Last edited:
For me, we don't make art... (yes it's a blanket statement)... we perform a craft. If we do it REALLY well, the audience congratulates us on creating art. Art is the product as perceived by the audience... that judgement is solely in their hands so far as I'm concerned.

I've seen extremely non-technical people make what I would consider art on a very shoestring budget ( < US$1000 ). I've also seen huge budget stuff made by people at the top of their game turn out to be absolute crap... I've even seen different project made by the same people at either end of the spectrum.

I'm reminded of a scene from a film (I think it was "the patriot" -- probably wrong) where the character is trying to learn to make these wonderfully spindly rocking chairs. Everytime he tries to sit in a new one, it falls apart... but that one time everything comes together just right... Art.
 
Sorry, didn't mean to turn this into BASH GuerrillaAngel thread...

As to the OP, the two aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, I would go so far to say that the two are linked! You cannot become a true artists without technical expertise. There are many places in which you can deep geek dive in any medium.
 
Hmmmmm..........here in Nederland we have people that do Film school or Viscom, and people that do Art school. The artist make movies based on a single concept. Conceptual art movies....A movie of a boy, trowing rocks in the watter for 2 hours. A movie about 2 naked woman mastrubating in 2 different houses. Most artist movies are realy crap, or have a realy crap story structured.

Artist are not teached how to make a story...

The Film school people have a difrent problem. Most of them can not come up with a good story, concept or Idea. The only thing tose movie makers know........movie structers and movie rulles. Not how to makke a new Idea or concept.

So.....I did art school.....that makkes me a Artist. Specialty: Instalation art, performance and sound. I wil makke a movie ussing the 3 akt structure. It wil be a surrealistic movie.....
 
Last edited:
Top