Could I have a budget this low for this type of movie?
- Thread starter Princess
- Start date
The reality is that everything in film is expensive, at least if you want it to be good. I think the difference is that the visual aspect of a film is so immediately obvious that most try their hardest to bring to life at the very least acceptable images. Sound is not immediately obvious, and so is either relegated to something else in post, or barely thought of at all.
In the same way that you can get a DP to work for free, you could get a Sound Designer to work for free, and in a similar way that a free DP is better than no DP, a free Sound Designer is better than no Sound Designer. But, you're not going to get images that look like they were shot by Roger Deakins unless what you're paying is commensurate the kind of pay people like Deakins demands. I think, similarly, you're not going to get commercial-standard audio unless what you're paying is commensurate with the going rate of commercial-standard mixing.
But that's the thing - the 'cinematic' look is not a DSLR away. The 'cinematic' look is certainly cheaper than it was 10 years ago, but that doesn't take away from the fact that a DSLR in the hands of someone who isn't a Cinematographer, and I mean a Cinematographer in the truest sense of the word, not simply a glorified camera operator, is not going to get a 'cinematic' image, at least if you define 'cinematic' as being on par with Hollywood films.
I saw features shot on Varicam that looked similar to 35mm film, less than 10 years ago. Now, it didn't look like 35mm film because of the camera (i mean, it was a Varicam, even if it had a 35mm adapter on it). It looked like that because of the DP behind the camera. Today, you still need a great DP behind the camera. You can make 16mm look like 35mm, and you can make a DSLR look like a RED. Neither of those things happen simply because of the camera alone.
In the world of audio - you can buy Pro Tools and an MBox for <$1000. Does that mean you're going to be making world-class Sound Designs and mixes? No. Interestingly, however, people seem to think that a <$1000 camera is going to make their images look like a Hollywood film, though they tend to recognise that a <$1000 piece of audio software isn't going to make their audio sound liek a Hollywood film, even though they tend to give more thought to the visuals than the audio.
I'm just amused, and more than a bit bemused, at the idea that many of us who are able to write, produce, direct, shoot, edit, and even do our own VFX and musical scores, would be somehow unable to handle the finished audio on our own as well.
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, and maybe I'm in for a big surprise, but if that's true then I'll worry about conforming to theatrical standards when I have a distribution deal in front of me.
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, and maybe I'm in for a big surprise, but if that's true then I'll worry about conforming to theatrical standards when I have a distribution deal in front of me.
That's assuming you'd be able to obtain a distribution deal with a film that doesn't meet standards..
As I said in my previous post - I'm sure you could handle some level of sound, the same way that you handle some level of shooting and/or grading your film. That doesn't mean you can't complete your film. But you'll struggle to find anyone who'll pick you up and show your film if your film doesn't meet broadcast-safe colour spec, for example. You're gambling on the 1 in 10,000 (ish) chance that there's going to be a major distributor who likes your film enough to invest $xxxxxx in conforming your film to theatrical standards. If you want to take that gamble, fine. But you should realise it is a gamble that only few have succeeded with. You can easily name those who have succeeded in doing so, but think of the hundreds of films that have been shown at Sundance in that time that haven't been picked up, either for not meeting spec or otherwise. Then think of the thousands of films that simply didn't make it into Sundance because they were not up to scratch, either creatively or from a technical standpoint.
Unless I'm mistaken, none of the major deals made at Sundance this year were made with films that were not up to theatrical standard.
I don't think anyone's saying that you should spend $100k of a $102k budget on post sound, but just about every filmmaker I've worked with has dedicated part of their budget to sound post (except those back in film school).
I think APE is getting at the fact that it should be considered a part of the process, and should be invested in accordingly, rather than relegated to the gamble that maybe if someone likes my film enough they can worry about paying for it - by doing so, you are hurting your chances of being picked up in the first place.
From what I can gather it's somewhat like a colour grade - no-one would shoot flat and simply leave it flat and simply suggest that 'if someone likes my film they can pay for the colour grade' and if you do get a professional to colour grade your film, rather than attempting to do it yourself (unless, of course, you are a professional colourist), you will not only have a better looking film but also a much more commercially viable film that's more likely to be picked up.
Am I wrong, APE?
Last edited:
Setting aside the whole issue of "theatrical" or "broadcast" levels of distribution, even the bar for direct-to-DVD distribution from bottom-of-the-barrel distributors is being raised these days. We just sent our latest offering to a dist we've worked with over the years. They now require all submissions to be pre-QC'd by an independent third-party - and you'd better believe the dist ain't payin' for that. Btw, that QC check is exactly that... just a check. They don't fix any failures for ya. Back to the drawing board to fix all the failures on your own dime... and then back to the QC to try for another pass.
So you're welcome to wait til you have a dist deal in front of you, and then consider fixing the issues. I'm just sayin', good luck landin' that dist deal when even the humblest of distributors are flooded with so much material that they can now demand passable QC before even lookin' at what you got to offer.
Getting back on topic, if you have 1mil please don't use them all on your first movie. Make something smaller first.
Gl in the future.
Gl in the future.
And I'm bemused at how delusional and ignorant of filmmaking you are being! Especially as it only takes a few seconds of research to prove your level of delusion, for example: Take ANY of the films listed by rayw in the Films I think I should be able to shoot" thread, look them up on IMDb, click on "Full cast and crew" and scroll down to the Sound Department. The smallest audio post team is about 6 people, the largest about 25, the average is about 15. This is 15 experienced audio post professionals working for roughly 10-16 weeks, in facilities which cost many hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars to construct and equip. Even the smallest micro budget features require at least 6 -12 professionals + high quality facilities to achieve minimum theatrical audio standards. We're obviously talking about low and extremely low budget features here, blockbusters can require over 70 audio pros and $30m+ facilities.
In fact, can you give me one single example of a theatrically released feature film in the history of filmmaking where the audio post was completed by one person, let alone one person with no professional experience without commercial audio post facilities? For you to think you can do your audio to theatrical standards is completely ridiculous, there are only 3 possible explanations for your erroneous belief: 1. You are utterly deluded. 2. You are completely ignorant of what is required to achieve theatrical audio standards and are foolish enough to argue with someone who does. 3. You are truly some sort of marvel comics audio superhero capable of audio feats never before conceived by a human being!
You're essentially right, although what I am saying goes quite a bit deeper due to the fact that getting theatrically acceptable audio is NOT in the least bit a trivial task, in fact it's almost certainly the most difficult task for the vast majority of low and very low budget features.
Zensteve's last post is absolutely correct, carefully consider what he alluded to; direct-to-DVD has about the lowest audio expectations/requirements of any commercial distribution channel whereas theatrical distribution is at the complete opposite end of the scale, at the very top.
What I've wanted to do in part during this thread is to give advice on how the very low budget filmmaker can approach this unavoidable problem. Unfortunately, all I've been able to do is provide little snippets of info here and there because many in this thread aren't interested in how to deal with this problem but are more interested in arguing: 1. For what is patently impossible, 2. That this "unavoidable problem" does not even exist and 3. A professional specialist in the field should be ignored because he doesn't know what he's talking about and/or just trying to drum up business.
There is one important point I'll address regarding your post; to fix an unacceptable soundtrack will probably cost double and possibly as much as 5 times or so more than it would have cost to do it right in the first place and still result in a finished product which is not as good artistically as it would have been, had it been done right in the first place. Therefore before starting to make a film, a feature filmmaker should at least consider the question: Is it easier to find an investor to put up enough money to allow you to do it right in the first place or is it easier to find an investor to put up 2-5 times more to fix it after you've finished?
I couldn't begin to tell you how many films are stuck rotting on shelves, never to be seen by the public (except maybe free on youtube), because they've hit this QC brick wall and simply cannot afford what it costs to pass QC. All audio post facilities/professionals require half payment up front and half payment BEFORE delivery (or some variation thereof) because there is not a single audio post facility which has not been stung by a filmmaker or production company running out of money or going bankrupt trying to achieve acceptable audio standards.
Theatrical features QC works differently to other QC though. QC for theatrical features virtually always occurs during the actual re-recording process rather than as a separate process after re-recording is completed. This is accomplished by only allowing highly experienced theatrical re-recording mixers to create a mix in a Dolby certified mix facility, with a Dolby employed mastering consultant present. I don't know of any theatrical distributors in the western world who don't require a mix completed in a Dolby certified facility. This requirement is even true just for exhibition at many of the top film festivals, let alone for actual distribution! In fact, Dolby have a special rate specifically for filmmakers creating festival exhibition copies and directly support most of the top festivals by providing Dolby consultants and sometimes additional Dolby equipment for the duration of the festival.
Those making features in the hope of theatrical distribution must, at the very least, be aware of these basic filmmaking facts. If being ignorant of these basic facts is not bad enough, arguing that they don't even exist or that an amateur filmmaker in a home edit suite can account for them, is simply unfathomable!!
G
Sorry, man. I disagree completely. Cinematography is not hard. Some people make it out to be this grande chore and yeah, there are great Cinematographers that do amazing work, they'll tell you that most of cinematography is production design (locations, etc).
I've seen first timers on vimeo who happen to have access to great locations literally point and shoot something that looks like it's straight out of a movie. The fastest way to make a pretty image is to point the camera at something that looks nice.
So while that's all noble and such, yeah, the cinematic look IS a DSLR away. And that's sometimes 400.00 dolllars, with a kit lens. I'm an image freak, and even I recognize that as long as there's a semblance of a competent frame the audience can get beyond sub par images.
Audio on the other hand is a different story. A free sound designer may actually do more harm than good,
It's really not even the same comparison, and this comes from someone who's just now beginning to get into post audio. Unless your free sound designer and/or mixer's reel sounds great, you're probably better off doing it yourself... or even better, saving money and hiring someone that knows what they're doing.
I agree to an extent - half of what makes great cinematography is Production Design and Location Scouting. But I disagree that it's something that 'anyone' can do.
If it was, then we wouldn't have Cinematographers, unless you make the assumption that all Cinematographers are simply conmen who trick productions into paying them..
I do agree that if you point a camera at a pretty image, you'll get a pretty image from the camera. One of my favourite quotes is from a Cinematographer, who when asked how he got such a beautiful sunset shot, replied 'I pointed the camera west and pressed record'.
But pointing the camera west and pressing record isn't going to get you the beautiful lighting designs present in just about every Hollywood movie. Sure, we could agree that audiences will forgive bad visuals much quicker and easier than bad audio. But to then make the jump from that to 'cinematographers are (essentially) unnecessary' is a big call.
I certainly didn't mean to imply that you'd be hiring some guy who's never done it before in his life, and my whole point about hiring someone for free is that you'll get something - but it won't be great, and it certainly won't be of acceptable standards, similar to doing it yourself.
THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF YOUR FILM DOESN'T COST A PENNY!!!
Screenplay is #1. Yeah, I know that some of the people commenting in this thread are well aware of that, but I just feel like we're getting into too much of an audio-video debate. Truth be told, it all matters, does it not?
For whatever it's worth, I will say that the only crew position in insist on hiring, for my next ultra-low-budget feature is that of sound recordist, and I want someone who is legit (and, I need them there for preproduction).
Yes, I'd like a DP, but I can do that myself, worst-case-scenario. I think a large part of the reason that Kholi says cinematography is "easy" is because he's kind of awesome at it. I don't think it's easy, not even slightly. However, I think most filmmakers are visually-minded people, so we have an easier time with the visual stuff than we do with the audio stuff. And that's why we hire audio people.
Screenplay is #1. Yeah, I know that some of the people commenting in this thread are well aware of that, but I just feel like we're getting into too much of an audio-video debate. Truth be told, it all matters, does it not?
For whatever it's worth, I will say that the only crew position in insist on hiring, for my next ultra-low-budget feature is that of sound recordist, and I want someone who is legit (and, I need them there for preproduction).
Yes, I'd like a DP, but I can do that myself, worst-case-scenario. I think a large part of the reason that Kholi says cinematography is "easy" is because he's kind of awesome at it. I don't think it's easy, not even slightly. However, I think most filmmakers are visually-minded people, so we have an easier time with the visual stuff than we do with the audio stuff. And that's why we hire audio people.
The first part of the last sentence is where we start running into serious problems, several of them!
1. How do you know if your free sound designer's reel sounds great? Sure, you can listen to the reel on your headphones, laptop or even studio monitors and the reel might sound great but a real cinema system (not a home cinema system) is such a highly specialised and radically different animal. The size, frequency response, room acoustics, sheer power and even the basic technology upon which cinema speakers are based are all so completely different from anything you or a free sound designer are going to own. Imagine creating a mix on an iPhone, you might get it to sound great (or as great as it ever can sound on the puny little speakers in an iPhone) but what happens when you take that mix and play it on an audiophile grade music system, what are the chances of that same mix sounding even acceptable, let alone still sounding great? The difference between even a good set of studio monitors and a cinema system are at least as great as the difference between an iPhone and an audiophile grade music system! Regardless of how talented or experienced your sound designer is, if he/she has only ever owned and mixed on an iPhone, it is completely unreasonable to expect them to be able to create a mix on an iPhone which is going to sound decent on an extremely high quality music system. There is no way even a relatively high priced professional sound designer is going to be able to own the equipment necessary to create a decent theatrical mix, let alone a free sound designer!
2. Feature films and high budget TV movies have very similar audio post workflows (although different equipment requirements), workflows which are quite different to other areas of professional audio post. These workflows contain a significant number of conventions/working practises specific to feature films which have evolved over the years to avoid certain problems which can halt a feature in it's tracks. Except with a tiny handful of exceptions, they don't teach this stuff at university and neither you nor your sound designer are going to discover this by yourselves until it's too late. How are you going to find a free or even relatively cheap sound designer who has significant experience of professional feature film workflows? And NO, audio post workflows for shorts is nothing like audio post workflows for commercial features!
3. As I said in a previous post, theatrically released features require several teams of audio post specialists working for at least 10 weeks and as many as 20+ weeks in some cases. It's rare to find an individual who has the knowledge, experience and skill to undertake the work of all of these different specialist audio roles and if you do find such a person: 1. They are NOT going to be free and 2. It's unreasonable to expect one person to be able to produce an equivalent (acceptable) quality of work as say 10+ people, given the same amount of time.
In short, anyone who says they (on their own) can do a good enough job on your feature for it to be theatrically distributable (without seriously qualifying that statement) is either trying to con you or fooling themselves!
In a nutshell I would say: To make a film which someone (a distributor) is able to distribute requires compliance with certain audio specifications. To make a film which someone also wants to distribute requires an exceptionally well told story!
G
Obviously what you "can imagine" and how the industry actually works are two different things entirely! But, you don't have to imagine anything, just go and look it up on IMDb! The ADR recordists plus one of the Supervising sound editors would be the ADR team, a Foley Editor, Foley Artist and Foley Mixer is the Foley team (backed-up by a second Foley Editor and Foley Artist team), while the Sound Designer and 2 Supervising Sound Editors deal with the dialogue and other sound effects. These teams would be working pretty much concurrently. In addition there is the recording mixer (+ assistant) but much of their work doesn't start until the other teams are near completion. 11 audio post personnel in total, working in teams. This is in addition of course to the 2 man production sound team.
This is exactly in line with what I said about a micro budget films requiring 6-12 audio post personnel, working in teams. In a blockbuster the teams would contain considerably more personnel and the sound effects (for example) may be broken down into more sub-teams.
I never said dozens of audio experts, except for very high budget films. For low budget films (say $1m-$5m) I said the average was roughly about 15 audio post personnel. By the way, NONE of these audio post personnel are "on standby", they all have specific roles/jobs to complete. Even blockbusters do not employ audio post personnel who are "on standby", except maybe a maintenance technician. In addition to the audio post teams, 2-3 production sound personnel is entirely standard practice on micro budget films. A one man production sound team is asking for trouble!
G
Maybe for a short and even possibly the odd pro for a feature but that still doesn't solve your problem. You'd need to convince let's say 6-8 audio post pros, all at roughly the same time but even that doesn't solve your problem. For example, minimum union rates in the US are about $2.5k a week for a re-recording mixer and maybe your script can convince one to work for nothing (I doubt it!) but how is your script going to convince a dub stage to waive it's fees? Baring in mind a theatrical dub stage is going to cost a minimum of about $250 an hour!
If your name was Steven Spielberg or Quentin Tarantino you might, MIGHT mind you, manage to get what you need for a theatrically distributable feature for next to nothing but it's still pretty unlikely and of course Spielberg and Tarantino would never ask anyway because they work with budgets where they can't take the risk.
G
Alright, after much patience over what the DIY amateur filmmaker can and can't do regarding audio I've decided my next research quest AFTER my (currently halted) youtube top subscribers, and AFTER my film festival research will be "independent filmmaker theatrical and distributor audio requirements."
You guys happy, now?
Just to get you guys started...
http://www.lavideofilmmaker.com/fil...bution-tips-a-guide-for-indie-filmmakers.html
http://www.dolby.com/us/en/professional/technology/cinema/dolby-atmos-creators.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DTS_(sound_system)
http://distribution.4filmmaking.com/film-distribution.html
ITREF
There.You guys happy, now?
Just to get you guys started...
http://www.lavideofilmmaker.com/fil...bution-tips-a-guide-for-indie-filmmakers.html
http://www.dolby.com/us/en/professional/technology/cinema/dolby-atmos-creators.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DTS_(sound_system)
http://distribution.4filmmaking.com/film-distribution.html
Typical film deliverables list
Filmmakers are often stunned by the list of deliverables when they sell a film. Here is a typical list of the kinds of film deliverables that may be required depending on what rights you are selling.
Filmmakers are often stunned by the list of deliverables when they sell a film. Here is a typical list of the kinds of film deliverables that may be required depending on what rights you are selling.
- The original screenplay as written
- The shooting script - scenes, action and dialog as it actual happens in the finished film
- Credit statement - detailed billing list of everyone in the main and end titles
- Publicity photos
Black and white photos (three sets of contact sheets or digitals) with the subjects identified
- 100 production stills depicting scenes of the cast in performance
- 50 informal or casual photos of principle members of the cast and crew
- 25 gallery or portrait sitting photos of cast in and out of character
- 150 production color shots of scenes
- 50 candid shots of cast and key production team members
- 35 portrait shots of principal cast
- "Answer print" (color corrected, projectable 35mm theater print)
- Original picture negative and composite optical soundtrack negatives
- 35mm color corrected interpositive print
- 35mm color corrected internegative
- 35mm textless background negative of titles sequences so translated titles can be substituted
[*]Sound deliverables
Non-Dolby sound
- 3 or 4 track 35mm magnetic masters with separately mixed tracks for:
- dialog
- music
- sound effects
- mixed music and sound effects
- Access to original 35mm mag 4 track Dolby stereo master with surrounds
- Original 35mm mag 2 track Dolby stereo master with surrounds
- 35mm mag Dolby stereo music and effects on track (w/o dialogue)
- 35mm mag mono 3 track master with separate tracks of dialog, effects and music
- Music master recordings consisting of a 1/4", 1/2" or DAT of all the music used
- Music cue sheets specifying the performer, composer, publisher, copyright owner, affiliated rights society, usages, place and number of cues showing film footage and running time for each cue (a "cue" is a usage of the music)
- Music agreements (one copy of each for each music selection used)
- Composer
- Lyricist
- Publishing company
- Sync and performance contracts
- Music sheet - copy of original leads sheets
- Composer's original score copy
- Film soundtrack materials suitable for creation of an original soundtrack CDROM
- Screen credits, detailed list of everyone credited
- Dialogue continuity, copy of detailed dialogue and continuity reports
- Laboratory access letter granting right to request laboratory to strike new 35mm prints
- MPAA certificate with rating
- Certificate of Insurance for Errors & Omissions (E&O)
- Risidual information - comprehensive list of everyone who will be due residual payments, cast, writers, directors, etc.
- Title and copyright - copy of title report, copyright search report, chain of title documents for all literary source materials
- Miscellaneous materials including soundtrack album art work, working prints, outtakes reels, etc.
Last edited:
Damn APE I had that post up for like 10 minutes before noticing, after researching imdb, that u meant several small teams and so I edited the post. U quoted that way too quickly. Research on imdb for indie films showed that average 10 people work on audio and many seem to be from foley dept. Main men seem to be what most directors know- 2 sound recordist and 2 post mixers can do a decent job for indie's. Obviously if it is aimed for theatrical release then more audio work is required as was discussed earlier in the thread.
Last edited:
Must have just caught your original post.
In my experience the average number of audio personnel for indies (inc. production sound personnel) is a little higher than 10, unless you're only talking about micro-budget indies rather than all indies. BTW, you can not have an audio post department of just 2 post mixers (re-recording mixers), the mixers need to be given something to mix (!), so you must have sound editors as well. The re-recording mixer's job entails the vast majority of all audio processing, as well as the basic mixing.
The difficulty, time and therefore cost required to do audio post is hugely dependent on the distribution channel. For example, TV distribution has is own difficulties, mainly due to the often large and complex list of required deliverables (compared to theatrical release). Nevertheless, as an incredibly rough guide, audio post for TV movies (even 5.1 Dolby Digital HDTV movies) usually works out somewhere in the region of 10 times cheaper than the audio post for an equivalent theatrical release. The biggest audio post teams for TV rarely comprise more than about 12 people but programs such as documentaries for example can require as few as 2 audio post personnel, a sound editor and a re-recording mixer.
G