First film...HELP!

A

Analog_Addict

I am a Film Student here in the UK and I am starting the second year of my course at University. I realize that without doing something myself outside of University, I will not get anywhere.

So me and friend have talked about producing a film over the past month. We have a storyline and I will start writing the script soon.

We plan to go all out with around a 80min running time and hopefully filming on film rather than DV.

Issues I have so far:

Funding - We can probably get a £900 grant at most, plus maybe £750 from each of us. Giving us (best case scenario) a budget of £2400.

Is this anywhere near enough? We would like to film using Kodak 35mm (if I can source a 35mm camera from University). At £160 for 400ft this is not cheap. I have sourced lots of cheaper 35mm film stock but it is expired.

Also how many minutes of footage will 400ft of 35mm provide?

Another question about film. If we do go ahead with 35mm (or even 16mm) is it possible to telecine the footage to digital and edit it on a computer? Will this give a lossless result? Telecining is not a problem but I would like to know what outcome it will achieve.

We also plan on getting actors from drama departments of my University and his college. What is the usual deal with this? How much will they want to be paid?

I have access to TV broadcast quality DV cameras and even a HD camera but I really would hate to film using DV.

Have we bitten off more than we can chew? Is the budget anywhere near enough to produce a film of this scale?

Thanks!
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Buy this book

Lo-No Budget Producer by Elliot Grove

... pretty much all of your questions are answered... all apart from the ones about DI, which couldn't hope to be up to date

But basically... er, no the telecine/DI process isn't loss-less... but it's how stuff gets made these days... you need to talk to your telecine people before you shoot and agree a workflow with them

Oh... and just for the hell of it I'll share my golden rule for micro-budget production:

NEVER SHOOT A SCRIPT YOU COULDN'T SELL TO A GENUINE PRODUCER

Any film maker who green lights a script that they haven't had option offers is basically pissing the production money up a wall (In my opinion)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The problem I see with going for funding at this point is that your funders are going to expect ROI (Return On Investment), which you can't guarantee yet since it doesn't sound like you've handled distribution or the business end of filmmaking yet. I would shoot a couple of smaller pieces on DV which you work on distributing (even a feature), so you can work the distro and promotion process out before asking investors to risk their money on you. You'll also find it easier to get funding if you can show that you have a history with successful distro with little capital.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think the biggest question is being missed... is that enough money for a 35mm feature. Not even close.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
film = spendy. Stock + processing + transfer, not something to do unless you know what you're doing or you'll end up wasting lots of film fishing for the right take...and run out of stock.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Step 1. Get a producer and have him come up with a budget.
Step 2. Consider your options when you see the budget.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
So how does one get option offers on a short?
Click to expand...

You can't... but I think shorts should only be made by wannabe director with the intention of getting festival attention... there isn't any other sound business reason for doing them

My problem is shorts don't even appear on my radar anymore, so I never factor them into my replies! (My bad)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think the only way to shoot using film would be by sourcing a stock of cheap 16mm but I don't even know if my University has a 16mm camera stocked.

I guess I will end up having to go with DV. I just find DV aesthetically lacking. I have managed to source a lot of Super 16mm film but finding a camera to use it with is just a wild goose chase.

EDIT: University has emailed me back and said that although they own 16mm equipment, they cannot let me use their equipment now due to insurance obligations. What is your advice on equipment? I have no access to any broadcast quality DV equipment. Is rental a valid option?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Analog_Addict said:
I think the only way to shoot using film would be by sourcing a stock of cheap 16mm but I don't even know if my University has a 16mm camera stocked.

I guess I will end up having to go with DV. I just find DV aesthetically lacking. I have managed to source a lot of Super 16mm film but finding a camera to use it with is just a wild goose chase.

EDIT: University has emailed me back and said that although they own 16mm equipment, they cannot let me use their equipment now due to insurance obligations. What is your advice on equipment? I have no access to any broadcast quality DV equipment. Is rental a valid option?
Click to expand...

Yes rental is an option, but so is getting insurance for your schools equipment. If you rent you will need the same insurance anyway. You can get equipment insurance from www.filmemporium.com (for UK you need to search).

Seriously, figure out a budget, insurance for a film camera is a big chunk already, from what you posted.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think the only way to shoot using film would be by sourcing a stock of cheap 16mm but I don't even know if my University has a 16mm camera stocked.

I guess I will end up having to go with DV. I just find DV aesthetically lacking. I have managed to source a lot of Super 16mm film but finding a camera to use it with is just a wild goose chase.
Click to expand...

Before you give up on the idea of shooting on film... have you bought and read the Elliot Grove book, because the first third of that book is full of suggestions for acquiring film stock for free... and also shooting strategies for keeping the shooting ratio down.

As to acquiring a camera.... how much effort have you actually made? You say you don't know if your university has a camera, which means you haven't asked! and despite the fact you don't know what the situation is you're already considering a switch to DV!

When I worked and lived in the UK I knew of at least two companies in my home town who had 16mm gear lying around on their shelves gathering dust... plus one charity who used to hire out 16mm gear at dirt cheap prices. I can guarantee there is a usable camera within three miles of where you are, if you know who to ask.

Plus, it's possible to buy a 16mm camera for about £500... so, it means shooting on a Russian camera instead of an Ari... but surely if you really want to work on film...

On a personal level, you really need to ask yourself if you're cut out for a life in the movie business... if you fold the first time you hit a problem them you probably aren't going to survive... this is an industry that requires constant creative problem solving and a commitment to your project. Compromise is the worst thing a movie maker can do, because they're not making the film they want to make.

The truth is there are at least twenty different solutions to your current problem... any of which will allow you to make the film you want. Switching to DV isn't even on that list.

Go read the book... actually ask if your uni if there is a camera... talk to your lecturers and see if they know anyone with a camera... or if that seems too hard, just shot it on DV. :huh:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
clive said:
Before you give up on the idea of shooting on film... have you bought and read the Elliot Grove book, because the first third of that book is full of suggestions for acquiring film stock for free... and also shooting strategies for keeping the shooting ratio down.
Click to expand...

No but I will definitely look into buying that book.

clive said:
As to acquiring a camera.... how much effort have you actually made? You say you don't know if your university has a camera, which means you haven't asked! and despite the fact you don't know what the situation is you're already considering a switch to DV!
Click to expand...

I have actually asked like I said in the edit. Now here is the interesting thing, I have sourced 6000ft of untouched Super 16mm film stock, which I can have for 100 quid. Also included is some recans.

So this gives a 2:1 ratio for the projected film running length. Ideally with my minimal budget I am aiming for a 3:1 ratio.

I have been having a look on Ebay at some 16mm cameras but it is hard to determine which can accept Super 16mm format without modifications. If anyone can give me some budget s16mm friendly cameras and anywhere to buy one from that would be great.

I need a camera that:

Accepts Super 16mm format film
Accepts 400ft rolls
Can be used for sound sync

Realistically what price am I looking at for one?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
I am all for going for it and shooting, but it sounds like you are about to make some bad decisions. Type of film stock matters. Camera matters, sync sound, etc. Every little thing matters. You need someone that knows about this stuff, or you need to seriously educate yourself if you plan on producing this yourself by shooting some shorts or camera tests first and doing a budget.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A 3:1 shooting ratio is going to need an expert DOP, a superb cast and storyboarding of the entire project... and not ratty student film maker storyboards, but the entire film visualised as it will be edited laid out on paper.

Basically you'd need to approach it the same way the Coen Brother did all of their early films... where they were on a 2:1 shooting ratio.

However, just to check we're using the terminology correctly... you do understand what a 2:1 shooting ratio is?

It's just I hear a lot of digitally trained directors using the terms to mean they can only do two takes from each angle... but the problem is, that isn't what it means... what it means is cutting 90 minutes of finished film from 180 minutes of master footage... so, you can't shoot a master shot of the whole scene, then a mid, then a reverse, then some close ups, then some cut-aways... basically, you are almost editing in camera.... you'll lose half of your 2:1 when you tighten your edit in post.

The problem with this kind of production is that it places incredible stresses on your cast... not only do they have to get it right first time... they have to work in an incredibly disjointed manner... you have to be a really spectacular director to pull off that kind of shooting ratio.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
To give a real-world example of what Clive is saying, my last feature was shot on 16mm. We had a 6:1 shooting ratio -- which meant I only had enough stock to shoot one or two takes of each setup.

I don't recommend working this way. It's very stressful and often discouraging.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top