How many shorts before a feature?

[harmonica44]

I wouldn't mind making a couple of more with real actors, but only a couple. The reason is that it takes too much time to make one. My first took half a year and still counting, from pre to post. Some actors dropped out and I spent almost every moment of my free time outside of work looking for replacements more than once. Not that I mind, but I ended up closing almost all of my free schedule, and I missed out on getting possibly more experience in other ways. The time it takes to make a short I could be out there practicing with my equipment, or making myself available to work on other people's if I get emails back.

I was too busy trying to finish the short and get everything ready, that I didn't even have time to practice in the mean the time. Some make 10 shorts with actors before their first feature, but for me, that could take 10 years, depending on what goes right and wrong. So I think it's best to maybe only make two more tops, and just practice otherwise, and make myself available to hopefully get on sets, and learn there, and learn more.

But then when the time comes to self fund my own feature, will I have problems finding crew to want to work with me, and securing actors and contracts, if I have only made a couple of shorts, and the rest of the time I just say I practiced? What do you think?

 

[PaulGriffith]

The "real" answer is when you can do things instinctively. How many dozens (hundreds?) of questions did you pose on this forum just for one short?

This is the answer. Only you will know when you're ready, and that knowing will only come with experience.

 

[harmonica44]

Well if making shorts with actual stories is the way to go, to get more people to want to work with me, than I will make more. But it seems that making a short is about 3% directing experience, and 97% organizing and damage control, so I won't have time to even work on other people's shorts instead. I will have to cut off working on other people's projects, and devote the time entirely to mine, which I don't think is the best idea to learn, but if it means more to show in my portfolio, than I will.

 

[WalterB]

Maybe you should think for yourself.
Nobody says you must only work on your own projects.
And I, for sure, don't say that every short 'thing' needs to have a great story. (Did you watch the links I posted? 2 jokes and 2 fake trailers: only 1 of the jokes has a kind of storyline. These things aren't even real shorts, but they show things about creativity, productionskills, editing, post-production,grading and a little about directing since I always need to shoot too much in too little time )

Maybe it's even better to join other projects to learn skills and get to know people. Try to pick a few short ones: 1 or 2 days on set.
And then do some short 'thingies' to get more experience and to use what you've learnt from the other projects. Helping on other projects is also a way to learn to know people.

You seem to have a one way track in your mind; think different and be flexible. Be creative! Not only in your script or editing, but in every aspect of life.
Don't take every advice literally. Most of the time advice is just another perspective.
Working on your own projects doesn't exclude working on other projects as well.

The 97% damagecontrol is a result of little experience.
Most of the mistakes you made, are mistakes you won't make again.
That percentage will drop, but you will always come across problems you'll need to solve.

 

[Crownom]

Tell me what do you mean by 'practicing'?
Do you mean shooting some nice views or some events or what?
Because it depends and if the 'practice' is faster than making shorts, it's the way to go

 

[Ferguson Films]

Well if making shorts with actual stories is the way to go, to get more people to want to work with me, than I will make more. But it seems that making a short is about 3% directing experience, and 97% organizing and damage control, so I won't have time to even work on other people's shorts instead. I will have to cut off working on other people's projects, and devote the time entirely to mine, which I don't think is the best idea to learn, but if it means more to show in my portfolio, than I will.

I think like everyone else has said, it comes down to you.

I haven't seen any of your shorts, so I don't really know how amazing your work is yet, but shorts don't need to take huge amounts of time; you should set out a list of things you need to get to grips with weather its setting scenes, directing, editing, sfx etc etc and start short shorts so you can work on things

I didn't know how to make short films... but since I started in November 2011, I am filming the 10th on a weeks time and by doing so many I have found I have a group of cast and crew I can call on for just about anything (which is really handy).


I Wish you luck in witch ever way you decide to go.

 

[sonnyboo]

How many shorts before a feature?

I don't know. How many songs do you have to write before you get a masterpiece? How many pages do you have to write before your novel is complete? How many licks exactly does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?

You've asked a very subjective question. The singular person who can answer it is you.

Some make a feature right off the bat, others fill a dump truck with shorts and never make a feature.

This disregards the flipside.... others start with a feature, waste an incredible amount of time and money because they have never made a movie before and their movie sucks. Some start with short films, master the basics, then go on to make feature films that are of a much higher quality.

 

[-JK-]

Well if making shorts with actual stories is the way to go, to get more people to want to work with me, than I will make more. But it seems that making a short is about 3% directing experience, and 97% organizing and damage control, so I won't have time to even work on other people's shorts instead. I will have to cut off working on other people's projects, and devote the time entirely to mine, which I don't think is the best idea to learn, but if it means more to show in my portfolio, than I will.

Thats all relevant experience for a feature though.

I think you're missing one good point that was made, that you can take a simple but effective concept, with a minimal cast and you don't have to spend like a year on it. When you said you had that one scene with a huge protest, maybe try and think of another way to show that or another way to handle it in the story, or even just a way to progress the story without that. Or maybe just try and focus on a concept that doesn't involve huge mobs of people.

Work within your means. Examples:

https://vimeo.com/8076064

https://vimeo.com/28385385

https://vimeo.com/20606655

 

[sonnyboo]

Ten years agao, a letter of intent from HBO to broadcast a filler movie made by an independent movie could get a bank to pay as much as $2 Milllion with a loan because HBO would pay that much to some independent producers. I met 2 producers who got paid that much by HBO.

You've met 2 producers who apparently do not have names and got paid $2 million for a movie that also has no name.

Yeah, that's credible.


HBO barely pays $2 million for the cable TV rights for movies like Twilight for a year. Please don't post nonsensical hearsay without any real proof to back it up. It spreads disinformation and assumptions like they are facts. They are not.

 

[Kholi]

I made half of a short before jumping into a feature.

Which is true, but misleading at the same time: I worked on SEVERAL shorts and commercials in a key position, under the director, learned a ton over the span of a handful'a years, then stepped into a feature blindly.

The point: it's dependent on you, and noone else's opinion of when you should do it. When it's time to do it, you'll be incapable of holding yourself back.

 

[2001 Productions]

I worked on SEVERAL shorts and commercials in a key position, under the director, learned a ton over the span of a handful'a years

I think this is a key point. I did a similar thing: made one short, which got me a job on a pro shoot assisting the writer/producer/director during pre-production, working on set during production, and apprentice editing during post. Had I made a dozen shorts by myself, I never could've learned as much as I did during those 8 months.

2 years later, I was shooting my first feature (which was still crap, but I got it done).

 

[PaulGriffith]

it seems that making a short is about 3% directing experience, and 97% organizing and damage control

Making a feature will be every bit of this as a 6 minute short, except 15-30 times more of it.

Most of the organizing is because you are also producing, though a director does do as much preproduction as well.

Most of the "damage control" is because you're unexperienced and biting off larger bites than you can chew. Think about how big of a bite a feature is.

 

[ItDonnedOnMe]

How many hours have you spent so far learning to make films?

Malcom Gladwell's 'Outliers' has some interesting numbers that I think are relevant to this discussion. Across disciplines it seems to take approximately 5,000 hours of practice to achieve true mastery of something, and the real outliers - the people who we look at as the absolute leaders in their field - tend to have over 10,000 hours of practice in, often well before they became famous for their work. This seems to be true regardless of the field, and appears to have little to do with innate skill - anyone who puts that kind of time in is likely to achieve mastery.

So just to hit the lower threshold you're looking at three hours a day for five years! How long have you been working towards being a filmmaker? How many hours have you really put in in that time? So the question of whether to make another short or feature isn't really that important - if you haven't put the time in either one is likely end up not particularly good, so you don't want to blow a lot of resources either way.

Another related concept to this is that the less competent you are at something the more likely you are to overestimate your own skills. You are also more likely to overestimate the skills of others. This means if you haven't really put in the time yet to get good at something you won't even know that what you and your crew are doing isn't very good. In fact you are likely to think it's far better than it really is. I see this all the time with inexperienced filmmakers - they simply can't see what's wrong with their own films - and the only way to get past that is to just keep putting in the time to do one project after the other, always with an eye towards making the next film better than the last.

Personally I believe it's better to do this with a series of shorts rather than jumping in to a feature. Make a short, look at what you would have liked to do better, do it better on the next one. Rinse, repeat - you can iterate quickly this way. It's important not to try and make each film perfect because frankly volume is more important than absolute quality. You don't want to get bogged down spending six months on a single short, and if it's taking you that long to make a short right now a feature is likely to take several years.

 

[harmonica44]

Well I guess I could put in a few more years of practice. I decided I want to be a filmmaker early last year, so that's how much practice I have been putting in. I am 27 and wanted to make my first feature by the time I turn 30. I figure I would want to start a feature career while I am still young. When I make the feature though I am going to want a sound person and DP that have as much practice as I though, so even if I practice 3 hours a day for five years, what if the ones I can afford are not as experienced as that?