I dont get it . Many of these films are shot in a living room. They pay AD's more in a day then their film will even make
I am trying to understand since i am making a film
I am trying to understand since i am making a film
why do small indie films need AD's and such
- Thread starter davidevans10
- Start date
An excellent First can be a valuable asset to any production. If you
feel you don't need one, then you shouldn't use one. I always use
a First even on small shows because they keep everything organized
so I can be the director and only the director.
To boil it down for you, the 1st AD is the one who handles the on-set logistical portion of the production, allowing the director to be an "artist" and DIRECT the film.
Many of those films shot in living rooms probably aren't paying anybody involved. A good 1st AD doesn't necessarily mean a budget increase, if you're doing 'no-budget' and have someone who is excited about film but more of an organizer/analytical/etc than artsy, that's interested in being involved in your no budget venture, they may well be a great option to tap to fill that role.
I have a budget but i'm talking to AD's in Toronto who have gotten paid on what seem to be modest films. I cant justify paying someone for it
It's a pretty critical crew position.
I have directed several times without a good 1st AD. I would never do it again. Without a 1st AD, the director is so busy sweating a million details of logistics that he doesn't have any time to think about the bigger picture of the film.
I have directed several times without a good 1st AD. I would never do it again. Without a 1st AD, the director is so busy sweating a million details of logistics that he doesn't have any time to think about the bigger picture of the film.
Then you don't need a First.
Someday, in the future, you may find you need one depending on your
project. Until then do not use a First.
Their whole job is, at it's most basic summed up value, to make your life as director easier so you can focus on the art and not have to worry about whether person A is where they should be, and person B knows they're needed for the next shot, etc...
If you don't want to/can't justify paying someone to make your life a little easier on set, then don't.
Series of bad 1st ADs (I hired them, so this is 100% my fault) is largely what drove me out of filmmaking for the past two years. My last two projects were such nightmarish descents into hell I had to step away for a while. Most of the issues were related to me having NOBODY I could delegate to with a sense of confidence.
Arent they planned ahead of time and done one by one?. im even acting and i just feel like i explain the shot and i make sure its happening. The AD seems like a headache in my particular situation
Like most things: whether or not you need an AD depends on your project and organizing skills.
If you have the time and overview during shooting to be busy with other things than directing: don't recruit an AD. If you need to focus on directing while at the same time other things need to keep going: you may consider using an AD.
If you have the time and overview during shooting to be busy with other things than directing: don't recruit an AD. If you need to focus on directing while at the same time other things need to keep going: you may consider using an AD.
Yep, and that's the point. It's a whole process. Do you want to be concentrating on the logistics of the production or concentrating on designing and crafting your directors vision. If you need to explain the shot to the AD while you're shooting, either something has gone really wrong (most likely the wrong person was picked to be the AD), you've changed your mind or pre-production wasn't done right.
If the AD is a headache on set, then you have the wrong AD. It's important to have an AD that compliments your style. Most AD's can handle change to various degrees. Some AD's suit a super organized style more while others suit a fly by the seat of your pants and deal with a director that doesn't have a real vision but we still need to keep this train-wreck on track.
Work out what you need. You might not be ready for an AD.
Unsure if ironic, since making Lovecraftian films...
Like an extra bad day on a Troma Films set.
I literally walked away from film making almost completely for 2 years now.
I'm thinking about, maybe, starting to do a little bit again.
If you wrote a script that requires a large crew and a AD but can't afford to pay them, then you need to rewrite your script.
Scripts CAN be written so that you don't need an AD, large crew or even paid crews.
If you don't have $$$, for heavens sake don't write spending any into your script.
Scripts CAN be written so that you don't need an AD, large crew or even paid crews.
If you don't have $$$, for heavens sake don't write spending any into your script.
so if i'm on my own schedule i dont really need one i suppose right? maybe just a helper
It really depends on the situation.
2 actors and 3 crew members, shooting at your own pace... yeah, sure, you can manage yourself.
6 actors and 9 crew members.... get an AD.
No. If you're on your own schedule you dont really need one.
If you use a "helper" to do all the duties of an AD then you
are using an AD.
The point everyone is making that you are resisting is most
shoots can use that person on the set; the one who handles
all the little details allowing the director to direct. Call that
person a helper, call that person an AD. That job is important.
You said you were trying to understand. Now you know more
about how important an AD is even on low budget movies. You
sure are resisting using one. I suggest you do not use one. Using
someone who doesn't understand the job will only make things
more difficult. You don't need one for your shoot. But now you
understand why so many productions use one.
Even in films shot in a living room.