Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Camera or Film School?

ethereal

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Points
0
hey guys... I'm sorry if this a major faux pas... anyway...

If you could, i'd appreciate anyone taking the time to read this and give me an answer, and if you could take the time to elaborate, it'd be nice if you could give your reasons.

I've basically been studying cinema last 2 or so years, so one day I could become a "filmmaker", and its come to a point where I can't decide what path to take... I've gotten into a fairly good (digital) film school, but anyone in the industry will tell you film school's a waste of time. anyway, last few days i've emailed a few of my idols to ask them for their opinion with the following message. They're all people who work in the film industry and sorta teach as well, so I thought it appropriate for them. if there is anything that's even the slightest bit confusing, don't hesitate to ask. i'd be happy to clarify... I am however, taking out any reference to what country I'm in at the moment, purely for personal reasons, along with an introduction and general hello-how-are-you's. some bits are edited, but here's the bulk of the message:


I'm an aspiring filmmaker living in ******. I do a lot of theatre, charity and community work, and part of that work is geared towards reviving cinema as a medium here... stuff like working to set up mobile drive-ins in remote villages, making more people aware of cinema's power as a storytelling medium. I'm working on expanding on such work in future, but that's somewhat irrelevant for this discussion. Filmmaker's too vague a term though, so personally I like saying that I'm an aspiring director-editor. For the sake of making a living, I'll be making tv commercials. That's the only place where there's any money right now. Either way, I have a decision to make. I have a little over $50,000 (USD) to invest in either film school (the Cinematography course at the IFSS, i've gotten in, and I need only give in a deposit) or into "equipment" and learn on my own. Personally, I'd go for the latter, but there are more than a few problems. I'm trying to make movies in an industry that doesn't make movies.

Hmm... I'll explain exactly what the local market's like right now. Basicly, there's only a make-do-with-anything DV/SD crowd, and the ultra-rich whatever-works 35mm adfilm crowd. DV crowd slaps together anything at all and puts it on tv. Everything that is shot here on 35mm (only TVC's have the budget for it) is done with technical expertise from abroad. Most of it anyway. The DOP comes from Singapore usually, and that's where it goes for Telecine and color grading. Both Primary and Secondary color correction. The footage is then brought back on Digibeta tapes usually and then they do the edit. Now this entire setup is costly (for people working here atleast), because the director (and sometimes even the clients, unnecessarily) has to be flown out for the grade, enough takes have to be shot. There are a handful of 35mm cameras around, owned by something like 7 to 10 people, and only 4 of those have a wholly functional camera package, and only two large production houses with their own studios/soundstages. There are no rental houses here, per se. Since there are such few people doing this work, there's no real demand for technical expertise, because those who're working at that level already have that money to spare, so they'll go the whole nine yards and outsource. People are happy, because really their clients don't know any better, they're making wayyy too much money for the work they do (one person I know can and would pull in upwards of $100,000-200,000 dollars a month, depending on what and how much he wanted to take) and their requirements/standards seem inversely just as low to boot.

The main problem's the startup money, and that's the only reason nobody has bothered trying to build up the industry, because its too costly trying to get the expertise (from out of town) to maintain an enterprise of that magnitude to get it off the ground. Or to work it for that matter. The other problem, which ruins the few people who have enough money to invest is not having any expertise to even buy the right equipment in the first place.

Nobody knows how to color grade. Or edit. Or work with large amounts of data. Or plan for upgradable, scalable solutions. Hmm. I suppose that's not entirely true, because there are exceptions, but its of no real world value to a clientele that doesn't require it. To some extent they know how, but its purely through trial and error, they just don't know why or when to do what they do. i'd say that while I appreciate their intuition, I find that they have no real structure in their workflow. The only experience is insulated in this industry. Everything's hack-slashed together into what works for the industry. If this was a predominantly english speaking country, we'd have a flood of easy "talent" around to work with. Right now its whoever takes the time to bother, because you can pick up a copy of Adobe Premiere Pro at the store for a little over a dollar. And its not that I don't respect their work, its just that years of experience here means very few people even have the notion of having a method. They work very well with what they're given, but its the sort of insulation where the top post facility in town will almost blank out at the mere mention of a vectorscope or a waveform monitor. it is important though, to point out, they may very well have better, more solid workflows in mind, but personal preference or capability doesn't necessitate investment here.

High-end digital cinema has not entered the market yet, and I cannot see the RED succeeding in the near future (which many people are banking on) because they have the money for the basic production package, just not enough for a full editing/color grading/sound setup and lenses (or they just think its immaterial to invest in it). Or storage for that matter. They'll be editing it purely on FCP or Premiere, but again, with no attempt to use waveform monitors (even the software ones built into the NLE), no attempt to control the logistics of having that much data to work with. But that's still workable. The main problem with the lenses is that there are only a couple of lens sets available in the market for rent, and I doubt those are going anywhere because nobody can use the 35mm cameras without them. and the more compromises made, the less you get out of it.

The problem for these guys is that a) they don't have the money/talent (or the money to hire the talent) to pull off the same quality of work as the people working on film, i.e. they don't have the money or the setup at production, let alone a good DOP, or lights. Or even a crew. And some bare necessities are simply out of reach. Gels, filters, etc, for example, are scarce because they have to be brought in from abroad. b) Remember, the only people with the studios and the cameras don't like the RED. At all. I know so personally, because I worked for one of the three big Director/Producers who run this town (and by town i mean country. local industry is that small). It'd cut into their profits and their market if they helped the RED guys out. Not to say its not doable. It'd just be a pain for a while. The benefit of the RED as a replacement for the film cameras, however cheap it might be, will cancel out, because the cost of renting everything from one guy who owns it all, and knows it, is too much. Clients whose budgets exceed that already have the big shot director/producer/studio owners on their bench. I don't think they'll be able to deliver the same quality anytime soon, not without a fully flung out setup. If say, the footage isn't perfectly shot out, and not handled decently and correctly in post, it'll be a waste (and there's a lot of room for error there). Especially if they make this much of an investment, and end up with a camera that only allows returns on pseudo-HD work. that is, if no one's putting more attention towards it in terms of quality control.

Haha... If I think about it, ****** might have one of the only industries where everything is an indie production.

So... Issues.
 
First person who comes up with a "complete" setup and knows how to use it successfully will set a new standard. It'll break into virgin territory; untapped market that nobody has bothered trying to approach, because uptil now, the cost of actually setting up the infrastructure for a quality product was insanely costly. Right now, what I need is a digital cinema camera that I can integrate with a desktop editing solution like Final Cut or the Adobe Production Suite (with Colorista or Color Finesse). I have a decent workstation right now. Initially I'd only need to grade digital cinema camera footage, and then footage that's been mastered to Digibeta, and output/finish at broadcast quality onto Digibeta, but I want something that I can scale up and upgrade regularly until I'm able to buy a film scanner, and start working with that. I don't want to have to make double or triple the investment again when the time comes for a proper DI setup, because the color correction program i have just won't cut it and I wasn't able to ante up several years of progress. It'd make all that time and money I put back into the editing suite useless because i'd have to invest in an entirely new setup at that point in time. That would also mean I'd have to sit and wait to round up both the money for a DI setup and a film scanner, to be bought at the same time. Because there's no point to getting the DI system without the telecine machine, there just isn't any reasonable ROI, i reckon. And the film scanner won't gel in with a 1600 dollar software suite you can buy off the shelf, apparently. that's one of the problems i see which might be pressing and really sway my decision; an upgradable, scalable solution. Real-time's an issue as well, purely for when you're catering to clients (where I expect to get most of my revenue from). otherwise for true indie productions, by students or filmmakers, i think that purely having such an oppurtunity would suffice. Until such action is taken, TVC directors will continue to exploit their monopoly.

Regardless, starting off with a REDone for example, might be a good idea, if executed properly. Quality (when compared to film) doesn't take that much of a precedent, and considering you'd start off with 4K, the eventual SD delivery is going to be more than adequate. Film is routinely handled badly as a technical medium here, and it ruffles up very few feathers. The most significant edge is that its digital, so nobody has to clunk across the world with cans of film. Also, successfully coping with handling production with it means I could potentially invite people to invest into building on such a venture.

There are two major drawbacks (or concerns, if you're being an optimist), which might just be me being paranoid. Its just that I'd be completely on my own. I'm very sure that I'll hit a major technical or logistical snag somewhere, and when that happens I won't really have a way to find any real world guidance. e.g. They're less than a dozen working cinematographers around in the country, and even less with bankable experience. The second concern is just as much a shot in the dark (haha) as the first, and is almost the same. If I stay, I might bottle-neck the true potential of the resources at my disposal. True, accepting and working with some better standard as necessary is a huge advantage, but I run the risk of doing the exact same thing that people are doing now, purely because, whatever the intention, I'm not aware that I'm doing something wrong (less than optimal, rather), or that I can do it better. I'm sure that if I'm confined to learning by reading out of books and applying it on my own, there's a plateau, or worse, a dead end, that I'll reach because there's only so many books i can read and only so much I can learn out of a book. And its always possible that I progress too slow. The process of getting those books is time consuming and expensive. All the good books have to be purchased in the states and brought here by a relative or a friend, whoever it might be, whenever it is convenient. Usually it'll take a long time for me to decide, because I'll go through book reviews and reading lists and the like to decide on a few. I don't expect having problems learning though, because I tend to pick up things very, very fast. Art is the only real challenge for me, because to some extent it can't be rushed. I just don't like the idea of being overconfident.

On the other hand, film school will allow me to maximize on my abilities much better than i'd be able to completely on my own, barring the internet that is ( i <3 interwebs). The disadvantages however, are largely the same as attending film school anywhere in the world. Its a lot of time and money. It's 2 years spent outside the industry and the country for that matter. One of the benefits, of making a solid list of contacts (networking) while you're at school, is immaterial to me, because I'll be going to another country to study. When I come back home, I'll could get a job very fast, because there's an amazing dearth of D.O.P.'s here. But there is just no way I can raise that much capital again any time soon, and it just doesn't seem to be a sound return on my investment. And until then, the biggest disconnect i think, is that most of the skills, workflows, etc. that I develop while I'm at school won't be "marketable" or usable. Nobody wants them here, and its an expensive extra. And really, they won't have any merit unless they're applied and shown to work. Considering the time it would take to actually break free from this sort of "technical apathy" its reasonable to assume someone or the other else will pile up the money and make it work. Just not with the same intentions that I have. (i hope that doesn't sound pretentious.)

I might have the wrong idea about a bunch of things, and I'm quite possibly overthinking this. I'm only 20, and by no means an expert on anything, but I'm fairly confident I can figure this out, considering the last two years or so I've spent studying as much of it as I can.

To sum it all up, I'll say this. I have mentioned my dilemma before to other people over the last few days, and they've asked me how much of a risk there is with each option. To me, as I explained it, there's equal risk. If I leave, I run the risk of spending all my money learning how to use something I don't own. If I stay, I run the risk of spending my capital to own something I haven't learnt how to use yet.

I don't know what I'm supposed to ask at this point, but whatever the case, a shove in the right direction would be appreciated. Or at least an effort to tip the scale in favour of something. Your opinion is valuable to me, it would help me better make my decision. I hope I've been clear, if not concise. If I've left out anything, or if you have any more questions, do ask. I lost my train of thought somewhere in the middle and now towards the end, and I apologize if that has made some bit hard to understand.

Anyway... Thanks again, and thank you for your time.
 
Hi,

I didn't read your two posts all the way through; but there are a few threads on this issue/debate if you try a search. The basic, basic ideal is to do both school and real set experience at the same time. The general consensus is that you learn the craft of storytelling in school, and learn the hands-on technicalities in the real world. Some schools are better than others in those respective fields, so it really depends which school you go to, and frankly, if there is any work being done in the area. Most will argue the benefits of each, but for the most part, if you go to school and try to work on real sets as well, you'll be well on your way.
 
I taught myself to use a TV camera by buying a second hand ENG camera when I was about 17. About 5 years later I finally got around to going to film/tv school. While I was very proficient with the camera I was never able to get the larger experience on my own.

Film school offers (or offered for me anyway) the exposure to other crafts, the experience of working with a crew and other collaborators.

Overall I think it's hard to replicate the practice and experience you get at film school when buying your way into your own gear.

In the end my experience at film school also made me decide that I was actually more interested in post-production that shooting, which is something that I wouldn't have really been able to figure out any other way.
 
Dude, your posts are way too long. But answering your title: Fuck film schools. Get some sort of decent camera and shoot. Period.
 
Ethereal, this sounds like where i live exactly.

I'm solving this problem in 2 ways, cause where I live I can't get into the money of TVC's and music videos for local artists (which are awful and make work no fun for me).

35 was too expensive, dv and hdv are too expensive for the signal you get, 16 is too expensive, and i'm still saving up for a red.

I solved my problem by bringing super8mm film back to beirut. I develop by hand in 2 tanks at home, and can develop 20 min footage in an hour. Double the men double the amount, still don't need to but can and will when its necessary. I then telecine since everything is dv here, and am trying to tweak my pc so it captures HD and so far it works.

I charge cheap so everyone who's broke can get a moving image. I have cameras in mint condition and use photo chemicals for stills. I now know more what to do in terms of diluting and adjusting the chem to avoid magenta shifts etc...

All developing is done by hand, so ideally when i get good at it, I can maximize my films' potential much like a still photo done by hand vs the machine process.

The setup is SUPER low cost, I'm selling rolls for 25 bucks and developing for ten. I should scan my film for 150 bucks, but i'm doin it for 60. I sell cameras too if i have extra ones, and members at the lab get first stab.

People are getting away with ten minutes of nice progressive footage ready to edit on a dvd with sound synced for half the price of renting a proper progressive dv or still interlaced HDV (not HD) cam for a day.

I give workshops with some friends who are much more experienced in shooting (I'm a post guy) and hope to enlarge my darkroom so that members can do their own rolls.

Its nowhere as expensive as the other options, but there are a lot of steps before post as it's film. But its progressive and blowupable.

Where i live, if you bust a market, the big boys will get you and shut you down, as it's corrupt, and not a merit based industry. I solve this by not touching lighting. I don't want to get into the mess of trucks and storage, I make deals with the sharks to provide light kits at killer prices and to them its extra business as the ppl coming to me could never afford the sharks in the first place.

I plan to bring in a couple of reds. There are 2 here but the owners are not keen on renting them, and the price to rent is well over 2000 dollars a day (dunno if this counts as a bad attitude i think it does)

I keep one RED for me, the other rents out with a DP, for sooooooo cheap.

You have to offer 'alternative formats' to keep it indy and not mess with the big guys. you need to go really really low in price. My film sells cheap I buy it for more, but make up for my loss with transfer. It's just how i tell you i price it, yet you have the freedom to buy film and not pay me for the rest of the process. Its a faith based risk to sell my film at a loss, but its working so far. I make some money this way, and could live off it here if i focused ALL my time on being a super8mm house.

I think R1 will double this income, and scarlets alongside small guage film can quadruple it, as long as I charge really low.

All you have to do is increase creative output. Offer easy access to great means, and have workflow figured out.

I have the option of film school, I wanna go just for the break. I can always learn something, but you can make that 50,000 a hundred thou if you plan it correctly and don't get greedy.

So many formats out there. We ghetto our way through everything here we barely have electricity ;) I've had so many situations where we were on fire developing rolls during powerouts and all other places stop working 3 hours a day it felt great.

Adapt to your environment but don't let it break you. School's always fun. Always, and its the best place in the world to build a mailing list.

Cheers, hit me up, I can tell you everything you need to do to run super8mm in less than 40m2 for less than 10,000 dollars. You'll have the facility to a-z a moving picture sans the post. Would love to share it all, its very easy.

T
 
keep it small, make the work big

look at these guys, I run my business based on their scheme. I don't print business cards at all anymore and i still get work. Red are the finest example of making something work in an environment that retrains you (in red's case, the modern market, in our case, where we live)

There's always movie makers, no room for an industry, work with a community, and raise their standard.
t
 
hahaha Grey Mog beirut sounds exactly the same... :-/ sad but true.

Hardware come and go, knowledge is forever.
I TOTALLY agree with you... :-/ i wish people here knew that. the thing is, I've worked with one of the top directors here. and he didn't know squat. what he was doing was acting as executive producer. the creative director was doing everything, the script, look-and-feel, pre-production documents. we have lots of producers. very little talent. I am just iffy about it. because I had a talk with one of the D.O.P.'s they hired regularly, and he was like, who are you more likely to hire? guy with a degree and a student reel, or a guy with a camera and work under his belt?

to make it clearer, I have searched through this forum and many others about the same topic, as in RED vs School, but I feel that it doesn't really address the environment I'm in at the moment. the original posts go into the details. for example:

a) those threads don't usually involve going to another country an ocean away to study. I won't make any contacts that are of any use there.

b) there are no rental houses here. just a few rich people with a few cameras, and then prosumer dv cameras. the point and shoot kind, because nobody wants or needs manual color control, for example. lights might not be that much of a problem if i need them once in a while. but stuff like gels and filters (for work lights) will be nearly non-existent. light meters for still cameras are expensive enough as it is. 35mm camera packages have cine light meters, no one else. my father has an hvx for ENG work, and i haven't gotten to use it that much, but i will be able to soon. regardless, if say i wanted to buy and use the letus on it, i wouldn't have the lenses to rent either. so its either buy now, or just forget about it. sound i can handle. i have quite a few friends who have their own sound studios and the like.

c) nobody cares for workflow. or doing things the right way. the film unions are now defunct. nobody would hire any one from them, it was just too expensive (and by that i mean inconvenient). its the sort of place where, if you're on a halloween shoot, and you want lightning flashes, some set guy will rip open a wire and mess with it so that it shoots sparks. and this was for MTV here. why the hell bother with a flickerbox or a strobe? that same philosophy extends onto every level. why bother with blocking, foley, staging, storyboarding, cinematography (beyond the basics, which are borrowed from stage and theatre lighting), sync sound, original content (to be fair, international copyright doesn't apply here), actual actors or talent (instead of any looker they find), color correction, the list goes on and on. when i come back, there are no guarantees they'll suddenly be a demand for what I've learnt. if I leave, i run the risk of learning to work in the proper way, when its readily apparent that here, far from trying to "break" the rules, people don't have ANY idea of 'em, and they really don't want or need them.

d) there are no film schools here. none. zip. film's a small elective you can take in a couple of colleges with a media department. that's about it.

e) to sum it up again, the risk i'd say, is equal. Go to school, learn to use equipment you can't afford afterwards (yet), or don't go to school, buy equipment you haven't learnt how to use (yet). if i stay, do i risk doing the same as the rest of the industry? i don't know. if I leave, is there any guarantee I'll be doing anything beyond music videos and talk shows and bad soap operas on tv when I arrive because i'm broke (and didn't have the time to make contacts)? i don't know.

f) we don't make movies. we steal em and play them in the privacy of our homes. a few ethnic groups make the occasional grungy c movies on what looks like old 16mm film with lots of people singing and dancing around, which is usually two weeks of master shots and random flourishes and closeups thrown in for drama. apart from random fight scenes. inevitable cult classics, but you can't get to enjoy a second of it unless you're suitably intoxicated. its like watching those ridiculous old dubbed kung fu films.

see, most people would be effing smart about this and just abandon ship. leave, study, and settle in another country. me, i'm one of those loons who likes it here, and wants to contribute.

i have the money now. i want to make a decision. all i'm asking is for some perspective really... again, any criticism, as long as its constructive (which i have no doubt it will be), is appreciated.
 
If you are a reasonably dedicated and capable self teacher, learning purely technical skills may be just as easily done on your own as in school. Yes you will make a lot of mistakes, that is just as true of the school experience too. Do you feel comfortable with this level of self teaching?

Is there any community of active (or frustrated) production people around you that can act as mentors for some of the skills you will need to acquire? Will having an acquisition to finish capable digital production system get you access to this community in return for services? Would they be willing to share in the learning curve and costs involved?

Can you realistically afford both the camera package and a decent high end workstation /software package to produce finished media?

Are you technically comfortable with computer based systems and is there local technical support available to assist in maintenance and problem solving?

Can you solve problems yourself with online help, like from this forum? There is a wealth of knowledge here at all levels both technically and creatively.

Are there local schools with decent theater programs where you can learn the basics of creative drama, lighting, and staging? These skills carry over very well to motion picture production, even though some of the specific techniques are different.

Is there a group of like minded friends students who are serious about doing the same kind of thing you want to do?

Just trying to suggest different ways of refining your thought process.

For me being a lifelong tinkerer and self teacher, I would go for the gear. But I have had some good mentors and learned a lot from participating as a low level assistant on professional productions. I was a theater major in school.
 
If you are a reasonably dedicated and capable self teacher, learning purely technical skills may be just as easily done on your own as in school. Yes you will make a lot of mistakes, that is just as true of the school experience too. Do you feel comfortable with this level of self teaching?

Is there any community of active (or frustrated) production people around you that can act as mentors for some of the skills you will need to acquire? Will having an acquisition to finish capable digital production system get you access to this community in return for services? Would they be willing to share in the learning curve and costs involved?

Can you realistically afford both the camera package and a decent high end workstation /software package to produce finished media?

Are you technically comfortable with computer based systems and is there local technical support available to assist in maintenance and problem solving?

Can you solve problems yourself with online help, like from this forum? There is a wealth of knowledge here at all levels both technically and creatively.

Are there local schools with decent theater programs where you can learn the basics of creative drama, lighting, and staging? These skills carry over very well to motion picture production, even though some of the specific techniques are different.

Is there a group of like minded friends students who are serious about doing the same kind of thing you want to do?

Just trying to suggest different ways of refining your thought process.

For me being a lifelong tinkerer and self teacher, I would go for the gear. But I have had some good mentors and learned a lot from participating as a low level assistant on professional productions. I was a theater major in school.

I'm skipping the bold bit for now... I'll answer the rest to get you and everyone else interested up to speed:

I umm... obsess. I have to learn something if I'm interested in it. get it down perfectly. doesn't matter really what it is. I've been self-taught at largely everything, and gauge someone else's ability to teach me by how much i can/could have learnt on my own. usually, I learn more on my own, occasionally tallying my errors with other people doing the same if I want some clarification. i'm fairly well read because of that habit. i am comfortable teaching myself, to a great extent. i'm also more technically minded (if there is such an expression) than creative. I helped set up my father's ENG business, and we recently started distributing stock footage as well.

hmm... money. i know that i have 50,800 dollars for sure, as of right now. I got more than half of that selling artwork (i draw, paint and sometimes sculpt. i didn't have any significant instruction for that either), and I expect someone to commission a few paintings soon, so I suppose I can get a 1000 dollars more if i'm lucky. soooo right now it just depends on what I can get for a little over that amount. I have a workstation, a fairly decent one (win xp x64, 4GB ram, after effects CS3, intel core 2 quad 2.667 ghz, and a 768mb nVidia 8800 GTX that I flashed to a Quadro FX 5600). I expect I'll have to buy a RED one, nikon lenses, a few accesories, an output card (possibly a pro sound card?), and hopefully a waveform monitor, along with some sort of color grading software for AE. my dad's office has a VTR, so I can probably use that to output stuff for work right now, but haven't decided on a bunch of details, so i'll probly end up combing through the forum for answers. I'll admit the choices in lenses baffle me though. :-/ i'll have to find some sort of optimal set up for the money i have. i build my own rigs from scratch. there's a large, cheap, tech market here for computer hardware, so its a kid in a candy store sorta addiction. :D very comfortable with computers. and I get most of my material online anyway, so the forum is nothing new.

i'd actually answer in the affirmative for everything... the ONLY thing i'm not sure about is whether i'll have a "good" mentor... :-/ i have a bunch of major theatrical productions under my belt as well, one of them working with an actor who studied at the royal academy of dramatic arts, and i'm regularly involved with productions by students at the national academy of performing arts. sooo lots of background in theatre here as well. just no film. I have one lead though, and I'll try and get him to mentor me, but that's pretty far-fetched. Worst comes to worst, it only means I won't have a safety net. I can get money invested, once i have something solid for people to back. I'm a reasonably good salesman that way... either way I'll end up piecing together everything into what works for me.
 
Okay, if there's no film industry in your country, why the heck don't you leave? Come to the US, go to a good film school here, not "great" as $50,000 won't be enough for a "great" film school's tuition, and make contacts here where films are made daily and, sometimes, hourly!

If the USA doesn't work, go to Singapore! NYU has a film program there now, or rather Tisch does (NYU changed their name apparently), and I think Chapman's film program has something in the works for their too, if not already going on. That way, you'll be able to meet film students from all around, heck, maybe some people from your country who were interested in film too, you never know, right?

Listen, if you're trying to single handedly start up your country's film business, then that's a very unrealistic dream. There are a lot of things to making films that goes beyond your little question about whether to buy a camera or go to school. It really is a people business. If you were really going to do anything, you would have to get all those video and film fat cats to unite and develop a studio versus doing the varying production work they're doing now on their own. Buying a camera isn't going to make you the top guy and you don't have the means to set up your own rental house or studio either with that $50,000 budget. Now, if you could get a RED and go to film school as well, do that, you'll have people wanting to work with you quite often but be prepared to become a cinematographer or producer as that's likely what you'll be asked to do with the mentality of "Expensive camera = Guy who knows his stuff = Knows how to use it = Cinematographer" and, if they have their own cinematographer, you'll most likely be offered to be a producer on the project to compensate the use of your camera.

What it sounds like you want to do is start up a studio and that's just not possible to do on your own. It would be like trying to set up a studio to compete against Warner Bros., Universal, Sony, or any of those other movie studios. That may not be your intent, but that's the equivalent scope of what you describe.

I chose to go to film school versus getting a RED and, you know what? I'm glad I did because I wouldn't have been able to use it yet as I can hardly get any of my classmates to help me on my projects regardless of whether I help them on theirs or not, even if it's just to be an extra in the background. They want to focus on their own stuff and could care less about what other people are doing. Thankfully, I'm used to this mentality from my undergrad, so when my film looks like a movie with great performances and a terrific story and theirs looks like an amateur Mini-DV film school kid project with terrible performances and a suck story, they get some major payback. But, still, even after they're humbled, they'll go back to focusing on their own stuff or going to parties or any of that other stupid college kid stuff while I'll be hard at work on my next project. What I'm trying to say is that film school can be a mixed bag. You could get lucky and meet the right people right off the bat or you could get saddled with groups that I'm encountering and feel like you've wasted your money on film school. But there's always the one truth about it, who else are you going to work with? It's not like you can just call up Harrison Ford and say, "Hey, I'm an indie filmmaker, want to be in my movie shoot this weekend?" or call up a famous cinematographer, or crew members, or anybody. You'd have to meet them all one-by-one and make friends. But you'll need a way to meet them which could range from buying a ticket to a particular party or event to meeting someone while buying groceries and by chance through dumb luck alone. That's why film school is good, you get to meet people and, at the least, try to get them to work with you and, if you make good friends with them, you'll have started a network that could lead to bigger and better opportunities.

Now, this ties into something else. If you have a dedicated group of friends that will help make films with you, try to set up your own company that way, maybe not with the expense but you can at least buy a company name for yourselves, and then make an indie smash hit that wows everyone! .... Yeah, thought not. Everyone thinks that they can win Sundance, man. But you've got to have something incredibly good to have even a chance. Don't be fooled, the fanciest and most technically perfect film won't necessarily be the one to get praise, as can be seen with several flashy Japanese action films. It'll be the "Napoleon Dynamite" movies or the "Juno" films, something really funny that everyone can relate to. If you're that good, then go that route, but if you waste everybody's time and do little piddly cliche film after little piddly cliche film that doesn't even impress one person, then maybe you need to reevaluate your career choice.

You've got options. The RED isn't it. Scarlet may be a better choice but a camera alone isn't going to get you anywhere.
 
I can relate to what you say about being interested in learning and being self-taught. That is exactly why I bought a Sony ENG camera when I was interested in that. And exactly why I've taught myself many skills and held many different professional roles.

However the more pragmatic aspects of film-making (especially professional film-making) are very hard to learn alone. Etiquette, roles, processes, working with others - all are hard to learn without either a structured and well-supported teaching program, or a solid immersion into the industry (such as an apprenticeship).

Making films with like-minded individuals is great practice in the very practical elements of the industry (lighting, composition etc) but is pretty useless for learning how to work in a professional environment. In fact the 'do everything yourself' approach can become pretty problematic in a more structured environment, where stepping on toes can create serious friction.
 
film school is a joke.

dont buy an expensive piece of equipment unless you will make money with it.

buy a house.

then buy a cheaper system, 2/3 scarlet..

learn to write good storys and shoot.
 
film school is a joke.

dont buy an expensive piece of equipment unless you will make money with it.

buy a house.

then buy a cheaper system, 2/3 scarlet..

learn to write good storys and shoot.

I disagree. Not all film schools are jokes. If you can get into NYU, UCLA or USC and can get them to pay for at least half of the bill, then do it. I would never give up my film school experience for anything. I met more people & learned more things than any book, camera or message board could ever teach me.

Plus, when you go to film school, they will provide all of the equipment for you! No need to buy a camera if what you're looking for is proper training and future relationships with people in the industry.
 
Depends on the film school. I pride myself on being very very proficient at almost any technical thing i can get my hands on. On the other hand the subtleties of filmmaking are what make quality shine through. any idiot can cut a piece together with the tools, it takes patience and skill to do it well. If the film school is hands on, do it. It gives you a miniature industry to work with, and may help you discover little things that you are stronger at than anyone else. I truly believe film school was the best choice for me. I bought a RED after I finished.
 
Well, don't get too caught up with the thought that the film school will provide you with equipment. As we've already said, it depends on the school. Chapman, for instance, is more film-based than digital. Yes, they have some digital cameras, an HVX200 actually, but not that many to go around. What they do have is support equipment like tripods, dollies, and, if I remember correctly, a jib arm or two.

In my experience with film school, you could really save a lot by buying your own bare microphone and camera and just use the school's accessories and other equipment to supplement you in your projects. But, either way, your first semester or, depending on the school, your first year will be spent with a $200 Mini-DV junk camera for introductory film production courses, regardless of undergraduate or graduate courses. In that case, it pays to have your own camera so you can stand out a little better. But, a RED is overkill during these times unless you can make your own films on the side, which is not likely. Again, I say, if you can, stick with Scarlet versus a full-on RED and try to go to film school as well.
 
SUCCESS! I found an NTFS (National Television and Film School, in the UK) trained Cinematographer with an MA in Cinematography and a good few years of experience! he seems more than willing to take me on, I'm surprised I didn't find him sooner, he's worked on a documentary with my dad in the not-so-distant past. :D

now all i have to do is figure out what to get. hmm... any ideas? I have a budget of a little more than 60,000 dollars now (it need not be spent all at once, whatever works). i need to know what to get and more importantly why. ideally, i'd want a camera configuration and upgrade that reflects and suits a learning curve. really, there's no one better to explain that than people who have used the camera extensively themselves; so come out, wherever you are..!
 
It's concerning when people say things like "fuck film school, start shooting".

The people that are feaking out on this forum over the announcement of Epic and Scarlett are the ones that have their entire wellbeing wrapped up in a piece of equipment. No one can take knowledge away from you. Equipment will come and go, no matter how hard RED tries to not make that happen, but a (good) film school education will stay with you forever.

Also, it's important to determine what you want to do. Just shoot? A camera may be more realistic. Direct? Don't worry about the camera, learn to tell stories on DV or 8mm.
 
heh. the irony. i decided to go, but now i can't. bugger. so anyway... my student visa's not going to come in time for me to actually go. So i'll have to go in 8 months, with the next intake.
 
Back
Top