Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • 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 :)

Directing: Career Paths (DP, AD, etc)

T

Tyler Leisher

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2009
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Points
0
This may not belong here, but I'm not sure where else to put it, and as it pertains a little to cinematography, I figured why not.

So my dream job and goal in life is to be a Producer/Director (Heavy on the Director). Like Stephen Soderbergh, Ron Howard, Michael Bay, Judd Apatow, etc.

I would love to learn how to light a scene, how cameras work, etc. But given the choice between having to choose between being a Producer or Cinematography, I'd probably choose Producer. If I couldn't direct, I'd love to Produce. Both because it allows me to develop the stories I want to tell, follow the process along the entire endevour, be really creative and have a say in every part of the filmmaking process, and ultimately reap more of the rewards if a film is successful.

The real problem comes into play because I've seen DoPs who've gone on to Direct and Produce. So I know it's possible.

The real question is, what do I do for money before becoming a director that will best prepare me for the job once I get there? As they say, Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity, so I want to be as prepared as possible.

With that being said, what is the best career path to take for me? I understand that the best way to be a director is to make shorts and write. But in the mean time, whats the best for me?

PA -> 2nd 2nd AD -> 2nd AD -> 1st AD -> UPM -> Producer (and then Produce a film and set me up as Director)

or

Camera PA -> 2nd AC -> 1st AC -> Operator/DP -> Director (and Produce once I have a successful film completed as Director and earn more clout, ala Ron Howard, Barry Sonnenfeld or Stephen Soderbergh)

There's been a lot of directors that have come from being a Cinematography.. and I've done a little research to find that some DPs on TV shows have directed a few episodes.

I'm a very technical and organized guy, I have worked as a 2nd AD and 1st AD on some shorts and stuff but I really only did that because it was the only job available on those projects and I just wanted to get my foot in the door.. that plus I was coming from a PA background, and I had worked in the AD department for pretty much any industry job I had. But that hasn't stopped me from being a tech geek and drooling over new cameras or being interested in how things are photographed.

From my understanding, the career ladders look like this:
ACs / Camera PAs move on to be Cinematographers.
ADs / Set PAs move on to be Producers (1st AD -> UPM -> Producer)

Is that true, or is there more to it then that? Do ADs often move on to being UPMs and then Producing their own films? I understand that this might seem like a loaded question, but hopefully I can get some good info from you guys.. I know that you get a different answer out of people based on the audience you ask, so most of you will probably say Cinematography.. but I figured why not ask as this is one of the best forums for film makers on the internet.

With that being said, I appreciate your input and opinions and would love to spark some kind of discussion about the natural progression of jobs in the industry (especially those pertaining to DP/Director/Producers.
 
As you correctly stated, the best path to becoming a director is writing, writing, writing. Direct shorts any time you can. The problem with the two paths that you've laid out is that when you are working full time on other peoples' projects, you don't have time to come home and write your own material. If you really really want to direct, don't let anything get in the way of your writing, even cinematography or producing. Just my opinion.
 
There isn't any natural progression to the job of director, except perhaps in the case of a long-running TV series where people on the show such as the DP get a shot at directing an episode.

Personally, I'd say learn to become a screenwriter because the main reason a director gets a shot at directing a feature is because they are attached to a script with commercial possibilities that people want to see get made.

Otherwise, you should do whatever you feel you would be best at doing, because none of those alternate jobs to directing are easy either, they also take talent, passion, and a long-term commitment.
 
Do everything yourself. Then, when you are ready ... delegate.
 
Thanks guys, I really appreciate it. I hadn't looked at it from that way.

I'm fairly new to how the industry works, still trying to grasp everything. Was I correct in assuming the career paths (Minus the directing part)? ACs go on to be DPs and ADs go on to be Producers? Or do you stop at being a 1st AD? I'm not sure how to jump from 1st AD to UPM to Producer works.
 
If you want to be a producer, you need to hook up with an up and coming director. That's the under 20 years path. But wait, you want to be a director, so you need to hook up with an up and coming writer. On second thought, maybe you should just get back to work on your script...
 
A friend recently said something to me that I find completely true and helpful.

It depends on what you as a Director need work on, if you lack leadership and want to learn more about that coming up as an AD is a great way to learn those skills. If you lack the composition and technical skills, coming up as a DP would be a great way to work on those skills.
 
you had a path of becoming a producer then hiring yourself as the director..
that wont happen.. you wont get funding.
no one wants to fund a no name with no directing experience..
write.. shoot and edit a bunch of shorts and enter them into festivals
 
I never really looked at "director" as a career path, that thinking seems kind of odd to me. This is art, if you're passionate about the art then do what you can with resources you have available. Enter shorts into festivals like Zak stated, and eventually--if you're good at what you do--you'll get noticed by the right people and be "plugged" in. While competition is pretty tough, have faith in yourself. Just let your passion guide you... don't approach this stuff as career paths, etc.
 
Dominic Cochran said:
If you want to direct, write or just do it. Just make something.

But if you want to be a GOOD director, you should learn how to edit. There's no better way to learn how NOT to make mistakes on set than learning to edit.
Click to expand...

While that's generally true, the art of directing has a lot to do with things other than where to put the camera and what coverage is needed. The primary job of the director is to coax the best and most appropriate performances from the actors, by any means necessary, and in a collaborative way. Directing film is about directing actors. The primary weakness I've seen in people that attempt to move from editing into directing is that they approach the directing in more of a technical way, concerning themselves primarily with coverage, screen direction, and the like, and not with developing methods of communicating with the cast (or the crew, for that matter) in ways that encourage their best work. While it's certainly important to get the proper coverage, a well prepared, collaborative director comes in with a vision of what they want, conveys that vision to a cameraman who helps to achieve it, and on the day concerns themselves mainly with performance. Things happen both in rehearsal and during shooting that can and often do alter the original shooting plan for the better, and one must think on their feet in order to take advantage of those moments. That's what directing is really all about. Editing is a much more controlled, more personal and private discipline. Directing requires great communicative and social skills, which are not usually well developed in the privacy of a cutting room.
 
Dominic Cochran said:
If you want to direct, write or just do it. Just make something.

But if you want to be a GOOD director, you should learn how to edit. There's no better way to learn how NOT to make mistakes on set than learning to edit.
Click to expand...

I agree 1000%. To be a good director you must understand how to edit in your head, at least the basics. Directing is like editing in reverse, you must know how to pre-visualize the jux-opposition of angles, motion and screen direction.

I think knowing how to direct talent is another special skill, and requires knowledge of how that breed of person ticks, and how to motivate them properly. Some knowledge of the theater would help build that skill in my opinion.
 
Im in the exact same position as the OP.

I have enrolled in many film classes (that will start this fall) things such as Directing classes, stage and lighting, etc.

I too cant wait to get going, and get in the industry full blown.
 
I always felt that to help get the coverage part down, it helps to direct some live TV stuff (especially if you are still in school and can take a class) since you have to figure out coverage and editing on the fly. That comes in handy as you encounter problems in a narrative setting.

But I also agree with mmost. If you can get the most out of actors and convey your vision, then you are a big part of the way there, and that to me is one of the toughest parts to do (probably why I'm an aspiring DP instead of aspiring Director).

Otherwise, I think there's a ton of good advise in this thread, mostly because there's no clear way to get where you want, which also means that you'll have a few different opportunities as to how you want to do it.
 
My advice is starve! If you want to be a director, don't be anything else (in the industry). Be a librarian or barrista at Starbucks and keep working on your scripts and beg barrow and steal equipment, talent and locations to shoot shorts. Almost all the AD's and AC's that are good end up getting used to the money, or eventually stop and put their energy into their passion. Either way there is no advancement without risk.

I had lunch with Barry Sonnenfeld once and asked him about this very subject. He said that for him shooting a movie and directing it was all the same. He worked mostly with the Choens so he just felt part of the creative team. when it came to Directing his approach was no different. He didn't even know he was going to like directing, his goal at first was to shoot. The important part was he was always pursuing his passion.
 
mmost said:
While that's generally true, the art of directing has a lot to do with things other than where to put the camera and what coverage is needed. The primary job of the director is to coax the best and most appropriate performances from the actors, by any means necessary, and in a collaborative way. Directing film is about directing actors. The primary weakness I've seen in people that attempt to move from editing into directing is that they approach the directing in more of a technical way, concerning themselves primarily with coverage, screen direction, and the like, and not with developing methods of communicating with the cast (or the crew, for that matter) in ways that encourage their best work. While it's certainly important to get the proper coverage, a well prepared, collaborative director comes in with a vision of what they want, conveys that vision to a cameraman who helps to achieve it, and on the day concerns themselves mainly with performance. Things happen both in rehearsal and during shooting that can and often do alter the original shooting plan for the better, and one must think on their feet in order to take advantage of those moments. That's what directing is really all about. Editing is a much more controlled, more personal and private discipline. Directing requires great communicative and social skills, which are not usually well developed in the privacy of a cutting room.
Click to expand...

Agreed. My main point was to help someone new avoid drastic mistakes on set, a goal toward which I think editing knowledge can be valuable, and is underrated as a training ground. Getting a good performance from inexperienced, OR experienced but emotionally fragile actors is certainly crucial; but it's also something that can't be learned in the camera dept OR production dept. That's definitely where the artists get separated from the wannabes. Sink or swim and what not.
 
work as a PA for at least a year and learn about everyone's job, if you still want to direct, then buy a camera, any camera and start making music videos, commercials, shorts, promos everything and anything. the experience doing as many things as possible will give you the confidence and expertise to be the boss on set and to be able to stand up to your biggest obstacles: the money men (women), the suits, the clients, the agency the label.

by all means get out there and do it, also, in this world of scaled back budgets, i see a lot of directors particularly commercials and music videos being done by young guys that know the effects programs really well and are also creative. these guys hook up with producers and pitch elaborate effects jobs and then end up getting them as directors and then do all the effects themselves...saving a ton of money on the overall product but at the same time using their expertise with the tech side to continue to come up.

finally, treat everyone as you would want to be treated, you never know who people really are and where they will be in 1 year, 5 or 10 years. that guy you PA'ed one job with could end up being the biggest director or producer in a few years and you could get ahead just by knowing them.

dino
 
All of the posters offer excellent advice. First and foremost, a director is a story teller.

However, unlike a novelist, whose book is the finished product, screenwriters create a blueprint for a film, which is the finished product. And the film is only realized when a lot of terrific, skilled film makers collaborate -- craft service to post production supervisor, casting director to production designer, make-up artist to production sound mixer, etc. (I am talking about indie and major theatrical productions here, though the same applies on a smaller scale to even student and guerrilla film making).

What elevates a director's game is taking the time to really learn what everyone does on a film. This takes years. The effort is a great investment. Learn the entire pre-production, production and post production work flow. It really drives home how critical genuine collaboration is in the film making process.

And yes, one of the director's jobs is to play well with actors. To create a safe and creative environment for them. But the set is not the place to coax a great performance out of an actor. A director is not an acting coach. You want to get great performances? Cast great actors.

A director needs the ability to communicate his or her vision of the film to every single department and crew member so that they can then do what they do best. A director does that by being incredibly prepared.

Above all else, a director needs humility. And a willingness to embrace the many great ideas, which pop up on a daily basis during pre-production, production and post from crew and cast. You never know when or where these ideas and suggestions are going to come from. Once you assemble all the amazing people who come together to make a film, the project takes on a life of its own. The best ideas don't have to come from the director. And many, many times don't. Be open to them. Have the good sense to grab them when they do come. And always, ALWAYS give credit where credit is due. It will take your film to a whole other level. And ultimately, isn't that the goal of every film maker?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top