FilmmakerIQ.com

• Rick Barney said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  Hey all, newbie here. I signed on last year with hopes of getting a project going but never did (dang sinus problems). Anyhow, I’m starting to shop for cameras and really don’t know what to get. Of course we all dream of hitting the lotto with our idea (for me that would be history channel, travel or TLC). Anyhow, as I look into getting a camera what you recommend. I know HD but beyond that…I’m clueless (I come from a radio background so film will be new to me). I have found a few canon XH-A1 and XH-A1s used on Craigslist that are 1080i film quality. Because this is all out of pocket and I don’t know if it’ll take off I don’t want to spend to the hilt on a new camera that’s 1080p. Plus, going this route I could probably get 2 cameras instead of one in the 4500 range. This is getting windy but basically I just need to know if footage from a 1080i camera work for HD broadcast down the line. I would hate to go shoot a bunch of stuff, have it edited decent and the quality is just one step short of perfect. Hope this makes sense. BTW, most of my filming will be outdoors.
  #
• numballover said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  It’s very hard to come up with the correct answer, because there are so many options.

  Every channel has different specs. I think the bigger problem with the XH-A1 is going to be the HDV codec which records at 25mb/s. Most channels prefer codecs 35mb/s. Some even require 50mb/s.

  I’d bet some channels will accept XH-A1 footage…but I can’t say for certain. For just a little bit more money you could go with the XF-100 and probably be much better off. I don’t know what kind of deal craigslist is offering, but new the XF-100 is only about $300 more than the XH-A1

  I personally don’t like shooting 1080i…but that’s probably just me being snobbish.

  My main question would be are you certain that you have to buy a camera at all? Could renting be better option? I say this because there is a ton of other gear that you may need to factor into the equation. If $4500 is what you’ve allocated to your camera budget then you’re probably fine…but if that is the total budget then you may need to reevaluate some things.

  If you are a radio person, then I imagine you’ve at least thought of sound. Don’t forget also the necessary lights, tripod, etc.

  If you plan on shooting over a long period of time, you may have no choice but to buy your camera. However, if your entire shoot is going to last less than 30 days, I’d highly recommend renting. You could get a better camera, and spend much less money.

  You could rent a Canon XF-100 from lensrentals.com for 30 days for just $800.

  Movie Reviews from Killerfilm.com
  #
• John P. Hess said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  I think you should save your money and hire camera people who can bring their own gear. Barring that, you should rent.

  But the most important question in terms of what camera you should be shooting with is what type of project do you want to shoot? Is it reality/documentary?

  All my Best,
  John Hess
  Creative Industries Media Group | GospelJohn.net
  #
• Rick Barney said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  Thanks for the advice guys. Numballover, Thanks for the info on the Codecs info. These are things I am unfamiliar with. I have found listings for the XH-A1 for around $2000 – $2500. Obviously I haven’t touched them in person to see condition. Don’t worry about the snobbish because I feel that way about certain things as well so am leaning to the “P” which is why I was asking about how “I” would be embraced. I was reading how 1080P is smoother so that was another reason I wanted to go that way. Origionally I was looking at a Sony that was around $4500 so that’s where my price point has come in for the camera. I figured there would be a bunch of extra things needed (Wireless lapel mic’s, stands, etc.) Through the people I have lined up to be involved we have a fair amount of audio gear which will help. Thanks for the rental link. That is something I have considered, with this lead I can shop prices. My concern with rental is that we all have “DAY JOBS” so this will all be done on weekends which is fine because the concept is all weekend related anyhow. That means my time of need for the camera will probably be longer than 30 days and in that time I have the camera I may only get out to use it one or two weekends. There are a couple of audio/video production houses in my area. I may check weekend rates with them first before buying. I have (maybe foolishly) looked at it from this viewpoint: Buy Camera for $4500 + Extras. Use for a year, if things dont work out sell camera for $3000. In the end, I lose $1500 which doesn’t seem that bad compared to rental costs if you are saying a camera is around $800 for a month. Hope that makes sense. Maybe thinking that way the $4500 camera isn’t enough. I don’t know, that’s why I’m here.
  John P. — Yes, the show will be reality/documentary. I’m guessing that roughly 75% of the show would be outdoors. The bulk of that would be daytime filming. Some stationary…some will have movement.
  Maybe you need a few more facts before you can help with this but from the limited info I have given you and knowing at this point that I still prefer to buy over rent (Although that could change if prices are reasonable to rent from a local prod house on weekends), what would you suggest as a baseline starter setup? As previously mentioned I want it to be recorded in a quality that is potentially TV friendly should things work out and I generate interest in it with one of the local affiliates. For this assume there will be 2 hosts on mic/camera the majority of the time. We will want to do interviews as well. I hope this is enough for you to point me to a starter setup.

  Thanks all
  #
• John P. Hess said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  Well here’s the thing… if you buy the cameras – who’s going to operate them?

  If you want this to even have the possibility of landing on a network, you’ve got to have people who have some experience behind the camera. People who know how to frame a shot, how to white balance, how to focus, how to follow action. The quickest way to get those people is to pull from your videography pool and those guys all have their own gear. Also these guys may have worked with you local affiliate and know what their technical requirements are.

  Or better yet, just ask the affiliate what their technical requirements are. You’ll get a sheet of paper which they may or may not follow.

  If you buy/rent the gear blind, you’re going to have to face the learning curve for this stuff which could potentially ruin your project.

  And now I’m going to my non-tech side and may piss off people… the reason most shows get rejected is because they’re not good, not because they don’t meet the technical specs. I’m probably wrong on that “statistic” because I made it up, but my gut feeling is if they want it bad enough, they’ll find a way to make it meet specs (barring some high faluting network like Discovery or BBC).

  In other words, spend your money on people, not machines. 1-2 cameras and a sound person would suffice.

  I know that’s not the advice you’re looking for, but you will be infinitely better following it then if I just rattled off some model numbers.

  To other people reading – this advice is for the “I want to make this project” question and is a different journey from the “I want to become a filmmaker” question.
  #
• numballover said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  @Gospel_John said:
  To other people reading – this advice is for the “I want to make this project” question and is a different journey from the “I want to become a filmmaker” question.

  I agree with you John, but I think what you are saying bares some clarification. Your answer is approaching the project purely as a business proposition. Spend X, sell the project for X+ profit.

  So I think what John is saying that if your goal is to tell a specific story and sell it for profit, then you don’t have time to spend the years needed to develop the needed camera skills. So in that case its best to just be the producer and hire some camera talent that can also guide you on the best set up for your budget.

  I will disagree with you on one point though, and that’s about networks ‘finding a way’ to make it work. I do alot of work on Sy Fy originals and a major concern is the network kicking back portions for technical reasons.

  This happens quite often and is very expensive to fix, often requiring reshoots. The network rarely cares about bad camera work, but if the shot is too dark or has an odd flicker they kick it back every time.
  #
• John P. Hess said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  @numballover said:
  I agree with you John, but I think what you are saying bares some clarification. Your answer is approaching the project purely as a business proposition. Spend X, sell the project for X+ profit.

  So I think what John is saying that if your goal is to tell a specific story and sell it for profit, then you don’t have time to spend the years needed to develop the needed camera skills. So in that case its best to just be the producer and hire some camera talent that can also guide you on the best set up for your budget.

  I will disagree with you on one point though, and that’s about networks ‘finding a way’ to make it work. I do alot of work on Sy Fy originals and a major concern is the network kicking back portions for technical reasons.

  This happens quite often and is very expensive to fix, often requiring reshoots. The network rarely cares about bad camera work, but if the shot is too dark or has an odd flicker they kick it back every time.

  I figured I got that point wrong… :)

  Rules for Reality/Documentary may be more relaxed. Local affiliates may be less stringent. Or they may not be.

  Check with your station.
  #
• Rick Barney said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  Your suggestion of contacting from people that have video background is valid. We are actually pursuing that today to see if an independent guy that’s friends with my co-host is open to participating or at least jumping in to help us get started.
  I’m calling it a project because I have said it will be more reality based and not headed to the big screen in any way, shape or form.
  I have a couple of very talented people that are ready to get in on camera work. One has a journalism degree from KU and has done video and camera work and is very into photography. The other is the webmaster at my employer but is into everything techno gadgety and loves to tinker with this stuff and has more than a basic understanding of video editing and camera operation. Another guy in the building has shot and edited a lot of video for Better Homes and gardens and he is open to helping out but probably not in for the long haul.
  To come around to just selling the project or idea and moving on would be the easy way. I could call a production company and pitch my idea, maybe pocket some money for the idea and that’s it. Like you, I have a vision and see the potential with this. It’s something I would like to try to build on my own with people that see the same vision I do and who also believe in it. I agree with you completely on the reason some shows don’t make it…because they aren’t good. Then again, reality TV is currently filled with a lot of “NOT GOOD” shows but they are one. At this point I don’t expect to get rich but if I could cover my expenses and some point and make what I do with my day job so I could do this and maybe even grow in the video world that would be awesome. If I were to just hire people I would spend my money and maybe get something useable…maybe not. Not sure what cost on something like that would be for a weekend but I’m sure it’s not cheap. I would assume a weekend could burn $1500 plus expenses…I may be shooting super low on that. If we bought our own gear…even as clueless as we are … that would give everyone a lot of hands on time and put us in a great position for filming in 3 months or so. We would have time to record, edit and see how things work out. The biggest steps i see with this is A) have an interesting topic B) put it together well. Both visually and entertaining C) have some connections to get it in front of people. Hopefully a TV connection so it seems a bit more “LEGIT” than just posting youtube videos. All of the people involved in this know that even if it doesn’t work at least we had a good time out trying it and it was some weekends out in the world. But, if we’re going to spend the time going to get footage and try to do this thing I’m not going to waste my time filming it in a quality that isn’t useful down the line. Thanks for the input guys, don’t want to come across as not listening or strong headed. I have a basic understanding of target audience and such thanks to the radio background so I want to clarify that I believe my project is good. Obviously the people participating in this believe in it as well or they wouldn’t be willing to jump in. Also, I believe in it to the degree that I’ll spend my own money to get this started and we all know that isn’t going to be cheap. Thanks guys.
  #
• John P. Hess said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  How about this?

  Drop the idea of heading for TV and go for purely for internet. Youtube is plenty legit if you have decent production values. There’s also Vimeo, Blip and other sites out there but they don’t have the reach that YouTube does.

  You can produce very cheaply and build an audience online. This also exposes you to a far larger audience than a local TV affiliate could ever muster.

  If you’ve got radio connections, a Kickstarter Campaign might be a good way for you to start connecting with an audience and help raise some funds.

  There are a lot of possible opportunities for really low cost production if you get away from stringent broadcast demands.
  #
• Rick Barney said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  I have thought about that and do think there’s some potential with the web. How many hits, how much traffic do you have to get from something like that before you take it to the next step to pitch it to someone? The reason I ask is because the thing that’s steering me away from youtube is lets say I spend all this money to buy my camera and gear. Put together a pretty nice project and I’m getting views from 10,000 people. At this point someone from a production company “DISCOVERS” my project and A) likes the idea and maybe even likes me as host BUT they want to do it with their people. Suddenly I just bail on everyone that was there from the beginning with me. Not a big fan of that. B) They like the idea but DON”T like me so they take the idea to their people and start their own project which is 99.5% a copy of mine. It’s tough to compete with that when they have funds and people to go out and really do it up. I would have been better off calling and pitching the show in the beginning and pocketing the money they would offer for the concept. Unfortunately through youtube I see the idea evaporating out from under me. I understand that I could pay money and put it in through the writers guild but also have the feeling from friends that if someone wants your show idea those with money will just bury you with paperwork so you can’t do anything. Maybe a bit negative but just the way I’m looking at it from my lack of experience.
  Here’s why I’m focused on TV for now, and this is from the local level. I have a friend who is the sales manager at one of the “BIG 3″. She told me that their parent company told them they need more local content for the web. I would like to produce the show, get it hosted on their website. See if they can promote it on Saturday/Sunday mornings between the garden report and doggies on death row. Maybe let us produce a short teaser and push people to the web. If it gets decent hits maybe I can get them to open up and play it on the .2HD channel around the weather loop. This will do a few things for me. First it will help us work out the kinks, second and most important, it will help build an audience and hopefully give us credibility ASAP because we’re affiliated with TV (Hopefully this makes it a bit more challenging if someone tries to snag the idea). 3rd, this station is part of the Heart-Argyle chain of stations. If you could get into one, maybe they could help push this out to other stations in the region then across the states as the show develops and improves. One of my other friends has a show on Public Television and has been on HGTV in the past. She said that she loves Public TV because they are in 80%+ percent of the markets in the US and in those markets they hit something like 90% of homes with TV because Public TV is on antenna, dish, Cable, etc. I sort of look at the possibility of getting on the .2HD channels the same way. Maybe I’m dreaming…won’t know till I meet with my friend early next week. She may have some other ideas or options as well. Youtube isn’t ruled out completely…just not at the top of the list. Anyhow, this all brings me back around to the camera. Why not shoot with the best thing I can afford now so should opportunity present itself I’m ready to go and get it on TV Vs. going at it a cheap way now and then having to go back and re-shoot later. I say do it right the first time even if we have to strip it down a bit to play on Youtube.
  #
• 8thSamurai said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  Cart, meet horse.

  Trying to get a show on air involves a LOT more than tech specs. TV shows aren’t purchased based on artistic merit, but by potential profitability – lots of eyeballs = advertising dollars = success. And don’t get me started on paperwork.

  There is no magical ‘perfect’ camera, only the best tool for the job you want to do. Talking heads on the road is different than talking heads in a studio is different than a ‘real world’ house is different than a snowboarders action shoot etc.

  And the operator is far more important than the gear.

  Public Television aka PBS? Look on their webpage for their extremely stringent requirements and narrow focus of purchase. (This tends to be more relaxed for local affiliates in rural areas. Chances are your local station has someone to call and ask.)

  It honestly sounds like this is your first project, which means the chances of landing a full season contract on any network are infinitely small. Yes, there are exceptions. Don’t expect to be one – they’re called that for a reason.

  With no track record, you’re going to have to present something fairly mind blowing. Oh, and execs tend not to take direct meetings any more. You just missed the tv show market festival for this year, by a few weeks.

  Plan for youtube. If you have significant (millions) of regular viewers, they’ll be far more interested than appearing out of nowhere, with no experience, saying ‘I have an idea’.

  Everyone has an idea.

  http://digitalisdreaming.blogspot.com/

  http://twitter.com/#!/DigitalisVitae
  #
• numballover said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  @Rick – Add a space or two between paragraphs. It’s a little hard to read in one big chunk like that.

  I’m a little torn about John’s suggestion of going to youtube. You tube can be a great way to get views, but doesn’t generate much income without tens of thousands of hits. Youtube is a giant promotion vehicle, not a business model. If you had written a book, and would make a show on youtube as a means to sell the book, that would be different. But purely to get attention and get some ad income…I’d be pretty skeptical of that approach

  If you have an in road to a network, and think you can seriously deliver the goods, then you can maybe put together a short pilot and pitch it.

  The scenario of an idea being stolen does happen, and might happen even if you put together a whole show. You could produce the whole show only for it to never be seen, and later have the network create their own show just like it.

  Creating a show as web content for local TV doesn’t sound like a bad idea. More than likely that won’t let you quit your day job unless you are in a huge local market.

  My website tried to work out a deal for a show for local TV station. The deal would have given us several ad slots that we could sell. Overall I figured at max we could make $900 per episode. For the show we wanted to create, that would have pretty much been just breaking even.

  PBS is not bad, and several docs I’ve worked on have gotten some decent sized deals with both local and nation wide PBS affiliates. But even still you have to meet their level of quality.

  I think having read all of your posts and getting a feel for the whole situation I’d have this advice: Rent some top notch gear the next time you and your crew have a 4-day weekend. On that weekend try and do a 20 min pilot for the show, and spend less than $1000 doing it. Show that to your friend and see if that is the kind of content they are after.

  If it isn’t, then proceed to put the pilot you shot on Youtube. Create a second video explaining what you are trying to do. Maybe do a kickstarter thing.

  Essentially, I’m saying I think you need a “business card” to put your foot in the door, and show the level of content you produce.

  Without some sort of demo, most networks will assume the exact same thing all of the commenter here have assumed — that the produce you produce will be sub par. Make a good video and that will go a long way to getting a deal.
  #
• Scott Jarvie said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  @numballover said:
  …

  I’m a little torn about John’s suggestion of going to youtube. You tube can be a great way to get views, but doesn’t generate much income without tens of thousands of hits. Youtube is a giant promotion vehicle, not a business model. If you had written a book, and would make a show on youtube as a means to sell the book, that would be different. But purely to get attention and get some ad income…I’d be pretty skeptical of that approach
  …

  This is the reality of the situation. Youtube is a phenomenal tool to market your product, it is a kin to self publication.

  The graveness of the situation is that Numb’s over exaggeration, is actually no where close. Tens of thousands of hits, will generate pocket change.

  Youtube partners are not allowed to disclose how much money they make from the program. However, after years of data mining and inquiries it’s become widely accepted that the partners gain approximately $1.00-$2.50 per thousand views, or $1000-$2500 per million views. $900 sounds like a pretty good deal now :P

  You can however take your tens of thousands of views to another distributor and say, look, we have an audience, this is something people want to see.

  Dudley Do-Right says:
  “If it’s worth doing, it’s worth doing right!”
  “Remember to always look before crossing the road.”
  #
• John P. Hess said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  Now wait a cotton pickin minute… I never said nothin’ about making’ money on YouTube. YouTube is for exposure, it’s a way for you to build up an audience which you can sell directly to either through Kickstarter or direct sales. Or to sell advertising on your show directly (not through yt)

  Ricks profile says he’s in des Moines Iowa a city of about 40k people in a state that’s about 3million people. Now I don’t know the coverage those stations get but realistically how many viewers are going to be actively tuned in when the show is being promoted? A couple hundred?

  I’d trade 10,000 yt hits for a couple hundred Iowans (no disrespect).
  #
• Scott Jarvie said 3 months, 1 week ago:

  @Gospel_John said:
  …
  I’d trade 10,000 yt hits for a couple hundred Iowans (no disrespect).

  So would most local stations, if your program is getting views on yt, it says it’ll get at least the same amount of views as the current program that they already sell ad space for, with the exception that it might earn more.

  A large step up from a shot in the dark.
  #

Remember Me