firsttimedirector

I'm now using my real name Johnny Roc and will no longer be using this account. It won't let me delete the post, sorry for double posting.

I'm the firsttimedirector. Instead of changing the name I've created this new account. thanks for all the input. My DP is out of town shooting a feature right now so our communication is limited but we'll have plenty of time to catch up. I've done a lot of research and have talked to a few labs to get some numbers which i have posted on a different threat: DI vs Old-school. I have a lot of respect for 16mm the format. And think those who don't work as hard on a 16mm set will not last in this biz. I think the leadership skills of the above the line people have a lot more to do with how seriously talent and crew take the project. There are plenty of gems in every format. 16 to me has the quality of the impressionistic painting, the grain being that intentionally visible brush stroke. But it all depends on the project and unfortunately a 35mm film is still more marketable than a 16mm film all else the same. Even despite the successes of Funny Ha Ha (my dp shot), Leaving Las Vegas, Band a part, Wendy and Lucy, the Wrestler, Hustle and Flow, the Balad of Jack and Rose, Mutual Appreciation (my dp ), Half Nelson, etc. Surprisingly after doing my homework shooting on 35mm and staying in the film world is almost the same if not cheaper as shooting on 16mm even with a 10 to 1 shooting ratio. 4 perf, recans. 2 perf of course would require DI. Assuming the goal is a film print which it is. I have 35mm prints for my old shorts which I obtained from a D5 master and also have a few HDcam masters and the difference between the print and the HDcam is very significant imho. I remember seeing this really crappy film Cargo at the largest theatre at sundance fest about four years ago and a few seconds into it you realize it was shot on 35 and it's a 35mm print, I didn't have to ask, the difference was that significant. It's night and day really. I think DI has its place and is very useful for films with special effects, and anything that will end up on the small screen, but ultimately HD found its way into our lives because of very clever marketing. You can't pick up a film mag without HD being mentioned at least once on every page. Yet screenwriting, or original composition, or actor's performances usually get a few pages somewhere. I mean blue-ray? common. Do we really need an hd master on a 46'' tv? I'm not talking about capturing on HD here, I'm talking about the work flow. I respect all those 40K festival features shot on HD, and the special effect blockbusters... I think the DI process is being pushed onto the indie filmmaker because a) the theatrical release is becoming more of a dream these days and it'll end up on the small screen anyways B) those post houses have to eat too and DI is their bread and butter. The biggest question I had to ask myself was can we realistically hope for a theatrical release? the answer is yes and we are shooting on 35mm.

oh i didn't know that. do they have to be my real names?! My DP told me he could do without a 2nd AC on a 16mm shoot.

forgot to ask: I've worked with my dp before on a short but can't pay him as much this time. He's photographed 2 features that had screened at top fests. and his latest just got into a top 5 fest. got a theatrical but made no money. he's a friend and will do it for any amount. what rate would be fair? 330K sounds like a lot but with the amount of locations/cast our prelim budget looks extremely tight so we're trying to cut corners everywhere. what's the going rate? 300/day? 150/day? it's a 24 day shoot. hopefully not offending anyone on this board.

it's my first post in many years so please, be gentle. i'm a director/producer not a dp so might say something silly even though I've directed 3 projects on 35mm. am i missing something: on the small screen i don't care, on the big screen i def prefer 35 mostly due to the grain. 50K ft of 35mm for a 90min feature is about 6 to 1 ratio and would be equivalent to 20K ft of 16mm. new 16 stock is 23cents/ft vs 15c/ft for 35mm re-cans. ( even with the snip test am i 100% safe with re-cans? any horror stories? ) processing is the same at about 11c/ft but more ft to process with 35. need one more crew member if shooting on 35, one less if shooting on 16mm. 35 camera package ( 24 shooting days ) is more expensive ( how much more? ) than 16. The DP likes arri, i think moviecam is a little cheaper and can use the same lenses. panavision is more expensive, right? It's about the stock and the lenses not the cam, am i right? i def want to have a film print. so would be saving $30K on blow up if shooting on 35mm (would than mean we would be cutting the negative instead of making a print from a D5 or an HDcam? How much would it cost to make a print if shooting on 35? I'm not talking color correction, i mean just striking a print. 35mm might attract better crew/cast but 16mm will give us more interviews ( we can play the indie card ) bottom line: because of the blow-up overall shooting on 16mm would only save us less than $30K. Even with a 10 to 1 shooting ratio the difference is not that significant. Am I right about this? I must be missing something 'cause the wrestler, half nelson, wendy and lucy, the balad of jack on rose, etc were all shot on 16 for a reason. Anyone who attempts to answer thanks in advance.

This forum is so helpful, thank you all for bein' so kind with your help. Ok, my new issue is the editor feels strongly that the sound should be synced at telecine, 'cause if assistant editor does it and it goes out of sync there won't be a way to easily sync it. I'm thinking it would be a waste of money if I had the colorist do it 'cause I'm paying him $450/hour and my editor gets $500/day. Unless the colorist could do it really quickly. We used the smart slate. What's the right way?

Ok, I'm doing telecine today, very excited to see the film on the big screen for the first time. But here is the thing: the telecine house quoted me $190 per blank 60min DigiBeta tape. And they say they only garantee quality if you use their tapes. But when I called a raw stock company I got $34 for a brand new Sony Digi Beta 60min tape. Am I missing something? I've heard that's how they screw you but just didn't think it would be this bad. Is there a chance it's not the same thing? Since I'll be needing more than one tape I don't want to just throw away my cash. Any advice on that and on my telecine session in general would be much appreciated. The colorist's demo reel btw was amazing.

Ok, I'm in post now and wondering if it's worth going w/ a student rate of $350/hour at a well respected company (their rate card is almost 4 times as much) and be ready to be bumped or should I go with also a professional company at $175/hour (their rate card is $200/hour). It would be supervised telecine on a Spirit 2K in both cases. I have 17k ft of Super 35mm. I guess my question is can telecine make or break a film or is it pretty much the same thing? Also, should I hire an editor before transfering or can it wait after telecine. And finally is there a way to only telecine what I'll actually use so I don't have to sit there for 12-14 hours or do I have to do everything I shot?

Thanks everyone for the words of wisdom. The nightmare is finally over and the most important thing is that I feel that I have what I need to save the film in post. As far as the knowledge goes yes I went to film school, and yes I know the 5 c's of cinematography, and shot by shot, and many others inside out, and I have studied many films frame by frame - nothing tops experience and I'm glad I now have some. I still do feel very strongly that my DP only knows a fraction of what I know when it comes to composition and I should have made him stick to the storyboards. But bottom line the director will always be the weakest on the set of this scale because he or she is the only one who really cares about the quality of the picture. Unless everyone is getting paid the real money. It's just every argument once he threatens to walk there is not much I could do because my priority has always been the quality of the film and not my ego. If I would have replaced him on day 3 with an unknown it could have ruined the film. I'm slowly building my rolodex and already picked a few amazing people from this crew for my next picture. BTW, I hate talking about someone to strangers, but what really pissed me off is after I found out from my producer that he held film in his car hostage until he got the check that he needed. Thank God my producer didn't tell me that on the set - everyone has a limit.

It's a 6 day shoot - two days left. I didn't just jump into it I took a year to study film on my own, and produced/directed/starred in a few instructional dvds that've done ok. I expected an hour hour and a half but not three and I half hours which is how long it took them to set up lights last time. So I called up my gaffer and asked if there is anything I can do to make his life easier. Turns out he had to teach most of his crew on the set (that my producer hired). So I offered to hire one of his own people at $200/day he confirmed one in five minutes so will see if it'll make a difference tomorrow. I'm super prepared and I come in with my shot list - my dp doesn't want to look at it, then last minute says what about this and loses me in two seconds and then everyone is pressured to just shoot just to make the day and i have no choice to let him do it his way. I'm planning to take control tomorrow. I know exactly what I want and since he didn't even look at my shot list last time I will lead to shoot my way.

I'm a first time director in production on a $50K 35mm short. Everyone but me including my dp is very experienced. I'm only two days away and things are a lot better than the day 1 nightmare I don't even want to think about but I know things could and should run a lot smoother. I know this board is for DPs but if you can relate, please, help. I understand composition inside out, I also wrote the script which helps a lot. Unfortunately I'm also in the film and the scenes that I'm in my DP tries to direct and treats me like one of the PAs. My AD is overqualified and on his side, my producer is incompetent. The Gaffer is knowledgable but his people are green. Everyone else is very nice to me and are working very hard. The good news is that I like what I'm getting, the endless rehearsals with the cast show, I'm happy w/ the performances, and I know it will look good 'cause I've seen my DPs reel and know he is a perfectionist, and I like what I see in the monitor when I'm not in the scene. The problem is that his priority is pretty pictures, and my focus is on telling the story visually. He told me once that he is taking a certain shot for his reel that I didn't need which pissed me off since I'm paying for the film and stock is expensive. I do understand how any dp would want a shot of a brand new ferrari peeling out, but my stunt man almost killed the engine. I don't care that my DP has a h u g e ego, I knew that before I hired him but didn't think it would be a problem. It does bother me that he wouldn't even consider talking to my scripty or production designer when they aproach him and just barks at them to shut up and leave him alone. He is working very hard though I give him that, and I think since he's got all his crew he is bossing around and I only have my cast he feels like the man. It does bother me that he snaps at me or just walks away from me in front of everybody - that makes me look bad and I find unacceptable. What's really killing me is lack of knowledge of how the set works. It's the little things. Like my AD not letting me call: "Action" saying it's unheard of director saying it the AD usually says it, but I've seen countless directors say "action" on behind the scenes. May be 'cause they're names and can do whatever they want. When I firmly asked her if she doesn't check to see if I'm ready every time I won't let her say 'action' anymore she said: "ok mommy" and walked away and still checks to see if I'm ready only once every three times. I know I can cut but don't want to cut all the time when I'm not ready 'cause we have to make the day. So far we made our days but barely. It also bothered me that my DP said to me on day 1 that he would rather AC on somebody else set and get twice as much ($300) than DP for me. He usually ACs btw. The lights are taking f o r e v e r and I don't know anything about lights beyond the basics so can't help much but once we go over 12 hours everybody hates me and gets it out on me. My cast nails it in two takes on average btw. The reason things are the way the are because I'm still learning on how the set works and when I try to be a leader and call wrap when I know I got all the shots I need I forget that we haven't taken the room tone yet and i look stupid. The funny thing is that I have one of those over the top personallitys and usually command respect anywhere but the film set. Any words of advise would be greatly appreciated. Also my AD asked to be paid $450 for her last day or she walks which is much highter than what I'm paying her now and was wondering if it would be too risky to replace my AD just for the last day. - firsttimedirector/writer/actor