Low Budget Shoot On HD or 16mm?

[David Mullen ASC]

Rental houses usually count a week as three days, i.e. $750/day equals $2250/week.

 

Most Varicams and F900's are around $1000/day, body only, so the package is more like $2000-$3000/day, so $6000-9000/week.

 

Pro HD equipment generally is more expensive to rent than film equipment, even 65mm sometimes (I think the book rate for a 65mm Panaflex is around $800/day). Where the savings come is in tape vs. film. A $50 HD cassette holds 50 minutes of footage, whereas a $500 roll of 35mm film holds ten minutes, and that doesn't include processing and telecine costs. Even though Super-16 is like 1/4 the costs of 35mm, that's still well over a 10:1 cost difference between film and tape per minute once you factor in processing, etc.

 

If you are making a low-budget feature in a limited period of time, often three to four weeks, then renting often works out to be cheaper. You probably would be able to work out a deal to get a Super-16 package (camera, lenses, tripods, etc.) for a month for under $10,000, let's say. That's cheaper than buying a Super-16 package. You probably could work out deals on S16 stock and processing to keep those costs down to $20,000 or so -- so you're still under the $40,000 mark. You may not have enough left over for a neg cut and optical printer blow-up to 35mm though, and definitely not enough for a D.I., even using HD as an intermediate. But then, even if you shot in DV, you may not have enough of a budget to transfer that to 35mm anyway.

[Will Montgomery]

Buy a cheap 16mm camera, like a Russian K3 ($175) or something and shoot a few rolls, process it and transfer it. This could all be done for under $700 and you'll have gotten an education worth several times that. Plus you'll have a camera to play around with in the future too.

 

Once you do that you'll start to understand everything involved. You're really lucky to have any budget for a project but you want to make sure you can finish what you start so try to be realistic on money no matter how tempting film my seem.

 

Try to finish it up quickly so maybe one of the networks will buy it durring the writer's strike. :P

[Javier Calderon]

Thank you very much, David, for the insight.

 

and "Ha", Will, to your writer's strike comment. Heck I still haven't even begun the color correction on my DV feature yet (January's the start date on that). I should be done with the entire work by early/mid '08 . . . THEN I'll start really doing the practical, hands on work with 16mm. Right now, I'm just trying to get a better theoretical knowledge of what to deal with, and expect - monetarilly and otherwise - so that I can make the best decisions possible with what little money I have to actually spend.

 

Hopefully for all the guild writers out there, the strike will be long over well before I'm finished with my next feature (lol).

 

Oh . . . and by the way . . . just for grins (little show and tell), here's a link to a quick teaser trailer put together for the feature I'm presently working on:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5W81h7hVBk

[Will Montgomery]

Oh . . . and by the way . . . just for grins (little show and tell), here's a link to a quick teaser trailer put together for the feature I'm presently working on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5W81h7hVBk

Very nice. It's tough to cut a good trailer, that's a special skill and you have it. Definitely check out film, it would be a worthy tool in your arsenal.

[Javier Calderon]

Thank you very much, Will. I appreciate your looking at it.

 

For the moment it's back to work for me. Gotta get this film DONE.

 

Thanks all,

Javier Calderon

[Martin Yernazian]

no Super 16 camera for less than 10-15k?..... I think you fellas have it a little bit wrong

My NPR ( body mags etc etc) cost me less than 5 grand and is a work horse with a pl mount installed by Les Bosher and last service by the man himself, with rods and a 4x4matte box,

off course you ask, well Martín, what about your glass?

Well that's when your job as a dp finishes and the producer= business man comes around, work a deal, find it, you can rent really decent glass for a couple hundred a week.... YEAP, you know how many movies are been done right now vs how many packages are sitting around ratio are we talking about?Holy CACA!

 

Necessity is the mother of invention, off course I will love to have some Ultra 16 glass by Zeiss to shoot my feature, guess what? for my next project I can't afford it, so what I do, I look at an alternative that will fit my story, a zoom, a good one, OLD and heavy? you bet, but, the glass is great and pretty unique for today's standards! you can find the 15-150mm Angie, (the fatty) F1.9 for 600 bucks on ebay and it will cover S16 and then you will get a 9mm Kinoptik or what the hell a Switar 10mm or if you want some crazy effect get a Peleng 8mm and you adapt yourself to what you have.

 

I know is not the way pro's do it, well, who cares? how many movies a year you see done by "Pro's", that you go " WOW that was great"? pfff, do it YOUR WAY, what ever feels right!, I want to see different movies, not the same thing over and over, Wake up people, most projects are more driven by their excuses than the films themselves, I don't want to be harsh but that's the reality

 

2) sorry, but I heard 10,000 feet for a music video/ short films? what the hell are you? Kubrick? or super rich? what a waste!!!, that's a 3.1 ratio on a 90 minute feature

 

Amigo let me tell you something you, can make a feature with that much stock, when you do a project like that, you have to rehears the poop out of yourself and your cast and crew, knowing the movie inside and out, a lot of people here are great professionals but most of them are spoiled by their big daddy employers, you, don't have that luxury, you have to work the buck to your best advantage

 

Get an ACL and you won't regret it, what it looks like is that you are trying to shoot your own movie, your own rules, Your own timing, etc etc

Then do it, planned out get good decent glass, and go shoot the damn thing, get it done

 

I will listen to Will, if you are shooting it, then practice, by the cheapest stock and practice for a week or 2, also that's how long your shoot should be like, Yes for a feature!

Time is money and you don't have it, Take things seriously, do your research, study what you are trying to accomplish, look up great independent films done this way, and study them, make them your own.

Sometimes in America people expect that things are given to them in a silver plate, that's why if you have money you have more possiblities, in your case, (and mine) that's not a option, you make things out of your own struggle, you become more nonconformist and you go get your shot, you become a cowboy , a maverick, like our film ancestors were before before becoming studio PC passive aggressives.

 

I don't mean to attack anyone, and if you feel offended then sorry but that's the way things are, you shouldn't feel ashamed, you work a different way, Cest La vi, for people like me, I believe that been a maverick will give me more for what I do and not for how much I spend. with Respect of course.

 

Get your film done, edit on a EDL system, do a one light transfer and as Will said save your money and Re Telecine with the actual shots you have already picked

 

Don't wait forever to get the best of the best of the best thing, because there is always something that will be better, so cut your losses and make your movie the best way you can with what ever you can afford, don't dream into having the best pro's or the best elements, more likely, it won't happen, at least not yet. Go into the basics and then exploit them

 

Make a great movie and then you'll see how many pro's will come to you!

 

and remember " it takes any idiot to spend a dollar, but it takes a genius to spend a penny "

 

Good Luck

[Martin Yernazian]

Also nice trailer, that fast quick to the point, and even do I didn't get what the movie about, it has left me wanting more!!!!

 

good job

[Javier Calderon]

Awesome, Martin. Awesome. THAT'S what I'm talking about. The "Shut Up And Film" philosophy. Thank you so much for posting your opinion and perspective. Very valuable here.

 

The going word on Sean Carruth's 2004 16mm feature film debut - the Sundance Grand Jury Prize-winning film "Primer" - was that it was shot for around $7,000. While I don't even know HOW he accomplished this (if he even actually did and it's not just marketing babble) I think that anything even AROUND this amount of money spent on a full, feature length film on 16 is insanely industrious and really sets a standard for what can be accomplished w/the medium; and while I only saw the film on youtube (of all places), the images look stunningly professional and the DOF is breathtaking.

 

I'm looking very much forward to 1) finishing this particular feature I'm on (I've been working on it for long enough, so I'm ready for it to be completed!), and 2) gearing up for the attack on 16!

 

Oh . . . and thank you so much for looking at the trailer, Martin, and the kind words.

 

Te lo agradesco muchisimo!

Edited December 14, 2007 by Javier Calderon

[Martin Yernazian]

Javier, you are on Luck I just moved to open my second office in theUSA in LA and I brought all my gear here , including my grips and my film/ digital cams

PM me you contact info, I will love to help you make this, if it appeals me off course, but if it doesn't I will appoint you the right people that will be able to push your concept forward

 

My Best Regards

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Wo, Adrian. $750 a day for a month (which I can't imagine shooting a feature for less time than this) runs around $22,500. That's definitely out of my price range. I know Vincent mentioned not being able to find a good, feature ready S16 package for under $15K.

 

I'm basically looking at an overall budget of between $20-40K for the entire enchilada (that is, for pre pro, production, and post). I already have most of the gear for post (G5, 2Terabytes of space, Final Cut Studio, Logic Pro, etc, and am probably going to be getting a 17" JVC DT V1710CGU for critical color correction). I just need the camera . . .

 

I think I'll work with what a lot of you guys have already helpfully suggested on here and getting a good, solid, but relatively inexpensive camera and running tests w/it. Although Adrian's suggestion of a Bolex or something around the $250 range would work, I'd possibly like to see if I can get ahold of a solid ACL and perhaps use that for more than just test shoots. I just got in contact w/George over at Optical Electro House, and he was very cordial in his response, so we'll see what turns up there.

 

 

The $750/day was me, the camera, my lights (what I do have), my grip, and the lenses lol. I don't think that's too unreasonable!

 

 

In seriousness, though; shoot within your means. And plan the hell out of your project!

[Martin Yernazian]

For Primer, the whole 7000 grand is an actual partial lie, (I was investigating all this cheap movies and I was going to write an article and a thesis paper for Berkeley students eager to make a film)I have talked to several people that were actually on the crew (yes there was a crew) And Shane and his pals exploit the crap out of this people, their gear, their knowledge, their time, and their credit, there was actually a guy that DP for 60 to 70% of the movie, and then he left to shoot a commercial and they kick him out because they want it to shot a few scenes and finish the movie, after the were on hiatus for 2 weeks, meanwhile the guy put his SR2, Zeiss 12-120 , a lot of film and so forth.

The whole 7 grand legend comes out of what he actually spend to get the film out the lab:

he finish shooting during the whole summer of 2002, He Developed the film and telecine and color correct to Mini DV, so he can edit on his laptop, but guess what?, he never pays the lab. For 2 years the guy edit this movie and does the music and blah blah blah, he sends it to Sundance and he gets accepted, whoops problem! they ask him to give them a 35mm copy.

Now when you get into Sundance, there is people jumping to transfer the film for you, mostly and more likely if its a feature, ergo you will make some money to pay them back, in their case was New Line Cinema if I'm not mistaken, but hold on, he didn't have the film, it couldn't be re cut because first he need it to pay the 7000 grand that he owe the studio.

So his uncle, puts the money, ergo there is the only 7 grand spend from an investor, the rest were donations from his crew, the one that he screw later on.

[Javier Calderon]

Hey - awesome, Martin. I'm PM you very soon. Believe it or not I went to your Blog and discovered (through you) Michael Masley. Awesome. Best of luck with that production.

 

Regarding the Primer story . . . Holy cow! That's really too bad. And I was actually wondering what on earth this guy had been up to since then. I mean Primer was screened coming on four years ago and he doesn't seem to have anything in production (or even pre), so I was wondering - is he a one trick poney or what? The world was pretty much handed to him in a silver platter with the success of Primer. If I were him, I would've had my next production out and running (with a real budget at this point) in no time!

 

Anyway . . . enough of that. This isn't a Primer thread - nor do I want it to be. :)

 

I'll PM you soon.

 

Thanks!

 

Javier

[Alex Ellerman]

aside on Carruth:

 

At a screening of Primer, I asked Shane what his plans were next, if the film had opened a bunch of doors for him...

I believe he said something to the effect of "i'm writing a movie rom-com about an oceanographer falling in love."

 

here we go, from an interview with village voice columnist [and my film teacher] Amy Taubin:

 

"It's a coming-of-age romance between an oceanography prodigy and the daughter of a commodities trader. It's set against trade routes in East Africa and Southern Asia. "

 

seeing the (lack of) progress he's made since winning Sundance... can't say that makes me feel great.

[Javier Calderon]

"seeing the (lack of) progress he's made since winning Sundance... can't say that makes me feel great."

 

Exactly, Alex. I read blurbs here and there about that particular plot line he's working on. I also heard elswhere that Steven Soderbergh had taken an interest in him and that there was a possible collaboration of sorts.

 

Yes, yes . . . that's all good and well. But what is point? The point is that it's been, again, almost four years and there is NO word "on the streets" about ANYTHING he's doing now. Nothing on imdb/imdbpro. Nothing in a google search. Nothing.

 

Now, believe it or not, I spend very little of my time thinking about these particular things since I have my own work and career to contend with. However, and since we're on the subject, it simply makes me shake my noggen because there are soooo many of us that are slaving away to be where he is at. And - Martin's inside scoop aside - Shane seems to have gotten where he's at legitimately; i.e. by making a quality product that impresses and moves people. I don't know him, don't know his mindset or his reasoning, and don't know if he actually wants to be a career film maker or not, but if he does . . . then his having been handed the great opportunity that he got handed, and yet NOT striking w/another film while the iron of his success was still hot is a bit beyond me.

 

Anyway. Well, at least he got one good film done. :)

[Martin Yernazian]

Yeah well, when I heard what I heard I was so disgusted, I felt like flying to Texas and giving a beating., but come on who gives a damn, as you said Javier, we have our own careers

 

Let's keep moving!!!

[Alex Ellerman]

Hey Javier-

 

and after speaking with people around here... i'm led to believe that Carruth probably didn't even make that much $$$ on Primer... they say that on your 1st successful film the authors recoup the initial investment ( uh, 7k? ) and make a little green, but what you're SUPPOSED to be doing is positioning your next paid/backed project.

 

i guess i thought that writing/directing/acting in a Sundance winner would reap a little more success, either financial or for your future. it's an interesting case study. I liked the film (especially considering the budget). I don't like what this portends for indie filmmakers.

[Martin Yernazian]

The reason why he is not making another film I have no idea, why he didn't made money with Primer after all the success?, well I don't know any exact numbers, what I do know is that the film had to much baggage, to many people pissed at the production and their owner/s

 

One thing for sure Alex, that production wasn't 7000 dollars, and he shot way more than 9 reels of footage, some of the people that I have talk to were connected with the production in first degree ( I can give out names you understand) they stimate, between the donated time, gear, and film the whole thing would it cost him around 30-50k, they thing is he ripped off a lot of people in the way.

 

Now the question is, can you make a film on film for that kind of money ( 7-10k) ? absolutely , there is peoplethat do it all over the world all the time, the thing is that to have great quality you have to rely more in some key people or just yourself, that's were you have the "your kind of" gold and not the actual material gold that so many productions are lucky to have.

 

Got to learn to wear many hats and still look pretty ;)

[Javier Calderon]

"i'm led to believe that Carruth probably didn't even make that much $$$ on Primer..."

 

Well, Alex, although you may have a good point, the numbers.com - http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2004/PRIMR.php - has Primer listed as having grossed over 1/2 a million dollars so far . . . so let's hope Shane got/is getting at least a LITTLE bit of that.

 

"what you're SUPPOSED to be doing is positioning your next paid/backed project."

 

DUH!!! lol . . . That's what I'M saying!

 

Heck, I wrote a script a few years ago that I think is beautiful, really strong, and has the potential for making a lot of money, but I also know that it's going to take about 4-7 million to make it right. Therefore, given the fact that I didn't have enough work to speak of, I decided to spend the next few years making a full feature and making it look/be as good as possible with NO money (or practically no money). THEN if that film has any success, and anyone asks "Well, now that we've seen what you can do with no budget, what are you wanting to do next now that we're willing to invest a few bucks on you?" that's when I pull out the already completed script that I had from BEFORE I even begun THIS project.

 

And we're off and running in no time - this time with a budget. :)

 

Well . . . that's the plan anyway . . .

 

We'll see what happens. Again, gotta shut up and finish this darn film first.

[Javier Calderon]

Absolutely, Martin (by the way, I emailed you. Did you get it?). You have to wear ALL the hats sometimes in order to get something done!

 

If the film cost between 30-50K, however, that sounds more like what I would have expected a film like that to have cost. That's about how much Daren Aronofsky's "Pi" cost, I believe. I don't recall offhand how much Rober Rodriguez's "El Mariachi" cost, but I, although like you said, one can make a film ON film for between 7-10K, it's probably more realistic to have to spend at least 20-30K.

 

And I've been saving up!! :)

[Javier Calderon]

Oh . . . and Alex. One last reply to your post:

 

"I don't like what this portends for indie filmmakers."

 

You mentioned this regarding the Primer/Carruth scenario . . . But you know what? I don't think that this scenario is indicative of the kind of success that an indie film maker can expect if their first film does well. Again, and although I know NOTHING personally about Carruth, I would venture to say that the reason why he hasn't done anything in the past four years since Primer's release ISN'T because of lack of willing backers/investers, but becuase Carruth himself my not have the product ready (script, idea, etc).

 

I say this because all one has to do is take a look at directors like Robert Rodriguez, Darren Aronofsky, and Christopher Nolan, to name just three.

 

Aronofsky did Pi. Pi did great. Next thing you know - and not TOO long afterward - he blasts one out of the ballpark with Requiem For A Dream; a film that had a budget of 4.5 million.

 

Christpher Nolan. He premiers with his first feature - another black and white indie named "Following". Did pretty darn good. Next film? He gets the go to do Memento - another sophomore film with a budget of 5 million - and, again, BLASTS it out of the ballpark. Now he can write his OWN checks (presently working on the Batman Sequal - The Dark Night).

 

Heck what about Joe Carnaghan? His first feature "Blood Guts And Octane" was so so as far as I know . . . What was his very NEXT feature, however? the 7.5 million dollar power house indie "Narc" w/Ray Liota and Jason Patrick. He's another one that's "made it" at this point and isn't at all hurting for work.

 

I think the point that I'm trying to illustrate here is that the going scenario seems to be this:

 

KICK TAIL on your first feature. Do it on your own with little or no money. Show Hollywood/the world that you DON'T need it or it's money to be a good creator/artist. If you do that, then it seems that you get thrown a "small" 2-7 million dollar budget so that you can make your first "real" movie. If THAT one does well . . . Well then . . . your playing ball now.

 

Heck as far as I'm concerned, if one gets to the point where one can acrue a 4-7 million dollar budget . . . they've already "made it"!

 

So I think that, again, the fact that Shane Carruth hasn't done much of anything lately is not a testament to the climate or forecast for the indepndant film maker, as much as it's saying something about Shane Carruth. What, I'm not sure (I'm not hear to badmout him or anyone. Maybe he just doesn't WANT to make another film. It may be as simple as that). but I don't think his scenario is a bad omen for indie film makers. :)

[Alex Ellerman]

Gents; interesting points... i agree the $7k number probably is misleading when applied to Primer and to El Mariachi for that matter... there's just no way you could have sound/postprod included in that number which would barely cover film stock/processing...

 

Anyway... $500k theatrical, split 50/50 with theaters... not much left over once everybody is paid. not sure what deal he cut on dvds... so how rich do you think his home run made him?

 

more importantly, the cardinal rule of writing or making a film is to have a second project ready. producers are famous for saying, "i love this script but... what else do you have?"

 

so Javier, if you're script is that good, have it reviewed by some peers who know screenwriting, and see what they think. if a script is lighting in a bottle, then truly, you can't keep it hidden. people will find out. An A-list screenwriter I know once wrote a post on a message board where he basically said "throw it out on the 101 (CA Highway) and lock the doors" because they will find you.

 

so Shane Carruth might not be a bad omen, but certainly a cautionary one. Once you've been given a great chance, you've got to make something of it.

 

as an aside on Carruth, i thought he was a real nice guy at the screening, i enjoy the commentary on his movie, and i think he showed a real auteur vision on the movie. i think he'll make another movie and i'll watch it.

[Martin Yernazian]

Javier, primero, como estas?

I believe you could make a movie for 7-10k, not the final super polish cut, but one that you can send to festivals, and so forth, I know people that have won plenty of festivals with 2 features, one done for 5 grand on Super 16 and another one done 35mm for 13k, they probably lost weight, and a couple of years of their life, but they got their film done and they didn't screw anyone.... they did it right, now both of them work as directors in their countries

[Javier Calderon]

"so how rich do you think his home run made him?"

 

Well, of course, and as you yourself said, the point here is definitely not how much you make monetarily, but how far your film allows you to go as far as making the NEXT film possible. All the same, and although I was certainly not trying to make the point that Primer made Carruth some MAJOR money, I absolutely see your point - better even now that you broke down the 50/50 perspective.

 

Regarding your comment about putting the other script I have "out there", I do agree with you, Alex, but I actually FIRST really want to have something under my belt so that I'll have more leverage when I say "AND on top of having written the script, I can actually make the movie myself. So give me the reins AND a budget."

 

"so Shane Carruth might not be a bad omen, but certainly a cautionary one. Once you've been given a great chance, you've got to make something of it."

 

Ab-sooo-lutely, Alex. I agree. That almost seems like common sense though doesn't it? In ANY profession - not just film making. Don't let the fruit of your success rot on the proverbial vine - especially if you're just starting off.

 

"there's just no way you could have sound/postprod included in that number which would barely cover film stock/processing... "

 

Man . . . You know what? I JUST got back from TV Pro Gear here in LA because I was just about to buy a JVC DT V1710CGU for color correcting and, while there, the tech who was going to sell it to me - SUPER nice and cool guy - happened to be a real film aficionado who's shot for years in the medium . . . and although (believe it or not) he pretty much was saying something similar to the gentleman at DRCO (i.e. DON'T shoot on film. Use video all the way), and on top of that he was kind enough to do some breakdown cost analysis of film stock, development, etc . . .

 

the fact of the matter is that 1) like we've shown here, although it's possible for the costs to get up around the 50-70K range, it IS somehow possible to do a film ON film, for around 10-20K, and 2) the HD/film comparison footage he showed me (as if I needed any more evidence) wasn't even CLOSE. Even the ugly, gritty shots using film were farrrr superior to the video he showed me - which was beautiful, clean, clear, picturesque and pristine.

 

Which, of course, brings us back to the conclusion I already drew quite a few threads back . . . film might be more difficult and expensive . . . but I think I might be sinking my teeth in it all the same.

[Javier Calderon]

A 35mm for THIRTEEEEEEN???? Oh man . . . I'm not even gonna TOUCH that one. :) That's awesome. Good for him/her.

[Guest Ole Dost]

The first time you shoot with a pro 16mm/35mm film camera will surprise you because you can clearly see outside of the frame you are filming. This is almost reason enough alone to go with film. They are also much more comfortable and functional to operate handheld.

 

Another big reason to consider film is that distributors or producers reps. will very often not watch low-budget video based features. I have a feeling this will stay true since the recent floods of no-budget DVX movies have jaded them.

 

I'd also not compare HVX video to Super16 film results. S16 is a far superior medium. It uses real lenses and records far more overall information than consumer grade 1/3" chip HD devices, which is what the HVX is. You also have more DOF options, lens options and far more latitude.

 

One idea is to buy a simple wind-up 16mm camera like a Russian model for $250 to practice and hone with. Rent an SR2 or Aaton LTR54/XTR for your feature. You simply won't find a practical, feature ready S16 camera package for less than around $15,000. Rentals can be fairly cheap if you look around.

 

MUCH CHEAPER!

You can get a russian Kinor 16 sx-2m. That´s NOT a Krasnogorsk wind-up camera, it´s a professionell News Gathering/Documentary Camera; you can call it the russian Eclair ACL. It is pin registered and allows the exchange of Mags. The pictures will be as well as those made by an Arri SR or Aaton. You can get a KInor sometimes for about 500 Euros!! There´s one on EBAy (Kinor 16 sx-1m -same camera but with three lens turret) these days, even equipped with a crystal sync motor under 500 Euros!! If you want to shoot Super 16, you can get a Super 16 AND PL-Mount upgrade for about 850 Euros!!