Two RED camera shoot. . .

[Philip Perkins]

I think the nerve that Stephen Pruitt has touched here has not much to do with whatever technology is in fashion this summer for indie filmmaking--there have always been "mavericks" doing things their own way in that regard.  What people here don't like about his approach is his "de-professionalizing" of crew positions, and the taking over of all choices made about equipment etc..  These both have serious economic consequences for most of the readers of this forum.  I just had a discussion with another filmmaker on a different forum that took a similar tack--she believed that crew people, esp. grips and electricians, were just a video version of rock and roll roadies or construction laborers, and since she had no experience with real pros doing that work (and never will, with that attitude) she felt that people like us were just part of a conspiracy to keep our unjustifiable rates up for easy work.  And of course, as always, unions and their supposed control of the movie business were brought up.  People without much experience making movies very often don't understand what all the people on crews do, or why they get paid what they get paid--I think it is like me wondering what all those highway-crew workers are doing that always seem to be standing around where they are fixing a freeway.  If I knew the highway repair business then I'd probably understand what all those guys did, why they were there and why there had to be that number of them to get the job done well, on time and as cheaply as possible.  Video gear has now gone the way of the musical instrument/home recording market--and many people are being told what they want to hear, those somewhat uninformed attitudes are being reinforced by people who want to sell them a lot of gear, which they figure is simple enough that anyone can operate it well enough.  There is some truth to this notion, but only some, and only in situations where the filmmaker has a really good idea of what they can do well with those people operating that gear will the results be good.  There always seems to be a lot of parroting of Apple-esque marketspeak about "new paradigms" or "freedom to create" or destroying the "established order"--concepts that appeal to people to whom our world seems a monolith with no entrance for them.  With a little self-education and talking to people outside their usual acquaintance hopefully they will see that the situation is not really that way at all, but that they "don't know what they don't know".

Philip Perkins

[wbrisett]

Philip:

I think you're spot on, and I'm probably lucky in that I've worked with the right people. In fact, there have been several jobs I turned down because I saw it was a train wreck waiting to happen. But, I also think that we're all going to see our jobs change as things in the industry continue to change (could be workflow, could be new equipment, but we have to adapt to the situation)... I left the studio world because nobody wanted to pay professionals to record anymore. People bought equipment and felt that they didn't need to buy studio time anymore. I know of at least a dozen top studio engineers here in town that either decided to retire, or move on to other things. That doesn't mean that they really didn't need studio engineers, it's just that they didn't feel they needed them anymore. That's the shift, and so you're right, that's probably the nerve he hit. I guess I'm a bit more insulated from that nerve he hit since I've been through it before.

Wayne

[studiomprd]

"The RED camera specs report 24bit audio but the camera barely provides 16bit." what the RED camera specification says is correct, it does record 24 bit audio;  however the capabilities of the RED system currently results in barely 16 bit audio quality, at best!

BTW, Sennheiser still makes, and sells, lots of 416's, and they are still a great mic, and an industry favorite used widely by working professionals daily, all over the world and at all budget levels!  Sennheiser had figured that the MKH-60 would supersede it in the '90's, but the demand for 416's continues unabated. Although the 816 was replaced by the MKH-70, due to customer demand, there was a special run of them a few years back, and it quickly sold out at premium prices!

a degree in electrical engineering (I started out on that path myself) and two, count them 2 degrees in Sound Design are not even close to a substitute for experience on real productions, large or small.  There is more to production sound than having a bunch of Schoeps mic's, like knowing when and how to select and use them...

with Dr. Pruitt's PhD in economics, his business plan may make economic sense for him, but my MBA says it is bad business!! the most important assets of any business is the people and their contributions, not the facilities the plant owns.

...  and if it is only a hobby, or a "dream", well it is his hobby and dream, not the crew's...

just because he is on "Summer Vacation" from his day job doesn't make it a vacation the rest of them

and he seems to think that the presence of high end toys guarantees high quality results, no skills or talent needed!!

" It's an insult to any professional to imply that owning the tools is all it takes. "  I always tell my students: " It isn't about the arrows, it is about the Archer! "

he tells investors what a wonderful deal he has for them, while stating he realizes that his chances of actual financial success are slim, but that it is OK, since he doesn't care if it is a financial flop!

and BTW, where did all this gear get purchased?? After talking to Sergio, he updated his shopping list, and my bet is that the lucky vendor is B&H!! They will sell anyone with money as much stuff as they can, but don't call them for integration assistance or tech support!

[Noah Timan]

First of all, I love my 416s, and although I use an MKH50 almost exclusively, a properly handled 416 sounds great and will work in almost any environment.  It's not a second rate piece of gear.

I'm glad someone said it.  I was going to let it go, but I was also a bit bemused by the notion that using a 416 would mean that the sound would be inferior.  There are plenty of occasions and situations where I find it still to be the BEST choice.

Secondly, comparing side by side the quality of your recording is irrelevant.  You're right, most people won't notice.  But people flock to watch crap in the theatres and sit in even greater numbers in front of their televisions to watch even worse crap.  You sure can fool most people most of the time, but that doesn't mean you are making good movies.

If movie making is your hobby, then do whatever you want.  Spew out more content for the general public.  I, on the other hand, work on movies as a profession.  It's my passion too.  And because of that, I will always strive for better than good enough to fool the layman.  I want it to be good enough to make me happy and good enough for my film making peers to appreciate.

Well said.

[old school]

The proof of all Mr Pruitts beliefs about how to make films will be his movie. I hope he surprises us all and delivers a winner, but the odds are not in his favor as far as I can ascertain from his posts. Way back in the day, I'm sure many thought Frank Ford Coppola and George Lucas were out of their minds wanting to work outside the Hollywood system and they seemed to do all right. Of course they graduated from UCLA and USC film schools and were surrounded by a very talented band of brothers and sisters with talent to spare. I could be wrong, but I think all those folks got paid. We just got wrapped. Go Lakers.....

CrewC

[Noah Timan]

Finally I'll say this, working on low budget productions allows me to enjoy my job as a sound recordist. Why? Because I'm valued by everybody there, all the way down from the director to the lowly P.A. The sound department is treated with respect and not treated as the enemy. That makes me enjoy my job. I've worked on a couple of large sets, and sound was important, but certainly not treated as an equal.

In my experience, this is a pretty dangerous generalization.  I've worked on plenty of low budget movies, and plenty of bigger budget shows.  There isn't really a direct correlation between how much respect is given to sound and the size of the budget.  It's true that sound CAN be more expendable on a bigger budget because the financial obstacles to ADR that exist in lower budget productions aren't there -- but if you're getting respect only because someone simply doesn't have enough money to disrespect you, how rewarding is this really?  It seems like a pretty hollow victory to me. 

More gratifying (to me, at least) is respect due to what you actually bring your directors and producers to the table, with your craft and your protection of the actors' performances.  That, however, is not tied to the budget -- that comes and goes based largely upon the individuals you are working with/for, as well as your abilities (in problem solving and politics as well as in mixing and recording), and how you and your department represent yourselves on set.  There are directors of ALL budgets that hate ADR and looping and insist on good production sound, and there are directors and producers of ALL budgets who, regardless of the financial picture, simply don't care about getting good production tracks, or know enough/have enough experience to care. 

.02 nvt

[Noah Timan]

Video gear has now gone the way of the musical instrument/home recording market--and many people are being told what they want to hear, those somewhat uninformed attitudes are being reinforced by people who want to sell them a lot of gear, which they figure is simple enough that anyone can operate it well enough.  There is some truth to this notion, but only some, and only in situations where the filmmaker has a really good idea of what they can do well with those people operating that gear will the results be good.

There's certainly been plenty of discussion on both sides of the fence.  What we HAVEN'T seen a lot of, or at least I haven't seen a lot of, is the proof in the pudding of all of the claims made by the do-it-yourselfers -- in other words, films made with inexperienced technicians and $50,000 of personally purchased gear that are technically great (or comparable to the more expensive traditional counterparts made with film or professional video cams and a regular crew).  Where are those films that herald this "era of change" that is being touted?  I'm not so much referring to Mr. Pruitt here, who did admit that the technical quality of his project would be better if he were able to afford pros and their gear.  I'm more referring to the Kool-Aid being pushed by the manufacturers and dealers, and then the message of that being pushed by the producers who've drank said Kool-Aid.  Until there are some palpable examples and results, I think it's going to be difficult to overcome our collective skepticism.

.02 nvt

[jasony]

To a large degree, the democratization that is going on in the film world is similar to what happened in the music world a decade or two ago. I remember having to buy $100,000 worth of equipment in order to come up to what was then "industry spec" and produce a record that could stand with the accepted professional standard.

But then along came the computer.

Now, with less than $5000 (sometimes MUCH less), you can produce something in your home studio that rivals almost anything out there being churned out by the professional studios. RIVALS- not surpasses (more on this in a moment). So where are all of the CD's produced by amateurs? Just look around- they're everywhere, and the system has figured out a way to distribute them so that everyone can make some degree of money at every level of production (free MP3 websites, Jonathan Coulton-style self promotion, etc). HOWEVER, the music world is still dominated by the professional musicians being recorded by the professional studios (on, usually, most of the same equipment that the "amateurs" use). The barriers to music production have dropped so much that the distinguishing things- knowledge, education, and professional experience- have become MORE important to getting your stuff heard. So in some way, the proliferation of cheap audio recording technology has actually increased the market for the professionals, although there were many, many big studios that went extinct when the sea change occurred.

However, it's interesting to note that even though it became easy to produce a fully-professional CD at home, the listening audience almost universally decided that it's no longer about higher quality (we all pretty much stopped at 16/44.1), and the vast majority of music listeners have voted with their feet and decided that the convenience of MP3's outweigh the quality difference of a CD.

So now we're seeing the same thing happening in the film business.

It used to be that you needed to spend millions to get something on film that stood up to the industry standard of what was acceptable. You couldn't even own a camera yourself! Nowadays, you really can spend $50-100K to get in the same ballpark. Not, admittedly, up to the very best standards of modern film making, but close. So the exact same thing is playing out in the film world that happened in the recording industry. How long before the CCD becomes as good as film... and then surpasses it? How long before we can shoot and edit a film entirely on a laptop (wait a minute...)

The point is, history and technology clearly show us that the methods of producing almost anything tend to democratize, and that eventually the tools of creation (whether the ability to print on a piece of paper, record a song, or make a movie), eventually reach the masses. At that point everybody becomes a creator, because creation and self-expression are the most natural of human impulses.

But in any of these sea-changes, the adaptable ones with the knowledge, education, and professionalism tend to stay in demand, while the ones who cannot adapt go the way of those recording studios I mentioned. The old adage is true: it's not the tools, is the carpenter.

In all of this, though, there is the probability that our audience (filmgoers) will make the same decision about movies and film that they made about music and decide that they really don't care for that extra 10% of production value. I believe the popularity of YouTube has show us that we're going in this direction. The quality of the picture or sound is becoming less and less important (except in a few summer-blockbusters). What is more and more important is what's accessible, easy to view, and free.

[Guest jimg]

Jim you can cut those numbers almost in half if you buy as a "student or education provider" from the apple store and outsource the add-ons (memory, hdd, etc) from 3rd party vendors.

Thanks, Scott.

I'm well aware of the savings available. I buy all my Apple hardware factory reconditioned if possible, another great source of savings. Hardware unavailable there we buy via the education accounts for my better half's public school job or the account we set up for the after school art program she has run for the last 20 years or so. I am also able to find meet and/or beat pricing from many of the national computer or home entertainment suppliers by asking them to beat the best web price I've found on memory, drives, monitors and so on.

On the other hand,if you are going to point, click and buy from the RED store, the only valid price comparison is from the web store of the required auxiliary equipment supplier. At least Apple gives good support. Just try telling a B & H sales rep you are unhappy with the purchase you just made or that it was broken out of the box.

Best regards,

Jim

[Noah Timan]

In all of this, though, there is the probability that our audience (filmgoers) will make the same decision about movies and film that they made about music and decide that they really don't care for that extra 10% of production value. I believe the popularity of YouTube has show us that we're going in this direction. The quality of the picture or sound is becoming less and less important (except in a few summer-blockbusters). What is more and more important is what's accessible, easy to view, and free.

Yeah, except they HAVEN'T yet...there's been talk for years about how this is going to happen, and perhaps someday it will.  So far, though, we've yet to see many movies made for $50-100,000 of gear and a small crew of amateur technicians that have taken the world by storm and substituted for regular productions in movie theatres and in narrative televison.  I'm not as avid a moviegoer as I once was, but I have yet to see a movie made under these constraints that *remotely* compares technically with what is made under the usual circumstances. 

I don't think the MP3 comparison is apt -- I think that as long as an MP3 isn't coded horribly, most people won't really notice the inferior quality under casual listening circumstances unless it's an A/B comparison (and even then I wonder...).  But most people also don't listen to music in a dark room and focus all of their attention to it.  They listen behind conversations, while working or working out, doing chores, in the car, on the phone, in the bar, etc etc -- almost always amid a lot of distractions.  A movie is a bit different.

I also don't find the YouTube analogy apt as YouTube isn't really showing dramatic programming that goes on for long periods of time.  To the best of my knowledge, YouTube material is all clips and short things that run for a few minutes -- not really a substitute for movies and TV shows.

The overwhelming bulk of what I see released and scooped up by the masses is not movies and programs made by amateurs who bought a video camera, sound recorder, mixer, and a few microphones and went to town without the benefit of an experienced crew.  When we start seeing movies and material like that being accepted by the public, outside of regional film festivals and the like -- and replacing or legitimately competing with what exists now -- then I'll start believing in the revolution that's being advertised.  Again, until then I'll take all this talk of the new world with a grain of salt.

.02 nvt

[thebrengun]

I'm glad someone said it.  I was going to let it go, but I was also a bit bemused by the notion that using a 416 would mean that the sound would be inferior.  There are plenty of occasions and situations where I find it still to be the BEST choice.

I have to say, I think that the original comment was someone said "Oh no I see a 416 indoors" or something to that effect.  I don't think they were commenting on the quality of the mic, just the decision to use it in that setting.  More of a taste thing given that the rear axis pickup of the 416 isn't always so preferable in an indoor setting, I know that many would choose a hypercardioid instead.  But none of us were there, so we can't really judge...

EDIT: Full disclosure and hilarious irony, my profile picture features me with a 416 indoors...oh well.

[studiomprd]

OK, so perhaps the original 416 comment had to do with the appropriatness of the selection of a 416 in a particular circumstance (though the Wunderkind says that his production has no 416's, possibly rendering this a moot point) and that goes to the practical production experience of the EE/MFA laden sound crew, rather to the equipment in question, doesn't it.

again: It is not about the arrows, but about the archer!

sure the technical capabilities of low cost production (music, and movies) can approach, perhaps even equal or surpass so-called more professionally equipped rivals, but that would only be when there is talent in the creation of the content.  Dr. Pruitt seems pretty much convinced that he has most of the talent, and the contributions of others on his project aren't nearly as important as having quality toys!  this is not generally born out in actual practice in the real world.

for example I have a copy of George Lucas's student project THX 1137, and even without better technical production equipment (as in the later made theatrical version) you can see the talent involved in the student production, it shines, and it certainly outshines any technical limitations!!

[KK Proffitt]

I have a copy of George Lucas's student project THX 1137, and even without better technical production equipment (as in the later made theatrical version) you can see the talent involved in the student production, it shines, and it certainly outshines any technical limitations!!

I thought that was Electronic Labyrinth: THX 1138 4EB...is there yet another version?

[studiomprd]

sorry if I got the number wrong....

only 2 versions: student version, professional version.

[studiomprd]

well it has been over a month since we have heard anything about this historic, novel, but christian shoot, and there have been no further postings on Dr. Pruitt's site, so I guess he doesn't need anything ($$$) or anyone else.

The last post on the site had a less than stellar "production still" of his stars, he with his face covered, and she in full profile with her mouth wide open.

but mainly, I figured this was a good place to post this excellent article link (apologies to Capt. Cut'n Paste!) and some highlights...

http://www.reelenergy.com/news/latest-news/news-alert-from-laff-the-sky-is-falling-mark-gill.html

" It's not enough to have access to the moviemaking process"  this includes buying high tech toys. "Talent matters more. Here's how bad the odds are: of the 5000 films ( virtually all of these are privately financed. There's only one problem: most of the films are flat-out awful ) submitted to Sundance each year— generally with budgets under $10 million—maybe 100 of them got a US theatrical release three years ago. And it used to be that 20 of those would make money. Now maybe five do. That's one-tenth of one percent... Unless you're making a tentpole, your movie now has to be very good... Quality of emotional content is what matters, simple as it sounds, it all comes down to a good story, well told. And that's a lot harder to do than it is to say... Put another way, if you decide to make a movie budgeted under $10 million on your own tomorrow, you have a 99.9% chance of failure   Let me put it another way: the digital revolution is here, and boy does it suck. "

[Jeff Babb]

A bit petty.  Don't you think?

[studiomprd]

perhaps, but maybe you don't find these folks becoming a bigger part of the "market place", and the trend to be bringing down the whole business ??

it seems even the "big shows" are adopting this thinking, even as there are fewer of them (read the article!!) and more of these "new age" projects.

[Jeff Babb]

Take the job or don't.  If the producers don't care about the sound, no amount of whining is going to change their minds.  When they spend a bunch of money for ADR maybe they'll learn their lesson and hire a real sound team for real money next time.  Or maybe they won't.    Better yet...  Become a producer, make movies with a great story, picture AND sound.  Get a reputation.  Make another movie.  Make sound a priority.  Change the landscape.  Do it again.  Change the culture.

Or not.

[studiomprd]

the latest on this Christian movie:

" The one problem we have been facing has been the weather.  We have been battling 100 degree heat just about every day, and those days sometimes run as long as 18 hours.  And the vast majority of the places we have been shooting have been unairconditioned spaces with very poor ventilation.  It’s been rough, but we’re persevering!  And only about four more weeks of shooting to go!  "

[Richard Ragon]

Dam.. All that Equipment thats going to end up on eBay, will be damaged.

-Richard

[studiomprd]

" I guess we’re official now.  The Internet Movie Database (http://www.IMDB.com) now has a site with some of the relevant facts and factoids about “Works in Progress.” Unfortunately, this listing is itself a bit of a work in progress, as there are a number of errors and omissions that need to be corrected.  First and foremost of these is that, somehow, Mary Settle Pruitt (my lovely bride!) was left off of the screenwriter credit! Nonetheless, we are definitely now on IMDB (thanks Anita!).  I mean, how cool is that?

Except for a few inserts and establishing shots (which I’ll be filming this weekend), “Works in Progress” is all but “in the can.” And so now our attention turns to our editor extraordinaire Kevin Harlan and the wonderful world of “post-production". Given the great look of this footage, we can hardly wait to see what NEVER2LATE Productions Senior Editor, Kevin Harlan, does with it all!

Yes, it’s been an amazing run, and it lasted for a little over three months of active shooting, but, like they say, “all good things must come to an end

Oh, yeah.  And to writing our next film.  Yep.  You heard it here first:  Lord willing, “Terminal” will be shot next summer. "

[studiomprd]

hold the presses...this just in:

based on the overwhelming "success" of his first "Feature Film" video (which is still in post-production!!)

"   You heard it here first:  NEVER2LATE Productions’ second feature film, to be shot during the summer of 2009, is tentatively titled “Terminal.” Whereas “Works in Progress” (currently undergoing post-production) was a poignant romantic comedy, “Terminal” is high drama from the first shot to the last.  It’s a dark, depressing, and yet very human and accessible story, with a truly wonderful and redemptive message. But be warned:  This story is simply in another league and has the potential, if we can pull it off, to be one of the best indie films shot in the midwest in a long time.  I just can’t wait to get this one going!  Take my word for it:  “Terminal” will be a no-compromises film.  This time, with one very good film already under our belts, we’re going for all the marbles.  "

of course, he still won't be paying the crew much, and based on the "success" of his system of extra long (and uncomfortable, I heard) days shooting every other day, this serial abuser will expect the entire crew to be available for his  entire summer vacation from his day job.

He and his wife are going to start writing it as soon as he finishes the outline.

[Mick]

Mike, what is your problem with this guy and his production? The amount of cynicism and criticism you and some other guys have shoveled his way is a little excessive don't you think? If he is making a low budget independent movie, asking crew to work for no, low or deferred pay and to work in adverse conditions, I would think that he probably outlined all this up front and they had the opportunity to refuse. Last year I asked members of our crew to help me make a short film over a weekend and they worked hard and efficiently for no reward other than to help me. They know that if I benefit in any way from their efforts that I will compensate them, be it in future employment, referrals or whatever. I've been in the biz long enough to have heard the old song about time put in now paying off down the line, but sometimes it's true, and if opportunity knocks then I will work hard at being the exception to the rule and make sure that my crew never regrets working for me for food.

People work for little or nothing all the time, mainly for experience and networking. I've done my share of AFI work and freebies for friends and I've known wannabe producers take outrageous advantage of crews' goodwill. We all have. I'm not saying this guy is right in everything he's doing, but I'm equally unsure about whether he is deserving of the scathing remarks made about him and his production in this forum. I'll be doing a two red camera shoot myself in a month or two and yes, I'll be counting on the goodwill of friends and associates to help me out. It won't be for as long as a full length feature, three days in fact, but it a will require some dedication, talent freely given and much trust on everyone's part. Anyone with the guts and creative talent to shoot an independent feature, Christian or otherwise in this market and economic climate gets a thumbs up in my book, just so long as the people who contribute to the project are compensated and acknowledged if it is successful.

Mick 

[RPSharman]

Mick,

I totally agree with what you are saying.  But I think the issue with this guy is that he seems to feel a professional crew (not paid versus unpaid) is not required to make a self-proclaimed brilliant movie.

Frankly it feels like he was saying that all film jobs are easy, and can be sufficiently duplicated with minimal training by book-learned, non-professionals.

There is nothing wrong with asking professionals to work for free if you are making that kind of low budget film.  They can always say no.  There is nothing wrong with asking kids with no experience to attempt the job while working for free, hoping for a less than professional yet satisfactory result.  But it's insulting to imply, or outright state, that any professional or creative position in any industry is simple enough to do without training and/or experience.

Robert

[Mick]

I just feel that the history of this posting has been pretty snarky in places and unworthy of the usual level of professional integrity to be found here