Your Custom Text Here
I'm conducting a brief reader survey for all of you that read this website. Taking the survey could take as little as 30 seconds of your time. (Most of the questions are optional; you get to choose if you want to reply in depth to anything.) The only requirement, in fact, is that you provide your city and state. This will help me decide what sorts of screenings I do and don't discuss on the site.
I appreciate your input.
iPhone 3G is being released today. If you are submitting to the mania, or already have a (non 3G) iPhone, these web apps are for you. I'll do a version of apps from the iPhone apps store at some point. Until then, enjoy these web apps on the set or off... All descriptions are pulled from Apple's iPhone web apps site.
ON THE SET
Power Load Calculator Allows you to calculate the load on a particular circuit when certain devices are plugged in. For example, you can calculate whether or not the circuit breakers in a location can handle the lights you want to use and if not, the size of the generator that needs to be hired. This sort of thing is better discovered during pre-production and not on the day of shooting, so this calculator is very useful in that regard.
Depth of Field Calculator This tool will calculate the depth of field for a given sensor or film type, aperture, focal length, and subject distance (the distance from the camera to the person or object you are focusing on). A lower number means that a large proportion of the background will remain in sharp focus and a higher number means that a smaller proportion (if any) will be in focus.
Footage Calculator Enables you to calculate the amount of disk space required for various video codecs at varying frame rates. It offers an easy-to-use interface that allows you to quickly and easily view the required information whilst on the move - perfect for those awkward on-the-spot questions from clients.
Film Rate Calculator Calculates the relationship between film reels and shooting time. Use this calculator to work out how many rolls of film are required for a certain shooting ratio, or alternatively calculate how many minutes have been shot for a certain number of rolls. This is a useful tool for any script supervisor or producer.
Red Footage Calculator For Red users. You select your resolution, frame rate, Redcode, aspect ratio, and amount of footage. The calculator tells you how much disk space is needed. Cool.
Weather Underground The Weather Underground, now on your iPhone. View current conditions, animated radar, forecasts, and severe weather alerts. [Note: Not to be confused with the radical leftist organization of the 1960s-70s or the Sam Green documentary of the same name.]
Sunrise & Sunset This applications helps to calculate the sunrise and sunset times for each location in the world on each day of the year. Enjoy planning your next holiday, trip or photo session where ever and when ever you want to go. Just click on the location, choose date and timezone and optionally add 1 hour daylight saving.
The Weather Channel The Weather Channel for iPhone delivers current conditions, hourly and 10-day forecasts, severe weather and maps in a fully interactive environment. [Note: I prefer the Weather Underground web app's interface to this one from the Weather Channel, but some will prefer this one.]
Stormchaser Cloud Reference Chart An on-the-go webguide to common cloud shapes and patterns and what they mean to the stormchaser or weather buff who wants to predict the coming weather via cloud formations.
OFF THE SET
IMDb iPhone Client Web interface with support for looking up actors, characters and movies. The client also helps you find trailers that are suitable for viewing on the iPhone and view additional information such as: Goofs, Soundtracks, Trivia, Quotes, and Crazy Credits.
Fandango Movie Showtimes and Tickets Buy movie tickets on the go with Fandango. Access showtimes, read movie details and reviews, find theater info, and get maps - all on your iPhone or iPod touch!
Moviefone for iPhone Give us your Zip Code and we'll give you the world -- of movies. Find Movies and Showtimes near you, as well as Upcoming Releases, our Top 20 Movies list, and Top iPhone Trailers.
iNetflix An iPhone Netflix client. It will let you see your queue, whats at home, recommendations and new releases.
The Cut List The Cut List displays a list of movies from the top 100 DVDs to new releases from your favorite online movie rental store.
EDIT (7/11/08 @ 12:30): iPhone App Store is open
U.S. Copyright Office - Copyright is a kind of intellectual property monopoly. And if it was intellectual property Monopoly, this site would be "Go." Translation: Start here.
How to Register a Work - This site takes you to eCO, where you can file a copyright registration for your work through the Copyright Office online system.
Public Domain(?):
Stanford Copyright Renewal Database - Allows you to search for whether a work is still under copyright or not.
Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States - A chart to help you understand the labyrinthine laws regarding when a work will fall into the public domain. The chart is available as a PDF.
Fair Use:
Documentary Filmmakers’ Statement of Best Practices in Fair Use - If you are a documentary maker you should know this up and down.
Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Online Video - Like the Documentary Best Practices, this is something to know and learn.
Center for Media and Social Impact: Fair Use Library - A must.
Creative Commons:
Creative Commons - Where to go if you want to give it away, legally speaking.
Resource pages and other links:
Stanford University Libraries: Copyright & Fair Use: Charts and Tools - A great page of links.
Cornell University Copyright Information Center: More great links.
EDIT (7/9/08): This post was accidentally deleted. I think I've restored it pretty completely, and added some more links in the process.
EDIT (9/29/16): Fixed some broken links.
EDIT (5/21/23): Fixed some broken links.
Jane Sloan, Shmuel Ben-Gad, and Frank Blaakmeer at Masters of Cinema have compiled what appears to be the most comprehensive (complete?) Robert Bresson bibliography in the world. As someone whose passion for Bresson's work led him to trying to read Notes on Cinematography in the original French back when the English translation was out of print, well, it pleases me deeply to see the hard work that these scholars have produced. Here's a quote from one of the 2000+ sources listed, J. Hoberman's "States of Grace" (Village Voice, September 27, 2005):
Do this job long enough and you learn to accept certain realities. Some people will laugh at Written on the Wind and cry over Sleepless in Seattle --instead of vice versa. There are reviewers who find Godard boring and think Lukas Moodysson is a genius. And although it is tiresome to hear two-buck chuck extolled as Chateau Lafite Rothschild, you realize that hey, this is America -- everyone's got an opinion, and if it weren't for bad taste, many folks would have no taste at all. But I reach the edge of my tolerance in the case of Robert Bresson.
Bluntly put, to not get Bresson is to not get the idea of motion pictures -- it's to have missed that train the Lumiere brothers filmed arriving at Lyon station 110 years ago.
Celtx, the free screenwriting/pre-production software, just launched its 1.0 version. According to the press release, new features include:
2. Comic Book - a new editor to write properly formatted Comic Books, and a common framework for collaboration between writer and artist.
3. iPhone - now view your Celtx projects from just about anywhere with a display optimized for your iPhone.
4. Catalogs - a new organization and searchable dashboard view of all your story's elements and production items.
5. Sidebar - annotate and break down each scene with notes, media (images, audio, and video clips), and production items through an easy to manage, thoroughly upgraded new sidebar.
6. Project Scheduling - has been vastly upgraded to fully integrate with the script breakdown and provide a Call Sheet and a host of new shooting reports.
7. Storyboarding - you can now choose from a variety of ways to view and manage your images, create a storyboard outline based on your script, and add shot descriptions to each image.
I'll try to dig into this in the next few weeks and give a report. But first, I've got about 500 emails to reply to and some bags to unpack from my European travels.
To overstate the obvious, there's a new look here at SRF. As I prepare for the premiere of my new film, Quick Feet, Soft Hands, I have been doing some re-tooling of the Lovell Films website. Since I was already spending hours digging around in web design apps it seemed like a logical time to revamp this site as well. SRF has looked the same for nearly two and a half years, which is ages in cyber-time. I, for one, am happy to see a change.
As for the content, nothing's changed. Self-Reliant Film is the same ol' website you know and love.
The only difference of any significance is that I've tried to create more of a bridge between this site and the Lovell Films site, which promotes my own film work. There was a kind of design schizophrenia going on between the two sites -- they didn't look like they represented the same person, and the links between the two were virtually hidden. The links certainly not hidden in real life -- the blogger and the filmmaker are one and the same -- so I've tried to address that a little with the nav bar at the top.
So, that's the main difference. If you're compelled to explore the Lovell Films site, go for it. And if not, I hope you continue to enjoy what you find here.
Ok, enough about the re-design.
Coming soon: The remainder of my long-delayed reviews of Apple Color training tutorials.
ADDENDUM: Oh yeah, one more change: You may notice that the banner of the site has been shortened from "self-reliant filmmaking" to "self-reliant film." That's what I call this blog, that's what most other people call this blog, and that's the URL of the blog. So it was time to have the banner actually use the proper name.
This afternoon I'll be moderating the Blogs, Buzz, and Buddy Lists panel at South by Southwest. If you're in Austin for SXSW, stop by. You'll see: Karina Longworth: film blogger, Spout.com
Victor Pineiro: Writer-Producer, "Second Skin" - premiering at SXSW
Ian Schafer: CEO, Deep Focus
Alison Willmore: Film blogger, IFC.com
... along with yours truly.
And if you don't catch the panel, I'll be in town through Wed blogging about the screenings and panels I attend. Drop me a comment or email and we can connect.
UPDATED: Two more sites that we discussed on the panel today:
All filmmakers are, in some way, students of filmmaking (I know I am), but this one's for the REAL (i.e., in-school) student filmmakers out there: Some of us are starting spring break today, while others will be enjoying spring break later this month. Assuming you're not already using this time to make a movie this week, here are some ways to spend your time if you're unable (or uninterested) in traveling to Cancun, Panama City, or wherever it is the kids go these days. No excuses -- any of these suggestions can be done on a budget:
Read your camera's manual! Seriously. I've met a lot of people that have never read their camera's manual. You might be surprised at some of the things it'll do. After you read it....
Take a daytrip for inspiration! Get out of your apartment and explore your area. Take your camera and shoot some location scouting shots. Already got some inspiration?
Work on that script you've been meaning to write! Visit your local library, take your notebook or laptop with you and don't leave until you've written a few pages. And while you're there...
Catch up on film history! Check out (literally) some of the greatest films of all time. Blockbuster probably doesn't have them, but your library might. And get some books while you're at it: Bazin and Sarris are your "beach reading" this week.
And for extra credit:
Teach yourself filmmaking software! There are a ton of ways to do this. Here's just one of many: Lynda.com's excellent Final Cut Studio tutorials are all available online, and for $25 you have access to every single one of them for an entire month. That's enough time to learn enough about Final Cut, Compressor, Motion, DVD Studio Pro to move you to the head of your class.
The most precious resource for us filmmakers isn't a camera or even money -- it's time. If you're not already making a movie this week, use this week to recharge your batteries. Literally. Then go shoot. If filmmaking isn't just a hobby, it's your compulsion, I can almost guarantee that in ten years you'll look back and consider this time better spent than doing tequila shots in front of MTV's Spring Break camera crews. At the very least, you'll remember more of it.
Chris Cagle over at Category D recently posted information about a film -- as in 16mm, 35mm, etc. -- preservation manual he found online. For me, this is perfect timing. Just this week some librarians at Virginia Tech asked Stephen Prince
... from a surprising source: ESPN.
John Sawatsky, ESPN's senior director of talent development, has tutored reporters, anchors and producers around the world. Since 1991, he has devoted all his time to teaching interviewing to professional journalists. ESPN asked him to assess the prospects for the upcoming "60 Minutes" interview of Roger Clemens.
Sawatsky's assessment amounts to a lesson in interviewing technique (and rips Mike Wallace to shreds in the process). Fascinating reading.
Over the last month or so I've needed to send and receive a lot of large files (Final Cut project files, songs in AIFF format, DVD burn files, and so on). By "large" I mean in the 20mb - 4gb range. These files are usually too large to be sent via email because of file size limits, using an FTP site can be a hassle (as David Pogue has noted), and sending files via DVD-Rom via mail or FedEx is (comparatively) slow and pricey. For me, the solution has been to share these large files via a few of the several services that exist online. I have used YouSendIt, FileFactory, and Pando. All have worked just fine.
The first two are file-hosting sites; Pando, on the other hand, is a stand-alone application. It requires a (free) download, but it also allows for the sharing of much larger files.
If you find yourself needing to share large files and don't know where to start, a fairly comprehensive listing of file hosting sites is available on Wikipedia. You can also check out this article, which surveys some of the main services.
Film Festival World has recently launched a few useful resource pages worth checking out: Their Ezines, Journals, & More page selects some of the better sources of critical writing on film from around the (digital) globe. Alongside long-running magazines (like Cahiers du Cinema and Cineaste) are sites like the Rouge and Senses of Cinema. I'm looking forward to exploring the sites that are new to me.
Another resource worth checking out is what they call The Essential Film Blog Reader. Though some of my favorite bloggers aren't listed (Mr. Schnack? Mr. Lowery?) what's there is quality stuff: David Bordwell, Ray Carney, Chris Fujiwara, Girish, Sara Jo Marks, Chuck Tryon, and others. Needless to say, I was flattered by the compliment of inclusion (and their biography, which was done entirely without my input).
If you're unfamiliar with Film Festival World, you can read more about the site here.
Despite (or because of) the so-called "democratization" of film technology, film programs are doing a booming business. Acceptance rates hover around 10% or less at a lot of the more notable programs in the nation. From my own first-hand experience serving on the grad selection committee (in 2006) at Temple University, I can tell you that we accepted something like 8%. The last time I checked, the best med schools in the country aren't that selective. So how do you make yourself a competitive applicant?
For starters, recognize that most film schools, generally speaking, are looking for interesting people with original ideas more than they're looking for folks that are already great filmmakers. (In fact, it's their job to teach you to be a better filmmaker.) Since they're looking for interesting people, your job as an applicant is to present your unique life experience, creative vision, and professional potential.
As for specifics, what follows are some highly subjective tips and observations from my experiences as reviewer of film school applications, as a writer of student recommendations, and -- not so long ago -- as an applicant.
Rule #1: Follow directions. An incomplete or improperly submitted application will likely result in your application being dismissed. This seems like something so basic that no one could screw it up. Wrong! And since many programs are trying to weed out 90% of applicants, the first folks to get cut are those that didn't cross their t's and dot their i's.
Rule #2: Give yourself time and know your deadlines. Begin assembling your application more than a month in advance, particularly the letters of recommendation. Some schools won't accept a late application -- even if it's only late by a single day. Know your deadlines and work on your application well in advance of those deadlines so that your application can be as strong as possible.
Assuming you can obey Rule #1 and Rule #2, your application is going to get a look.
Most applications require you to submit the following: - Application Form - Undergraduate Transcript - Personal Statement - Creative Sample - Letters of Recommendation
I'm going to focus my attention on the last three because those are the most important elements of most applications.
Personal Statement:
DO write with honesty and accuracy.
DO talk about the types of films you want to make. Be a specific as possible.
DO write about how and why you got into filmmaking, but keep it very brief if it's not terribly unique (e.g., spare us the "When I first saw Jurassic Park..." memories).
DO discuss why you're applying to this specific school. Demonstrate that you've done the research about the programs and why this is a good one for you.
DO talk about how you've grown and changed as a person since you've been making films.
DO mention any visit you made to the school and any conversations or correspondence you've had with specific faculty members or students. Consider: You're trying to stand out from possibly 500 other applicants. They've actually met you. Remind them of that!
DON'T be afraid to be a little critical of the films you've made. Use this as a way to explain why you would benefit from film school. You're applying to film school because you want to be a better filmmaker, after all.
DON'T fret if you've not made many films, or even any at all (as long as your portfolio can contain creative work other than films and videos). If you've never made films but have done other art-making (photography, painting, creative writing) discuss why you're interested in making the transition from one art form to another. Think about it: Who would seem to have more professional potential in film -- an individual with a portfolio of amazing photographs or someone with a few just-okay videos?
DON'T be afraid to share your unconventional, idealistic dreams. ("I ultimately want to start a radical, experimental film co-operative in Idaho.") On the other hand...
DONT make statements that suggest you have absolutely no sense of the reality of the film business. ("I plan to get a three picture deal with Disney after my 3rd year film is screened.")
DON'T be afraid to speak about your accomplishments, but...
DON'T exaggerate or embellish your accomplishments. Besides the fact that dishonesty can come back to haunt you, grad schools are looking for people that haven't done everything. Tell the truth and show some humility.
DON'T spend all of your time talking about your favorite movies. You're applying to film school to make your own movies. Talk about that.
DON'T use a one-size-fits-all approach to your personal statement. Like a cover letter and resume for a job application, your statement should be tailored to each school.
Creative Sample
DO put your best work on the DVD first. With 500 applicants, most schools simply aren't going to watch that 90 minute movie of yours. Sorry. How long do you think these people have? Do the math: 500 applicants x 10 minutes of screening footage = 83+ hours. Get it? Shorter is better, but great and long is better than short and bad.
DO test every single DVD before you send it off. Test it on multiple machines. Send two if it makes you feel better.
DO label your work with your name, email, phone number and some indication that this is part of your portfolio for application in to X program.
DON'T include films or videos that feature derivative genre retreads or sophomoric humor. You're trying to demonstrate that you're mature, unique and original. Even if you aren't.
Letters of Recommendation
DO choose your recommenders carefully. You usually need three. For better or worse, "names" impress, so if you've done an internship for an award-winning filmmaker or studied under someone very well known in academic film circles, a positive recommendation can mean a lot. A glowing letter from an alum of the program can go a long way, too. A lukewarm recommendation, on the other hand, is bad regardless of who wrote it.
DON'T wait until the last minute (or week) to contact your recommenders. Chances are, many of them will have several students wanting recommendations, possibly even to the same schools. Some recommenders won't write in support of more than one student to a school. Others may have certain policies that you need to know up front (e.g., they only write for students that have earned A's), which may determine whether or not they can write for you.
DO volunteer to share a draft of your personal statement and your creative sample with your recommenders. This will help them write their letters. They may even be willing to give you some feedback.
DON'T ask a person to write a letter if s/he has tried to politely decline. All letters should be glowing.
Finally, a word about transcripts....
DON'T assume that your grades matter in the way you think they do. I once heard a professor on a grad selection committee remark, "Now this is my kind of transcript: All A's and F's." He was serious. That student was accepted on the basis of her strong portfolio while others, with lesser portfolios and better grades, were not.
In sum, be honest about who you are, share only the very best of your work, emphasize what is unique about your accomplishments and your goals, and help those writing in support of you to do the same. Then hope for the best.
Good luck!
It's that time of year again, when current and former students start asking me about film schools -- where they should apply, if I will write a letter of recommendation, and so on. Whether or not film school is right for an individual is a personal decision and I'm not going to reiterate the pros and cons of film school here. Instead, this two-part post aims to help those who have decided to apply. This post will address some basic tips on looking for a graduate program in film production. The next post will provide some tips on the application process.
**Where should I go to film school? Well, that depends. What kinds of films do you want to make? Do you ultimately hope to work in or outside the industry? Where would you enjoy living? Until you can answer some basic questions about your personal goals, deciding on a film school is next to impossible.
Needless to say, it helps to have some idea about your goals before you apply. After that, begin researching the different programs that exist. The IMDB maintains a pretty good list of film schools. I think it's smart to make your first initial research into film programs no less than six months in advance of applying.
Here are things to consider as you look at programs:
Location. Do you want to pursue your filmmaking in a place where you'll be free of distractions, or do you need the stimulation of a city? Does the town or city have a cultural community that will allow your work to thrive? Will you be placing yourself thousands of miles from the place where you want to film your work? If you ultimately want to work in Hollywood you might want to aim for a California school so you can go ahead and begin building that network. If you want to work "regionally" (code for "outside LA or NY"), you should consider studying close to the place where you want to ultimately live, work, and film. (One important exception: If you want to teach filmmaking, don't go to a school where you might want to ultimately teach. Many schools have explicit policies against hiring "their own" as tenure-track faculty.) One way or another, a school's location is an incredibly important factor to consider.
Reputation of the program. No one is going to finance your next movie simply because you attended some elite film school. There is something to be said for the networking that a school like USC or NYU provides, but there are several worthwhile, lesser-known programs outside of the so-called "Big Five", particularly if you're not interested in a career in Hollywood. Among them (in alpha order): American University, Art Institute of Chicago, Boston University, CalArts, Columbia College, Emerson, Florida State, Iowa, Stanford, Southern Illinois, Texas, and Temple. Some of these cater to experimental work, others to documentary or alternative/independent narrative. Many are good bargains. I'll leave it to you to do the research.
Faculty and students. A lot of prospective applicants put an emphasis on who will be teaching them. Faculty, no doubt, are important: Perhaps less important than their individual accomplishments is their ability and willingness to take the time to mentor their students. Having said this, your fellow students matter even more than faculty. You'll spend far more time with your fellow students, you'll collaborate together, and you'll critique each other's work. If you don't respect them and the work they're trying to do, I expect you will be very, very unhappy.
Course Offerings and Curricula. As you look at the required courses for each program, ask yourself: Do these look like interesting courses? Are these the subjects that I want to learn about? I've known students to transfer or drop out of film programs because they were dissatisfied with having to learn about experimental film, or (at another school) because they weren't learning enough about experimental film. What's mind boggling to me is that this is pretty straightforward stuff. You look at the required classes, and you look at the other courses that are offered from semester to semester. If it looks like a good fit with your interests, you've found a contender. If it's missing courses in areas that are vital to your development, forget it. For the programs in between, contact the faculty and students and ask lots of questions.
Equipment and Facilities. A decade ago, the equipment that a school could offer mattered a lot, but it's not a lot to get worked up about today. After all, you can buy an HVX-200, a laptop and Final Cut Studio for a fraction of a year's tuition at most film schools. You don't want to go someplace that has crummy equipment, nor do you want to attend a school that lacks enough equipment to serve its students. You need good (film and video) cameras, sound equipment, lights, and editing stations. (Maybe not even the editing stations, if you already own one.) Beyond that, don't get worked up about facilities and equipment. If you're simply going to film school to touch the latest equipment, maybe you should go intern at an equipment house instead. Indeed, having access to every single new toy can be a distraction. You need to learn to make do with the basics. At least that's what I think. If you need a huge state-of-the-art soundstage to make your movies, go for it.
Film Funding. Some programs expect students to fund their own work; other programs fund their students' work. Each system has its pros and cons. For instance, with school-funded films who gets to decide which films get funded? Are some films funded and others not? Who retains the copyright on school-funded films? On the other hand, when funding your own work, how will that impact your ability to graduate in a timely fashion?
Length of Program. Most programs are three years; some are two years. There may be a difference between what a school's literature states and the reality though. Ask current students for the skinny on how long it takes for students to typically finish a program. It can be a positive thing, of course, to stay in school as long as you can. After all, student loan payments aren't due until after you're no longer enrolled. The point is, you need to know what kind of time commitment you're making.
Cost. Tuition is one thing to consider; cost of living in the town/city of the school are equally important. Don't let cost enter your first considerations of film programs. After all, you might be offered a fellowship or assistantship if you're accepted. But unless you're independently wealthy you will probably want to keep cost in the back of your mind. I believe you should not go into a lot of debt for film school, or any MFA for that matter. This is an art degree, not a law degree or med school, that we're talking about.
**After you've narrowed down your list to say, 10 or so, get in touch with the schools and try to find out more. Email or phone the various departments and speak with the Department Head or professors. During your conversations with these folks, ask if they can put you in touch with some current students. Also -- this is important -- ask them if there is a way that the program can share with you some recent student work.
From here, visit as many of your final contenders as is possible. Sit in on classes, meet with faculty and students. Screen student work, if you can. Ask lots of questions -- not just about the school, but the larger filmmaking community in the city/town. The positive impression that you make will help you as you apply.
Speaking of applying, my next post will outline some specific things you can do to make your application stronger.
Though the press reports usually got it wrong, as AJ Schnack reminded everyone yesterday, Gore did not win an Oscar for An Inconvenient Truth (because he didn't direct it), but I have little doubt that the film -- because of how it drew attention to the cause of global warming, and because it drew attention to Gore's advocacy in the process -- was a factor in Gore sharing this year's Peace Prize. Looking over the list of previous Peace Prize winners, I couldn't think of another instance in which cinema played such a central role in the awardee's recognition.
Anyway, in the spirit of the announcement, I thought I would share some links and notes on environmentally-friendly filmmaking for those folks out there that, whether or not they like Al Gore, accept the findings of hundreds and hundreds of scientists from around the world that shared the Peace Prize for their work on man-made climate change research...
First, you might check out the Environmental Media Association's website, particularly their EMA Green Production Checklist (PDF download on the linked page). Most of their tips are basic "reduce, reuse, recycle" guidelines within a filmmaking context, but they're worth a look.
On a related note, in my searching online for other green filmmaking resources, I came across New Mexico's "Green Production Best Practices", which were outlined by Gov. (and Presidential candidate) Bill Richardson. No surprises here - this is a very similar list to the EMA guidelines above -- but it does have New Mexico-related resources to help you "go green." It would be great if all the other state film offices would draw up similar resource pages. If you agree, contact your local film office and make the suggestion. Or go a step further -- do the research yourself and provide it to them!
If you consider yourself deeply committed to these principles, you might want to track down a copy of Larry Fessenden's Low Impact Filmmaking. The book was originally published in 1992, so some of the information is dated. Still, this is the most extensive green-guide to filmmaking I've ever seen, and it's written with a true spirit of self-reliance. I only wish Fessenden would make it available as a PDF -- that would help disseminate the book more widely AND it'd be that much more environmentally friendly.
Finally, one of the most -- if not THE most -- significant things we filmmakers can do to help (or at least not hurt) the environment is to "work small." As I looked over the EMA Production Checklist I couldn't help but think about how the EMA's and the New Mexico film office's guidelines are geared toward Hollywood productions that feature hundreds of crew and dozens of vehicles and trailers. Without even considering the extensive things that happen in front of the camera on some of these sets (stunt car chases, explosions, etc), the fact remains that Hollywood filmmaking practices leave a big environmental footprint, no matter how much re-using and recycling they do. "Reduce" is the first step -- and it's one that the producers of so-called "Major Motion Pictures" would do well to remember.
Indeed, some of the most basic elements of low-budget, DIY regional filmmaking -- working with a small crew, shooting films in your own city with local crew, and using a modest amount of equipment (lights and vehicles, especially) -- also happen to be great practices for environmentally-sound filmmaking. Most filmmakers that "work small" (including a lot of people reading this right now) may not do so out of a commitment to the environment, but you know what? That doesn't diminish the effect. We can all do more, but working small is a big first step.
My earlier post on the 3rd edition of The Filmmaker's Handbook
Now that we've got that out of the way, here are some quickly-jotted observations:
There are lots of changes, but few surprises. And that's probably a good thing. There's only one new chapter, at the beginning, which lays out basic questions that filmmakers should consider before beginning their work. Aside from that, the changes are all revisions. The biggest change, because it's something of a philosophical shift, is that the chapters on Video now take precedence over the chapters on Film. And, of course, the video chapters have been (predictably) overhauled and expanded. The film chapters have largely gone (predictably) untouched.
It's still essential. I don't know of any single technical manual related to filmmaking that collects so much information in one place. None of its chapters can compete with my favorite books on sound, lighting, etc. but this is a great place for novices to begin and it's a great single reference book for the rest of us, particularly on the things that won't change as quickly as video (sound, lighting, film).
It's already starting to become obsolete. Steven Ascher notes this in the preface: "Right now, the pace of change in video and computer technology is so rapid, some things in this book could be dated before you get to the end of this sentence." There is a small, one sentence mention of the Red Camera (bottom of p. 34). I expect there will be more on 4K and RAW imaging in later editions.
There will be new editions, and probably sooner than later. The cover of this edition conspicuously notes that this not the "3rd Edition", but instead the "2008 Edition." Aside from noting that, well, it's still 2007, I have to imagine that this is a hint that we'll see this tome updated more regularly. And it is a tome.
Readability is reduced. The Handbook has been such a staple of film education because of its (relative) readability. Ascher and Pincus do a fine job of making complex technical concepts understandable for novices. But as the book has grown (see below) it has sacrificed some of its readability. There is simply so much stuff in this new edition that it can be a little difficult to navigate through it to find what you need. Luckily the index is above-average for this type of book.
It's big. Really big. I remember a film professor of mine once waxing nostalgic about how the precursor to the first edition of The Filmmaker's Handbook was a small pocket-sized book by Ed Pincus called Guide to Filmmaking. That book, my professor argued, was superior in some ways to editions of The Filmmaker's Handbook because you could stash it in your back pocket while you filmed. He had a point. This is a "handbook" in name only -- it has 830 pages and weighs nearly 3 pounds! (Here's a similarly sized work of fiction
In sum, while this isn't my favorite film book, if you are new to filmmaking, or if you are beyond the basics but need a single desk (or on-set) reference for tons of technical stuff, this is probably about the best $16.50
IndieWire reports today on the International Documentary Association's list of the "25 Best Documentaries." As an introduction to the genre for people who have never seen more than one or two non-fiction films (including, say, March of the Penguins) it's a serviceable list. On the other hand, it will probably upset a lot of people, if the comments after the IndieWire article are any indication. It's not worth getting too worked up over these things. Like those AFI best-of lists, they're not so much a serious study as a marketing tool for the sponsoring organization. Still, I was pretty surprised (and a little sad) to see just how historically short-sighted and Americentric this list is, particularly coming from a group that is comprised of filmmakers and bills itself as an international association.
Almost all the films on the list are American, English-language films. As for representation throughout the decades, the last seven years are represented by ten movies; the '80s and '90s are represented by seven more. The other eighty years of cinema are represented by a mere eight films.
I can put aside the fact that lesser-known, esoteric personal favorites (like, say, Ichikawa's Tokyo Olympiad, Godmilow/Farocki's What Farocki Taught/Inextinguishable Fire, Jorge Furtado's Ilha das Flores, or Wiseman's High School) didn't make the cut. But a list claiming to represent the "Greatest Documentaries of All Time" that doesn't feature a single film by Robert Flaherty, Dziga Vertov, Jean Rouch, Michael Apted, Chris Marker, Agnes Varda, much less Claude Lanzmann's Shoah ? Well, it's curious, to say the least.
Ok, I said I wasn't going to get worked up. So I'll stop.
Here's the list. Continue the debate in the comments, if you want....
1. "Hoop Dreams," directed by Steve James, Peter Gilbert and Frederick Marx 2. "The Thin Blue Line," directed by Errol Morris 3. "Bowling for Columbine," directed by Michael Moore 4. "Spellbound," directed by Jeffery Blitz 5. "Harlan County USA," directed by Barbara Kopple 6. "An Inconvenient Truth," directed by Davis Guggenheim 7. "Crumb," directed by Terry Zwigoff 8. "Gimme Shelter," directed by Albert and David Maysles and Charlotte Zwerin 9. "The Fog of War," directed by Errol Morris 10. "Roger and Me," directed by Michael Moore 11. "Super Size Me," directed by Morgan Spurlock 12. "Don't Look Back," directed by DA Pennebaker 13. "Salesman," directed by Albert and David Maysles 14. "Koyaanisqatsi: Life Out of Balance," directed by Godfrey Reggio 15. "Sherman's March," directed by Ross McElwee 16. "Grey Gardens," directed by Albert and David Maysles, Ellen Hovde and Muffie Meyer 17. "Capturing the Friedmans," directed by Andrew Jarecki 18. "Born into Brothels," directed by Ross Kauffman and Zana Briski 19. "Titticut Follies," directed by Frederick Wiseman 20. "Buena Vista Social Club," directed by Wim Wenders 21. "Fahrenheit 9/11," directed by Michael Moore 22. "Winged Migration," directed by Jacques Perrin 23. "Grizzly Man," directed by Werner Herzog 24. "Night and Fog," directed by Alain Resnais 25. "Woodstock," directed by Michael Wadleigh
In some fields, there's that one book which, without it, your collection would be hopelessly incomplete. In my opinion, every kitchen needs a copy of The Joy of Cooking, a library's not a library if it doesn't have the Oxford English Dictionary, and filmmakers... well, I would argue that all of us need a copy of The Filmmaker's Handbook by Steven Ascher and Edward Pincus. At least that was true a few years ago. First released in 1984, The Filmmaker's Handbook was one of the first, and best, books to cover almost all technical aspects of the filmmaking process. Its presentation of technical concepts was accessible to beginners; its depth of detail meant experienced filmmakers could return to it again and again, always sure to learn new things.
For years, the Handbook didn't need an update. Film technology had gone largely unchanged for decades. An f-stop's an f-stop, right? Then, in 1999, the Handbook was updated to include developments in digital video. A necessary nod to the present, no doubt, but also an invitation to obsolescence.
The 2nd edition was first published in March 1999 -- one month before the unveiling of Final Cut Pro 1.0. Things have changed. Radically. Needless to say, the Handbook's been long overdue for another update.
So when I say that the new edition of The Filmmaker's Handbook
In many ways, though, it's a bittersweet celebration. At this point, I don't expect The Filmmaker's Handbook to present any especially new information, exactly. The internet keeps me up-to-date on this stuff far better than any book can now. And, like so much of the technology it will no doubt discuss, I suspect that much of the information found in this 3rd Edition will be out of date within a year or two. If not sooner.
Yet, even when discussing evolving technologies, books have their place. Books demand (or at least request) more attention than digitally-presented information does. That's a good thing, especially when you're trying to learn something. You can also carry a book to a remote location where you might never have the internet access that would allow you to google for a solution that might crop up on set. But most importantly, a book lets you dog ear its corners, mark up key passages, and write in the margins. At least, that's what I plan to do with my new edition as soon as it arrives on my doorstep.
And besides, a lot of what this new 3rd edition of The Filmmaker's Handbook will have to say has never gone out of style and won't for a long, long time. After all, an f-stop's still an f-stop.
If you don't understand at least the basics of timecode, you really can't fully understand and appreciate video, at least as we know it today. While reading B&H Photo/Video/Audio's latest email newsletter (i.e., advertising) there was a nice little introduction to timecode. Sure, the article is littered with links to products -- B&H is in business, after all -- but this is a good introduction for beginners.
And, while I'm on the subject, here are a few freeware timecode calcluators for Mac and Windows.
ADDITION:
From The Edit Blog: The iPod as a Time Code Slate
If it could be said that this site has "features", then this would be a new one. Basically "Weekly Reader" will feature articles I read, or want to read, from the previous week. I probably won't do commentary, but if I do it'll be short. The idea is to cull all the "hey, read this link" sorts of things, which I would have spent a whole blog post on previously, into one post. It'll sort of write itself over the week, saving me time to focus more on original content. I hope that you'll use the comments section to add links to your favorite reads from the week.
Joe Swanberg interview on GreenCine
Andrew Bujalski interview on indieWire
Quinceanera filmmakers interview by David Lowery
Info about Stu Maschwitz's DV Rebel's Guide book.
Interesting breakdown of cool sound moment in When a Stranger Calls
Of course, if you're looking to unwind with some even lighter reading, perhaps you should check out this new feature's namesake.