This is not to start a debate...

[jb_617]

I don't "shoot" on film or video.

Am I doing something wrong?


------------------------

Paper & Pencil

[eidde]

one of the stills I have posted originated on film from a 20 minute super8 film I made a while ago.
Have since made another 20 minute video, and am
completing a 3rd on super8 and video.
So some of us use film, albeit limited.
To be honest I find film a bit of a pain in the arse.
Unless you want some sort of sweeping gorgeous photography to accompany your story then why wait 3 weeks to find out if your footage has come out or not?
In my experience film making is like pulling teeth out anyway, so why add to the pain by giving yourself another headache - waiting for it to get developed.
At the end of the day at my kind of level, its only done for kicks anyway, hardly art or business, so using film is a luxury I cant really afford, nor have the skill to use properly.

Having said all that I watched a wildlife 'film' on telly last night clearly shot on video, and it looked cheap and bad - never mind the bears eating salmon, the format was cheap.

Tough really, I used to be a spokesman for film, now I couldnt give a toss. What is the story like?
How much love and attention went into making it? is the acting anygood? Whats it about?
Those are the things I look for now, film/video..?
dont care.

[peter_g]

Actually, operating as a PLC rather then an individual does make money magically appear - about a fifth of what you spend!

Also, it creates a good impression. Labs and equipment rental houses will give you credit services a lot quicker if you are a PLC. Cast and crew will act more professional.

For the life of me I don't know why I am the first to point out these simple facts. I mean, Okay, if you want to make an ultra low budget video project all this won't apply to you, but otherwise you are literally throwing money away.

[Nigel]

I dunno...

For me film doesn't seem all that expensive. Not when you look at the cost of feeding people, paying people, renting gear, etc. I already have an Aaton Super16 camera so it is just a matter of film, processing, Xfer.

As for the comment about taking three weeks to look at what you shot--I don't know what rock you live under but turn around should be the next day.

Also, take a look at Super8. It is damn near point and shoot. Here is the Kodak link to their Super8 site:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/su...1.4.4.10&lc=en

Good Luck

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ December 01, 2004 11:37 AM: Message edited by: Nigel ]</font>

[miker]

if I ever have a *real* budget -- ie a pot of money just sitting there that's been allocated to my project -- then yes, I will do my damndest to shoot film and through a Ltd co.

but the definition of a low-budget film right now is something like Napoleon Dynamite which "only" cost $400,000 --- c'mon! okay, keanu reeves may get paid $30,000,000 for a role in a matrix film and the film business may be going "bankrupt" because of those filesharers, but $400,000 is not an insignificant amount in my book.

also let's not forget that Easy Rider was shot with help from Peter Fonda's credit card. even if you don't like the film, the 'making of' documentary is a revelation.

i would agree that at a certain point then ltd co. is the best way to go. but i would measure that on revenue, not on budget. also, a ltd co. introduces another level of bureaucracy that unless you have the willpower to deal with yourself, you will have to pay (or sleep with) someone else to deal with it for you.

[Spunkey1pestic]

Amen Miker!!!!
I will always prefer film!! That's That, but I
don't have access to a money tree!
So I shoot film when budget premits- I have a 16mm bolex, but stock is high-
So the Cannon XL-1 is my best friend-
At the moment I'm researching options for super 8- thus how I found this site.....

But I think festival's should open their doors to other formats- I have seen some great stuff and it dosen't get a second glance, simply because it wasn't shot on film.

[miker]

I have seen some great stuff and it dosen't get a second glance, simply because it wasn't shot on film.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">there's a certain amount of truth that you "lock yourself out" of the bigger picture by not shooting on film.

but hell, i'd be happy to sell TV syndication rights at the Cannes Film Market or MIFED. DV is a broadcastable standard after all.

i'm gearing up for the HDTV home cinema revolution, are you? to quote Phil Space, "cinema is so 20th century"

IMO with film-res HDTV and an engulfing screen hanging on your wall with immersive surround sound, theatre will take back the stalls and cinema will move to the lounge.

[peter_g]

Don't you understand how VAT works? If you charge customers VAT on goods, you have to send it to the Inland Revenue minus whatever you were charged on goods. If you buy more then you sell, which you certainly will in the early stages of a film production company, you get a cheque from the Inland Revenue. In other words, you always stand to gain. The only time you pay vat is when you pay the VAT you collected from your customers, which isn?t your money anyway. If that customer is another company they in turn claim the VAT back. If that customer is a private citizen, he/she just pays the VAT.

The accounts on a low budget film would be significantly easier to do then that of a corner shop. An accountant is not required - just a bit of determination.

As for corporation tax, that would only arise if you actually made a profit. You'd never make a profit without starting your production company because you couldn?t deal with any kind of distributor or whatever as a private citizen. You'd be forced to form a company and buy the film off yourself, sell the film onto the production company and then pay corporation tax.

Final line's is yes there are some advantages, but not in a pink coloured pyschodelic way, where cigaretes grow on trees and whiskey runs through the mountain.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The advantages for anything but an ultra low budget production far outweigh the disadvantages.

[eidde]

$$$$$
This is the quickest turn-around Ive found for super8:

http://www.widescreen-centre.co.uk/n...%20to%20Friday

not quite the next day.

Im sure some labs do offer next day processing. But then thats still too late, everyone has gone home and getting back to their real lives by then, until you can muster the courage to drag em back.

But anyway, these are details. I too wondered why most of the stills posted up there are all digital. But then this has always been a video mostly forum.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ December 01, 2004 12:07 PM: Message edited by: eidde ]</font>

[Chance1234]

Peter_G, I think you have very very rose coloured glasses on at the moment.

What about for example Corporation Tax, Filling returns ?
]
The cost of an accountant ?

Also, whislt claiming back VAT does have it plus sides it can also have it's downside , especially when you are balancing it off from what you are earning.

Mortus Illumina started off through a company, and that nearly bankrupted us twice.

Now i tend to go for the burying money in the sand approach which works much better.

Final line's is yes there are some advantages, but not in a pink coloured pyschodelic way, where cigaretes grow on trees and whiskey runs through the mountain.

On the Film side,

Again Cost. I could afford to shoot on film, but would have nothing or nobody to film :-(