So at what point should I get an agent? Before production? After production? After the project is finished? Being in Greater Cincinnati, I doubt many agents that could do any good for me are in this area.

Any links to agents online?

Thanks again for answering all of my silly questions.

As to the camera, the Z1 has got to be the way to go.
Before you get too excited though, do you have any idea what a print to film is going to cost? Whether you pay for it or they pay for isn't really that important, either way it's got to be factored into the project and getting distribution.
You could bypass the whole thing of course. Stick to digital and use digital projection, you can hire cinemas with the kit yourself. We've done this and if you can get enough bums on seats you'll make money. Even the big cinema chains down here were pretty keen on hiring cinemas to us, they get a good deal becaue the income is guaranteed. Much to my surprise they were extremely helpfull, both the management and the projectionists. More than happy to let us run test screenings out of hours etc.
In fact the cinema chains were easiest to deal with because you've only got one set of management to deal with. Once they got to know me they'd trust me as well as their own staff, quite happily let me pull their setups to bits to suit ourselves (we did very carefully put it back the way it was!).
We were running off a DSR-11 or DSR-45 into their video projector and even stuff off a TRV 900 didn't look too sorry, I'd spent a fair bit of effort getting the audio clean. I think the thing was it looked like a giant TV so the aduience accepts it for what it is. Once you try making it look like film THEN it starts to look horrid because your comparing it to film. To be honest the plain vanilla DV trailers looked better than the feature that was shot on 35mm, telecined to DB and then down to DV.
That's why I always say if you're planning on a film release shoot film, if you don't have the budget shoot something digital to suit your budget and leave it in that medium.
Bob.
Bob.

Bob,

So you when say digital, like WM9, H.264 etc?

Do you think the Vegas Film Script would hurt in post or would it be best to leave it in 29.97 DV?

My only thing is that if keep it digital, I may run the chance of missing out of the theatres that dont support digital and definitely where the bigger money is.

Last I heard, the cost of converting DV to film was roughly $25k. I just dont see someone throwing me a Z1 to shoot this with. It would be nice but thats twice my original production estimates. :)

So you when say digital, like WM9, H.264 etc?
### The best format you can output to a projector. Those formats would certainly be OK at decent bit rates.

Do you think the Vegas Film Script would hurt in post or would it be best to leave it in 29.97 DV?
### Depends on the look you want, realistic grit or "dreamy film."

My only thing is that if keep it digital, I may run the chance of missing out of the theatres that dont support digital and definitely where the bigger money is.
### You won't be missing out on any real money until you get your work into a film festival where people can see it.

Last I heard, the cost of converting DV to film was roughly $25k.
### In Indonesia? The cheapest I have heard here for a 35mm film print is $35-40K for a budget job, and for best results you should add a competent colorist's pay to that. The best 35mm transfers cost about $80K for a feature film.

I know that to convert "Trudell" which is showing this week at the Sundance festival, it cost the producers 50K for the transfer. Which is about right, based on rates seen around the web and from what few phone calls I've made on the subject. Most transfer houses prefer 60i, again, based on phone calls I've made, but have only marginally participated in the process.
It sure ain't cheep, although today, far fewer prints of a film are made, just enough to give the film some legs so it can get into DVD quickly and into the store shelves.
Patrick, you can hire teams to do this. If you try being the producer, director, scriptwriter, exec producer, AND own the largest share of the film, I'll assure you of a failure. Because no one can be everything, and certainly no one can be good at everything. You do what you do, and do it competently. If you truly have something worth capturing investors attention, you'll only chase the investors off with suggestions of you acquiring distribution, funding for production, etc. This usually is done in two steps. I have fairly intimate knowledge of how a few major pix were made, a couple of them Sony pix. There were 2 groups of investors, one for the initial sell, and one for the production.
Hire others that know the biz, know the market, know the investors. There are people out there who do nothing but arrange for VC, and then they get a cut of the pie.

Spot,

Thats what I was asking. I wasnt sure if I had to get distribution or have someone else get it.

Personally, I dont want to do it all. I think after directing and filming and then editing, I will have had enough and will be ready to hand it to someone else to create more magic from it.

While I would like a large cut of the pie, I understand that it probably wont happen, at least not for I. All I want to do is get it shot and edited and maybe make a few coins for my pocket that will tied me over until my next chance to direct/produce my other scripts.

I am just more concerned that after all of my production (pre/pro) is complete that I will be sitting on a film that is earning nothing and potentially wasting an investors money and my crew's time.

But none of this means anything if I dont come up with a decent camera to shoot it.The story's there, just not the equipment to capture it if that makes any sense.

Pmasters,

Take a look at the book, Spike, Mike, Slackers and Dykes by John Pierson. He was a "producer's rep" during the indie film boom.
It's a good resource on getting an indie film distributed.

He worked on She's Gotta Have it, Roger and Me, Slackers, Clerks, and a few other. He was not involved in their production. But often came in after production was done. He was a go-between filmmakers and distributors. Often the films he was involved with still needed money for post or film transfer. He would essentially become an investor after the fact. Also with a lot of indies, once you make the sale, you do not participate in the box office. I worked briefly on the only film in the book that he trashed. It's not a how to book, but more of a history.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0786882220/103-0229723-0647828?v=glance

So once a sale is made, Im out of the loop for decisions and profits?

I will definitely check that book out. Thanks for the tip.

Not necessarily. It depends on the contract you negotiate. But you are an unproven director with an unknown cast, etc., so the person buying your film will have an advantage. The biggest advantage they have will be that when you are done, you most likely will be happy to see some money back in the short rather than long term.

If you make a great film and more and more buyers want it, then that puts you in a better position. If you have a budget that allows for expenses as you look for a distributor, (setting up screenings, etc) then you will be in a good position too. But the truth is most filmmakers are not in that position when they finish their first film.

Thanks all for your advice. Now I need to find/hire someone to shop this after its produced but first it needs to get shot.

pmasters, check out the movie "startroopers II", the making of. This was a HD video movie made directly for DVD distro in 30 days. The people backing and running the production in this project are firm believers in the 20 -45 day production cycle, then into dvd distro. These people have websites, but googling will not help find them. You will have to do a lot of research for the contacts, or hire a serious agent that has a "good" history with the different distro houses. A few individuals have successive gotten dvds into Borders, Kmart, and blockblusters, odds are like 10,000 to one against. But be forewarned, you will be luckly to see a couple of pennies for every dollar in sales.

I figure the major money I would make would come off the sale for distribution rights more so than any royalties.

As long as i come out of this with some decent cash for the effort put forth, I wont complain. Come to think about it, I wont complain if someone buys it at all.

But the truth is most filmmakers are not in that position when they finish their first film.
Not only are they not in a position to drive the boat, they've also got to realize that the buyer of the film is taking a horrific risk on an unknown. While filmmakers do keep rights to the film itself, the distribution rights are almost never part of that package.
Patrick, I'd recommend you find a way to attend the pre-Sundance Film School sessions in June. All of this side of the biz is covered pretty extensively.
No one is even going to talk to you about distribution until you have a film. And based on what you say, you need a camera. However, I wonder if you realize how unrealistic you're being. The camera, at best, is insignificant to the overall cost. Lighting, sound, Foley, FX, sound design, sets, permits, location services, insurances, clearances, attorneys, editing time, all of this is quite costly. While I have a hard time understanding why the average film today costs 80 million, I also understand why you can't undertake a film at virtually any level without at least 25K sitting there, in addition to cameras, lights, sound. I do own all of that stuff, and I'm still not in the business of making indie film because it's just too far out of my mental range. I'm happy to score them and design audio for them, but that's the end of it for me.
Cinncinatti or Gruntville, GA, it doesn't matter. Great media comes out of all sorts of places. Including places like Norman, OK, where we made the documentary "Toubat" or Milwaukee, WI, where we made "The Way of the Powwow." Or Monument Valley, UT, where we made "Azee Choo'nii'gii."
And these were cheap....but still costly.

No matter how great the script is, no "free" actor is going to make it as great as an experienced actor. No matter how great the script, if you don't own a camera, then I'm sorry, but you ain't a cameraman, and if you ain't a cameraman, you ain't a director, and if you ain't a director, you ain't really an editor. But you're suggesting that you're going to be the scriptwriter, cameraman, grip, LD, editor, boom operator, and exec producer. All admirable goals, but from my somewhat experienced perspective, it's also not realistic ifyou're planning on treating the story with care. Weak camera techniques, lighting, sound coupled with the value of "free" actors, likely isn't going to get the attention of the investors you need/want to take the script to the next level.

I'd work on the script and hire a storyboard artist, or trade time with one, and you're likely going to do better. But if your goal is to get rich, rather than work for the value of the script, then you'll likely fall on your face.
On the other hand, if you have a great script, and you are more interested in seeing the script be treated as a literary work with a message and integrity, allowing camerapeople, lighting people, directors, editors, sound persons, graphic designers, and executive producers to do THEIR thing, which they likely do well if they're in the biz, then you'll probably have something.
It's too bad you can't attend some of the Sundance Film Lab stuff, because that's one of the things that guys like Redford, Soderbergh, Cameron, and other great directors drill into the heads of the students; great film makers don't make films, they create them. And they create them by finding others who can be as passionate about the story as they are, and allow them to channel that passion to create great stories on tape or film.
Worrying about distribution, film FX, and that sort of thing is so far away down the road from where you're currently standing, it's all just guesswork at this point.

Get a lawyer, give him a piece of the action, get going on marketing the script. No one, NO ONE will take the script without it coming through an attorney. It's for your protection and theirs. Just like sending a demo recording to a record label, everyone of integrity has no choice but to refuse it unless it's solicited, or comes through an attorney. It sucks giving up a piece of the pie, but it's necessary, and it's also part of "paying your dues."

pmasters, think of the music industry early years of controlling the market. At the moment, you must remember your at the bottom of the food chain, the typical contract concerning distro rights will expect you to share, if not paid in full, the cost of marketing and delivery of your project, out of your fixed fee. Don't be surprise if you end up with a bill and very little distro product. read the fine print carefully and with an atty that understands accounting.

Spot, you make excellent points however, the type of script I wrote doesnt require all of the above. The script I wrote was written with the idea in mind that doesnt require all of the Hollywood hoopla that involves a major production crew.

Please trust me that there are reasons well known actors arent going to be used. There is another reason that the film comes off as somewhat amatuerish. Its part of the story. Its part of what will capture the audience. Perhaps some of those on this forum that have read the script will chime in without giving too much information away.

After I wrote my big script last month and stressed terribly over it, I realized that I had written off more than I could chew at this stage and started on a new script that i could essentially write, light, shoot, and edit myself.

For the cost of a decent camera and minimal lighting, this script can be produced. Without spilling the beans on the forum, all the negatives lend to the realism of the film.

Your advice is better suited for the first script I wrote. That one will require me to relase way more control. This one here, allows me to develop and shoot from my point of view (please take note of that term because thats what the film centers around. My point of view on a controversial and dark subject.)

The same qualities that captured the Blair Witch crowd have been tweaked and included in my script without the whole witchcraft. But the things that I will have to worry about down the road are very important things that I must consider when planning this project.

I promise you, this is nothing seen before. Its quite unique in its content and messages. It will cause quite a stir amongst its viewers which is what I intend for it.

I absolutely would love to attend any seminar you and Sundance are a part of. Unfortunately, like most in this business, funds are typically an issue.

Personally, I think there are very, very few times that someone can walk into the film business and make a splash. If I walked into this thinking anything other than making a splash, then Im in the wrong line of work.

Spot, if you want to know more about this offline, I will be more than happy to discuss it with you and get your honest opinion. I just dont want to end up giving too much out here in the open and have it come back to haunt me down the road.

pmasters, spot's suggest about the Sundance Film Lab is a good starting pt. They post their projects with production logs and notes. Spot's point and my point, not in this forum, that shooting a scene requires more that just a camera. I know you need a camera, but just borrow any reasonable camera to demonstrate that you can shoot a couple scenes. This will help you alot.

SPOT is pretty much right, trying to do everything yourself can be plain dumb and almost certainly doomed to failure. You maybe able to get others to contribute for zero upfront but you need a formal deed.
Now I've had some pretty sad cases come my way, one young girl a few years ago came to our shop to buy a 2nd hand camera we had for sale, she couldn't afford a pair of shoes but she claimed she had a killer 'script' and she was going to shoot it herself on a D8 camera, have it transferred to 35mm, shown in cinemas and live happily ever after. She looked like she'd starved for a month to save the pennies to buy the camera, after an hour of trying to talk her down, we just refused to sell her the camera, some of us like to sleep straight in bed!
At the same time there's a pretty well known Australian who did quite well travelling the planet with a camera, probably still owes people in every continent a fortune for all the things he bludged off them. He 'sold' his series of movies by hiring halls and clubs, got paying patrons by doing letterbox drops the week before. After doing that for I guess about a year he sold the rights for a tidy sum and went onto much bigger and better things.
But if you've got no funds and responsibilities I think you've simply got to put your faith in someone, maybe you'll get screwed, remember they're taking a BIG risk too, that's life. The last thing you should be doing is agonising over this forever, make a decision and live with it.
If as you've said before this is your one big chance, sorry I think that's BS, no career is built that way. If you're any good then this is your FIRST big chance, so limit your risks and accept that your oppotunities maybe limited as well on this one and start planning your SECOND big chance.
Bob.

Sorry, I ain't buying it. "paid actor" doesn't equate to "well known actor." There are literally tens of thousands of good actors out there that work for peanuts, but they are indeed, professionals. Professionals don't do work for free, not very often. Look at a guy like Jon MacPhalen, who is in this forum as JonMac. He is a professional actor, but not well known, even though he's had lead roles in television productions. He's a trained actor. Trained actors simply convey the story better.
Minimalist pieces look minimalist because great (and usually lots) of lighting was employed to create the minimalist look. Here's a question for you as an example; how do you do a zoom in a professional environment?
I don't care if you're shooting dog food commercials, documentaries, comedy shorts, or a serious film, knowledge of production is very, very important. I've seen at least 50 independent films submitted for Sundance this year alone, and I'm telling you, even going for the most minimal or film noir look still requires a lot of production skills.
I'm not trying to bash on your dream, but it seems like you go through all sorts of ping pong positions on how all this works and don't really grasp the reality of the industry. Dreams die as soon as you become a part of the machine if you don't understand the machine. I'm certainly no Spielberg or Hans Zimmer, but I've had a pretty good run of successes. And my greatest successes came after I realized that by working with others who know the biz, I could present my ownself better as well.
If you're a script writer, then be a script writer. There's no shame in not knowing how to push a zoom or pull a focus, or set the angle of lighting for the feel you want to generate. But get some knowledge somewhere, because in this biz, you get very few shots, and you're never better than your last piece. Which often means you only get one shot, if the first one fails. And from what I see, regardless of how great the script is, and it could certainly be a great one, HOW the story is portrayed is every bit as important as WHAT the story portrays. Lighting, sound, camera angles, and how they all play together make the story work. The camera is your axe; it's what you chop with, it's what you should know inside and out if you're gonna shoot anything. Buy a scrappy VHS camcorder or High 8 on Ebay if you think you can get by with anything. Who knows...maybe the minimalist quality of such a camera will carry well into your story. It certainly worked for Michael Moore.

Bob,

I have no problem putting some faith in people. Seriosuly though, the script doesnt call for or need an entire screw. I can lay out my entire shoot for you.

2 main characters. (one is myself and the other works for credits only and I have that in writing.

1 supporting character (working for credit only as far fewer lines than the other character. Again in writing)

2 small speaking parts. (working credits and in writing)

Its a reality based, dark subject. Its written to have an amatuer feel, so no need for a grip, boom op, etc...Shot from my point of view.

Locations: most locations are shot by me without the need for a crew or sound. Again, from my point of view.

Main location, a rundown basement, provided at NO cost especially since I own it. No crew needed, minimally lighting which goes with the dark subject theme.

Now on the surface, it may not look like much. But the subject, content, and ridicuously low production cost is a steal for the small investment.

And I havent even begun to include the personal marketing an dhype thats involved for the film. Lets just say, there is a certain segment of the internet buying audience that will buy it just to see if its real.

Its a realistic horror flick in that it doesnt use effects to scare but more importantly, people's OWN fears to scare the hell out of them. The scary thing is people will not know if its real or not.

Spot,

This person is a trained actor who agreed to help me out so I can get my break. This person is someone I have been friends with for a while and she cares about helping out more than she does about making money. The fact that she is charging me doesnt make her less talented.

Heres the difference with modern day Hollywood compared to Holywood 20 years ago. You no longer have to know someone to get into filmmaking. Any dolt can buy a DV camera and make a film and make millions. Blair Witch, Napolean Dynamite, etc... did just that. While these films called for a certain level of production values, my script doesnt require such because it is written to shot this way.

Honestly, youre hurting my chances more than helping. A lot of people look up to you on this forum and some take your word as gold. My fear, is that some of them may be potential investors that may shy away because my project lacks all of the things that arent required as your typical script. Its a shockumentary for a reason. Its hard for someone to criticise a script when they havent read it. Perhaps those that have will chime in with their thoughts good or bad.

I could shoot it with a JVC 520U I have, but no way a 1CCD camera will give me the color I need. Thers no way that it will provide the all important audio that I need. And theres no way that footage will get converted to film. I know this camera in and out and have done quite a bit with it. But by no means, is it a feature making camera.

Now I did a lot of research on the DVC30 and at the bare minimum, I can make it work with my script. HDV would only give me more detail and resolution to work with.

Mark my words, if I get a decent 3 chip camera, this will be at Sundance in 2006. I can shoot the entire production in 2-4 weeks and edit it in less than a month.

As I said before I read the script [not finished] the other day.
Not tyring to say I know more than the next guy but here goes:

When writing a 1st indie a good rule is to use what you have around you, don't write 'Titanic'. This script has in a nutshell got what it takes to be a killer flick! I don't think that it will win any Academy awards, or stand up against Gone With the Wind, but for genre it could have the impact the orig Texas Chainsaw had on me the first time I saw it. It could go to festivals, straight to DVD, cable... who knows what they will want to buy it for but if you DON'T make the movie what chance do you have for getting a buyer who can make the big $$$. I say go for it !!!!
only my opinion.

Hey its only a script, but look what they told Lucas about Star Wars, no one got it... Now look at him. The only thing we can all do is help eachother with info and ideas.

Thats my exact point. This project isnt for awards, its more the shock and awe of the audience that hyped correctly, will draw and draw well.

Everyone has to cut their teeth somewhere and this is perfect for me. Small cast, small crew, and very low investment. If it fails, then I dont lose much. If it hits, then my profit margin is big. Either way, I get to learn alot hands on and I get to have fun living my dream and make some money in the long run. I guarrantee I can do $10-20k in sales from the web alone. Not a bad profit for something that costs very little to produce.