About the filming rules...

[Davy]

Dear All,

I would like to ask the English people an opinion...
In our club we have lessons all the time, wich is good for a beginner like
me, but i tend to miss any modern ways of filming/editing to them. Sometimes
I see modern stuff on t.v. wich has fast unsteady shots and a bunch of strange
wipes or fades. If an amateur would do this, judges would pick on this kind
of behaviour. But in the professional world this seems to become a standard.
A typical example is the Brittish hospital soap "the green wing". Another
example is a documentary about the Buena Vista Social Club. Camera's are
used here on automatic without a tripod, with from time to time an unsharp
image (this film earned 4 professional awards and is for sale worldwide.
I absolutely love this stuff but I think I will not even pass the club competition
when i try something like that. Has someone tried this? Any suggestions?

Thanks Davy (Belgium)

PS excuse the spelling.

[graeme webb]

Hi Davey,
The Shield, CSI, With out a trace, MTV etc etc etc (you get the green wing
in Belgium WOW !!). These are all exciting, cutting action and dynamic productions.
The guys who make these know the rules and are developing their own cinematic
'Language', they are a joy to watch. Some people have problems with this
style. Ask all the people in your club "what was the last film that you saw
at the cinema?" you maybe surprised at the answer. I come from a background
of creative photograpy so maybe that helps. Davey do what you feel is right
for you get the camera of the tripod onto a jib or dolly handheld and put
the controls on manual. Don't worry what judges say what do they know


By the way your spelling is great.

G

"Davy" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:

Dear All,

I would like to ask the English people an opinion...
In our club we have lessons all the time, wich is good for a beginner like
me, but i tend to miss any modern ways of filming/editing to them. Sometimes
I see modern stuff on t.v. wich has fast unsteady shots and a bunch of strange
wipes or fades. If an amateur would do this, judges would pick on this kind
of behaviour. But in the professional world this seems to become a standard.
A typical example is the Brittish hospital soap "the green wing". Another
example is a documentary about the Buena Vista Social Club. Camera's are
used here on automatic without a tripod, with from time to time an unsharp
image (this film earned 4 professional awards and is for sale worldwide.
I absolutely love this stuff but I think I will not even pass the club competition
when i try something like that. Has someone tried this? Any suggestions?

Thanks Davy (Belgium)

PS excuse the spelling.

[Dave Watterson]

Davy and Graeme have picked up the theme of the age difference within most
clubs ...

In Britain IAC has always been clear that it serves ALL amateur film makers.
If they just want to make better movies of grandchildren and holidays, fine.
If they want to make traditional top quality documentaries, great. If they
create safe, theatrical or 1980's tv style drama, hurrah. If they make fast-cut,
NYPD Blue, punky movies .... er.

Theoretically we should all try to accept each other's work - whether or
not it is the style we prefer. In practice it is hard for many older people
to adapt and accept the faster-paced work of today.

It has always been easier to play to the middle ground - to aim for an interested,
intelligent audience that is not necessarily bang up-to-date.

But as better folk than I have said ... go for it!

Use a club to learn what you can, to enjoy the older style work and to meet
some wonderful people. But don't let it dictate what you do. Stuff competitions
and festivals if they don't like that.

The problem is that you need to find people who are open to that type of
movie to tell you whether or not your film works. The "Bourne Supremacy"
style demands a camera operator and editor who can judge precisely when the
audience will be able to understand what they are shown and when it becomes
too much and muddled. It takes a lot of skill. The older kind of work is
easier - still damn hard to get right, but easier.

Belgium appears from this side of the Channel to suffer from a lot of "politics"
with suggestions of power cliques who run things their way. I realise that
for clubs themselves there may be a financial benefit to staying on the right
side of those at the top of the tree. But for individual film makers - why
worry? (Or have I got the wrong impression?)

Dave (the Scots one)

[Ned C]

Rule 1 There are no rules.

I think Dave's reply tends to sum it up rather well, it's an age thing. Most
film making groups rooted in the amateur tradition have views of film structure
and techniques based on the films of the 50s. I like Graeme's suggestion
that if the judges/audience do not like current styles of film or TV then
whatever you do will not receive their approval. The thing is to develop
your own style, do what you like and recognise that you may not win many
awards in the current amateur scene but you will receive recognition. On
the other hand it is possible to study what wins amateur contests and make
films that are based on that model, but that is hardly developing your own
view and style. So my advice is "go for it" make the films you like and look
for a wider audience than the traditional club/ national amateur scene,

Good luck.

Ned C



"Davy" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:

Dear All,

I would like to ask the English people an opinion...
In our club we have lessons all the time, wich is good for a beginner like
me, but i tend to miss any modern ways of filming/editing to them. Sometimes
I see modern stuff on t.v. wich has fast unsteady shots and a bunch of strange
wipes or fades. If an amateur would do this, judges would pick on this kind
of behaviour. But in the professional world this seems to become a standard.
A typical example is the Brittish hospital soap "the green wing". Another
example is a documentary about the Buena Vista Social Club. Camera's are
used here on automatic without a tripod, with from time to time an unsharp
image (this film earned 4 professional awards and is for sale worldwide.
I absolutely love this stuff but I think I will not even pass the club competition
when i try something like that. Has someone tried this? Any suggestions?

Thanks Davy (Belgium)

PS excuse the spelling.

[Davy]

But for individual film makers - why worry? (Or have I got the wrong impression?)

Dear all,

It is not that I am a competitive person, filming is a hobby for me as well
as i have many others. I am to young (27) to be bothered about how many points
a film can produce. At the moment i have other concerns (Work, some school
projects etc...). But I am planning to make two short films in wich these
'the shield'-like transitions would fit nicely. I have already planned it
this way.

I have no concrete examples about who didn't pass a jury this way but what
i do experience is that from time to time people get "ticked on the fingers"
(a Belgian expression, i don't know if it works in English ??) if an image
is out of focus for a second. So what? Big deal, is what i'm thinking then.
For me it's all about the subject. The opposite is: Ultra sharp high definition
tri-ccd £££ images saying absolutely nothing. If you can you should see the
Buena Vista Social Club documentary, You'll instantly see what i mean.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/tg/ ... 12-7085523

What I do want to say is that sometimes styles change. If you look at art
for examle, the rules are shattered long ago. (Our king had recendly got
the palace ceiling covered with dead beatles by an artist ))) Not really
something Michaelangelo would do huh )

Its virtually impossible to make a documentary about a home for elderly people
in CSI-style without mocking. But why does it all has to be by the rules.
I must say that i don't watch much TV. Only late at night, to relax. This
is the time when most of this 'the shield', 'green wing', 'csi'-stuff is
on. I Like this very much. Yes we even have the hillarious 'Smack the pony'
on tv over here!!!

Anyway why do I post this? Just to have an idea about the pro's and contra's
of filming/editing this way from people wo are watching these shows in prime-time
and not after midnight.

Greetzz Davy

ps: Yes, it was me Dave, who had the honour of walking trough your extraordinary
garden.

[Davy]

A better link to the dvd of the Buena Vista social club

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASI ... 12-7085523

[Cinema For Thurso Group]

Film production obviously has some clear cut principles which are what makes
any film work but there is one rule that we apply at Cinema For Thurso; the
Story/content determines form- make the film according to story or content.
This then covers everything that goes into the design of a movie from costume
to sets, lighting to set decoration camera technic to picture format and
sound- everything!
A film, at the end of the day isn't just one thing, it's many elements brought
together to make a mass. The right mixture makes a tastey cake, yum yum!

[Fraught]

I agree... film and the way its presented changes all the time. New styles
and techniques are being developed all the time. Bullet-Time, CGI, Rotascopeing...
techniques that change the way we interpret film. If we stuck to filming
by the book... then none of the above would exist... i say crack on with
whatever you like, and if it works... then superb!

Ps... i actually like in Basingstoke where Green Room is filmed! They
have recently finished shooting series 2 ... not that anyone really wants
to know that! LOL...

"Ned C" <neddy@fred.com> wrote:

Rule 1 There are no rules.

I think Dave's reply tends to sum it up rather well, it's an age thing.
Most
film making groups rooted in the amateur tradition have views of film structure
and techniques based on the films of the 50s. I like Graeme's suggestion
that if the judges/audience do not like current styles of film or TV then
whatever you do will not receive their approval. The thing is to develop
your own style, do what you like and recognise that you may not win many
awards in the current amateur scene but you will receive recognition. On
the other hand it is possible to study what wins amateur contests and make
films that are based on that model, but that is hardly developing your own
view and style. So my advice is "go for it" make the films you like and
look
for a wider audience than the traditional club/ national amateur scene,

Good luck.

Ned C



"Davy" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:

Dear All,

I would like to ask the English people an opinion...
In our club we have lessons all the time, wich is good for a beginner like
me, but i tend to miss any modern ways of filming/editing to them. Sometimes
I see modern stuff on t.v. wich has fast unsteady shots and a bunch of
strange
wipes or fades. If an amateur would do this, judges would pick on this
kind
of behaviour. But in the professional world this seems to become a standard.
A typical example is the Brittish hospital soap "the green wing". Another
example is a documentary about the Buena Vista Social Club. Camera's are
used here on automatic without a tripod, with from time to time an unsharp
image (this film earned 4 professional awards and is for sale worldwide.
I absolutely love this stuff but I think I will not even pass the club
competition
when i try something like that. Has someone tried this? Any suggestions?

Thanks Davy (Belgium)

PS excuse the spelling.

[Willy Van der Linden]

"Davy" <davyvdbergh@yahoo.com> wrote:

But for individual film makers - why worry? (Or have I got the wrong
impression?)

Dear all,

It is not that I am a competitive person, filming is a hobby for me as well
as i have many others. I am to young (27) to be bothered about how many
points
a film can produce. At the moment i have other concerns (Work, some school
projects etc...).

Dear club-mate,
You're only 27 and I'm almost 60 (in a few weeks). An enormous generation
gap ! Why don't you want to become the secretary of our club ? And old chairman
and a young secretary ! We love making films and we already work together.
When I'm on holiday I always ask you to replace me and you can do what you
wish.

Dear British friends, I would be happy if Davy could replace my wife ...
as the secretary of the film club of course ! I'm already happy that he joined
the forum club ! Congratulations, Davy !

[Willy Van der Linden]

"Davy" <davyvdbergh@yahoo.com> wrote:

I have no concrete examples about who didn't pass a jury this way but what
i do experience is that from time to time people get "ticked on the fingers"
(a Belgian expression, i don't know if it works in English ??) if an image
is out of focus for a second. So what? Big deal, is what i'm thinking then.
For me it's all about the subject. The opposite is: Ultra sharp high definition
tri-ccd £££ images saying absolutely nothing. If you can you should see
the
Buena Vista Social Club documentary, You'll instantly see what i mean.


You're only 27, Davy... and Sammy, the other club-member is only 23 (I thought

he was 21). Sammy won two silver pluses and one silver at the British International
Festival. I wondered how the older generation of British judges would evaluate
his films in which you can feel that he is still very young. The results
were very positive. I know what you mean by the Buena Vista Social Club documentary,
Davy. A few weeks ago you asked me to show that film in our clubhouse. I
enjoyed it very much. Indeed the cameraman didn't use a tripod for instance.
I didn't mind at all, also because the story was very strong. The Cuban atmosphere
in that film was fantastic. Yes, dear friends, you should see that film.
Davy is right. Nevertheless I'm in favour of using a tripod, but to be honest
I think that in exceptional situations it's better not to use one. You don't
always have the time to use a tripod in order to take the best shots. Spontaneity
is something very important. You don't ask people : "Please could you wait
one second. I would like to take a solid shot of you !" It's a bit like
that in the Cuban film.

Please, Davy, use your own style. I'm not against it. You know that I always
tell the judges of our local competition that the story is very important
rather than the technique. In Belgium judges always concentrate on the technique
and they don't think of the power of a film. Do you remember the BIAFF-film
"Di Capo" made by Etienne Maes ? In Britain his film was very successful
(international medaillon). In Belgium it was not !

[Dave Watterson]

Davy and Willy mentioned Jorg Widmar's camera technique in 'Buena Vista Social
Club' - and it is great. Among the DVD extras are some examples of extended
interviews where the cameraman is constantly moving - but smoothly - which
is what allowed the director to make some cuts without the usual odd "wriggle"
which comes if you cut a plain talking head interview.

Horses for courses though - that technique is bothersome for extended shots.
Tripods also give better image quality on our digitals systems.

BUT the real reason to see, hear and love 'Buena Vista Social Club' is to
see the stars ... old musicians and crooners who thought their heyday had
long gone ... then in their late 70s, 80s and even 90s in one case ... were
brought together by Ry Cooder, recorded a wonderful album and performed to
huge audiences in France and the USA.

Coming up to 60, Willy? They prove that that is still kindergarten !

Dave (old man) Watterson

[Davy]

Dear British friends, I would be happy if Davy could replace my wife ...

Err...Wouldn't she be jalous?

LOL Davy

[Willy Van der Linden]

"Davy" <davyvdbergh@yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear British friends, I would be happy if Davy could replace my wife ...

Err...Wouldn't she be jalous?

LOL Davy

What a question, Davy ! She would not be jealous at all. You know that. She
would be very happy. You know that in two years I will resign. It will give
me more time to make films. Unfortunately our club-mates do not (want to)
believe me. I've been a chairman for almost 20 years ! We need young energetic
and hardworking people to save our film clubs. Perhaps also in Britain.
Let's talk about it in our film club next time.
Cheers.
Willy

[Ian Gardner]

"Willy Van der Linden" <vanderlindenhig@telenet.be> wrote:

I've been a chairman for almost 20 years ! We need young energetic
and hardworking people to save our film clubs. Perhaps also in Britain.
Let's talk about it in our film club next time.
Cheers.
Willy

That`s one of the reasons that in our film club, the Chairman`s reign lasts
for only two years. Our government lasts for about 4 years. Maybe were more
democratic! Other reasons would include that if it was a forever post then
the club would indeed become stale and boreing! If the Chairman and his committee
get it wrong, then the problem will only last a maximum of two years, or
he resigns before. I don`t know about other clubs in England.
The secretary`s job (on the otherhand) can last as long as you want it to,
maybe because it`s a harder job with more paperwork, the same as the Treasurer.
There are some people that we get on better with then others, may be it`s
a personality clash or everytime they open there mouths, `me, me, me,` comes
out of it all the time. If the Chairmans job was for life, and you didn`t
like the person, then it could be a problem.
We choose our Chairman by putting names forward, and then we do a public
members vote at the AGM.

May be your club could change the rules and have a 2 year rule instead.

Ian (IWVCC Secretary for 10 months) Gardner

[Peter]

"Dave Watterson" <david.filmsocs@virgin.net> wrote:

Davy and Graeme have picked up the theme of the age difference within most
clubs ...

In Britain IAC has always been clear that it serves ALL amateur film makers.
If they just want to make better movies of grandchildren and holidays, fine.
If they want to make traditional top quality documentaries, great. If they
create safe, theatrical or 1980's tv style drama, hurrah. If they make
fast-cut,
NYPD Blue, punky movies .... er.

Theoretically we should all try to accept each other's work - whether or
not it is the style we prefer. In practice it is hard for many older people
to adapt and accept the faster-paced work of today.

It has always been easier to play to the middle ground - to aim for an interested,
intelligent audience that is not necessarily bang up-to-date.

But as better folk than I have said ... go for it!

Use a club to learn what you can, to enjoy the older style work and to meet
some wonderful people. But don't let it dictate what you do. Stuff competitions
and festivals if they don't like that.

The problem is that you need to find people who are open to that type of
movie to tell you whether or not your film works. The "Bourne Supremacy"
style demands a camera operator and editor who can judge precisely when
the
audience will be able to understand what they are shown and when it becomes
too much and muddled. It takes a lot of skill. The older kind of work is
easier - still damn hard to get right, but easier.

Belgium appears from this side of the Channel to suffer from a lot of "politics"
with suggestions of power cliques who run things their way. I realise that
for clubs themselves there may be a financial benefit to staying on the
right
side of those at the top of the tree. But for individual film makers - why
worry? (Or have I got the wrong impression?)

Dave (the Scots one)

Yes, OK, but how many people in clubs make the more way out films? I know
that there are one or two people doing very fine documentaries, and there
are some very good films being made, like the one on the IAC website (of
the child on the train with the space age planes flying alongside, which
is brilliant), but mostly its "down at the steam railway" or something similar.

OK, I know I will have upset some steam enthusiasts by giving that as an
example, but its true.