AFVM

[Mike Shaw]

Sadly, I think you're absolutely right. For the most part (says he, hedging his bet...)

'Sadly', because it would be good to think that young people are and could be a major part of the 'local video club' film making community. As you say, many clubs do have a smattering of (much) younger members - but they can be counted on fingers. And for the most part, the films they make are noticeably different - rarely, if ever would you see one of these younger members putting an old Reader's Digest joke onto film - Reader's Digest seems to be a source of inspiration (??) for so many 'joke' films from the upper-yeared membership.

Dropping the word 'amateur' is also a good idea. But it isn't an easy word to replace - if replacement is indeed necessary. 'Amateur' was dropped from our region's 'Kent Film Festival'. There is also, however, a 'professional' Kent Film Festival. So far, there have been no conflicts as a result, thank heavens - but we have tried to add an alternative word or phrase as a sub-head to indicate the difference. The word 'amateur' has unfortunate connotations - amateurish, unprofessional and so on. Perhaps the IAC's use of the word Amateur may be seen in the same light. (Mind you, many of those Reader's Digest films I mentioned earlier - and all of my own films I'm sure - would fit the 'amateurish' label extremely well!). One alternative that was suggested for KFF - and used by the previous poster - is 'non-commercial'. But it is a bit 'heavy' and verbose and doesn't sit happily in a festival title (for example).

I can also relate to the sentiment of not tying a new section in FVM specifically to 'younger' members. Some older members can - and do - come up with equally vibrant and forward thinking films, although for the most part, it is the 'young ones' who want to explore new ideas, break new ground etc etc. In the advertising world, a creative group that was continually able to crack major problems and come up with new and fresh ideas (outlandish sometimes), was (still is maybe) known as a 'ginger group'. (I was even in one myself ... in my very young days!). Perhaps a section of FVM could be allocated to a 'ginger group' - fresh new ideas, trechniques, innovations etc etc, from any source, rather than just from the young?

Finally, to confirm the basic thinking behind ned's message, how many times has a 'concept' movie been shown at your local club, accompanied by teeth sucking and head shaking from a number of the oldies who want to know 'what the heck was that all about'. It was this attitude that was one of the contributory factors in me leaving one club and joining another...

And (yes, another 'finally'), I see ned c isn't even a UK resident. Is this, then, a world wide phenomena, or just the IAC?

[Dave Watterson]

Is this, then, a world wide phenomena, or just the IAC?

It is worldwide - at least in the western world. Australia, Canada and the USA all have aging membership in their clubs and national organisations. I am told the same is true in several other European countries.

It is certainly true of UNICA - the supra-national body which represents organisations like the IAC. In that case cost may be a distorting factor: to take part in the annual UNICA festival you have to give up a week of leave and travel to a different country each year. To join its committee you must be prepared to travel several times a year to meetings in various countries.

Iran has a thriving Young Film Makers group. It is, of course, state supported and probably essential given the cost of video gear in relation to typical wages. To some extent many of the former soviet block countries have youth sections - for the same reason. In those lands the concept of state support for the arts of the people is accepted as normal.

Not so in UK, USA, Canada and Australia ...

Dave

[edin]

I feel we have the start of a "ginger group" within this current thread and several good ideas and suggestions have been made from many of the contributors. The AFVM is currently only available in a printed format and may be able to get to more people if it also offered an online version. The Australian equivalent of the IAC, the Federation of Australian Movie Makers (FAMM), have recently published an online version of their newsletter in a PDF format.

This would of course reduce the cost of distribution, but also enable its content to be easily copied and distributed outwith the IAC membership. There may be an unexpected benefit from this, as many more people, not current IAC members, but with an interest in film making would see and read it.

It could encourage more people to take out an IAC membership. If say a special online edition of the AFVM is produced with contents that is more appropriate to non commercial & independent film makers and provided on the IAC website for a trial period of, say, three months.

Hopefully any comments and feedback could be used to review the current AFVM contents and thus cater for a wider film and video making community.

[Dave Watterson]

Ever since I first got involved with the website about a decade ago, I have been trying to get at least one issue of the magazine online - if only as a sample, so that people would know what they are missing. Liz Donlan, when she was editor would not countenance it. Garth Hope, the current editor, is not against it but wants to choose the right edition and not the current one.

By the way - we lost the A from AFVM about ten years ago!

Under its present constitution IAC cannot sell the magazine to non-members. It is all tied up with the fact that IAC is a Registered Charity and that as such, it has very limited right to trade.

I don't see any harm in "giving it away" on the web, but that might upset the fee paying members ... who would ask what they are paying for if everyone can see the magazine anyway.

Maybe we could look at a "highlights from FVM" section which would re-publish articles from editions prior to the current one. Of course we would have to get the permission of the authors concerned.

There is some overlap. You will have noticed that almost all the articles about how this or that award-winning film was made - appeared first on the website. Some of Ken Wilson's earlier columns are on the website too.

Do you think members would be prepared to pay their fees for the chance to read some articles in print a couple of months before the rest of the world can read them online?

Dave

[Mike Shaw]

I think you have hit the nail on the head there.

FVM is one of the material assets of belonging to the IAC. Publish it in its entirety on the 'net, and members will ask why they need to join (especially if they don't call upon the 'invisible' benefits such as music clearance).

One technique used by at least two organisations I know about is to put up 'tasters' - the start of an interesting article - but the rest of it, is for access by members only.

It might attract more people if many of the existing articles on the IAC site were made accessible to members only - for example, someone wishes to read how an award winning film was made, clicks on the link, only to be confronted with the first para followed by a 'You must be an IAC member to read the rest... ". members of course would not have that message - they'd see all from the outset. Would that encourage new members? All I kinow is I did join one organisation so that I could access the extra information and images available.

On the content front - I would dearly like to see some 'avante garde' articles - as well as the Regional and Club news. The alternative to putting the Regional and Cluib news in FVM is to make more of the regional magazines.

But as far as I am aware - all these regional magazines are run by unpaid people, and funding for the print runs comes from ....??? Regional events ??? Adding to the workload of volunteers - and putting pressure on unknown funds - may not be such a clever idea!

[ned c]

Sadly the disappearing traditional video club is a part of the scene here in the USA for exactly the same reasons as elsewhere. Primarily aging membership and the new world of film making that is outside all the old traditions.

I believe that national organisations, like the IAC, have a place but it is very different from what they did in the past. Producing the magazine is a huge effort, I edit the AMPS newsletter so on a much smaller scale know something of the challenges Garth faces. The cost of print and distribution is so high now that a major part of the IAC budget must go to producing the magazine. Definitely time think outside the box!

I like the idea of an on-line magazine with members access, we now e-mail the AMPS newsletter to members unless they are willing to pay more for a print version. The saving is great and we have redirected the money into the Festival as those who have received the new lucite plaques know, and reduced membership fees. Let's face it, the membership fees for the IAC are a chunk of money in this world of economic challenge. In the case of the IAC the money could be redirected into reduced membership fees, the Festival with special awards for members, substantially reduced entry costs for members, free distribution of DVDs from the library to members. It is not difficult to create value for membership outside the magazine. If the only reason for membership is the magazine then there is something seriously amiss.

The world has changed from the 1930s/1950s paradigm that video cubs adhere to, it is not difficult to think of new and value added ways to improve organisations. We are changing AMPS to fit a new model. The UK members corresponding here should seek election to the IAC board and initiate change.

Long live the revolution (1776 that is)

ned c

[Brian Saberton]

Doesn't the IAC's charitable status preclude having a members only area on the web-site? I've a feeling this cropped up once before.

[Mike Shaw]

Just checked with one of the other organisations I was referring to - and it isn't a charity but named as a "not-for-profit membership organisation". It has a publicly accessible website, with a larger members only section.

I know of at least one video club with the same approach - a public arena, and an area for members only. Perhaps that isn't formed as a charity either - I shall ask. However, I would have thought that things like details of who members are would and should be kept from the public domain, even with a charitable organisation. So I'm surprised charities don't 'allow' it.

If the disadvantages of being a charity outweigh the advantages in today's climate, then perhaps that's something that could be looked into? What are the advantages of being a charity against being a 'not for profit etc' organisation.

[ned c]

Surely the NLE discussion forum is restricted to IAC members only?

ned c

[Dave Watterson]

What are the advantages of being a charity against being a 'not for profit etc' organisation.

GIFT AID.

(That is part of the taxation system which allows a charity to reclaim the tax which has been paid by its supporters on the money they donate. A Full Membership fee of £37.50 paid under Gift Aid is worth £48.00 to IAC. )

I don't know what the total of that is nowadays - go along to the AGM in Milton Keynes to find out - but if even 800 of the IAC's members pay this way that is £8,400 extra income.

Personally I would prefer IAC to drop the formal charity status so that it could branch out as suggested ... but you have to be very sure of your ground to gamble eight and a half thousand pounds on the idea.

Of course if the current way of working just keeps losing members, the "gift aid bonus" will get smaller too. Maybe taking a gamble is the only way to keep going.

Dave

[Mike Shaw]

Ned has a point - this forum is restricted (for posting purposes at least) to IAC members - does that infringe the charity status? If not, then why can't it be extended to a 'members information' area?

That wouyldn't negate the Gift Aid aspect (which I wasn't aware about - is it heavily publicised?)

[Dave Watterson]

this forum is restricted (for posting purposes at least)

NO !
Where did you get that idea, Mike?

This forum is proudly open to anyone interested in taking part. There has been for many years a private IAC round-robin email group dealing with NLE issues ... but the website has remained a public resource.

We say to the world - here we are. We have lots of faults and problems, but we love film, love making film and celebrate the best of movie-making. We know some visitors have looked at us, warts and all, and decided to join. Hurrah.

We hope other users have found inspiration in the "Conversations with ..." "Making of ..." and so on.

Dave

[Mike Shaw]

My boob. I thought I remembered having to register for the forum or something. Perhaps it was the email message system.

Bit more proof that my memory is rapidly fading.

Oh well.

[Dave Watterson]

No, Mike, you're as sane as the next person ... oh ... I have just noticed who is next to you (!) ...

We do have a registration system on the forum to keep out the spam robots but we do not ask people to identify themselves as IAC members or not.

[We get around 70 attempts a day by spam robots to log on.]

Dave

[stingman]

Sorry to catch this thread at last but i`ve been busy with editing and climbing Snowdon. I havn`t read every post in this thread.

I must agree with Fraught. The last time I saw the mag, it was good, but it did seem to eye on the edge of the older person. The last one I saw had a series about recording sound and Mics. It was good, but done by an older person so it seemed a bit dry. The Bosses at the IAC are older as well. As I go on and on about it! It does reflect the age of our club members, only 3 below retirement! This does reflect in the films. The older persons films are good and done properly (in fact, most are excellent!) but if I want to sit down and watch serious films ALL the time, then I could stay at home and watch Classic FM.
When a younger person has made a film, they introduce new ideas. The odd film has to be funny or it gets to be like watching paint dry.

I`m not being agist because we can learn from older people, just like we learn from the younger generation.

As to the mag again. How old is the editor? I bet he`s over 50. Who has been the youngest contributor to the mag?

How about a shuffle and get new people on board for the mag. I class myself as young and would love to contribute. Even Fraught would, I reckon. None of us on here have been approched to write the odd article. It`s the same with Judgeing for the IAC. You need younger blood just to keep everything balanced and keep it alive or our IAC, clubs and all will die!

Sorry about the doom and gloom! But it`s not just the mag, it`s the whole industry. They're connected.

Be good.....

Stingman