Attracting New Members

[Mike Shaw]

In my ignorance - I thought that was what IAC stood for anyway?!

On reflection, it is more likely to be 'Institute of Amateur Cinematographers'.

I also like - prefer - the alternative. International and Association are far better/stronger words that Institute and Amateur.

Add me to the + list on that one!

[Ian Woodward]

Good to add your name to the list for the suggested name-change, Mike - and yours, too, Willy.

But, apart from new chairman Ivor Rose who initiated the thread and Dave Watterson who (as always) has been generous with his time, is anyone on the IAC Council actually listening?

Which raises one further question: Why do the contributions of IAC Council members appear so infrequently in the IAC forums? It would be nice occasionally to get their views on some of the more vital “Can we survive in the 21st century?” issues raised by members in these forums.

Or is there perhaps a regulation prohibiting them from doing so?

Ian Woodward

[Dave Watterson]

You foul fiend, Woodward! Accusing me of being a member of IAC Council!!!

I was on Council for three years some time back, but successfully kicked the habit.

I understand there was an informal agreement that Council members would not get involved in the forums to avoid discussions which might become prolonged and/or acrimonious. Personally I think that is a mistake. Council serves the members, so it makes sense to interact with members - and for this thread also non-members.

Diverting for a moment ... as I am sure Mike will confirm ... in the marketing world contacts with people who withdraw or drop out are valued a lot because you can try to discover what went wrong for them, where you failed to meet expectations and so on. Hence I think that in discussing boosting membership the views of Chrisbitz and others who have left IAC are important.

I rather like the "International Association of Cinematographers" ... but do we really want to take on lots of members in other countries? There is no Norwegian or Danish federation at present. It seems the Canadian federation has stopped working and the American one is in trouble. At present I know of only two international non-commercial film organisations: Eurofilmers - an organisation with its roots in the German speaking lands but now keen to extend to the rest of Europe, and UNICA which has national federations as its members, not individuals.

[Mike Shaw]

Why not take on membership from outside the UK? We already have a few overseas members - and as the population of the rest of the world exceeds that of the UK (!) - there are more potential members 'out there'!

Overseas membership fees may have to embrace extra postage of the magazine ...

I'm all for it. The standard of overseas films - particularly from the Continent - is pretty high from what i have seen - and they enter our 'BIAFF competition' so ...

[Ian Woodward]

Oops! sorry, Dave, I misread on the “Who does what”/Contacts” tab the bit about “Other Officers and Advisers” where your name appears; this is not the same thing, of course, as being a member of the IAC Council.

But, as Mike concurs, having a worldwide membership would not do any harm at all to the fortunes and reputation of a UK-based International Association of Cinematographers. I’m all for it.

[Willy]

I have been a member of the IAC for many years. So I receive "Film and Video Magazine" every two months. My clubmates often ask me to borrow it. They find it very interesting. However, their first language is Dutch. Their second language is French. But today English is used more and more. The ladies of our national hockey team are called "The Red Lions". Not "Les Lions Rouges" or "De Rode Leeuwen". Our "computer language" is English. Everybody understands the word "to delete" here. In Dutch it means "verwijderen", but in "computer language" the verb "to delete" is more used. Most technical terms are in English. When you buy a washing machine, a TV-set, an editing machine, a camera ... the manuals are always in English. On the radio 80% of the songs are in English. Etc... etc....

So why not trying to "internationalise" the IAC a bit more and take members from the continent? "Every bit helps." That's a Dutch expression. Take advantage of your language and culture and identity and ... A bowler hat, a London taxi, a telephone booth, driving on the left side of the road, the white cliffs of Dover, ... but also English humour and English films... or let's say British films... ! I think you can attract enough cinematographers from abroad. Receiving an IAC-certificate at BIAFF gives a special feeling. Even if there is "only" one star on it.

I already know that this year there will be at least 10 Belgian entries from my region at BIAFF. I don't think they could all have been encouraged to take part in different international film festivals. There are some IAC-friends like ... who do their utmost to encourage filmmakers from around the world to promote BIAFF.

Really, I am not the only one he loves the UK. In our film world that love is mutual. We all feel we are welcome.

[Willy]

We must think of practical things to promote the IAC as "Institute of Amateur Cinematographers" or International Association of Cinematographers"... Suzie, your suggeestion is brilliant!

Why not the following thing: filmmakers who are IAC members and receive at least **** at BIAFF have the permission to have their film preceded by "The IAC presents ...". Each time when they show their film they make publicity for our international organisation. It also encourages all friends to make a very good film for BIAFF. And maybe it stimulates friends to join the IAC.

Maybe it's not a good suggestion, but I am just thinking... I would be proud if some of my films could be preceded by the IAC-logo and under it International Association of Cinematographers

[TimStannard]

I'm not so sure about the "International" suggestion. I think it sounds rather big and fear that may put some people off joining.
An English, British or UK organisation is a little bit more "local" and this in itself has some attraction (in the same way that being "international" might attract others). One is often more inclined to support a local charity.

Another aspect is some people may not like the idea that their membership money is being used to promote or subsidise a fesival in Ghana or the Ukraine.

I am not suggesting that only Brits could join, the organisation should continue to encourage and welcome international members, just that the emphasis should be on promoting filmmaking within Britain and by Brits, British festivals and clubs, and, indeed, be a focal point for organising British entries and participants in external festivals and competitions.

I quite like Willy's idea of an official "ident" at the beginning of films which have achieved a certain level of merit. Indeed all films entered at BIAFF get a star rating and there is nothing to stop anyone preceeding their film with "Two Star Winner at BIAFF 2010 - run by the IAC" or similar, which would similarly promote awareness. The IAC could be encouaging all of us to do that NOW.

[Ian Woodward]

It would be great, Willy, for 4-star IAC members and above to put “The IAC presents...” at the beginning of a film if the IAC’s initials were changed to mean the International Association of Cinematographers.

It would be even better if, after getting rid of the grey-area word “Amateur”, such a film was then screened at the IAC’s annual competition, BIFF.

The transition would be complete and we would no longer have to explain to non-film-maker friends, as I find myself having to do sometimes when the IAC is mentioned socially, what the initials stand for.

The “A” part always sort of sticks in the throat because, as has been discussed in these forums ad nauseam, the word amateur to many non-cineastes does not necessarily denote someone who pursues a pastime to the very best of his or her talent and expertise, and certainly does not adequately describe someone who is driven by an unstoppable passion in the way a piranha is driven by its stomach juices. The amateur, to many such people, is quite simple an inexpert person lacking professional skill.

I can’t honestly say that I am self-consciously proud to be an amateur, because I am constantly striving to be anything but an amateur, certainly as defined above, but rather someone who aims to imprint a sense of professionalism in all that I do. If that makes me sound pretentious, then so be it, and, as someone else one said, I couldn’t give a damn. Be true unto to yourself and the truth will be revealed and, along with it, a sense of integrity.

I think it would be generally agreed that many IAC members do indeed make films that possess all the attributes of the very best professional film-makers; of course, we could argue until the cows come home that many professionals produce films lacking all the essential hallmarks of professionalism, but that’s another matter.

So here’s to the UK’s International Association of Cinematographers hosting the British International Film Festival, whenever and wherever that may be. May it be sooner rather than later.

[Mike Shaw]

Ian, I think maybe you're mixing up or interpreting the word 'Amateur' as 'amateurish'? Which is, of course, why the word amateur is so 'detested'. As that has become a bugbear all round, dropping the word is a good thing of course, but I don't mind being an 'amateur'. Amateur golfers, sportsmen, photographers and the like have no problem with the word either.

Tim - we have people from abroad as members now, and we have many entries into our competitions from abroad - I see no problem therefore with using the word International as part of the IAC mnemonic (instead of Institute) and inviting people from overseas to join in. I don't think it sounds 'big' - or any bigger than it sounds now. In fact, it could be said it would be a more worthwhile organisation to join, with a possible potential to enter films in foreign competitions as well as our own. I'd personally welcome being a member of an International organisation - and I don't think for a moment it means the IAC has to arrange things like film shows in Ghana (maybe a local affiliated 'club' or group could seek advice from the International body - would that be so bad?). It means members can join from all over the world. Maybe if it ever grew large enough internationally, 'offices' would/could be set up in different countries to tend for the local needs of that country ... if that ever happened, the IAC would be very large, and well worth belonging to (IMO!).

There is an added bonus - the 'IAC' logo etc can remain unchanged, paper work doesn't have to be replaced, and so on - ooblah dee, ooblah dah!

Only one possible snag ... would the 'Charity status' of the (current) IAC allow such a change?

[Dave Watterson]

Let me drop another thought into the mix ... the vast majority of IAC members are not ever likely to get 2-stars or 3-stars at BIAFF ... in fact they do not enter competitions. They make films of their holidays, their grandchildren, local events and occasional seaside-postcard style comedies. IAC currently has the task of supporting and encouraging all film makers to develop their skills and enjoy their hobby - whatever their level of skill and commitment. That is not the same as sending them on the route towards the unstoppable passion of a piranha. (Great phrase!)

If we turn our thoughts from the top end of our hobby towards the rest of the members ... what could IAC do to help and serve them?

[Willy]

Yes, you're right, Dave. I am a member of two clubs. Every year in both clubs some members are eager to show their holiday films. They make trips with their families or with groups and they make "reportages". Also special or original films.

Our regional chairman had the following idea about ten years ago:
"Let's organise a seperate regional competition for holiday films, but with a length of maximum 10 minutes. The filmmakers who are interested send their short films to the regional secretary. Deadline: ... He puts all these films on a video tape and forwards this compilation tape to the clubs in our region..." At that time it was still video.

I was the chairman of such a club. We had to decide which were the three best holiday films. Every club did the same. Together with the tape we received a form to fill in. At the regional proclamation of the annual competition also the winner of the holiday competition was announced and his film was shown.

It could be done at BIAFF as well. I remember it's done like that for your website competition.

To be honest. It was a success in the beginning. A few years ago they stopped with that competition. I don't know why, but I think it was not well organised anymore, but I remember that thanks to the chairman's initiative we had an interesting activity in our local club every year.

By the way: I have found on internet "The International Annual Film Festival held in Berlin/Cannes"... So BIAFF = "British International Annual Film Festival"... ?

Sorry, Dave, ... yes you are right. Friends who prefer to make holiday films must be encouraged. The IAC can enthuse them.

[john ingham]

Do you really need a meaning to the title ? why can it not be just a name .... just look at B&Q we all know they are building suppliers,

IAC stands for the Film and Video institute..it say's so in the top left hand corner

or if it is a stumbling block..why not use the words "independent Art of cinematographers" or Artwork

[Ian Woodward]

Mike S: “I think maybe you're mixing up or interpreting the word 'Amateur' as 'amateurish'?”

I rest my case! I’m certainly not misinterpreting the word “amateur” – I defined it succinctly and correctly in my last posting as “an inexpert person lacking professional skill”. But you’re right; many people DO regard an amateur as someone who is “amateurish”. For that compelling reason the word has to disappear from the name of the IAC.

Willy: “By the way: I have found on internet ‘The International Annual Film Festival held in Berlin/Cannes’... So BIAFF = "British International Annual Film Festival"...”

That’s brilliant, Willy. Our competition/festival could therefore still retain the initials BIAFF – although BIFF has a sinewy, muscular feel about it that is appealing.

So, very quickly, the International Association of Cinematographers (IAC) could be hosting its prestigious film fest at the British International Annual Film Festival (BIAFF

If I, or my entrepreneur family, were running the IAC as a business (which it patently is not), we would canvass our employees/members over the proposed name changes. Those more in favour of the change than not would win the day. Not voting (abstentions) would have no bearing on the outcome.

Dave: “I understand there was an informal agreement that Council members would not get involved in the forums to avoid discussions which might become prolonged and/or acrimonious. Personally I think that is a mistake. Council serves the members, so it makes sense to interact with members - and for this thread also non-members.”

So we do need to know as a matter of urgency if the IAC Council has been reading this important and far-reaching thread, which was initiated by Ivor just a few weeks ago (4 January) and having already notched up a staggering 1026 hits. It would also be good to know what it actually takes to get such proposals moving and onto some sort of agenda.

At the moment, it just feels that the subject is being discussed by a few passionate, like-minded souls whose thoughts count for nothing and that the discourse will merely end up in the ether equivalent of a wastepaper basket. That's a disquieting feeling.

[Mike Shaw]

That definition of 'amateur' sent me scurrying to my dictionaries - because it wasn't quite the same as I thought. Chambers says as its first definition - "An enthusiast, admirer, one who cultivates a study or art for the love of it and not professionally " - and then it goes on to say - " often implying that he is superficial, trifling, dilettantish, or inexpert; one who engages in sport purely for pleasure ...". (I think they meant to include women amateurs as well, maybe...). The Miriam Webster says 1: devotee, admirer 2: one who engages in a pursuit, study, science, or sport as a pastime rather than as a profession 3: one lacking in experience and competence in an art or science. And finally, the Oxford Dictionary definition is "Noun: a person who engages in a pursuit, especially a sport, on an unpaid basis: it takes five years for a top amateur to become a real Tour de France rider; his last fight as an amateur : a person who is contemptibly inept at a particular activity: that bunch of stumbling amateurs : Adjective: engaging or engaged in without payment; non-professional: an amateur archaeologist, amateur athletics; --- done in an inept or unskilful way: it’s all so amateur!

The 'amateurish/inept' definition comes last in every instance - but it nevertheless remains the most dominant definition in people's minds when it comes to our hobby (and none actually say 'inexpert' or 'lacking professional skills' - I'd say many amateurs in all fields often show more skills than their 'professional' counterparts... ).

But, Ian is right - 'amateurish' is virtually the only interpretation the word is given within our ranks.

I definitely +1 the idea that the 'A' in BIAFF stands for Annual (and not that terrible word 'Amateur'!). Like it! (Any 'pro' wanting to enter can be simply shown the 'rules of entry' ... )

As for the IAC 'just being letters standing for nothing, like B&Q', not quite the case John - B&Q are the initials of Richard Block and David Quayle who founded the company ... a bit like the more well-known founders of M&S. To me it doesn't make much sense for The IAC to be just arbitrary letters - and (again to me and, I believe, a growing number of others) I think the letters better stand for International Association of Cinematographers than Institute of Amateur Cinematographers - especially as the value of 'amateur status' is so negative: however - would that make the Association open to pros (but isn't it now? Couldn't they teach us a few things? Well, some of them! They just mustn't make films for profit when entering competitions etc?).

Dave asks What can the IAC do for non-competitive members? (wasn't the original question 'How do we get new members? So long ago, I've forgotten!). Willy has an excellent suggestion (as always!) - a competition directed purely at the films they do make - such as holiday and babe-on-lawn films. I'd add to that - printed/video training programmes they can access for free or for a very low (very very low) fee - say postage only. ( Hmmm. That's not likely to be all that low the way things are going... ). Training videos, hints and tips on each of the different editing systems - which I'm sure members can provide - we have experts for example right here on this forum.

On the thought of making the IAC an 'International' body, many many years ago (about 45) I joined Mensa, when total membership was around 2000 in this country (and they allowed idiots like me in...). It wasn't restricted to the UK of course, but was founded in the UK and started life here (like the IAC), and it has spread around the world to gain tens of thousands (maybe even hundreds of thousands now) of members. The magazine has grown from roneo'd sheets of meeting locations to a big monthly glossy crammed with interesting stuff. Each country has its own offices, its own events - but naturally there are 'International gatherings' and events. The IAC could be and do the same ...

as long as the current (charity) rules allow.

If they don't, maybe its time for an even more drastic change ...