Exactly what constitutes 'Amateur'?

A forum for sharing views on the art of film, video and AV sequence making as well as on competitions, judging and festivals.
Post Reply
Storyteller
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 9:17 am
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK

Exactly what constitutes 'Amateur'?

Post by Storyteller »

Although I've been a personal member of the IAC for several years, only in the last couple have I dared submit films to BIAFF - a competition, of course, for amateur fillms.

I've been approached in the last couple of months by a local man who runs his own corporate film-making business. He makes documentaries professionally, sometimes works as a cameraman for television companies, and so on. Some of his documentaries have found markets and sell well in this region. (East Anglia).

He wants to work with Norfolk Video Productions (me!) on scripted dramas, which I make with the sole purpose of entering in BIAFF (and maybe other comps).

He offered to take on the roles of director and DoP of NVP's next production, due to start filming in March. Our film will as usual be a 'zero-budget' one, no one gets fees. It will be a 'Norfolk Video Productions' film. If I accept his offer (I write the screenplays and am very happy to be writer/1st AD/Producer) will our film still qualify for BIAFF?

Second question: if a film was to find a commercial outlet after being in an amateur film competition like BIAFF, could it be marketed in some way (I mean, suppose Channel 4 came along and said, "we like that, let's broadcast it." I know, I know: - flap, oinck, flap, oinck...) (Obviously, it would thereafter be ineligible for such comps.)

Amateur drama groups are still amateur even though they traditionally charge admission to their productions, as long as no actor or backstage crew are paid. Shouldn't such a view be taken of film-makers who may sell a few copies of their DVDs, as long as no one involved in their making profits from such sales?

Peter
User avatar
Dave Watterson
Posts: 1872
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
Location: Bath, England
Contact:

Re: Exactly what constitutes 'Amateur'?

Post by Dave Watterson »

It will not surprise you to hear that this question comes up often, Peter. The official position as stated in the competition rules is:
This competition is for films made by individuals or groups for pleasure and not for commercial gain. The following are, however, permissible:
Films made by IAC regions and clubs for the benefit of those organisations.
Public or private exhibition and sale, where the proceeds are solely for the benefit of clubs, regions or bona fide charities.
Any sponsorship must be used only to cover production costs and the expenses of the production team and actors, and not for paid assistance from video professionals, either for filming or post-production (apart from the making of copies).
If it is discovered, either before or after making any award, that the film has infringed these requirements, the organisers will have the right to disqualify it, revoke the awards and reclaim any prizes.
The emphasis is on each film rather than the people making it. So long as your professional is not paid for working on the film it would qualify.

IAC has not, so far as I know, declared a policy on subsequent sales. In a famous case many years ago a film by the Finchley club actually got a cinema release. An animation by our forum friend, Albert Noble, ("Red Type") got a West-End run. I do not think that in either case their IAC awards were taken from them. More recently Michael Slowe's film "Hounds and the Huntsman" was bought by a television company and marketed on DVD by them. Michael generously - and typically - insisted that all royalties and proceeds due to him be paid to the IAC. But whether he had done that or not I heard no one question his BIAFF award for the film.

AMPS - the equivalent of IAC in America - is clearer:
Productions made solely for fun and pleasure, for artistic expression or to make a statement about society with no profit motive in mind, have not been subject of any sales or rental agreement prior to entry in the Festival nor expect to be after the Festival and have not been made as a part of a college course. No person working on any aspect of the production may be paid for their services nor may the production be sponsored by any commercial organization. Entries may be made by individuals or more than one person, such as a club or group, provided the financial conditions set out are met. This Festival is for non-commercial productions only and we ask that the makers respect this requirement
On a practical point the playing field is more level in this digital age than it was when we worked on cine film. In those days professionals had much better kit - and it showed. Their kit is still better than ours now - but the difference in results is very hard for a casual viewer to spot.

So grab this chap and help him rediscover the joy of making films for the love of it!

Dave
Storyteller
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 9:17 am
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK

Re: Exactly what constitutes 'Amateur'?

Post by Storyteller »

Thanks, Dave, for clarifying the position.

Peter
User avatar
Dave Watterson
Posts: 1872
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
Location: Bath, England
Contact:

Re: Exactly what constitutes 'Amateur'?

Post by Dave Watterson »

On a wider front ... behind the scenes at the last two UNICA festivals there have been rows about whether certain films were professional or amateur. The UNICA Committee is examining the issue but faces a problem. As an international body consisting of the national federations of film makers in each country ... it finds almost every country has a slightly different test of "professionality".

Many federations, like our own IAC, have been playing down the term "amateur". Some like the Austrian Federation have replaced "amateur" with the term "author" which implies a film essentially made by one person. That suggests those federations welcome the new breed of film makers who are somewhere between hobbyists and professionals. In UK those people are often called "independents" - though that word also has different connotations in different countries.

Closer to home there is another related issue. At a recent weekend meeting of IAC club officers, several sent apologies because they were working: filming weddings. They clearly regard themselves as having a foot firmly in the amateur camp and yet they also make money from their skills.

In some countries the national federations face an embarrassing problem: films which do well in their national contests are chosen to represent them at UNICA ... but in the meantime those films have been given over to merchandising companies who promote them to television, art house and festival circuit screenings for gain. AMPS (the American federation) allows for that in its rules by specifying that films in its contest should be:
"made with no profit motive in mind, have not been subject of any sales or rental agreement prior to entry in the Festival nor expect to be after the Festival." Which allows for the possibility that a top film might get picked up for commercial distribution later.

I should explain that there are more commercial options available for films that are not in English. Television companies are often supposed to transmit x% in their native tongue which means making programmes (expensive), dubbing American shows (time consuming) or picking up short films from competitions ...

We have discussed the amateur/professional issue in competitions before, but it is a question which will not go away.

I am raising it now before the BIAFF judging so that no one will imagine my concern was triggered by an entry in this year's IAC International Competition. In fact it was a UNICA report which made me start to consider it again ...

Dave
ned c
Posts: 910
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 3:39 pm
Location: Dammeron Valley USA

Re: Exactly what constitutes 'Amateur'?

Post by ned c »

As a past president of AMPS may I add some further thoughts to Dave's comments on how our rules were devised. AMPS has a separate category for students which is why productions made as part of a college course are excluded from the general category. We set out to define the MOVIE rather than its MAKERS which is why we used the term "non-commercial" rather than amateur, it more accurately describes the intent of the movie. We had run into the same problem that Dave outlines; many entrants were making wedding and event productions and were clearly earning income from their movie making. In our opinion this inarguably makes them professionals; I am sure they don't tell their clients they are really amateurs and just do this for pin money.

Here in the USA there are a number of retired, even active, Hollywood film makers who make films that meet the AMPS criteria and we welcome their entries; and given the vagaries of judging they don't win everything!! Have you also noticed how many professional actors appear in the winning IAC movies? They take no fee but value the experience and raise the standard. However; are they "professional" assistance? The rules for the new Sarnia Festival has a paragraph saying "without professional assistance other than processing, copying or the physical process of sound transfer", which would obviously exclude any entrant that used professional actors or wedding/event/SI movie makers. It reads like a carryover from the days of film rather than digital.

I know we have been here before but the word "amateur" in the context of film is a derogatory term and whilst I respect those who see themselves as dedicated amateurs if the present generation of film makers is to be part of our constituency then we have to leave the word behind.

Current technology is such that the playing field between n-c (no I did not choose that as it is my initials) movie makers and professionals is pretty much level. Obviously skill in using the technology is important but the real ability now rests firmly with creativity!!

ned c
Michael Slowe
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 4:24 pm

Re: Exactly what constitutes 'Amateur'?

Post by Michael Slowe »

Oh dear, this topic will not go away! We could of course abolish all restrictions and demarkation and allow anyone to enter any festival. Would a film director such as say, Sam Mendes or Michael Winterbottom want to enter a film for BIAFF? Of course he wouldn't. What therefore are we afraid of? Professionals will stick to their established career paths, TV and the cinema will garner the best films and 'non commercial' festivals will remain precisely that - non commercial.

I think the key is what the intention was when the film was planned and made. If any monetary gain was envisaged or even hoped for then the film should not be accepted in a non commercial (amateur if you insist) festival. Simple as that. If, as in my case with a number of films, a TV channel has broadcast or plans to broadcast a production the maker, or anyone connected with the production, must, at no stage, be financially rewarded. As Dave has kindly pointed out in my case, royalties due to me have been designated to a charity, in my case so far the IAC, but it could easily be Battersea Dogs Home. So there we have it - no gain it's non commercial, any financial benefit whatsoever, it's commercial.
User avatar
Willy
Posts: 711
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:42 pm
Location: Antwerp Belgium

Re: Exactly what constitutes 'Amateur'?

Post by Willy »

Michael Slowe wrote:Oh dear, this topic will not go away! We could of course abolish all restrictions and demarkation and allow anyone to enter any festival.
.
I have never made a film to make any money... eh... or, oh, yes, I am not honest ... I almost forgot...

When I was an educational adviser at the European School I got the opportunity to go to Varese (Italy) Munich (Germany), Culham (England), Luxemburg City etc... That was quite an experience. I loved the trips together with my tripod carrier. Yves was one of my colleagues and he was the secretary of my own filmclub.

We didn't have to pay for our trips. The secretary-general seemed to be impressed by my documentary 'An Irish Moment' and he asked me to make a film as part of the 45th anniversary of the European Schools.

I was a rebel at that time. I talked about asbestos in my film. Most buildings had to be demolished I said and the tax payer was the victim. He had to pay for the new impressive buildings in Brussels. Result : my film could only be shown on an "open school day" on a TV-screen in a classroom. I was disappointed. I stayed at home. The secretary-general couldn't "punish" me anymore. I had retired some months before.

However, about 200 colleagues asked a copy of my film. A good reminder of the wonderful time they had in Brussels. Yves and I could do good business. We wanted money, money, money ...! With it bought a nice carpet for our clubhouse. Being fully carpeted the acoustics were much better. We didn't hear the echo-sounds of a large tiled kitchen anymore.

Guilty or not guilty?
The question is : Do I have to be guilty? My film "Schola Europeae Symphony" was a BIAFF-entry. Knowing that I showed how spoilt those students were (Some even came to school in a rolls royce. The driver opened the door for them.), that my narrator said that the old buildings had to be demolished because they were full of asbestos, etc... I would say : NO. Knowing that about 200 copies were sold, but that I spent all the money on the equipment of our clubhouse I would also say NO, but this time with some hesitation.
Willy Van der Linden
User avatar
TimStannard
Posts: 1225
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: Surrey

Re: Exactly what constitutes 'Amateur'?

Post by TimStannard »

ned c wrote:The rules for the new Sarnia Festival has a paragraph saying "without professional assistance other than processing, copying or the physical process of sound transfer", which would obviously exclude any entrant that used professional actors or wedding/event/SI movie makers.
It's "without professional assistance" rather than "without the assistance of professionals".
My interpretation of the former would be "without paying anyone for their services" which, as I underestand it, fits with the IAC rules on using professionals in an unpaid capacity.
Tim
Proud to be an amateur film maker - I do it for the love of it
Post Reply