Age

[fraught]

Just thought i'd revist this one. Sorry if i'm reopening old wounds etc... but i felt enthused after reading the latest copy of AFVM.

Ok... where are the young people in the latest issue? Apart from the front cover and an advert in the back of the magazine... i didn't see anyone younger than 50! Obviously i could have overestimated slightly with the odd person... and for that i apologise! But on the whole... all i saw were pictures and articles for 'mature' people!

After seeing a smattering of obituaries, and an article on Julie Andrews(?!), i was ready to put the magazine down!

I think the Julie Andrews article was the thing that really wound me up! With all that is going on in the film world, someone thought the AFVM readership would be interested in reading about Julie Andrew's 69th birthday?! COME ON!!! And the IAC wonders why they're not attracing a younger audience!!??

Where are the articles on how to create SFX using Adobe After Effects, or FX Home, etc? What about articles on the best websites for streaming video? or the best videos to stream? How do i create realistic gore effects? How do i film a car chase without special rigging? I go to a number of film making forums for amateurs and they are asking these sort of questions. Just check out http://www.indymogul.com/ and you'll get an idea on what the youth out there is making and want answers to on how to make!
infact... what happened to the Youth Section in AFVM anyway?! I used to be a prolific contributer to it once, but sadly i wouldn't qualify these days, being 36.

Sorry for dragging this age old argument back... but i'm starting to think the IAC is slowly turning into a dinosaur! It needs a good fresh slap round the face!

[Ray Williamson]

I am afraid I agree with fraught. The articles in the magazine are often terrible. Technical articles are poor, with the writer having a basic misunderstanding of what he is trying to write about. There are articles about multi-thousand pound cameras and equipment which none of us need. It would make more sense to read how to get top-quality results with £100 cameras, bargain-basement software, home-made lighting equipment, and broom-handle steadicams!
Not everybody has a hyperactive credit card!
And those with the telephone-number budgets might learn something too!

[fraught]

Good point Ray.

I think it might be worth starting another thread regarding the content of AFVM! Because i have an urge to talk about it! And its going to change the subject from Age to the Magazine.

[DavidBeard]

46 and just joined!

[Chrisbitz]

46 and just joined!

Welcome! You're a little young, but you'll grow into it...


JOKE!!! I'M JOKING!!

[Stephen]

Welcome David

you whipper-snapper !!!

get stuck in !

[FILM THURSO]

Yeay! Back to basics, coz that's how low/no budget movies are made- by almost every non-pro film maker! See Youtube for the good, bad and the indifferent.



Just thought I'd add this here wot I put on another thread as I think it might be worth reading, or maybe you disagree!

You can rest assured that nc film making will survive all be it in a different form. Perhaps what we are seeing within the field is something similar to the decline of the Studio System. The world has changed (whilst going backwards in many ways) and the nc movie field is or at least feels less in need of club support. I don't want to see clubs die but sadly it seems with each obituary that's the way it's going.
In the 1980s the main stream cinema business in the UK was on life-support and a drip having lost 95% of it's audience- YES NINETY FIVE PERCENT! It was time for major change to bring about a new era. Movie making hadn't stopped as such, just the audience had lost interest.
Similarly movie making in the nc field has not dropped, it has escalated beyond levels ever conceived but the producers having more access to the means to produce have lost interest in the clubs that were needed to support their activities. Most people don't need a club (although losing the IAC would cost us the biggest loss- those copyright licenses) but they do need somewhere to show their films and that's why I would like to see the club circuit become more of an exhibition circuit.
Clubs generally don't make many films in any given year but there is no shortage of films being made by independants in the same area. It makes real sense for clubs to open up to material produced by non-memebrs to create regular programmes to attract nc film-makers into their venues as an paying audience which in turn adds to the club funds.
Amateur theatrical groups do this kind of thing. Our own local group brings in touring theatre and music shows to it's 70 seat venue. Can film clubs not go the same way?




post scriptum nunc ami amos lukem! I'm only 40!

[tom hardwick]

Ray and Fraught - you say:

The articles in the magazine are often terrible.
Where are the articles on how to create SFX using Adobe After Effects, or FX Home, etc?

FVM relies on voluntary contributions. People have to give up time, spend money and tap the keys. They have to take pictures, Photoshop them and CDROM them off to the editor.

Sounds like it's time you two gave it a go. Even a simple article will take you a day - can you spare the time?

tom.

[fraught]

Totally agree Tom.

I've just written an article on the making of my latest flick. I'm going to put together a seperate article together on how the FX were done.



ps: i'm not saying the articles are 'terrible', just often aimed at an age group i'm not a member of. I just want the magazine to appeal to a more broader audience of film makers.

[tom hardwick]

[quote="fraught"]I'm going to put together a seperate article together on how the FX were done.[/quote]

Good man. Make it appeal to a younger audience and you're out to woo us all. Don't forget to include lots of illustrations and pictures. It's what a lot of FVM articles cry out for, but cry in vain.

tom.

[stingman]

Sounds good fraught. I cannot wait to see it.

Be good...

Stingman

[Ray Williamson]

Ray and Fraught -
Sounds like it's time you two gave it a go. Even a simple article will take you a day - can you spare the time?
tom.

Hi Tom,
I gave it a go -- two goes in the past year, in fact. In one case a chunk was missing. Later, another chap wrote an article on the same subject of DVD/CD file systems, but the difference was that this chap had done no research and really had little idea of the subject. Now, if he had read my article, and paid a little attention to it.....
I guess though that the latter, although he no doubt did his best, did not use the internet and therefore was unable to download the specialised highly-informative program I mentioned, even though it was free! In fact it seemed as if he had not heard of file systems!
This is the problem - people are not interested in the technical stuff which could be useful to them in improving their craft, and on the other hand nobody really wants to know the "how I made my last film" sort of thing. So you are on a hiding to nothing!
I have no criticism at all of the Editor, who has been lumbered single-handed with the job, a job which really requires quite a lot of assistants. On most magazines of that size you see quite a list of names on the leader page.

[tom hardwick]

You say, 'the Editor who has been lumbered single-handed with the job', yet Garth was offered the job, knew the constraints and requirements and is paid a salary. He probably sweats a bit when articles are thin on the ground.

As all the other contributors supply their articles freely, it's mighty hard to criticise them. The proof reading is also done FOC and I sometimes think it's a wonder that the magazine materialises at all. Now if only there was some money for a decent cover photo session.

tom.

[FILM THURSO]

Perhaps we need to remember that the nature of what we do governs the content of the magazine and therin lies a tragic impass.
The magazine is produced in every way by professional hands yet it's content by default is non-professional. The very nature of this means that we the contributors do hold a considerable amount of responsability (blame) for what does and does not go in. There are those of us with great knowledge and skill to share who can write a deeply informative item with quality images yet it may be read as deadly dull whilst others may write with bursting enthusiam and sweet little else.
In the process of making our movies we can only work with what is available to us and for the magazine it's the same. It doesn't have to be that way though as I'm sure there are many more film makers of all ages who could write with both knowledge and interest to create articles that could even be useful.
If durge is all the magazine gets given it can't be made into anything else.
We must remember that you can dress a frog in tinsel and fairy lights but it'll never be a christmas tree.

[ned c]

I have the much easier task of editing the AMPS Newsletter, but the role of an editor is to "edit" and that means making sure that articles that are inadaquately researched or pale repeats of earlier articles should be returned to sender. But given the number of pages to be filled in FVM I can easily sense the panic that sets in as set up day nears and there are blank spaces.

I have very mixed feelings about the role of FVM, editing it is a thankless task (as this thread suggest) and it eats up a major part of our subscriptions. More and more journals are now offered as .pdf downloads as well as print but obviously the days of their print edirtions are numbered. Why not try a .pdf version of FVM for overseas members? I pay the same annual sub as UK residents but the postage costs are substantially more. I don't read magazines in my hot tub (drink wine instead) so that's not a problem.

ned c