First post, new member...!
Recently I discovered a discussion on the IAC forums concerning my film Rex and the fact that I supposedly used the Diamond award (which Rex won at this year's BIAFF) to stimulate the sale of my movie.
I strongly feel that I have to respond to this.
First of all, Rex is indeed for sale at the movie's website (http://www.rexdefilm.com). However, this website was definately NOT designed to sell our film! I wanted to offer my friends and colleagues a place to share information about the film and to watch the trailer, for instance. I regret the fact that some of you think otherwise, but as you might understand: it would be pointless to try and sell an amateur film to make any serious money. I do not consider this a commercial endeavour. If I would advertise my film and clearly build a website as part of some sort of marketing plan, then yes, it would definately become commercial. But the way it is now, I don't think that's the case.
The reason I offer the DVD for sale is twofold. First of all: making films costs money (sometimes lots of it). Although some of you (including myself!) consider this to be a part of amateur filmmaking that you have to take for granted, I don't see a problem in trying to recoup at least some costs. This is probably a point of principle, but trying to sell your film doesn't suddenly make the film commercial (as long as it was intended and produced as an honest amateur product).
Secondly, I want to reach as big an audience as possible. Of course Rex is available online, but I also want to offer people the opportunity to watch it the way it was (partially) intended: on a proper TV-screen. This makes it necessary to 'release' the film on DVD and as you might know: this costs money. As a former student and someone who uses all his savings to produce movies, I cannot afford to give away the DVD for free, and therefore I have to ask some money for it. And to assure you: if I would sell a DVD, the selling price would hardly cover the production costs. It's naive to think that a film like Rex would be a bestseller, or even a 'seller'!
My film is not "sold systematically", as someone pointed out, and there certainly is no case of copyright infringement, since the film and it's soundtrack don't contain any copyright protected material. All music was composed for the film itself and the composer signed off his rights to me!
Also: the fact that I have a company in producing commercials and corporate videos, doesn't make me a professional fiction filmmaker. Yes, I produce(d) audiovisuals for a living, but this is a completely different field. It's purely commerce, not art. The same could be said about a photo journalist (fast, gritty): the fact that he uses his camera to make a living, doesn't make him a professional fashion photographer (stylised, staged). Same tools, entirely different angle.
(The topic of student films touches this, but that's probably already discussed in another topic.)
I think the question whether or not an amateur film is a commercial production, is not easy to answer in this world of amateur filmmaking. Apparently a lot of people have a lot of different ideas about this, but I strongly believe that as long as the intention behind the film is pure and honest (ie. the film was made as an amateur product, meaning no one was paid and the film was not meant for commercial release), there is no harm in trying to sell it on a small scale. It doesn't stop being an amateur production and it remains a non-commercial film, in my opinion.
It's up to juries and pre-selection committees to allow or reject submitted films, based upon the festival's rules and conditions. I know I am certainly not the only producer to do this (but clearly the film's website made it visible, whereas in other cases these selling activities remain 'invisible' and unpublished on the internet) and I know there are many festivals that do not consider Rex a commercial production (thus an amateur production).
I regret the fact that some of you seem to look upon me as a 'profiteer', who submits films to festivals just to win awards and boost sales. That's ludicrous and it saddens me. I want to enjoy myself while making films - it's my passion - and have people enjoy them afterwards. That's all, that's it.
As always: please feel free to comment and respond. Let's have an open an honest discussion about this topic, that (understandably) appears to be a big issue with some fellow filmmakers.
Amateur films: commercial or not?
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
Hello Berry,
Last night we already had a nice private chat. In fact it was already 1.30 am when I went to bed. I was in a filmclub last night. In your last mail you wrote to me : "I understand and appreciate your passion. It is wonderful to meet people who support some ideas in a passionate way and also act and live like that. The fact that you tell us everything what you have in mind without any restraint is to your credit." Many thanks for these kind words, Berry. It shows that you are made of the right stuff. I also feel that you are someone who makes films for fun in the first place. You also said to me and other friends, I quote " "Rex" is my only film that is on sale, and probably the last." Hopefully we have found a new forum-friend. You are Dutch. I am a foreigner like you. Therefore it's better that a "native speaker" will say that your English is perfect. Where did you learn it ? I know that in Holland English is the second language. In Belgium it's the third language. In you last private letter (hopefully you don't mind that I reveal these things) you also said that you think of joining NOVA, which is the Dutch umbrella organisation for non-commercial moviemakers. Maybe, also NOVA can catch a big fish. NOVA, the IAC etc... need young talented people like you to bridge the yawning gap between young and old.
Before replying to the things you have written I would like to remind you of the rules of BIAFF, the Guernsey Lily and AMPS (the festival for Non-commercial filmmakers in the US). I remember that someone already did this in the past. Maybe it was Dave or Ned, but I think it is useful for the discussion on this thread.
BIAFF
An amateur film or video is one that is deemed to be made for love, with no financial or other reward and without professional assistance.
The Guernsey Lily Festival (Closing date 31st. May ! Hurry up my friends !)
A non-commercial film or video is deemed to be one that is made for love, with no financial reward and without professional assistance other than processing copying or the physical process of sound transfer.
AMPS (the American Festival)
Our festival welcomes productions made solely for fun and pleasure, artistic expression or to make a statement about society with no profit motive in mind and which have not been the subject of any sales or rental agreement. We have a seperate category to recognize the work of students and awards for fan-films.
You have invited us to have a discussion and therefore I thought it was useful to give the rules of the festivals first. In fact, Berry, we have already had discussions about this phenomenon several times, but in my opinion it is interesting to re-open them.
Last night we already had a nice private chat. In fact it was already 1.30 am when I went to bed. I was in a filmclub last night. In your last mail you wrote to me : "I understand and appreciate your passion. It is wonderful to meet people who support some ideas in a passionate way and also act and live like that. The fact that you tell us everything what you have in mind without any restraint is to your credit." Many thanks for these kind words, Berry. It shows that you are made of the right stuff. I also feel that you are someone who makes films for fun in the first place. You also said to me and other friends, I quote " "Rex" is my only film that is on sale, and probably the last." Hopefully we have found a new forum-friend. You are Dutch. I am a foreigner like you. Therefore it's better that a "native speaker" will say that your English is perfect. Where did you learn it ? I know that in Holland English is the second language. In Belgium it's the third language. In you last private letter (hopefully you don't mind that I reveal these things) you also said that you think of joining NOVA, which is the Dutch umbrella organisation for non-commercial moviemakers. Maybe, also NOVA can catch a big fish. NOVA, the IAC etc... need young talented people like you to bridge the yawning gap between young and old.
Before replying to the things you have written I would like to remind you of the rules of BIAFF, the Guernsey Lily and AMPS (the festival for Non-commercial filmmakers in the US). I remember that someone already did this in the past. Maybe it was Dave or Ned, but I think it is useful for the discussion on this thread.
BIAFF
An amateur film or video is one that is deemed to be made for love, with no financial or other reward and without professional assistance.
The Guernsey Lily Festival (Closing date 31st. May ! Hurry up my friends !)
A non-commercial film or video is deemed to be one that is made for love, with no financial reward and without professional assistance other than processing copying or the physical process of sound transfer.
AMPS (the American Festival)
Our festival welcomes productions made solely for fun and pleasure, artistic expression or to make a statement about society with no profit motive in mind and which have not been the subject of any sales or rental agreement. We have a seperate category to recognize the work of students and awards for fan-films.
You have invited us to have a discussion and therefore I thought it was useful to give the rules of the festivals first. In fact, Berry, we have already had discussions about this phenomenon several times, but in my opinion it is interesting to re-open them.
Willy Van der Linden
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
Hi Willy,
Thanks for your reply. Also thanks for your kind compliments about my English. I don't regard myself a 'perfect' English speaker, but I have always found it important to speak English as well as possible. In amateur filmmaking, it's almost a necessity. I think we are lucky in Holland that our English eduction at high school is very good. And also: I never wacht films with subs (aside from the occasional Korean or Russian movie
).
I sure hope to visit the forum more often. There are many interesting topics that need discussion and an open and 'clean' forum like this is the right place to talk about these things. The big disadvantage of the relatively small amateur filmmaking community, is that there are only a handful occasions where you can actually meet and catch up. So forum discussions are a welcome surrogate to this lack of personal contact.
Thank you for quoting the rules of BIAFF, GL and AMPS. I have read those and I think that these rules are open for discussion. I don't mean that we should discuss changing them in any way, that's not up to us, but we should talk about the way we interpret these rules. For instance, "financial reward" is a term that could be applied if a film was actually produced to make a profit. The way I read the BIAFF regulation is like this: "a film made for love, without financial reward in mind". I think that's the core of this discussion. Films that are made to make a profit (or break even), surely ain't amateur works. But films that are made purely for love and are sold on a very limited scale (as is the case with my film), definately are amateur films in my opionion.
The AMPS regulations are most clear about this: "...with no profit motive in mind". I know this is a hard thing to check, but in many cases it is clear. If you check the DVD-page on http://www.rexdefilm.com for instance, the only thing you'll read is this (aside from the 'technical' info of the DVD and the way to order): "On this page you can order the DVD of Rex". I don't think this line shows any promotional or commercial intention, but just offers the possibility to buy the thing. There's no kind of marketing involved, whatsoever!
If you would read these festival regulations very strictly, you could also conclude that filmmakers are not allowed to accept money awards. This, I think, can never be the intention of any festival. Films that come from a pure amateur heart, should be treated and accepted accordingly.
The reason that I probably won't offer any future film for sale online, is simple: no-one buys the damn thing!
Of course I have submitted my film to GL, I have heard nothing but extremely positive stories about this festival. I sincerely hope that Rex will not be rejected because of all this.
Looking forward to you reply...!
(I know that this discussion had already been held on this forum, but I couldn't find a topic that was devoted especially to this issue.)
Thanks for your reply. Also thanks for your kind compliments about my English. I don't regard myself a 'perfect' English speaker, but I have always found it important to speak English as well as possible. In amateur filmmaking, it's almost a necessity. I think we are lucky in Holland that our English eduction at high school is very good. And also: I never wacht films with subs (aside from the occasional Korean or Russian movie
).I sure hope to visit the forum more often. There are many interesting topics that need discussion and an open and 'clean' forum like this is the right place to talk about these things. The big disadvantage of the relatively small amateur filmmaking community, is that there are only a handful occasions where you can actually meet and catch up. So forum discussions are a welcome surrogate to this lack of personal contact.
Thank you for quoting the rules of BIAFF, GL and AMPS. I have read those and I think that these rules are open for discussion. I don't mean that we should discuss changing them in any way, that's not up to us, but we should talk about the way we interpret these rules. For instance, "financial reward" is a term that could be applied if a film was actually produced to make a profit. The way I read the BIAFF regulation is like this: "a film made for love, without financial reward in mind". I think that's the core of this discussion. Films that are made to make a profit (or break even), surely ain't amateur works. But films that are made purely for love and are sold on a very limited scale (as is the case with my film), definately are amateur films in my opionion.
The AMPS regulations are most clear about this: "...with no profit motive in mind". I know this is a hard thing to check, but in many cases it is clear. If you check the DVD-page on http://www.rexdefilm.com for instance, the only thing you'll read is this (aside from the 'technical' info of the DVD and the way to order): "On this page you can order the DVD of Rex". I don't think this line shows any promotional or commercial intention, but just offers the possibility to buy the thing. There's no kind of marketing involved, whatsoever!
If you would read these festival regulations very strictly, you could also conclude that filmmakers are not allowed to accept money awards. This, I think, can never be the intention of any festival. Films that come from a pure amateur heart, should be treated and accepted accordingly.
The reason that I probably won't offer any future film for sale online, is simple: no-one buys the damn thing!
Of course I have submitted my film to GL, I have heard nothing but extremely positive stories about this festival. I sincerely hope that Rex will not be rejected because of all this.
Looking forward to you reply...!
(I know that this discussion had already been held on this forum, but I couldn't find a topic that was devoted especially to this issue.)
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
I've just had a shower and breakfast and it's almost lunch-time, but I always live at night when it's pitch-dark. A difficult moment in fact now, because Frank De Winne, our Belgian astronaut is about to be launched? It's going to happen in Baikonur in Russia. They're showing it on TV.
An other thing Berry. I had a very short chat with you about 4 or 5 years ago in Bedford. Maybe you don't remember. You also talked to my friend Urbain Appeltans. You asked him who had made the subtitles for his film "Hannah".
Urbain Appeltans
Urbain is a very good example of someone who made commercial films and who took part in BIAFF and other festivals for amateur filmmakers. Maybe that was strange, but I was not against it. On the contrary ! I encouraged him to enter his films.
Being a commercial filmmaker and taking part in amateur festivals is possible, but how ?
I enjoy making trips in Britain by car. Driving on the left is very exciting. However, Urbain, wanted to take me to Bedford in his car. I accepted it, but I felt a bit embarrassed. On his car was printed "Cineac, TV Productions !". I tell you this to prove that maybe I am a passionate n-c-filmmaker, but not a fanatic one. Urbain made adverts for our Belgian TV-channels. Now he's retired. It's possible that he earned quite a lot of money with these adverts. However, he also made films for pure fun, not for money. Many friends on this forum remember his fantastic fiction
fillms "Hannah", "Dimato", "Cinemascope", "Prinsje" etc... We enjoyed them immensely. He always created a special atmosphere. Not modern "bang bang"- films, but films for nostalgic souls like you and me. I am talking to people of my generation ow. But .... he never sold these films. He won numerous awards at British festivals and on the continent. I am sure that you, Berry, can follow his footsteps. Be a commercial filmmaker, but also make films for fun and festivals like BIAFF. That's possible. It's not forbidden to be a professional and an amateur at the same time. And if you would like to recuperate your costs then you could make other films, films of weddings for instance.
Urbain in Guernsey
By the way, I contacted Urbain some weeks ago. Many friends have already asked me how he is. Also in Chesterfield. Urbain told me that he stopped making films for a while. He is still suffering. The doctors told him that it's better to take things easy at this moment. That's very difficult for Urbain as he is an energetic filmmaker. Urbain is also president of a region. I feel that they miss him from time to time. Our unbrella organisation CvB asks him to give lectures etc... but he has already cancelled some of them the last few weeks. He does not live a secluded life now, but he calmed down a bit. Hopefully he will recover very soon now.
In Guernsey some films will be shown made by some Dutch friends. At least that's what I hope. Urbain helped them. You will see his name in the credits of their films. It's also one of the reasons why it is interesting to attend the Guernsey Lily again. So, Urbain will not be in Guernsey, but you will feel his presence in some films.
Berry and I, fellow-countrymen
In the mean time Frank De Winne has already been put into orbit round the earth. Fascinating, isn't it ? I'm proud to be a Belgian. Stupid, isn't it ? ... But I didn't mean this. I am for one country ... The Dutch speaking part of Belgium being part of the Netherlands. Then Berry and I are fellow-countrymen. I mean this.
An other thing Berry. I had a very short chat with you about 4 or 5 years ago in Bedford. Maybe you don't remember. You also talked to my friend Urbain Appeltans. You asked him who had made the subtitles for his film "Hannah".
Urbain Appeltans
Urbain is a very good example of someone who made commercial films and who took part in BIAFF and other festivals for amateur filmmakers. Maybe that was strange, but I was not against it. On the contrary ! I encouraged him to enter his films.
Being a commercial filmmaker and taking part in amateur festivals is possible, but how ?
I enjoy making trips in Britain by car. Driving on the left is very exciting. However, Urbain, wanted to take me to Bedford in his car. I accepted it, but I felt a bit embarrassed. On his car was printed "Cineac, TV Productions !". I tell you this to prove that maybe I am a passionate n-c-filmmaker, but not a fanatic one. Urbain made adverts for our Belgian TV-channels. Now he's retired. It's possible that he earned quite a lot of money with these adverts. However, he also made films for pure fun, not for money. Many friends on this forum remember his fantastic fiction
fillms "Hannah", "Dimato", "Cinemascope", "Prinsje" etc... We enjoyed them immensely. He always created a special atmosphere. Not modern "bang bang"- films, but films for nostalgic souls like you and me. I am talking to people of my generation ow. But .... he never sold these films. He won numerous awards at British festivals and on the continent. I am sure that you, Berry, can follow his footsteps. Be a commercial filmmaker, but also make films for fun and festivals like BIAFF. That's possible. It's not forbidden to be a professional and an amateur at the same time. And if you would like to recuperate your costs then you could make other films, films of weddings for instance.
Urbain in Guernsey
By the way, I contacted Urbain some weeks ago. Many friends have already asked me how he is. Also in Chesterfield. Urbain told me that he stopped making films for a while. He is still suffering. The doctors told him that it's better to take things easy at this moment. That's very difficult for Urbain as he is an energetic filmmaker. Urbain is also president of a region. I feel that they miss him from time to time. Our unbrella organisation CvB asks him to give lectures etc... but he has already cancelled some of them the last few weeks. He does not live a secluded life now, but he calmed down a bit. Hopefully he will recover very soon now.
In Guernsey some films will be shown made by some Dutch friends. At least that's what I hope. Urbain helped them. You will see his name in the credits of their films. It's also one of the reasons why it is interesting to attend the Guernsey Lily again. So, Urbain will not be in Guernsey, but you will feel his presence in some films.
Berry and I, fellow-countrymen
In the mean time Frank De Winne has already been put into orbit round the earth. Fascinating, isn't it ? I'm proud to be a Belgian. Stupid, isn't it ? ... But I didn't mean this. I am for one country ... The Dutch speaking part of Belgium being part of the Netherlands. Then Berry and I are fellow-countrymen. I mean this.
Willy Van der Linden
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
Hi Berry, welcome to the forum. I hope you join us on a regular basis as we need more opinions round here! 
I saw 'Rex' at BIAFF and i thoroughly enjoyed it. Some fantastic acting, and well handled camera work, along with a great story line. I loved the ending too (wont say anymore as i dont want to spoil it for those that haven't seen it).
My opinion on the selling side is, if you have made the film and its 100% your property... why not try and sell it? Like you say, atleast you can try and recoup some of your money back! I'd love to have something good enough for people to want to purchase!
What i would object to, is if you worked in the industry and made your film using their facilities. I would see that as an unfair advantage in a competition. That's not to say i wouldn't want to see what film you would make under those circumstances... quite the opposite infact. I just think that a line would need to be drawn between amateur/hobbyist and professional.
So as far as i'm concerned, Rex is a cracking film and deserves its award. Well done.
I saw 'Rex' at BIAFF and i thoroughly enjoyed it. Some fantastic acting, and well handled camera work, along with a great story line. I loved the ending too (wont say anymore as i dont want to spoil it for those that haven't seen it).
My opinion on the selling side is, if you have made the film and its 100% your property... why not try and sell it? Like you say, atleast you can try and recoup some of your money back! I'd love to have something good enough for people to want to purchase!
What i would object to, is if you worked in the industry and made your film using their facilities. I would see that as an unfair advantage in a competition. That's not to say i wouldn't want to see what film you would make under those circumstances... quite the opposite infact. I just think that a line would need to be drawn between amateur/hobbyist and professional.
So as far as i'm concerned, Rex is a cracking film and deserves its award. Well done.
Only Boring People Get Bored
http://www.fraught.net
http://www.fraught.net
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
You have written some messages to me, Berry, and there are many things in them to discuss about. I feel that you love discussions, so I think that you don't mind that I talk about them on this forum. I don't have any secrets either.
If you don't agree with my translations, please tell me then. You told me the following things :
1. "I don't have the time to be a member of a videoclub. I find I must only join a club if I can dedicate myself to a cause. My present activities do not allow me to do this. I prefer to produce my fillms in a select group of friends without being a member of a filmclub. It has disadvantages, but also advantages. Joining NOVA (the Dutch IAC) ? I will think about it." My question, Berry : "What are the disadvantages of being a member of a filmclub ?"
2. In Clervaux a judge told us that you crossed the imaginary line a few times in your film "Rex". I told you this.
In your message to me you have said the following thing :
"It is comical that some of your friends quibble over crossing the imaginary line in my film "Rex". I find this an obsurd discussion. Rules are there to be broken. As long as crossing the imaginary line does not affect the interpretation and logic of the story then it is OK in my opinion. The filmmaker is free to experiment where he wants to do this."
I agree with the last sentence, Berry. You must even cross the imaginary line if it is functional. If it gives a strange and wrong feeling, then I think it is better not to cross the imaginary line. What do you think about this ?
If you don't agree with my translations, please tell me then. You told me the following things :
1. "I don't have the time to be a member of a videoclub. I find I must only join a club if I can dedicate myself to a cause. My present activities do not allow me to do this. I prefer to produce my fillms in a select group of friends without being a member of a filmclub. It has disadvantages, but also advantages. Joining NOVA (the Dutch IAC) ? I will think about it." My question, Berry : "What are the disadvantages of being a member of a filmclub ?"
2. In Clervaux a judge told us that you crossed the imaginary line a few times in your film "Rex". I told you this.
In your message to me you have said the following thing :
"It is comical that some of your friends quibble over crossing the imaginary line in my film "Rex". I find this an obsurd discussion. Rules are there to be broken. As long as crossing the imaginary line does not affect the interpretation and logic of the story then it is OK in my opinion. The filmmaker is free to experiment where he wants to do this."
I agree with the last sentence, Berry. You must even cross the imaginary line if it is functional. If it gives a strange and wrong feeling, then I think it is better not to cross the imaginary line. What do you think about this ?
Willy Van der Linden
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
Welcome Berry, great to have you aboard this forum and look forward to your continued contributions.
This discussion is central to the future of non-commercial (n-c) films as we know them and the more contributions the better.
First, let me state my position, I am an Englishman living in the USA, a member of AMPS, editor of the AMPS Newsletter. I started my filmic career as an amateur in the 60s, became a professional, ie earned money making films, had my own small production company operating in the UK and USA, retired to the USA in 2001 and now have time to return to my "amateur" roots. I have been a member of the IAC since the 70s but did not find time to enter films in the Festival and become more involved until these past few years. I have been a member of "cine/video" clubs on three continents, but again my contribution was more support than involvement until recently.
The above statement should exclude me from entering films in the BIAFF as they have to be "made without professional assistance", I have never hidden my status and the BIAFF have never rejected any of my entries so we can safely say that the rules are open to interpretation.
In my view we have to abandon the term "amateur" as its English meaning has changed; in the world of film it means "bad". To have a film described as "amateurish" is an insult. There are now a huge number of young film makers, many dreaming of being professionals, who do not want to be associated with amateur film making so it is essential if we are to have access to their productions to expunge the word amateur from all we do.
In the AMPS Festival it is the status of the film rather than its makers that matters. A non-commercial film made by George Lucas is acceptable (in fact would be welcomed) provided it is not made for sale and no-one involved in the production receives payment. Here is my problem with your film, it is being offered for sale, the argument that very few copies have been sold and you just hope to recover some expenses changes the whole intent of the film. There is also the possibility that your film may become a cult favorite and you sell thousands of copies, what is your argument then? You cannot be a "little bit commercial", you are either in or out. I have a studio website from whcih I offer services and productions for sale, but this is completely separate from my n-c activities.
There is also the "problem" of films that receive some degree of financial sponorship, AMPS faced this problem and decided that State sponsorship is acceptable but commercial sponsorship is not. Again a very difficult area.
Finding an audience for n-c films is an important part of what organizations should offer; AMPS circulates the winning entries on DVD for viewing by members, their friends and clubs. We all make films to be seen and hope for feedback and this is where we need the help of National organizations.
Berry, these are my pesronal views, I am not writing on behalf of AMPS or any organization so let the debate begin, the objective should be to open up the world of n-c film making to a broader base of both film makers and viewers.
ned c
This discussion is central to the future of non-commercial (n-c) films as we know them and the more contributions the better.
First, let me state my position, I am an Englishman living in the USA, a member of AMPS, editor of the AMPS Newsletter. I started my filmic career as an amateur in the 60s, became a professional, ie earned money making films, had my own small production company operating in the UK and USA, retired to the USA in 2001 and now have time to return to my "amateur" roots. I have been a member of the IAC since the 70s but did not find time to enter films in the Festival and become more involved until these past few years. I have been a member of "cine/video" clubs on three continents, but again my contribution was more support than involvement until recently.
The above statement should exclude me from entering films in the BIAFF as they have to be "made without professional assistance", I have never hidden my status and the BIAFF have never rejected any of my entries so we can safely say that the rules are open to interpretation.
In my view we have to abandon the term "amateur" as its English meaning has changed; in the world of film it means "bad". To have a film described as "amateurish" is an insult. There are now a huge number of young film makers, many dreaming of being professionals, who do not want to be associated with amateur film making so it is essential if we are to have access to their productions to expunge the word amateur from all we do.
In the AMPS Festival it is the status of the film rather than its makers that matters. A non-commercial film made by George Lucas is acceptable (in fact would be welcomed) provided it is not made for sale and no-one involved in the production receives payment. Here is my problem with your film, it is being offered for sale, the argument that very few copies have been sold and you just hope to recover some expenses changes the whole intent of the film. There is also the possibility that your film may become a cult favorite and you sell thousands of copies, what is your argument then? You cannot be a "little bit commercial", you are either in or out. I have a studio website from whcih I offer services and productions for sale, but this is completely separate from my n-c activities.
There is also the "problem" of films that receive some degree of financial sponorship, AMPS faced this problem and decided that State sponsorship is acceptable but commercial sponsorship is not. Again a very difficult area.
Finding an audience for n-c films is an important part of what organizations should offer; AMPS circulates the winning entries on DVD for viewing by members, their friends and clubs. We all make films to be seen and hope for feedback and this is where we need the help of National organizations.
Berry, these are my pesronal views, I am not writing on behalf of AMPS or any organization so let the debate begin, the objective should be to open up the world of n-c film making to a broader base of both film makers and viewers.
ned c
-
Dave Watterson
- Posts: 1890
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
- Location: Bath, England
- Contact:
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
Let me throw one idea into this mix:
Imagine you as an individual or a club have made a movie that has some local interest. It might be a documentary about the area, or a retelling of local legends (as Circle 8 Club do so well), or present some piece of local history (like Willy Van der Linden's dramatised documentary "Breendonk".)
You have made it in the pure amateur spirit with no one being paid for their contribution, though you have probably paid out expenses, provided food and drink etc. You have, however, taken care to clear all copyrights for music and any archive footage used, obtained permissions from any actors etc etc.
You send the movie to competitions and get appropriate rewards.
In the meantime a buzz has developed in your locality about the film. People who have seen it talk enthusiastically to those who have not. Friends start to ask you for copies. It becomes clear that a lot of local people would like a copy ... but they do not all know you.
It would then be tempting to announce that people could get a copy for a modest fee which would cover the cost of disc, slip-case, printing etc and maybe make a contribution towards the club's funds or your own time and energy in making the copies.
Is that legitimate?
It would fit under the AMPS rules because the movie was not made with commercial intent, even if it later turned out to have some commercial appeal.
The problem might be compounded by the long lead times many festivals require. It might have been clearly "non commercial" at the time you sent it in, but have become of mild commercial interest before the festival.
Dave
Imagine you as an individual or a club have made a movie that has some local interest. It might be a documentary about the area, or a retelling of local legends (as Circle 8 Club do so well), or present some piece of local history (like Willy Van der Linden's dramatised documentary "Breendonk".)
You have made it in the pure amateur spirit with no one being paid for their contribution, though you have probably paid out expenses, provided food and drink etc. You have, however, taken care to clear all copyrights for music and any archive footage used, obtained permissions from any actors etc etc.
You send the movie to competitions and get appropriate rewards.
In the meantime a buzz has developed in your locality about the film. People who have seen it talk enthusiastically to those who have not. Friends start to ask you for copies. It becomes clear that a lot of local people would like a copy ... but they do not all know you.
It would then be tempting to announce that people could get a copy for a modest fee which would cover the cost of disc, slip-case, printing etc and maybe make a contribution towards the club's funds or your own time and energy in making the copies.
Is that legitimate?
It would fit under the AMPS rules because the movie was not made with commercial intent, even if it later turned out to have some commercial appeal.
The problem might be compounded by the long lead times many festivals require. It might have been clearly "non commercial" at the time you sent it in, but have become of mild commercial interest before the festival.
Dave
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
There is a difference between a film that is offered for sale from a website with no known customer base or demand and one that grows in demand by word of mouth only. Yes, a film that "won" recognition and eventual distribution would meet the AMPS rules because the film maker did not set out to sell copies to recover costs or generate income.
ned c
ned c
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
Welcome Berry,
I've read through your posts, and I'm afraid that I feel it's quite clear that you cannot sell an amateur film and be an amateur.
How about I make a film for $1m and sell it only to recoup costs... It's irreleveant that I plead till I'm blue in the face that I didn't intend to sell it when I made it. You can't be expected to know my state of mind when I made it.
I've just made a film, and the same evening it was shown at my film club competition, it was on youtube. In my world, the more people that get to see my film, the better.
I feel it a point of honour for me, that I make my films for fun, and making them within a budget I can afford, is part of the fun. All my last film cost me was sandwiches for 10 people on 3 days. It's just how much my hobby costs. If I can't afford it, I'll have to find another hobby. (this already happened with my Formula1 racing hobby too)
If you have to pay to see my film, then it's not amateur.
I'd love to see your film though, as it comes highly recommended, and I believe you mention it's available online - what's the address where I can watch it please?
It seems you've accidentally stirred up a hornet's nest with selling the film, and you also say that nobody buys it! Why not give up and stop selling it then? Or if people really want to have DVD copies, I don't think anyone would complain if you were only selling them at cost price, say €4-5?
I hope I haven't offended you with my straight talk and opinions, but you can't add words to the rules to make them suit your argument
I've read through your posts, and I'm afraid that I feel it's quite clear that you cannot sell an amateur film and be an amateur.
How about I make a film for $1m and sell it only to recoup costs... It's irreleveant that I plead till I'm blue in the face that I didn't intend to sell it when I made it. You can't be expected to know my state of mind when I made it.
I've just made a film, and the same evening it was shown at my film club competition, it was on youtube. In my world, the more people that get to see my film, the better.
I feel it a point of honour for me, that I make my films for fun, and making them within a budget I can afford, is part of the fun. All my last film cost me was sandwiches for 10 people on 3 days. It's just how much my hobby costs. If I can't afford it, I'll have to find another hobby. (this already happened with my Formula1 racing hobby too)
If you have to pay to see my film, then it's not amateur.
I'd love to see your film though, as it comes highly recommended, and I believe you mention it's available online - what's the address where I can watch it please?
It seems you've accidentally stirred up a hornet's nest with selling the film, and you also say that nobody buys it! Why not give up and stop selling it then? Or if people really want to have DVD copies, I don't think anyone would complain if you were only selling them at cost price, say €4-5?
I hope I haven't offended you with my straight talk and opinions, but you can't add words to the rules to make them suit your argument
I like to make films, this is- my Youtube account. What's yours?
"all of the above is nothing more than nonsensical ramblings, and definately should NOT be misconstrued as anyone's official policy"
"all of the above is nothing more than nonsensical ramblings, and definately should NOT be misconstrued as anyone's official policy"
-
Dave Watterson
- Posts: 1890
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
- Location: Bath, England
- Contact:
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
Er ... one place you can see "Rex" is on the IAC Website!!!
It is part of the Bijou BIAFF collection of movies - see the link on the front page of the main website or go straight to http://www.theiac.org.uk/central/biaff2 ... biaff.html
The website for Rex is http://www.rexdefilm.com
but for people without Dutch try this fearsome URL which gives the google automatic translation into English http://translate.google.com/translate?j ... ry_state0=
Dave
It is part of the Bijou BIAFF collection of movies - see the link on the front page of the main website or go straight to http://www.theiac.org.uk/central/biaff2 ... biaff.html
The website for Rex is http://www.rexdefilm.com
but for people without Dutch try this fearsome URL which gives the google automatic translation into English http://translate.google.com/translate?j ... ry_state0=
Dave
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
I have very bad characteristics. As every human being, mind you. For instance I am very naïve. I could have been a rich man. We had a "première" of the film "Breendonk" in the concentration camp itself. The press was there. Articles appeared in the newspapers. People called me and asked a copy of my film, but I only gave a copy on an old video cassette (not mini-DV or DVD) to Gaston De Wit, one of the last witnesses and the narrator in my film. I didn't sell one copy of "Breendonk". To be honest : once I thought of selling it to earn some money for my club, but eventually I didn't do it at all. CvB, our national umbrella organisation put this film on a DVD, a compilation of the best Belgian amateur films, but in the right top corner you can see the CvB-logo. I was very proud. It was an honour. Maybe the film circulated in Britain after BIAFF. British friends know that I send copies of my film as a gift. I don't charge anything. I can give you enough names of British friends who do the same. The more people who see my films the better, also because of the message in the film. It's a bit strange perhaps, but I didn't even give any copy to Belgian friends. Only British friends posses a copy.
SABAM is our national copyright organisation. I paid 25 euros to ... as we call it ... register the film. It means that if someone borrows your film and makes copies of it, he or she can be sued by SABAM. Now I am really very proud that I have not sold one copy.
You can sell your films to raise funds for charity... for the cancer appeal or for people in need. I remember that once -I think it was Michael -suggested to sell my film "Together with Yoda" in the Cotswolds. For instance to help the Gloucester Fire Brigade. I didn't do this, but in fact Michael was right. This is noble-minded. Mind : I am not against selling films about weddings. Such films are not shown at festivals. Imagine that we make a film to support the IAC or BIAFF financially. That would be OK, but only if this film is not used at festivals like the Lily and other amateur competitions. I had a long version of "On the Road to Passchendaele". I could have sold that film very easily thanks to its theme. I asked a Dutch friend to make copies for the Genootschap Passchendaele Society. My friend Freddy, who is the president of that group of volunteers gave a free copy to each person who had done his/her utmost to organize the ceremonies in 2007 to commemorate the Battle in 1917. I didn't earn one euro with it ...
Imagine that having tropical fish in an aquarium is your hobby. You buy the fish that you can afford. It's also like that in filmmaking. I offered my actors in the Breendonk-film sandwiches and drinks. I paid everything myself. I am not a wealthy man, but I could afford it. I hired a vintage car for "Together with Yoda". It was not cheap. I paid it myself, but afterwards the reward was that many people seemed to enjoy my film. My costs were refunded by the positive comments, the results at festivals and the smiles on the faces of people while seeing my film. I am proud to be a non-commercial filmmaker !
SABAM is our national copyright organisation. I paid 25 euros to ... as we call it ... register the film. It means that if someone borrows your film and makes copies of it, he or she can be sued by SABAM. Now I am really very proud that I have not sold one copy.
You can sell your films to raise funds for charity... for the cancer appeal or for people in need. I remember that once -I think it was Michael -suggested to sell my film "Together with Yoda" in the Cotswolds. For instance to help the Gloucester Fire Brigade. I didn't do this, but in fact Michael was right. This is noble-minded. Mind : I am not against selling films about weddings. Such films are not shown at festivals. Imagine that we make a film to support the IAC or BIAFF financially. That would be OK, but only if this film is not used at festivals like the Lily and other amateur competitions. I had a long version of "On the Road to Passchendaele". I could have sold that film very easily thanks to its theme. I asked a Dutch friend to make copies for the Genootschap Passchendaele Society. My friend Freddy, who is the president of that group of volunteers gave a free copy to each person who had done his/her utmost to organize the ceremonies in 2007 to commemorate the Battle in 1917. I didn't earn one euro with it ...
Imagine that having tropical fish in an aquarium is your hobby. You buy the fish that you can afford. It's also like that in filmmaking. I offered my actors in the Breendonk-film sandwiches and drinks. I paid everything myself. I am not a wealthy man, but I could afford it. I hired a vintage car for "Together with Yoda". It was not cheap. I paid it myself, but afterwards the reward was that many people seemed to enjoy my film. My costs were refunded by the positive comments, the results at festivals and the smiles on the faces of people while seeing my film. I am proud to be a non-commercial filmmaker !
Willy Van der Linden
-
Mike Shaw
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
I have another situation ... we have made films (small group of us) using archive film from the local library. These films are of local interest (as it happens, not really suitable for competitions). We had a grant for some of the costs. People want copies - they are of historic interest (stretching back to the 30s). We made and shot extra material for free. However, we have had to pay to have the discs duplicated - we know we will be selling these. We've fixed a low, nominal price to cover printing. duplication,case and insert costs etc: once these costs have been covered, anything over will be given to local charities.
How does that fit into the 'amateur' equation? We're not doing it 'commercially' in the 'made to make money' sense, though it is our stated intention to sell them to recover duplication costs. We could ask for donations instead perhaps, but strangely, we found people are prepared to offer more than we're asking!.
This is a bit academic, because it isn't our intention to enter these historic 'look-backs' into any competitions. However, we do have a film 'on the stocks' which we know is in great demand (we could pre-sell copies before the first shot was in the can!). Same thing - it's being made for love, sold to recover duplication costs (not even filming costs), any 'profits' in this case going to a children's charity. This film we would dearly like to enter into competitions when finished, but probably can't because of the rules. Or can we?
BTW - we have cleared all copyrights for the original film archive material used - finding all the original film-makers - and their descendants has taken us three years or so!
How does that fit into the 'amateur' equation? We're not doing it 'commercially' in the 'made to make money' sense, though it is our stated intention to sell them to recover duplication costs. We could ask for donations instead perhaps, but strangely, we found people are prepared to offer more than we're asking!.
This is a bit academic, because it isn't our intention to enter these historic 'look-backs' into any competitions. However, we do have a film 'on the stocks' which we know is in great demand (we could pre-sell copies before the first shot was in the can!). Same thing - it's being made for love, sold to recover duplication costs (not even filming costs), any 'profits' in this case going to a children's charity. This film we would dearly like to enter into competitions when finished, but probably can't because of the rules. Or can we?
BTW - we have cleared all copyrights for the original film archive material used - finding all the original film-makers - and their descendants has taken us three years or so!
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
Maybe it's worth discussing why the rules are there, and what's the spirit of the rules?
I personally imagine that the rules are there so that a 14 year old kid can compete on a level playing field with a millionaire film maker. Fair enough, that may be an extreme comparison, but I'm sure you get the point...
Maybe the spirit of the rules is this? :
If your film is made with any sort of budget, then it's not amateur? Of course you can pay actors expenses, and sell your copies at cost price, (which I would say would be £3-4?) but if you have any financial input into the film, like a grant or a sponsor, then that makes it ineligable? Unfortunately giving profits to charity still makes it a profit making film?...
It's the spirit that's sometimes ignored - and there will always be occasions where you can rearrange words, or add one in here and there to suit an argument, but an amateur film should be made for the fun of it, and the joy of watching people's faces when they watch it. So by definition, it ought to be as public and as free as possible!
I personally imagine that the rules are there so that a 14 year old kid can compete on a level playing field with a millionaire film maker. Fair enough, that may be an extreme comparison, but I'm sure you get the point...
Maybe the spirit of the rules is this? :
If your film is made with any sort of budget, then it's not amateur? Of course you can pay actors expenses, and sell your copies at cost price, (which I would say would be £3-4?) but if you have any financial input into the film, like a grant or a sponsor, then that makes it ineligable? Unfortunately giving profits to charity still makes it a profit making film?...
It's the spirit that's sometimes ignored - and there will always be occasions where you can rearrange words, or add one in here and there to suit an argument, but an amateur film should be made for the fun of it, and the joy of watching people's faces when they watch it. So by definition, it ought to be as public and as free as possible!
I like to make films, this is- my Youtube account. What's yours?
"all of the above is nothing more than nonsensical ramblings, and definately should NOT be misconstrued as anyone's official policy"
"all of the above is nothing more than nonsensical ramblings, and definately should NOT be misconstrued as anyone's official policy"
-
billyfromConsett
- Posts: 489
- Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:27 pm
- Location: Consett
Re: Amateur films: commercial or not?
Hi Berry and thank you for addressing our forum.
My thoughts are just personal opinions. I’m not on IAC council, but just an ordinary IAC member.
The situation where professional film-makers submit movies into Biaff really does need to be addressed in my opinion.
The two areas causing me concern:
1) where movies competing for Biaff awards are openly for sale, either in the shops or on the internet
2) the situations where large group of people from film-schools make movies, obviously with the support of education finance. This support buys free actors, production, props, professional assistance (paid tutors), a whole range of tools and editing apps to give their movies professional production values.
Your movie Rex
I’ve seen your movie, and it’s an excellent piece of work. Google it, and one finds that Rex has its own website. The website is basic site, but it offers the movie for sale. You say that you’re just looking to re-coup some expenses for the making of it. Not for prices that I charge parents for Nativity DVD’s I make with their kids on – these are £3, including boxes, printed disk and printed covers – but for a price that’s often charged for commercial movies in the shops.
We hobbyists just don’t do that. Our movies cost us money to make. We pay and we share them.
In my view Rex has crossed the line, purely as it’s for sale to the world.
You do mention the awards the movies have won on your websites – nothing wrong with that. My whinge is the one commercial part of the deal - that brings all these superb standards into question for its non-commercial brief - in my opinion.
Your status as a professional film-maker, abeit in a different speciality, is fact. It would be brilliant for you continue to show off your considerable skills in your hobby interest of fiction film-making, in our non-commercial world. I hope you do, though it’s clear to see that your skills could get you far more paid work.
I would put to you that if you stated on the entrance form that your movie is on the net for sale, Rex couldn’t be accepted into Biaff. That would mean a Diamond award for truely defined non-commercial movie.
My thoughts are just personal opinions. I’m not on IAC council, but just an ordinary IAC member.
The situation where professional film-makers submit movies into Biaff really does need to be addressed in my opinion.
The two areas causing me concern:
1) where movies competing for Biaff awards are openly for sale, either in the shops or on the internet
2) the situations where large group of people from film-schools make movies, obviously with the support of education finance. This support buys free actors, production, props, professional assistance (paid tutors), a whole range of tools and editing apps to give their movies professional production values.
Your movie Rex
I’ve seen your movie, and it’s an excellent piece of work. Google it, and one finds that Rex has its own website. The website is basic site, but it offers the movie for sale. You say that you’re just looking to re-coup some expenses for the making of it. Not for prices that I charge parents for Nativity DVD’s I make with their kids on – these are £3, including boxes, printed disk and printed covers – but for a price that’s often charged for commercial movies in the shops.
We hobbyists just don’t do that. Our movies cost us money to make. We pay and we share them.
In my view Rex has crossed the line, purely as it’s for sale to the world.
You do mention the awards the movies have won on your websites – nothing wrong with that. My whinge is the one commercial part of the deal - that brings all these superb standards into question for its non-commercial brief - in my opinion.
Your status as a professional film-maker, abeit in a different speciality, is fact. It would be brilliant for you continue to show off your considerable skills in your hobby interest of fiction film-making, in our non-commercial world. I hope you do, though it’s clear to see that your skills could get you far more paid work.
I would put to you that if you stated on the entrance form that your movie is on the net for sale, Rex couldn’t be accepted into Biaff. That would mean a Diamond award for truely defined non-commercial movie.