IAC DISCUSSION FORUMS

I think that somehow the father of the young actress who stars in Distraction has been able to post the link to the film on lots and lots of ‘Short Film’ websites worldwide. It’s very enterprising of him and if this IS the explanation for the phenomenal viewing figure it’s been a very successful ploy.

That's interesting Howard. The subject of my coffee selling film, 'Danny's Red Box' has queried why I didn't include the word 'coffee' in the title. He considers that if I had we would have had far more 'views' on line. Apart from my own Vimeo and Web Site he put the film on You Tube and is counting the numbers! I've never looked at numbers, I suppose it may be interesting to do that. Anyway I like my title and pride myself on my selection of titles over the years.

By the way, is anyone else using this Forum? The Editorial in the magazine refers to it and urges more IAC members to use it. Hear hear, why don't they? Big Dave, can't you do something about this with your influence and prestige? Also Dave, I've been looking through my stacks of papers relating to films I've made over these last forty years and your critiques have always struck just the right chord.

Roger Fowles wrote: ↑Fri Sep 23, 2022 9:10 pm Gaining YouTube views is a bit of a dark art..

One way I discovered by accident: Find a very niche subject and make the best film (there won't be many others) about it. "Tuckpointing" is now has over a quarter of a million views. It will most likely only appear to a limited number of people, but with so few films about the subject every single one will watch it!

Another way is to hit on something that schools pick up on. "Tudor Rap" has yet to reach a quarter million

Any popular subject (which must be mentioned in the description) is lilkely to gain views - your Bond film being a case in point, but the "problem" is there will be thousands of other films about the same subject.

Roger Fowles wrote: ↑Fri Sep 23, 2022 9:10 pm The film managed a meagre 2 stars in this year's BIAFF so you're probably right about the reverse correlation between quality and views!

There is no correlation between quality and views. This is the same in professional cinema. Blockbusters are rarely high quality (although they will surely have some extremely high quality elements). It's the same with music, literature.....indeed all art.

I have noticed that some film makers do not pay much attention to the descriptions they supply for their films. A few even get their own film title wrong.

Howard is good at writing brief eye-catching notes and making sure strong stills appear beside his films.

Thanks Dave.
Tonight I’m pleased to have received confirmation that two of my eleven entries to the Birmingham Film Festival have been Officially Selected: ‘Crush’ and ‘Frankie’.

Howard-Smith wrote: ↑Sun Oct 02, 2022 12:55 am Tonight I’m pleased to have received confirmation that two of my eleven entries to the Birmingham Film Festival have been Officially Selected: ‘Crush’ and ‘Frankie’.

A just reward for making quality films, and also encouraging many actors and scriptwriters. I hope you are able to enter all 11 films in other competitions and are able to share your successes with us. To your credit, the fact that you were able to use local young actors in these two films seems to have had an influence. I think some of the other 9 films are really worth awards - I have watched them as you put them up on Vimeo, but I would have to watch again to remind me which ones I especially liked.

Thanks very much John Simpson.

TimStannard wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 10:17 pm

Roger Fowles wrote: ↑Fri Sep 23, 2022 9:10 pm Gaining YouTube views is a bit of a dark art..

One way I discovered by accident: Find a very niche subject and make the best film (there won't be many others) about it. "Tuckpointing" is now has over a quarter of a million views. It will most likely only appear to a limited number of people, but with so few films about the subject every single one will watch it!

Yes, making "How to" videos are a good way to get views and subscribers on YouTube. In my opinion many of the "How to" videos on YouTube are as good of better than what you get on TV. On YouTube there is a huge resource on film on the "dark art" of film-making!

By the way, a friend-of-mines teenage daughter was looking after their holiday let for the weekend and she was helped by a YT video on how to unblock a toilet! (The answer is with a coat hanger).

Viewers need a reason to want to search for, and watch a video. Reasons could be that the video has been made by a friend, or it is about a subject which is of interest. The most common thing that people are really searching for is a short burst of entertainment, something to take them away from the daily grind of life. Hence the rise of TikToc and Snapchat.

I have made several friends via YouTube, watching their videos, subscribing to their channel, commenting on their videos and getting responses back. The same has happend with my YouTube Channel people comment on my films, and I respond then some people watch and comment on nearly every video I put up. Popular YouTubers have so many comments, from people they don't know, that with the best will in the world they cannot respond to them all. And may just put a thumbs-up to show that they have read the comment.

Most people need friends and the internet can be a way of fulfilling that, even if they are never met in the flesh.

John, you are obviously a You Tube fan. I understood that film makers were more advised to put their films on either Vimeo or have their own site. I followed this advice and I know that I would get far more 'views' on You Tube because I get very few as things are now. I always thought that You Tube was for the youngsters and their messing about videos, together with the 'how to' videos that you refer to. I fear that I was wrong.

Just a quick reply, I came to Video Clubs, from YouTube, wanting to learn about film making!! To my surprise some film clubs hated YT and they were not too keen on teaching about film making either! As I say previously, it seemed they viewed film making as a dark secret art.
Has anyone else noticed that since the first lockdown, YT has been forgiven for trespassing on the film clubs domain and is now more or less mainstream. The trouble is many film club members are now around 90 and their film making days are over.

John, I have nothing against You Tube, you can find some great films on there. You don't mention Vimeo at all, do you ever use it and do you think that it is a good forum for film makers?

Going back to entering competitions: there can be several reasons why people do this. I can think of a few. To promote themselves or their film club, college, or group. To put over an idea which amuses or concerns the maker of the film. To fulfil an ambition which could go back to seeing the "Ten Best" filmshow or something like that years ago . In some ways for these things to be fulfilled there needs to be a recognition that the film is/was worthy, by being accepted for showing or whatever. posting.php?f=8&mode=reply&t=3966&sid=8 ... b55346069#

John ,your mention of the old Ten Best reminds me that it was the best forum ever for non commercial film makers, I know because I was lucky enough to get six of my films shown by them at the NFT. Film makers of international standing had their careers launched by this competition. The thrill of seeing one's film up on the big screen of the NFT before a full house was wonderful, as was the trophy presentation up on the stage by a leading figure in show business.

BIAFF is the nearest that we have to this but it doesn't quite have the same aura. Movie Maker had a wide circulation in the UK and, presumably, on the Continent and in America, because many more films came from there than do today to BIAFF. Many of today's semi pro festivals do not provide anything like the same satisfaction. I have sat in audiences where my film has been 'selected' and 90% of them were the film makers themselves.

It is a problem today to find a way to present our films. The old club public shows have all but disappeared, digital technology enables easy 'streaming' which is certainly not comparable with a nice big projected image. Even the commercial cinema is now facing post Covid problems with people preferring to watch films at home by means of Netflix and Amazon etc.

Michael Slowe wrote: ↑Thu Oct 13, 2022 11:51 am The thrill of seeing one's film up on the big screen of the NFT before a full house was wonderful, as was the trophy presentation up on the stage by a leading figure in show business.

Together with Tony Rose, the editor.
I wonder how many silver ten best trophies still exist and
haven't been melted down? They were hallmarked
Year by year, they will all slowly disappear..

Michael Slowe wrote: ↑Thu Oct 13, 2022 11:51 am It is a problem today to find a way to present our films.

I think what you mean is theres a problem of how to present our films as we (or some of us) want them to be seen - projected onto a large screen to a live, captive audience. This is true, and, as has been pointed out elsewhere in this thread, it's affecting cinemas too. IK suspect that watching a film in a cinema (or in a film & video club presentation to the local Rotarians or whatever) will become a niche in itself. But it might become a trendy one - like the trend for listening to gramaphone records on vinyl has become.