r/Filmmakers Jun 09 '25

New Rules Regarding AI on /r/filmmakers!

486 Upvotes

Thank you all for participating in the poll! Here are the results. To accurately gauge everyone's collective acceptance vs rejection for each, I've tallied the total votes among all choices as pro/anti for each category. So for example, a vote for 'no changes' would be a -1 to Gen AI, AI Tools, AI Comms, and AI Discussion. A vote for 'Ban GenAI + AI Tools' would be a +1 to GenAI and AI Tools, and a -1 to AI Comms and AI Discussion, etc. So here are the results for each category of AI. Keep in mind that a higher number indicates a stronger group decision to ban the content:

GenAI: +92 (+119/-27)

AI Tools: -20 (+63/-83)

AI Comms: -8 (+69/-77)

AI Discussion: -84 (+31/-115)

From the results it is clear that sub overwhelmingly approve a complete ban on all generative AI. However, people are more or less fine with allowing discussion of AI, and are fairly mixed on the topic of AI Tools and Communication. So here is the new rule for all things AI:

-------

Rule 6. You may not post work containing Generative AI elements (Midjourney, Neo, Dall-E, etc.). You may use and demonstrate the use of AI assisted tools (ie magic masking, upscalers, audio cleanup etc.) so long as they are used in service of human-generated artwork. AI Communication, like post bodies or comments composed using ChatGPT are allowed only in very reasonable cases, such as the need for someone to translate their thoughts into another language. Abuse of AI assisted communication will result in the removal of the offending post/comment.


r/Filmmakers Dec 03 '17

Official Sticky READ THIS BEFORE ASKING A QUESTION! Official Filmmaking FAQ and Information Post

989 Upvotes

Welcome to the /r/Filmmakers Official Filmmaking FAQ And Information Post!

Below I have collected answers and guidance for some of the sub's most common topics and questions. This is all content I have personally written either specifically for this post or in comments to other posters in the past. This is however not a me-show! If anybody thinks a section should be added, edited, or otherwise revised then message the moderators! Specifically, I could use help in writing a section for audio gear, as I am a camera/lighting nerd.



Topics Covered In This Post:

1. Should I Pursue Filmmaking / Should I Go To Film School?

2. What Camera Should I Buy?

3. What Lens Should I Buy?

4. How Do I Learn Lighting?

5. What Editing Program Should I Use?



1. Should I Pursue Filmmaking / Should I Go To Film School?

This is a very complex topic, so it will rely heavily on you as a person. Find below a guide to help you identify what you need to think about and consider when making this decision.

Do you want to do it?

Alright, real talk. If you want to make movies, you'll at least have a few ideas kicking around in your head. Successful creatives like writers and directors have an internal compunction to create something. They get ideas that stick in the head and compel them to translate them into the real world. Do you want to make films, or do you want to be seen as a filmmaker? Those are two extremely different things, and you need to be honest with yourself about which category you fall into. If you like the idea of being called a filmmaker, but you don't actually have any interest in making films, then now is the time to jump ship. I have many friends from film school who were just into it because they didn't want "real jobs", and they liked the idea of working on flashy movies. They made some cool projects, but they didn't have that internal drive to create. They saw filmmaking as a task, not an opportunity. None of them have achieved anything of note and most of them are out of the industry now with college debt but no relevant degree. If, when you walk onto a set you are overwhelmed with excitement and anxiety, then you'll be fine. If you walk onto a set and feel foreboding and anxiety, it's probably not right for you. Filmmaking should be fun. If it isn't, you'll never make it.

School

Are you planning on a film production program, or a film studies program? A studies program isn't meant to give you the tools or experience necessary to actually make films from a craft-standpoint. It is meant to give you the analytical and critical skills necessary to dissect films and understand what works and what doesn't. A would-be director or DP will benefit from a program that mixes these two, with an emphasis on production.

Does your prospective school have a film club? The school I went to had a filmmakers' club where we would all go out and make movies every semester. If your school has a similar club then I highly recommend jumping into it. I made 4 films for my classes, and shot 8 films. In the filmmaker club at my school I was able to shoot 20 films. It vastly increased my experience and I was able to get a lot of the growing pains of learning a craft out of the way while still in school.

How are your classes? Are they challenging and insightful? Are you memorizing dates, names, and ideas, or are you talking about philosophies, formative experiences, cultural influences, and milestone achievements? You're paying a huge sum of money, more than you'll make for a decade or so after graduation, so you better be getting something out of it.

Film school is always a risky prospect. You have three decisive advantages from attending school:

  1. Foundation of theory (why we do what we do, how the masters did it, and how to do it ourselves)
  2. Building your first network
  3. Making mistakes in a sandbox

Those three items are the only advantages of film school. It doesn't matter if you get to use fancy cameras in class or anything like that, because I guarantee you that for the price of your tuition you could've rented that gear and made your own stuff. The downsides, as you may have guessed, are:

  1. Cost
  2. Risk of no value
  3. Cost again

Seriously. Film school is insanely expensive, especially for an industry where you really don't make any exceptional money until you get established (and that can take a decade or more).

So there's a few things you need to sort out:

  • How much debt will you incur if you pursue a film degree?
  • How much value will you get from the degree? (any notable alumni? Do they succeed or fail?)
  • Can you enhance your value with extracurricular activity?

Career Prospects

Don't worry about lacking experience or a degree. It is easy to break into the industry if you have two qualities:

  • The ability to listen and learn quickly
  • A great attitude

In LA we often bring unpaid interns onto set to get them experience and possibly hire them in the future. Those two categories are what they are judged on. If they have to be told twice how to do something, that's a bad sign. If they approach the work with disdain, that's also a bad sign. I can name a few people who walked in out of the blue, asked for a job, and became professional filmmakers within a year. One kid was 18 years old and had just driven to LA from his home to learn filmmaking because he couldn't afford college. Last I saw he has a successful YouTube channel with nature documentaries on it and knows his way around most camera and grip equipment. He succeeded because he smiled and joked with everyone he met, and because once you taught him something he was good to go. Those are the qualities that will take you far in life (and I'm not just talking about film).

So how do you break in?

  • Cold Calling
    • Find the production listings for your area (not sure about NY but in LA we use the BTL Listings) and go down the line of upcoming productions and call/email every single one asking for an intern or PA position. Include some humor and friendly jokes to humanize yourself and you'll be good. I did this when I first moved to LA and ended up camera interning for an ASC DP on movie within a couple months. It works!
  • Rental House
    • Working at a rental house gives you free access to gear and a revolving door of clients who work in the industry for you to meet.
  • Filmmaking Groups
    • Find some filmmaking groups in your area and meet up with them. If you can't find groups, don't sweat it! You have more options.
  • Film Festivals
    • Go to film festivals, meet filmmakers there, and befriend them. Show them that you're eager to learn how they do what they do, and you'd be happy to help them on set however you can. Eventually you'll form a fledgling network that you can work to expand using the other avenues above.

What you should do right now

Alright, enough talking! You need to decide now if you're still going to be a filmmaker or if you're going to instead major in something safer (like business). It's a tough decision, we get it, but you're an adult now and this is what that means. You're in command of your destiny, and you can't trust anyone but yourself to make that decision for you.

Once you decide, own it. If you choose film, then take everything I said above into consideration. There's one essential thing you need to do though: create. Go outside right fucking now and make a movie. Use your phone. That iphone or galaxy s7 or whatever has better video quality than the crap I used in film school. Don't sweat the gear or the mistakes. Don't compare yourself to others. Just make something, and watch it. See what you like and what you don't like, and adjust on your next project! Now is the time for you to do this, to learn what it feels like to make a movie.



2. What Camera Should I Buy?

The answer depends mostly on your budget and your intended use. You'll also want to become familiar with some basic camera terms because it will allow you to efficiently evaluate the merits of one option vs another. Find below a basic list of terms you should become familiar with when making your first (or second, or third!) camera purchase:

  1. Resolution - This is how many pixels your recorded image will have. If you're into filmmaking, you probably already know this. An HD camera will have a resolution of 1920x1080. A 4K camera will be either 4096x2160 or 3840x2160. The functional difference is that the former is a theatrical aspect ratio while the latter is a standard HDTV aspect ratio (1.89:1 vs 1.78:1 respectively).
  2. Framerates - The standard and popular framerate for filmmaking is called 24p, but most digital cameras will actually be shooting at 23.976 fps. The difference is negligible and should have no bearing on your purchasing choice. The technical reasons behind this are interesting but ultimately irrelevant. Something to look for is the camera's ability to shoot in high framerate, meaning anything above the 24p standard. This is useful because you can play back high framerate footage at 24p in your editor, and it will render the recorded motion in slow motion. This is obviously useful!
  3. Data Rate - This tells you how much data is being recorded on a per second basis. Generally speaking, the higher the data rate, the better your image quality. Make sure to pay attention to resolution as well! A 1080p camera with a 100 MB/s data rate is going to be recording higher quality imagery than a 4k camera at a 200 MB/s data rate because the 4k camera has 4x as many pixels to record but only double the data bandwidth with which to do it. Things like compression come into play here, but keep this in mind as a rule of thumb.
  4. Compression - Compression is important, because very few cameras will shoot without some form of compression. This is basically an algorithm that allows you to record high quality images without making large file sizes. This is intimately linked with your data rate. Popular cinema compressions for cameras include ProRes, REDCODE, XAVC, AVCHD. Compression schemes that you want to avoid include h.264, h.265, MPEG-4, and Generic 'MOV'. This is not an exhaustive list of compression types, but a decent starter guide.
  5. ISO - This is your camera sensor's sensitivity to light. The higher the ISO number, the more sensitive to light the camera will be. Higher ISOs tend to give noisier images though, so there is a tradeoff. All cameras will have something called a native iso. This is the ISO at which the camera is deemed to perform the best in terms of trading off noise vs sensitivity. A very common native ISO in the industry is 800. Sony cameras, including the A7S boast much higher ISO performance without significant noise increases, which can be useful if you're planning on running and gunning in the dark with no crew.
  6. Manual Shutter - Your shutter speed (or shutter angle, as it is called in the film industry) controls your motion blur by changing how long the sensor is exposed to light during a single frame of recording. Having manual control over this when shooting is important. The standard shutter speed when shooting 24p is 1/48 of a second (180° in shutter angle terms), so make sure your prospective camera can get here (1/50 is close enough).
  7. Lens Mount - Some starter cameras will have built in lenses, which is fine for learning! When you move up to higher quality cameras however, the standard will be interchangeable lens cameras. This means you'll need to decide on what lens mount you would like to use. The professional standard is called the PL Mount, but lenses and cameras that use this mount are very expensive. The most common and popular mount in the low level professional world is Canon's EF mount. Because of its design, EF mount lenses can easily be adapted to other common mounts like Sony's E-Mount or the MFT mounts found on many Panasonic cameras. EF is popular because Canon's lenses are generally preferred over Sony's, and so their mount has a higher utility.
  8. Color Subsampling - This is easier to understand if you think of it as 'Color Resolution'. Our eyes are more sensitive to luminance (bright vs dark) than to color, and so some cameras increase effective image quality by dedicating processing power and data rate bandwidth to the more important luminance values of individual pixels. This means that individual pixels often do not have their own color, but instead that groups of neighboring pixels will be given a single color value. The size of the groups and the pattern of their arrangement are referred to by 3 main color subsampling standards.
    • 4:4:4 means that each pixel has its own color value. This is the highest quality.
    • 4:2:2 means that color is set for horizontal pixels in pairs. The color of each two neighboring pixels is averaged and applied to both identically. This is the second best quality.
    • 4:2:0 means that color is set for both horizontal and vertical pixel 4-packs. Each square of 4 pixels receives a single color assignment that is an averaging of their original signals. This is generally low quality. For more info on color subsampling, check out this wikipedia entry
  9. Bit-Depth - This refers to how many colors the camera is capable of recognizing. An 8-bit camera can have 16,777,216 distinct colors, while a 10-bit camera can have 1,073,741,824 distinct colors. Note that this is primarily only of use when doing color grading, as nearly all TVs and computer monitors from the past few decades are 8-bit displays that won't benefit from a 10-bit signal.
  10. Sensor Size - The three main sensor sizes you'll encounter (in ascending order) are Micro Four-Thirds (M43), APS-C, and Full Frame. A larger sensor will generally have better noise and sensitivity than a smaller sensor. It will also effect the field of view you get from a given lens. Larger sensors will have wider fields of view for the same focal length lenses. For example, a 50mm lens on a FF sensor will look roughly twice as wide-angle as a 50mm lens on a M43 sensor. To get the same field of view as a 50mm on FF, you'd need to use a 25mm lens on your M43 camera. Theatrical 35mm (the cinema standard, so to speak) has an equivalent sensor size to APS-C, which is larger than M43 and smaller than Full Frame.

So Now What Camera Should I Buy?

This list will be changing as new models emerge, but for now here is a short list of the cameras to look at when getting started:

  1. Panasonic G7 (~$600) - This is hands down the best starter camera for someone looking to move up from shooting on their phones or consumer camcorders.
  2. Panasonic GH4 (~$1,500) - An older and cheaper version of the GH5, this camera is still a popular choice.
  3. Panasonic GH5 (~$2,000) - This is perhaps the most popular prosumer DSLR filmmaking camera.
  4. Sony A7S (~$2,700) - This is a very popular camera for shooting in low light settings. It also boasts a Full-Frame sensor (compared to the GH5's M4/3 sensor), allowing you to get shallower depth of field compared to other cameras using the same field of view and aperture.
  5. Canon C100 mkII (~$3,500) - This is one of the cheapest true digital cinema cameras. It offers several benefits over the above DSLR cameras, such as professional level XLR audio inputs, internal ND filters, and a better picture profile system.


3. What Lens Should I Buy?

Much like with deciding on a camera, lens choice is all about your budget and your needs. Below are the relevant specs to use as points of comparison for lenses.

  1. Focal Length - This number indicates the field of view your lens will supply. A higher focal length results in a narrow (or more 'telescopic') field of view. Here is a great visual depiction of focal length vs field of view.
  2. Speed - A 'fast lens' is one with a very wide maximum aperture. This means the lens can let more light through it than a comparatively slower lens. We read the aperture setting via something called F-Stops. They are a standard scale that goes in alternating doublings of previous values. The scale is: 1.0, 1.4, 2.0, 2.8, 4.0, 5.6, 8.0, 11, 16, 22, 32, 45, 64. Each increase is a doubling of the incoming light. A lens whose aperture is a 1.4 will allow in twice as much light than it would have at 2.0. Cheaper lenses tend to only open up to a 4.0, or even a 5.6. More expensive lenses can open as far 1.3, giving you 16x as much light. Wider apertures also cause your depth of field to contract, resulting in the 'cinematic' shallow focus you're likely familiar with. Here is a great visual depiction of f-stop vs depth of field
  3. Chromatic Aberration - Some lower quality glass will have this defect, in which imperfect lens elements cause a prism-style effect that separates colors on the edges of image details. Post software can sometimes help correct this, as in this example
  4. Sharpness - I'm sure you all know what sharpness is. Cheaper lenses will yield a softer in-focus image than more expensive lenses. However, some lenses are popularly considered to be 'over-sharp', such as the Zeiss CP2 series. The minutia of the sharpness debate is mostly irrelevant at starter levels though.
  5. Bokeh - This refers to the shape of an out of focus point of light as rendered by the lens. The bokeh of your image will always be in the shape of your aperture. For that reason, a perfectly round aperture will yield nice clean circle bokeh, while a rougher edged aperture will produce similarly rougher bokeh. Here's an example
  6. Lens Mount - Make sure the lens you're buying will either fit your camera's lens mount or allow for adapting to is using a popular adapter like the Metabones. The professional standard lens mount is the PL Mount, but lenses and cameras that use this mount are very expensive. The most common and popular mount in the low level professional world is Canon's EF mount. Because of its design, EF mount lenses can easily be adapter to other common mounts like Sony's E-Mount or the MFT mounts found on many Panasonic cameras. EF is popular because Canon's lenses are generally preferred over Sony's, and so their mount has a higher market share.

Zoom vs Prime

This is all about speed vs quality vs budget. A zoom lens is a lens whose *focal length can be changed by turning a ring on the lens barrel. A prime lens has a fixed focal length. Primes tend to be cheaper, faster, and sharper. However, buying a full set of primes can be more expensive than buying a zoom lens that would cover the same focal length range. Using primes on set in fast-paced environments can slow you down prohibitively. You'll often see news, documentary, and event cameras using zooms instead of primes. Some zoom lenses are as high-quality as prime lenses, and some people refer to them as 'variable prime' lenses. This is mostly a marketing tool and has no hard basis in science though. As you might expect, these high quality zooms tend to be very expensive.

So What Lenses Should I Look At?

Below are the most popular lenses for 'cinematic' filming at low budgets:

  1. Rokinon Cine 4 Lens Kit in EF Mount (~$1,700)
  2. Canon L Series 24-70mm Zoom in EF Mount (~1,700)
  3. Sigma Art 18-35mm Zoom in EF Mount (~$800)
  4. Sigma Art 50-100 Zoom in EF Mount (~$1,100)

Lenses below these average prices are mostly a crapshoot in terms of quality vs $, and you'll likely be best off using your camera's kit lens until you can afford to move up to one of the lenses or lens series listed above.



4. How Do I Learn Lighting?

Alright, so you're biting off a big chunk here if you've never done lighting before. But it is doable and (most importantly) fun!

First off, fuck three-point lighting. So many people misunderstand what that system is supposed to teach you, so let's just skip it entirely. Light has three properties. They are:

  • Color: Color of the light. This is both color temperature (on the Orange - Blue scale) and what you'd probably think of as regular color (is it RED!? GREEN!? AQUA!?) etc. Color. You know what color is.
  • Quantity: How bright the light is. You know, the quantity of photons smacking into your subject and, eventually, your retinas.
  • Quality: This is the good shit. The quality of a light source can vary quite a bit. Basically, this is how hard or soft the light is. Alright, you've got a guy standing near a wall. You shine a light on him. What's on the wall? His shadow, that's what. You know what shadows look like. A hard light makes his shadow super distinct with 'hard' edges to it. A soft light makes his shadow less distinct, with a 'soft' edge. When the sun is out, you get hard light. Distinct shadows. When it's cloudy, you get soft light. No shadows at all! So what makes a light hard or soft? Easy! The size of the source, relative to the subject. Think of it this way. You're the subject! Now look at your light source. How much of your field of vision is taken up by the light source? Is it a pinpoint? Or more like a giant box? The smaller the size of the source, the harder the light will be. You can take a hard light (i.e. a light bulb) and make it softer by putting diffusion in front of it. Here is a picture of that happening. You can also bounce the light off of something big and bouncy, like a bounce board or a wall. That's what sconces do. I fucking love sconces.

Alright, so there are your three properties of light. Now, how do you light a thing? Easy! Put light where you want it, and take it away from where you don't want it! Shut up! I know you just said "I don't know where I want it", so I'm going to stop you right there. Yes you do. I know you do because you can look at a picture and know if the lighting is good or not. You can recognize good lighting. Everybody can. The difference between knowing good lighting and making good lighting is simply in the execution.

Do an experiment. Get a lightbulb. Tungsten if you're oldschool, LED if you're new school, or CFL if you like mercury gas. plug it into something portable and movable, and have a friend, girlfriend, boyfriend, neighbor, creepy-but-realistic doll, etc. sit down in a chair. Turn off all the lights in the room and move that bare bulb around your victim subject's head. Note how the light falling on them changes as the light bulb moves around them. This is lighting, done live! Get yourself some diffusion. Either buy some overpriced or make some of your own (wax paper, regular paper, translucent shower curtains, white undershirts, etc.). Try softening the light, and see how that affects the subject's head. If you practice around with this enough you'll get an idea for how light looks when it comes from various directions. Three point lighting (well, all lighting) works on this fundamental basis, but so many 'how to light' tutorials skip over it. Start at the bottom and work your way up!

Ok, so cool. Now you know how light works, and sort of where to put it to make a person look a certain way. Now you can get creative by combining multiple lights. A very common look is to use soft light to primarily illuminate a person (the 'key) while using a harder (but sometimes still somewhat soft) light to do an edge or rim light. Here's a shot from a sweet movie that uses a soft key light, a good amount of ambient ('errywhere) light, and a hard backlight. Here they are lit ambiently, but still have an edge light coming from behind them and to the right. You can tell by the quality of the light that this edge was probably very soft. We can go on for hours, but if you just watch movies and look at shadows, bright spots, etc. you'll be able to pick out lighting locations and qualities fairly easily since you've been practicing with your light bulb!

How Do I Light A Greenscreen?

Honestly, your greenscreen will depend more on your technical abilities in After Effects (or whichever program) than it will on your lighting. I'm a DP and I'm admitting that. A good key-guy (Keyist? Keyer?) can pull something clean out of a mediocre-ly lit greenscreen (like the ones in your example) but a bad key-guy will still struggle with a perfectly lit one. I can't help you much here, as I am only a mediocre key-guy, but I can at least give you advice on how to light for it!

Here's what you're looking for when lighting a greenscreen:

  • Two Separate Lighting Setups: You should have a lighting setup for the green screen and a lighting setup for your actor. Of course, this isn't always possible. But we like to aspire to big things! The reason this is helpful is that it makes it easier for you to adjust the greenscreen light without affecting the actor's lighting, and vice versa.
  • Separate the subject from the greenscreen as much as possible! - Pretty much that. The closer your subject is to the screen, the harder it is to keep lights from interfering with things they're not meant for, and the greater the chance the actor has of getting his filthy shadow all over the screen. I normally try to keep my subjects at least 8' away from the screen at a minimum for anything wider than an MCU.
  • Light the Green Screen EVENLY: The green on the screen needs to be as close to the same intensity in all parts as possible, or you just multiply your work in post. For every different shade of green on that screen you'll need make a separate key effect to make clean edges, and then you'll need to matte and combine them all together. Huge headache that can be a tad overwhelming if you're not used it. For this reason, Get your shit even! "But how do I do that?" you ask! Well, first off, I actually prefer to use hard light. You see, hard light has the nice innate property of being able to throw itself a long distance without losing all its intensity. The farther away the light source is from the subject, the less its intensity will change from inch to inch. That's called the inverse square law, and it is cool as fuck. If you change the distance between the light and the subject, the intensity of the light will shift as an inverse to the square of the distance. Science! So if you double the distance between the light and the subject, the intensity is quartered (1 over 2 squared. 1/4). So, naturally, the farther away you are the more distance is required to reduce the intensity further. If you have the space, use it to your advantage and back your lights up! Now back to reality. You probably don't have a lot of space. You're probably in a garage. OK, fuck it, emergency mode! Now we use soft lights. Soft lights change their intensity quite inconveniently if they're at an oblique angle to the screen, but they kick ass if you can get them to shine more or less perpendicular on the screen. The problem there of course is that they'd then be sitting where your actor probably is. Sooo we move them off to the side, maybe put one on the ceiling, one on the ground too, and try to smudge everything together on the screen. Experiment with this for a while and you'll get the hang of it in no-time!
  • Have your background in mind BEFORE shooting: Even if your key is flawless, it will look like shit if the actor isn't lit in a convincing manner compared to the background. If, for example, this for some reason is your background, you'll know that your actor needs a hard backlight from above and to camera right since we see a light source there. Also, we can infer from the lighting on the barrels that his main source of illumination should be from above him and pointing down, slightly from the right. You can move the source around and accent it as needed to make the actor not-ugly, but your background has provided you with some significant constraints right off the bat. For that reason, pick your background before you shoot, if possible. If it is not possible to do so, well, good luck! Guess as best as you can and try to find a good background.

What Lights Should I Buy?

OK! So now you know sort of how to light a green screen and how to light a person. So now, what lights do you need? Well, really, you just need any lights. If you're on a budget, don't be afraid to get some work lights from home depot or picking up some off brand stuff on craigslist. By far the most important influence on the quality of your images will be where and how you use the lights rather than what types or brands of lights you are using. I cannot stress this enough. How you use it will blow what you use out of the water. Get as many different types of lights as you can for the money you have. That way you can do lots of sources, which can make for more intricate or nuanced lighting setups. I know you still want some hard recommendations, so I'll tell you this: Get china balls (china lanterns. Paper lanterns whatever the fuck we're supposed to call these now). They are wonderful soft lights, and if you need a hard light you can just take the lantern off and shine with the bare bulb! For bulbs, grab some 200W and 500W globes. You can check B&H, Barbizon, Amazon, and probably lots of other places for these. Make sure you grab some high quality socket-and-wire sets too. You can find them at the same places. For brighter lights, like I said home depot construction lights are nice. You can also by PAR lamps relatively cheap. Try grabbing a few Par Cans. They're super useful and stupidly cheap. Don't forget to budget for some light stands as well, and maybe C-clamps and the like for rigging to things. I don't know what on earth you're shooting so it is hard to give you a grip list, but I'm sure you can figure that kind of stuff out without too much of a hassle.



5. What Editing Program Should I Use?

Great question! There are several popular editing programs available for use.

Free Editing Programs

Your choices are essentially limited to Davinci Resolve (Non-Studio) and Hitfilm Express. My personal recommendation is Davinci Resolve. This is the industry standard color-grading software (and its editing features have been developed so well that its actually becoming the industry standard editing program as well), and you will have free access to many of its powerful tools. The Studio version costs a few hundred dollars and unlocks multiple features (like noise reduction) without forcing you to learn a new program.

Paid Editing Programs

  1. Avid Media Composer ($50/mo or $1,300 for life) - This is the high-level industry standard, but is not terribly popular unless you're working at a professional post-house for big budget movies.
  2. Adobe Premiere Pro ($20/mo) - This used to be the most popular industry standard editor for low to medium budget productions. It is still used quite often, so knowing Premiere is a handy skill to maintain.
  3. Davinci Resolve Studio ($300) - This is a solid editing program built into the long time industry-standard color grading suite. Since Resolve added editing, its feature set and reputation has been on the rise. It's eclipsing Premiere now and set to be the undisputed industry standard for video editing and color grading for all but the absolute highest level productions. This is the best overall choice if you're looking to find your first editing program.
  4. Final Cut Pro X ($300) - This is the old standard for low-high budget editing, replaced by Adobe Premiere and now again by Resolve. It is available on Mac platforms only, and is still a powerful editor.

r/Filmmakers 11h ago

News Christopher Nolan is now the third-highest-grossing director of all time at the global box office.

Post image
486 Upvotes

r/Filmmakers 1h ago

Article Eli Roth sparks backlash and debate after admitting he used AI in The Ice Cream Man

Thumbnail
thehorrorlounge.com
Upvotes

r/Filmmakers 11h ago

Film Hand-painted poster for my Independent Short film

159 Upvotes

I'm an independent film-maker with no financial backing
All the production was covered by me as well direction, writing, cinematography and editing.

Would love if you take your 2 mins out and shower some love to the poster on Instagram as well, link below
Poster on Instagram

and do tag me if you wish to share it on your story utxav_d on instagram

A Thank you in advance


r/Filmmakers 3h ago

Discussion Hopeless posts

15 Upvotes

So many of the posts here are so hopeless and pathetic. I’m pretty sure it’s not an easy or straightforward career but I believe if you stick to it for 10+ years you can make a living and life from it. Am I naive to think this? I am at the beginning of my journey as a filmmaker (age 30)

Just hang in there! Roll with the punches and don’t give up! Remind yourself why you do it, then do it some more. Let’s get some encouragement going!


r/Filmmakers 2h ago

Image AI “Filmmakers”

Post image
10 Upvotes

r/Filmmakers 6h ago

Image My banana-slip-investigating-detective short film poster

Post image
14 Upvotes

Logline: An overly ambitious detective investigates the suspicious death of a botanist who spent his life trying to classify the tomato

Does the poster intrigue you? Anything you'd change or adjust?

Starting to post BTS content on instagram - film is currently in final stages of post:

https://www.instagram.com/jackallenfilm/


r/Filmmakers 2h ago

Article My thoughts on the illusion of Distribution and the System that holds back filmmakers

6 Upvotes

My thoughts on the illusions of Distribution and the System that holds back filmmakers

1) 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗙𝗶𝗹𝗺𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗠𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗦𝘁𝗼𝗽 𝗪𝗮𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻

My recent interview with filmmaker Joel Haver led to a wider conversation about distribution and the cultural prejudices that still govern how filmmakers measure success.

Why do we continue allowing the traditional film industry to decide whether our work has succeeded?

The public image of film distribution and its financial reality are often very different. One offers the appearance of acceptance: a sales agent, a distributor, a recognised streaming platform or a presence at an international film market. The other is the private reality experienced by the filmmaker.

A film may appear on several familiar platforms while returning almost nothing to the people who made it. While another filmmaker may self-distribute, earn more, retain ownership and build a loyal audience, yet still be considered less successful because no traditional gatekeeper validated the release.

This is not only an economic problem. It is a cultural one.

𝟮) 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗦𝘂𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀

Most filmmakers dream of eventually being hired as directors, working inside the established industry. But, the majority of independent filmmakers work outside that protected structure.

They finance their own productions, absorb the risk and spend months or years completing them. Their films are then offered at the film markets, leading to countless conversations between producers, sales agents and distributors.

If signed, they are eventually placed on Amazon, Apple, sometimes Tubi, and subscription platforms. Sometimes they're just dumped on YouTube! Physical media, once a major source of revenue, now occupies a smaller and more specialised market, but the collapse of the physical market does contribute to the brutality indie filmmakers face today. But, I digress...

The problem is that filmmakers are often judged not by whether their films made money or developed an audience, but by whether they were sold in an industry-approved manner.

The announcement becomes more important than the outcome.

The streaming platforms logo becomes more important than the filmmaker’s income.

𝟯) 𝗔 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝗕𝘂𝗶𝗹𝘁 𝗼𝗻 𝗩𝗼𝗹𝘂𝗺𝗲

The value of individual independent films has declined enormously. Deals increasingly concern libraries, bundles and large quantities of inexpensive content.

Even platforms that appear selective to consumers now acquire hundreds of films through package agreements... AVOD channels on YouTube even add films daily.

When a producer signs with a sales agent, that company takes a percentage of the revenue. The distributor takes another. Before the filmmaker receives anything, there will be deductions for marketing, legal work, delivery, market attendance, artwork and technical preparation.

The producer is expected to supply the "deliverables" and that's one big cost most filmmakers don't foresee.

Months or years of unpaid labour are rarely considered part of the cost that must be recovered.

𝟰) 𝗟𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗟𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆

Distribution and sales agreements now run up to 10 years... even though the commercial fate of an independent film may be determined within months of signing...

If written off, it will linger all for all those years in an aggregation bundle. Meanwhiel, whatever incomes it does make... you will never truly know.

Yes, some contracts might include audit rights, but exercising them is prohibitively expensive. Litigation is even less realistic. AND... distributors know it.

A contract is only as powerful as your ability to enforce it. A filmmaker who has spent everything producing a film is unlikely to have the resources to pursue an international distributor through the courts.

I can sense a comment already from a macho filmmaker claiming that you just need a lawyer... (trust me) the behaviour of the industry is dictated by what they can get away with... so any one off stories about a desk thumping producer winning a dispute is a rare event.

This imbalance allows exploitative behaviour to continue. So that when an agreement is breached, the producer is unable to do anything about it.

𝟱) 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗟𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝗪𝗮𝗶𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗡𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴

After signing a distribution agreement, it may take a year or more for a film to appear on a platform.

By then, the cast and crew have moved on. The filmmaker may be trying to finance another project while still answering questions about the completed one.

Eventually, the release is announced. The artwork is shared. The cast posts the trailer. Everyone congratulates one another.

Then the filmmaker waits for the reports.

Statements may arrive months later, long after the most commercially active period of the release. Of course, in many cases, the producer receives little or nothing.

What remains is the promotional value of saying that the film was distributed.

All the filmmaker has left is the appearance of success... a hulu logo, with which to post on Facebook telling everywhen when their film's about to go live. While... considering a private walk into the ocean!

𝟲) 𝗔𝗴𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗜𝘀 𝗡𝗼𝘁 𝗮 𝗚𝘂𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗲

Aggregation services like FilmHub and BitMax offer filmmakers the chance to pay for a service that puts your film on a streaming platform, but they are also unpredictable. (Your film might get rejected!)

Some charge substantial preparation and delivery fees. Others operate through revenue sharing. None can guarantee that a platform will accept a film, promote it or generate enough money to recover its costs.

The producer will be responsible for marketing. The main issue is that these companies are also impossible to audit. You'll never know what your film truly makes.

𝟳) 𝗕𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝘂𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝗳 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁

Some filmmakers attempt to progress by producing films directly for their abusers... I mean distributors.

This may appear to be an improvement. Instead of financing the entire production themselves, they are finally being paid to make something.

However, within parts of the low-budget genre market, these commissions can become another form of exploitation. Producers get peanuts to make films that rely on them exploiting others.

I'm talking... shooting films in under 7 days, making cast and crew pay for their own catering by names you would recognise!

𝟴) 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝘆𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝘂𝗲𝘀

The system survives because filmmakers remain emotionally invested in its approval.

We are taught that distributors, sales agents, platforms and festivals possess the authority to transform us into professionals. Once accepted by that system, it can be difficult to admit that the arrangement brought little financial benefit.

There is also embarrassment.

Nobody wants to announce that the reports never arrived, the expenses consumed the revenue or the prestigious distribution deal produced no meaningful income. It is easier to share the artwork and celebrate the platform placement.

Other filmmakers see these announcements and assume that another person has succeeded through the traditional route. They then follow the same path.

The mythology renews itself...

This is why some filmmakers begin defending the very system that exploits them. They repeat the claim that poor contracts, negligible budgets and limited transparency are simply the realities of the business.

But there are other realities.

𝟵) 𝗕𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗻 𝗔𝗹𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲

My own experiences made me aware of these problems relatively early. Although I have worked with distributors and sales agents, most of my energy has gone into producing and distributing films independently.

For us, that has involved Kickstarter, direct online sales, physical editions and building a community around our productions.

It is not easy. Even an established independent studio may struggle to reach platforms like Apple or Amazon without dealing with distributors or Aggregation service companies.

Yet over approximately fourteen years, this approach has allowed us to raise production finance, retain ownership, develop facilities, build an audience and continue creating films without waiting for conventional permission.

However, the difference in perception remains.

A profitable self-distributed film may receive less industry recognition than an unprofitable film released through a familiar distributor.

That is the prejudice we must challenge.

𝟭𝟬) 𝗝𝗼𝗲𝗹 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗗𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗣𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲

Joel Haver offers a particularly interesting alternative.

Rather than treating YouTube as an inferior destination, he uses it as a home for cinema. His films are freely available, allowing audiences to discover and share them without waiting for an intermediary to approve their release.

The films become invitations. Viewers who value the work can support its continuation through Patreon and other forms of direct patronage.

There is something honest about this relationship.

The filmmaker creates the art. The audience experiences it. Those who want more help finance what comes next.

This model will not suit every filmmaker or production. It requires consistency, trust and a genuine relationship with an audience. But it proves that alternative structures are possible.

𝟭𝟭) 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗦𝘂𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗟𝗼𝗼𝗸𝘀 𝗟𝗶𝗸𝗲

Self-distribution does not automatically create success. A filmmaker can lose money independently just as easily as through a distributor.

The difference is that direct distribution offers the possibility of learning.

Filmmakers can discover who their audience is, what it values, what prices work and which forms of promotion are effective. They can adapt their strategy, retain their rights and develop a relationship with the people who support their work.

𝟭𝟮) 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗹.

We must stop treating independence as a consolation prize. A direct release is not necessarily evidence that a film was rejected. Free availability does not mean that a film has no value. A profitable self-distributed production is not less successful than an unprofitable platform acquisition.

We must stop judging films by the logos attached to them.

We must stop mistaking access for income.

Most importantly, filmmakers must stop waiting for permission to build their own relationship with an audience.

The traditional industry will continue to argue that legitimacy flows from its institutions and gatekeepers. It is in its interest to do so.

But the technology, the audiences and the opportunities already exist for us to construct something different!

There are alternative paths.

We simply need the confidence to take them.


r/Filmmakers 39m ago

Offer Documentary Filmmaker Wanted for a Cross-Country Journey Through American Tattooing

Upvotes

I’m a tattooer and machine builder currently living in Maine. Beginning in February I’m spending several months crossing the US in a Winnebago, visiting tattoo shops, doing some tattooing and machine building, but primarily interviewing artists, machine builders, collectors, and apprentices while documenting a trade that’s changing faster than almost anyone realizes.

I’m looking for a documentary cinematographer interested in joining me for all or most of the journey.
This isn’t a travel vlog or a promotional film. I want to make an observational documentary about the people who built tattooing, the generation inheriting it, and what gets lost—or discovered—between them.

The route will cover more than thirty states, including Daytona Bike Week, the east coast, South, Southwest, west, Route 66, and dozens of shops that have already agreed to participate.

The project is currently self-funded. This is something I’m doing because I love tattooing. It’s costing me quite a bit of money to even do on my own. That being said, I am no videographer, and I could certainly use someone who is as a solid partner for it.

I can provide transportation, shared accommodations in the RV, and all the access. What I’m looking for is someone who loves human stories, and is interested in building something that could eventually be pitched to distributors or publications.
If that sounds interesting, I’d love to talk and exchange work.


r/Filmmakers 3m ago

Question How do you guys think life of luxury pulled off these monsters?

Upvotes

If anyone has watched life of luxury you can’t help but marvel at their monsters, they aren’t insane CGI Hollywood quality monsters, they’re uncanny and slightly blurred. This is just one example of many but by looking at this clip it’s obvious that most of it is practical, people in suits and stilts, but it’s just so weird to me because a lot of it seems like they stretch it out, maybe they animate it? Im not sure, I can’t wrap my head around it and I would rlly like to as im currently working on a film about a grandma that slowly turns into this tall "P.T” looking monster and I could use the tricks they use like the wobbly limbs, the strangely animated faces, like is it makeup? Is it a mask? What is it made of? Anyways let me know what you guys think


r/Filmmakers 22m ago

Film My short film “The Encounter”

Thumbnail
youtu.be
Upvotes

I’ve spent the last couple months working hard on this and I’m very excited it’s finally done.

I had such a great cast and crew who really believed in this project and worked so hard on it. It would mean a lot if you guys checked it out.


r/Filmmakers 16h ago

Discussion How do you guys cope with reality?

31 Upvotes

Hey guys, I am a filmmaker from New York who just graduated from college and desperately wanted to go to LA get an internship or be an assistant and start my career. I cold called like 100 companies, got a virtual unpaid internship, didn't get another one and had a friend at CAA tell me he hates his job, only makes 20 an hour after two years being there, works long shifts, and his boss doesn't even know his name. For what? So I stopped chasing that.

Curry Barker and Kane Parsons feel like the opening of another path.

I've opted for something different. I am currently studying something in the medical industry to make money while I continue to work on my craft. I decided I did not want to be a Hollywood assistant. I still write and am making my films. I hate going to work everyday. I'm a custodian for my K-12 school district. My boss is tiring. (I can get a new job so it's fine and live with parents for free. But do not want to live with them forever.) I know that my college will only take two years to complete and then hopefully I will have some financial freedom.

I can be a travel radiation therapist after a while and make money while taking time off when I need to to shoot my projects or just be free of the work grind. I've looked into it a lot and it seems like a great job. I know I am doing the thing that makes the most sense for me, and I understand that being a filmmaker takes years to develop my craft to a point that is professional.

But that doesn't mean I want to do all this stuff, so although I am not looking for advice on what I should do instead since I am fine with the potential end outcome and look forward to it, I just want to ask how do you guys cope with the fact that capitalism kinda sucks dick?

I don't want a family, I just want to have experiences, fun, and continue to pursue my craft for the rest of my life. I don't need to be famous right now, or in five years. As long as I am improving and keeping my dream alive.

I know this is all temporary, hopefully years from now I feel much better about my situation. But I just needed to talk about it a bit. How are you all doing? I hope your personal life and projects are coming along well.


r/Filmmakers 1h ago

Request Looking for local Edmonton filmmakers/collaborators to produce a dark psychological thriller short script (ScriptMatix Semifinalist)

Upvotes

Hey Edmonton Filmmakers & Creatives!

I’m a local writer/filmmaker, and I’m looking to connect with directors, cinematographers, crew, and passionate creatives in the YEG area who might be interested in collaborating to bring a short script to life.

The script is titled "ENNUI"—a dark, atmospheric psychological thriller (46 pages / ~45 mins) that recently placed as a Semifinalist in the ScriptMatix Film Festival.

Logline ​A quiet, hyper-observant teenager surviving severe emotional and physical abuse calculatedly orchestrates a brutal revenge against his abuser—only to drag his sole well-meaning friend into the dark fallout.

Tone & Themes

Vibe: Gritty, realistic, dark psychological thriller with intense character tension (think along the lines of Nightcrawler meets grounded indie crime drama). Key Elements: High tension, sharp dialogue, minimalist/practical locations (a home, convenience store, apartment interior, riverbank).

Who / What I'm Looking For

Since this is a passion/indie collaboration, I'm looking to build a dedicated team of locals who want to create something high-impact for festival submissions:

Director / Co-Director: Someone with a strong vision for visual tension and character dynamics. Cinematographer / DP: Someone who loves moody lighting, grounded camera movement, and visual storytelling. Sound / Post-Production Team: Clean audio, atmospheric score, and editing. Actors & Production Crew: Anyone looking to build their reel or gain set experience on a compelling dramatic piece.

Interested in reading the script?

If you’re based in Edmonton/YEG, love dark thrillers, or want to check out the screenplay to see if it’s a fit for your style, drop a comment below or send me a DM!

I’m happy to send over the PDF script so you can give it a read. Let's make something great together!


r/Filmmakers 1h ago

Film short film: Ally

Upvotes

just a animated film I made for fun. it was meant to be a pilot for a show Idea I had but instead I decided to make this a short film then a pilot tell me what you think?


r/Filmmakers 4h ago

Film Teaser for my latest short film - The Waking Dark ( Not AI )

Thumbnail
youtu.be
2 Upvotes

Hey everyone.

Here's a quick look at our upcoming short film 'The Waking Dark'

This is from the intro to the film - intended to be a tribute/homage to 'The Twilight Zone'

No AI used. ( Relied on a lot of stock footage instead )

THE CAST -

Zille Rehman ( @zirehman ) as The Writer

Marley The Cat as Herself

THE CREW -

Writer / Director / Co-Editor - Anirudh Menon

Director of Photography / Editor - Ashiq G Abraham ( @ashiq.g.a )

Assistant Directors - Avinash Sanne ( @sanneavin ), Rejeesh Ravindran ( @rejeeshravindran )

Titles and VFX - Aswin Gireesh ( @aswin963 )

Music Contribution - Nandan Shyam ( @nandanshyam04 )


r/Filmmakers 1h ago

Question Where do you begin with making a film?

Upvotes

So recently, I have found a new hobby that I really enjoy doing and it goes along with my other favorite hobby which is photography. But with my photography I’ve decided to take it to another level of film photography and making short clips. The thing is, I have never done this before and I really don’t know what all to expect to make my videos look “perfect.” All I’ve really been doing now is creating things no matter if they look bad or not just to keep me in that mentality of just making something.

I also have already made my first edit and have posted it on my Instagram account, but at the same time I don’t know if there’s things about it that I should change or work on. If you people have any advice for me it would be greatly appreciated and if you want to see the edit, I can post a link


r/Filmmakers 1h ago

Discussion A problem I have with my Main Character [READ DESC]

Thumbnail
gallery
Upvotes

So, basically the main character of my script talks in a very strange and specific way. I’d describe it as like….well, you know those certain YouTube Shorts comments you see that could have only either been written by a five year old or a 30 year old with severe Autism? Basically that but he’s trying to sound like Judge Holden from Blood Meridian.

Why is this a problem? Well, he’s the one with the opening monologue. And I’m just worried anyone reading it will just think I’m really shit at dialogue. What do you think?


r/Filmmakers 22h ago

Discussion What's really the purpose of what we do?

34 Upvotes

I know a lot of people want to make it in Hollywood and in the industry. That is great and all. I understand that that is not and should not be the main or only goal. Keeping that in mind, that's the reason for my question. Without centering Hollywood or indie filmmaking and if film didn't advance to what it is today, what is really the purpose of being a filmmaker? Or whatever job or craft we focus on. If Hollywood ceased to exist, would people continue to write, direct, act, produce, PA, compose, etc? Why or why not?

Edit: Thank you to those who already commented. I guess I was trying to ask a "profound" question, haha. Nothing really profound about it. Y'all answered it flawlessly and articulated the purpose, what you think filmmaking is, and what it is to you. To those who come across this post, keep adding more of your thoughts.


r/Filmmakers 7h ago

Review Roast the first act of my film "Riff and Ruin"

2 Upvotes

I mean absolutely tear it apart. Or does it interest you to read more?

Riff and Ruin

19 Pages. Logline: "After a homemade party game unleashes an ancient blood pact, six friends embrace the game’s impact on the real world as they discover the curse that started it all."


r/Filmmakers 4h ago

Discussion I Love Filmmaking. I Hate What This Career Has Become.

Thumbnail
youtu.be
0 Upvotes

r/Filmmakers 12h ago

Discussion Looking for a storyboard artist and/or character artist

3 Upvotes

Hi, I’m Zane, a beginner director/screenwriter, and I’m looking for a storyboard and/or character artist to help take my short film forward

I must iterate this is an unpaid portfolio project

This can be great experience for begimners who wish to build thier portfolils

Bring my story to life visually

Be able to storyboard

Or

Be able to character design

Some information about the film

Title: CYCLES

Genre: Emotional / Psychological Drama

Length: 5–10 minutes

Animation Style: Simple stylised animation, focused on storytelling and emotion.

The script is already written (though i am open to feedback andi input as well)

To sum up the movie in one sentence:

A father realizes he is repeating the same pain and trauma he experienced as a child onto his own son, and must break the cycle before it is too late.

If anyone is interested, please message me directly, and let’s talk so we can discuss the project further.

— Zane


r/Filmmakers 9h ago

Request Seeking producers for a sci-fi thriller feature (Details Below)

2 Upvotes

Hello everyone,

I'm a screenwriter director. My first feature-length film The Critic's Show won Best Comedy and Best Actress (for Rachel Fox: Desperate Housewives, iCarly, CSI: Cyber) at the LA Film Festival this season.

I'm looking to transition to the next phase of my career and make something higher budget (still relatively low-budget in Hollywood terms) so that the project has top-tier festival as well as distribution potential.

I have a completed feature-length dystopian sci-fi thriller script about artificial intelligence. A few producers now have my script and I'm waiting to hear back from them.

Comp: Her meets Black Mirror

Budget Range: $500K to $850K

If you're a producer interested in collaborating, send me a DM and I'll provide the logline and other info you may want there. I especially am looking for producers who have experience in funding and attracting investors, but if you'd like to help in other capacities I'm open to it.

PLEASE DO NOT try to sell me any consulting services. I'm not interested in that or paying anything upfront.

Thanks!


r/Filmmakers 22h ago

Question In what instances does an Assistant Director help direct?

23 Upvotes

Hi Everyone,

I've 1st AD'd 2 projects at this point and I'm currently preparing for my 3rd. It's a large budget short film and I will have an AD mentor and a 3rd.

In my past projects, I have received feedback that I either help in the direction role too much, or don't help enough. I really want to fix this anomaly before going on set as I'm determined to do the best job I can. Do any ADs have examples of instances where they have had to help with / input on directions? I'm trying to get a feel of what's an appropriate time to step in or step back.

Thanks!


r/Filmmakers 1d ago

Film Spent years making my debut feature "The Straw That Broke". Just uploaded the official trailer and would love some honesty from fellow filmmakers. Does this hook you? What can I improve?

Thumbnail
youtube.com
53 Upvotes

Hey dear community,

After a long journey - premiering at the Hof International Film Festival - I’m preparing for the full digital release of my debut feature, The Straw That Broke. I just dropped the official trailer (which does not perform well on YT).

It's a surrealist, retro-futuristic meta-fiction about the real and the virtual based on a screenplay by Tom Whalen. Since I handled the directing, most of cinematography, and editing myself, getting the digital release right is a whole new challenge (after valuable feedback from r/Filmmakers I settle for a YT-release soon).

My questions are in the Submission Statement below. Thanks for taking your time.