It depends on the film. Cinema verite style films – certainly. Others not so.
for me, it's hard to say which stage is more crucial. sure, you can always save something in the edit, but if you've shot it well, it makes the whole edit much easier. for instance, there are a few scenes in my documentary where the shooter got VERY little coverage and so we are left with absolutely zero choices in the edit room for those scenes.
good shooters AND good editors are worth their weight in gold. having said that, just because you pay someone their weight in gold, doesn't mean that they are the right fit for your project.
Monica – usually you can have some luck if you contact the press person in-house and tell them this is editorial, not commercial, if this is the case: Europe generally views access to old pictures differently than in the US (sweeping but I'll get shot down by other d-worders here if I am really off the mark), so you may find access has to be controlled but will not be costly. They have credible security concerns, but some of the best collections are in small institutions that are not hard to deal with (Brugges is cool). The Louvre gets bombarded and I was told by someone there that many professional news crews, for example, behave very badly – bulls in china shops. Our cameraman's behaviour was complimented, though to my eye he was conducting himself with normal courtesy and respect for the other people visiting. apparently not the norm...
Explore also the images that they can make available to you without you having to go and shoot yourself. Several collections are slowly being digitised, though this may be limited to stills...
H'm. It only took me two days to start complaining.
The reading restriction (i.e., not being able to read certain professional sections unless you're a member) strikes me as the same sort of glass ceiling I ran into when I wanted to start technical writing. That is, I couldn't become a tech writer unless I was already a "tech writer". Even though I had written about technology for periodicals for 20 years. Luckily, the head of the department looked at my resume and allowed me to try out eight years ago, and I've done it since (increasing my annual income by several times).
Now I want to learn how to become a documentarian (documentiste?), but it appears most of the information categories are only available to those who are already professionals. Same sort of glass ceiling.
Isn't it possible to allow enthusiasts to at least read through the posts, just to gain insight? Just don't allow them to make comments until they've won their spurs? Yes, I have been using tags, but those don't appear complete.
Sorry if I'm missing something, and the info is really available to all. I really do like the site, btw.
I think Dale makes an interesting point. While I completely understand the rationale behind the professional forum being "by professionals, for professionals", is what's being discussed so esoteric that the rest of us, who are either aspiring or just fascinated by the documentary film process, can't at least eavesdrop? The last thing I want is to seem ungrateful because I think this site is great and the advice I've read to others is thoughtful and constructive. I just think the secrecy of the members forums is unnecessary. Is there a way to do what Dale suggests, where somehow we could read posts, but not comment? I have no sense of the technical side of this, so maybe it's too complicated to institute. Any explanation would be appreciated.
I'm working on clearing all the photos for my first film, most of which are old family snapshots taken in Italy. Apart from getting a materials release from the owners of the photos,I understand that the conservative approach is to clear every individual pictured in those photos – a monumental task given that everyone is abroad and scattered about. But what if you can't locate everyone? From a practical standpoint, I was wondering how others have approached this for their films.
thanks, sheng liu. Ideally I'd like a theatrical run, with a DVD distribution plan. But I am not done shooting yet, I figured I would just go for broke initially with my first cut, and then poke around and see what any advice I can get in terms of what I can and cannot do.
getting the release forms will not be a problem (I have access to, and see the subjects on a semi-regular basis) the clips I use however, will most likely be removed. But it's worth it to try right?
what would be my first step in clearing these third party clips?
I sympathise (never with a Z!) with Dale Archibald and his thoughts about access to the forums for non-professionals. Although i would say that it seems like the pros regularly post advice and responses in the mentoring room and also access at least at some level is free. Somebody put in the hours to spruce up this site and they did a good job and didn't bill me for it so i am grateful for that. I have been a member on other forums that charge annually.
I haven't applied for professional status myself but i might. Can't believe there isn't a box to check for Production Manager or Coordinator when applying for pro status. We do a lot of work
even if it isn't necessarily editorial. Although i guess everyone doesn't have the luxury of larger factual production teams??? Do i have to be an "other"?
Evan, it is a fascinating site, and I do appreciate the work put into it. And, as I said, I suppose I could use the tags to work my way through everything.
I could probably fudge and say I'm a writer (which I have been since 1970), but I have had little documentary or video experience (if you don't count a stint doing puppets for a local cable TV show).
Last night I took the Introductory course to the Minneapolis Telecomm Network, so I'm on the path to enlightenment.
I simply think it would be helpful to look through the seminars in a more organized manner, and you can't do that if you're an enthusiast.
On another note, I noticed the lists on one of the bookseller sites for video and filmmaking. Interesting, what with the books on various aspects of the craft, lighting kits and all.
Evan and Dale, I am just a 5-year member of D-Word, not one of the three hosts/monitors, but recall that one of the concerns when putting the revamped D-Word together this past year was how to offer anyone at all who is interested in documentary some sort of platform so people with some experience in documentary can share their support, solutions, and other help with those who are new to it. Or who want to discuss whatever they like. The public/private division has nothing to do with fees; it's more about protecting privacy and some of the personal information that members exchange. While it might never be perfect, it's a fix.
D-Word doesn't charge fees and nor does it raise money with advertising, but the hosts did initiate a voluntary fundraising exercise a while ago to help pay for the intense programming needed to make all the bits flow together better. This included a much easier to use public zone. Enjoy the freebie!
Dale, I have often consulted titles published by CMP Books. Their publications on digital video sound and lighting were recommended to me – probably all updated since I read them.
Thanks, Jo-Anne. I'll take a look at them.
I do enjoy the site, and appreciate the work and care that goes into it. I shall continue to graze around the edges.
To all who have expressed comments about access to the member-only areas of this forum, the hosts will hopefully chime in soon. But I can say that I don't think those sections are made private simply to keep the discussion only to professionals or to create a clique. They were separated more to provide a safe space for professionals to share their experiences and challenges with few worries of their comments being seen by anyone (ANYONE, not just enthusiasts). The public forums come up in Google searches while the private forums do not.
That said, I think a great solution would be for the hosts to send out a monthly or even quarterly e-mail message to all D-Word members with some highlights of discussions held in the private forums which could be beneficial to all without compromising privacy. For example, right now there is an interesting discussion going on in one of the member-only topics about house parties as a fundraising tool and it would be great for some of the highlighted recommendations to be shared with the enthusiasts who could benefit by this information for their first project.
P.S. Not trying to be too self-promotional here, but can't help myself. I am the co-founder of a doc organization called Docs In Progress. While some people know us for putting on work-in-progress screening programs in the Washington DC area, we also have two initiatives which may benefit doc filmmakers based anywhere and with ANY degree of experience. One is a quarterly e-newsletter we publish. It's free and you can sign up for it on our website at http://www.docsinprogress.org (next issue to come out before the end of January will feature articles on rights and clearance issues and a story about a unique approach to online fundraising). The other is a work in progress screening we are coordinating in collaboration with NomadsLand on February 17 where the filmmaker will participate via Skype. More info on how to submit is here: http://nomadsland.com/content/view/60/158/
Erica – I think that's a great idea, but it also sounds pretty time consuming for whoever has to compile that newsletter. Maybe another, more user based, solution might be to add another button by the tag,edit,help, etc. that basically makes your post available to enthusiasts. There could just be one public thread that is a 'members selects' compilation thread. That way it would be up to the actual author of the comment (or a moderator, I guess) to decide whether the post should be available to the world (of course the default would still be that every post is private). While I realize most members would still hesitate to ever do this, a good way of alleviating that would be to automatically make those posts anonymous in the public forum. Yeah, it's out of context for enthusiasts, but they would just have to take the info or leave it and know it's coming from pros. This may be enough to appease everyone (except the poor web designer who would have to implement these changes). Just a thought. I think it's definitely valuable to take measures to keep the public D-Word vibrant.
Thanks Jo-Anne, Erica, and Ryan for your clarifications and comments. I'm a curious guy in general (probably why I enjoy docs so much), so I'm interested in what you all are discussing. However, if there is sensitive stuff in there, I will be content with the areas of the site that are available to me. I'm sure that a ton of work goes into maintaining this site while at the same time keeping it free, and for that I thank the hosts.
Thanks so much to Riley and Jo-Anne for the wonderful advice! Both of you are always very helpful to me.
hey guys, I have a quick legal question. If I shot a sporting competition (such as an MMA fight) , what type of legal document must I attain from the promoters of the competition to have the right to use it in my film?
I have release forms for individual participants, but is there a separate form for business, locations, ect?
and legally speaking, do I need to worry about locations like suburban streets and intersections, small chain stores like bi-mart (small chain in eastern Washington and parts of Oregon), and things like gas stations?
if there is a separate type of release I need to get, links to the documents I can download would be awesome...
thanks guys, I really appreciate it!
Sorry to act the role of a gadfly, but I guess I just don't see what sort of secret rites and protocols could cause "Let's show this to other adults, but don't let the kids see it." I understand there might be a reluctance to have everything on the site (e-mail addresses, etc.) available to search engines and spammers, but if forums are archived without editing the info is outed anyway.
So, as part of my learning curve, could someone explain to me what shouldn't be shown to enthusiasts? Without a complete description, of course? Or have a set of clear guidelines posted? I'd like a guideline as to whether I can put a website name down as a resource. I avoided doing so in an earlier post because I didn't know the guideline.
This is a marvelous site, one I came across by reading Wikipedia, and I've been looking for info on documentary filmmaking for some time now. I'd like to help it be better.
Dale (and others), as The D-Word's founder, let me jump in here with a brief policy explanation. The D-Word has always been an online discussion forum for documentary professionals worldwide. We make no apologies for the fact that we're somewhat "exclusive" or "clubby". We want a place where we can converse with our professional colleagues rather than be bombarded by basic questions from students and beginners.
In recognition that we all have to start somewhere, we've always had a public area of The D-Word, where Enthusiasts, as we now call them, can read the many guest conferences we've done over the years, and to ask questions in the Mentoring Room topic. We definitely plan to expand the public area of The D-Word in the coming years, particularly as we start to implement video hosting on the site.
As far as determining if someone qualifies as a pro, it's somewhat subjective as one of the co-hosts goes through every registration for membership. If there's any question, he either brings in the other co-hosts for their opinion or asks the registrant for more info. And if we do wind up rejecting an applicant for the professional area, we always allow them to either make a stronger case for themselves or re-apply at a later date when they presumably do have more experience.
As for making Members posts available for non-members to read, it would greatly curtail the freedom we feel to post our opinions. Especially since posts in the public area can be googled by the general public. But we're very open to new ideas of how to make the public area more vibrant, as Ryan puts it. So it's good to get everyone's thoughts and suggestions.
as some encouragement to Dale and other like-minded enthusiasts, you can be a first-time filmmaker and still qualify as a member. i still haven't finished my first film, but when i applied, i had reached a certain level with my doc in terms of funding and some industry recognition (along with my other film/video experience) where the hosts were comfortable that i would add something to the conversation, and not bog down the conversation with questions that were too basic. so when you are at a point that you are ready, apply for the full membership. in the meantime, the members will still be ready and willing to post helpful responses in the Public section.
Doug, thanks for taking the time. I'm really not checking out the incisors of a gift equine, just trying to learn as much, as fast, as possible.
It occurs to me that if the enthusiast/member difference must be kept up, perhaps you could offer a "guest member" or "trial member" listing. Have it for a short period of time, e.g., three or six months, and only allow it to those the Hosts approve.
At the end of that time, the person must show they've advanced toward becoming a professional: perhaps they've finished some paid classes, or have created and submitted==at least worked on==a 3-5 minute doc.
You might even put such trial balloons into a special area for viewers to comment on. Sort of myD-wordspace.
Christopher, thanks for the comment. I've been working on a film concept for some time. Since I'm a writer/editor/webmaster of over 30 years, I've been trying to master the storytelling/screenwriting aspects first. By the end of the month I'll start a class in Field Production, learning to use the cameras and mikes, lights, etc.
Since I'm sort of a "braid your own shoestring to start on" kind of independent cuss, I plan to self-finance my low-budget doc(s), although if I can land some funding I will be happy to accept it.
So...am I a filmmaker? I've certainly got the inclination.
I suppose I should let this lapse for awhile. I, too, don't want to "bog down the conversation with questions that [are] too basic."
dale, don't worry, you aren't bogging anything down. and i admire your perseverance and grit. i spent 7 years just "training" – community college courses, internships, editing awful local car ads – so that i would be confident in my own skill (camera, audio, etc.) when the right documentary idea came along. i'm sure you'll be up to speed MUCH faster than that. until then, keep asking the "basic" questions...
If I can contribute anything, let me introduce my fellow enthusiasts to another site if you haven't already joined it. http://doculink.org/mailing.html features an e-mail group where members have discussions on anything relating to documentary development, production, etc etc etc. It is still meant to be by professionals, for professionals, and they do ask that you don't spam the list. But as a beginner I've found it pretty useful and enlightening and if I've ever posted something too petty or amateur, the worst that has happened is that no one responded. No big deal.
But as part of my efforts to be a member here someday, I am seeking employment and actually wanted to know if anyone can recommend any job sites that specifically feature positions in non-fiction entertainment. This would greatly narrow my search to the kind of work I want to move into. Post any websites you know of here or e-mail me email@example.com
Thanks, guys. I'll check out doculink.org for sure.
Hey Everyone new to this site.
I am needing to create revenue projections for our
investor and our lawyer for a documentary I am producing. I am
relatively new to this process. Was wondering if anybody had samples
or advice on how to properly create revenue projections for a
Thanks ahead of time,
Does anyone know of online resources (other than Netflix) where I can view older movies and documentaries online for a fee?
I'm particularly looking for access to some of the harder to find, non-mainstream items, older foreign documentaries and films, etc.
No file-sharing recommendations please. These usually don't have the harder to find, less mainstream titles and I also want to respect the rights of the copyright holders.
Thanks so much!
I've been using Final Cut for my post-production and I just don't prefer the Apple layout and user interface. I was raised in a Wintel environment and I'm really learning towards switching to Adobe Premiere Pro for my next project.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
Does anyone know any compelling reasons why I would not switch over to Adobe? What are the biggest reasons for NOT doing so? What are the biggest disadvantages of Adobe Premiere Pro vs. FCP?
I will be filming in HD.
A. You can make changes to FCP to better suit your needs.
B. The latest version of Premiere Pro is a very good editing platform though it tends to be like most Adobe products with lots of hierarchical menus. Best to learn the keyboard shortcuts.
No need to sign your posts, Matt. It's done automatically.
The situation: We're starting post-production on our fist feature documentary, which tells the story of what happens when the filmmaker (my partner) puts his same-sex wedding announcement in the local paper of his ultra-conservative small home town. It includes casual interviews with people on both sides of the debate about gay rights, verite footage of the filmmaker engaging with the local "Family" Association and School Board, and several interesting characters.
The need: A creative collaborating editor who can look at our 100+ hours of footage and help shape it into a coherent story with the appropriate tone and voice: think Jesus Camp meet Roger and Me.
The problem: although our hometown of Washington DC has many talented editors and a wonderful documentary community, nobody with the exact right mix of skills, interests, political outlook and time available to work on this project has emerged. We are in discussions with some really terrific, experienced people in New York, Philadelphia and elsewhere – but the question is, how does it work to edit a project when you live in different cities? Should we expect to move there for a few weeks? Or months? Have any of the experts had experience editing long distance? I'd appreciate your thoughts and any advice on how to work together over a distance.
I very much look forward to seeing your films "Stone Reader" and "51 Birch Street" very soon!
I posted a brief intro of myself at:
To Matt- Re Adobe versus FCP – From a technical point the two programs are extremely similar, as are the layouts and even many of the keystrokes. In my experience the critical question is: who are you going to be collaborating with? Adobe seems to be used mostly by event and corperate-style videographers whereas FCP is used by almost all academic institutes and many indie filmmakers. If you're going to work completely by yourself it doesn't make much difference, but if you're going to collaborate on graphics, color, music etc., best to find out what your collaborators prefer. As to disadvantages, the big problem with Premier has always been instability; it shuts down a lot – maybe thats changed with the newest version. As to FCP, the biggest disadvantage used to be the price of MACS – but that has already changed with the new Mac Pros.
Thanks Robert. That's a very helpful point. No need to drill down through endless menus. I'll be sure to learn some of those critical keyboard shortcuts!
Dean, I don't want to underestimate the amount of skill required to do the various parts of post-production (as well as filming) or disrespect the great amount of skill required to make a memorable, moving documentary.
But my films are primarily going to be focused on content, not technical wizardry. I'm working with stories which move me very deeply that I believe will resonate with others deeply as well.
I will be doing most of the post work myself, as difficult as I know that will be. I am a quick learner and relish all the various challenges that I surely will face.
Dean, I'm not sure if you've done this or not, but get your interview footage transcribed. It's a lot of work up front, but it pays huge dividends down the road.
It may be best to sit down with a writer instead of an editor. Figure out the story you want to tell and the structure you want to use. You probably already know the story you want to tell, so write it out. Heck, you basically nutshell the story each time you post on the topic. As an editor, I don't need to watch a hundred hours of footage to get to that basic statement.
Starting with your basic statement, make a one or two page synopsis. Then make a treatment/paper edit, including what visuals, narration, music, etc. that you think will go into different places. Then sit down with a documentary writer or editor to look over what you have and get feedback from them. You can post what you come up with here and get excellent feedback.
Don't put it on your editor to reinvent the wheel. Especially if you know exactly what kind of wheel you want. If it's some Goodyear XKG All Season radials with white side walls, 205/85, etc., then say so.
Take a look at your Need and Problem statements again. You're setting your editor up for failure. I even have the 3 reasons why they will fail – not creative, not collaborative, and/or not the right mix. We could rewrite the statement to read – unprepared filmmaker seeks editor to do the hard work and accept the responsibility for things not working out right.
Editors are creative and collaborative and they don't need to be the "right" mix. The more specific you define the mix, the harder it is for anyone to meet the criteria. It's the filmmakers job to be the "right" mix, that's why they are telling a unique story.
It's really the filmmaker, especially the less experience they have, that lacks those qualities. It's not that the filmmaker isn't creative, or collaborative, rather without the experience, it's more difficult for them to clearly see the vision floating in their head, and then to clearly communicate that. The problem arises when the editor is unable to "divine" what the filmmaker is "seeing".
I hope I don't come across as harsh, and it's definitely not my intent, but one of the most common problems I see over and over again is the filmmaker him/herself getting in the way of making their film as good as it can be. And I'm the first to admit that I've been guilty of that on more than one occasion! But no one said the learning curve was easy or pleasant...
Anyways, my $0.02 – which won't even purchase fumes at the gas station :-)
Dean, part 2 of your question – working remotely with an editor. While it's not ideal, I think the technology today makes it much easier. One solution would be to have duplicate drives and file structures. As the editor works on a cut, they can send the project files to you so you can view what's going on. There's also tools such as Skype, etc. that would allow you to videoconference in and also see a virtual desktop.
There are times when an editor just needs to work alone to actually implement changes that have been discussed with the director. This is especially true in the rough cut stage. As you near a fine cut, there is more value in being there day to day. It all varies and depends on lots of factors.
Thanks Boyd – I'm also a first-time filmmaker and am struggling in post. I think a lot of what you've said could apply to me too – v helpful. Cheers!
Has anyone here entered a documentary in the Cannes Film Festival?
What was your experience like? Does entering in Cannes have advantages over entering it in Sundance?
JB, that SyncVUE is amazing. We should post about that in The Future of The D-Word topic and its potential for future collaborative projects.
Matt, Cannes shows very few docs, especially if you're not named Michael Moore. And much more expensive than Sundance, which is mighty expensive itself. Cannes has a market, too, but that's mostly for distributors selling shlocky films.
OK, many thanks Doug!
Hey I have a lot of respect for Cannes EXCEPT for the fact that they practically disregard the entire genre of documentaries. I take it Michael Moore has some direct connections.
Hahahaha yeah, plus it's the French. Oh well c'est la vie!!!
I've really been enjoying digging through this site since I joined a few weeks ago. Thanks to these forums and your profiles, I've gotten to know lots of documentarians and films though your posts and links to your respective websites. I've also been scouring the public areas of the site to gain more insight into the world of documentary filmmaking. Unlike most of you, I am a fan of the genre rather than an aspiring filmmaker. I admire the fact that so many of you are willing to share your experience and knowledge with others in such a supportive, non-condescending way. I'd like to ask a "What would you do if you were me?"-type question that pertains to documentaries. Since it requires some explanation and may be long, I'll leave most of it hidden. Thanks!
Hi Doug, I just saw 51 Birch Street and congratulations!
What a courageous film. For me, courage is such an admirable and rare quality in film nowadays and I'm delighted I saw it.
I had one of those rare life experiences laughing and crying at the exact same time when you clasped hands with your dad at the end.
That's quite a combo, to laugh and cry at the exact same instant; thanks so much for that!!
I have kind of a dumb technical question. When you were behind the camera participating in interviews, did you have a lavalier mike for yourself and a shotgun mike for the talent?
Robert Goodman, I just saw Stone Reader and loved it! I know you didn't direct this (you were the producer) but one of my favorite parts of the movie was the recurrence of various footage of butterflies throughout the film. Was this done to mark out different "chapters" of the movie?
This continual insertion of butterflies into the film reminded me of the recurring scene in Bunuel's Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie where the protagonists are repeatedly seen talking and walking in the French countryside....
Again Stone Reader is great film, with lots of unexpected twists and turns. Some great political points too (about ITT and the purchase of the publishing house) very subtly and ably presented.
Thanks so much for helping to bring that to the public. Because I'm a huge fan of Gabriel Garcia Marquez, I think I'm really going to enjoy the book The Stones of Summer, the subject of the movie.
Mossman's quite the scholar.... evidently 1605 was THE year for Shakespeare!!!
I plan to attend a local sports-related consumer show next month, with
an eye toward getting interviews and other shots. I'll use footage shot
in a public-access TV show, and for other things. Any tips or hints?
The eqpt will be loaned to me by the public access station. I will have
interviewees sign releases.
What sort of open-ended questions should I ask? What sort of shots? I'm
brand-new at this, so any help is appreciated.
In order to help you, you need to provide us with more information.
What do you mean by "sports-related" consumer show? Is this a fair, a sort of market with equipment on sale/ What sport(s)? Who do you want to ask questions? People selling equipment, members of the public, buyers?
What is your motivation for filming this event? Why is it important? Is there anything special about the event or the equipment being sold/exhibited here? Is this the first time or is this a yearly event? Is there any special significance for the locals? Will any (sports) celebrity be attending?If so, you need to obatin info about this person(s).
Will someone be demonstrating a sport using some kind of equipment? How big is the arena/sports ground, etc? Why are the organizers putting on this event?
These are things I would try to find out if I had to film this event and in order to figure out what to film and what questions to ask.
The following guidelines are the A, B, Cs of news coverage and they apply to documentary storytelling as well.
Whenever you decide to shoot something, you must ask yourself; "What am I shooting?" and "why am I shooting it?
Then your story must always answer the 5 Ws and 1 H: "Who, what, why, when, where and how."
Everything you need to do (what to shoot, who to ask questions, what to ask) depends on the answers to these questions.
Matt – I will pass along your comments to Mark. There are so many layers in the film it is hard to know where to begin. I can only say that I am very proud to have helped bring Stone Reader to audiences.
First, let me say this won't be a documentary per se, although I hope to earmark some footage for a project I've dreamed of for years.
This is an annual golf show in Minneapolis. It is a fair, where golf courses, club vendors, and a few related others get together on a snowy Feb. day to help people get the snow off their feet and dream of spring.
I'm mainly interested in doing interviews of folks from the golf courses that will appear, doing the 5W and an H in shorter clips. First end product would be a show for local public access TV, with saved footage for the other project I mentioned. After all, they'll be gathered in one location so it'll save time driving all over searching them out.
There will be demos here, and it's in the Metrodome, the huge playing field for the Minnesota Twins and Vikings.
Thanks for the questions. I've written and photographed for magazines for years, but this will be my first foray into the visual documentary-related forum.
regardless of the duration of your story, the mechanics are always the same.
Ideally, each story should have a beginning, middle and an end and answer the 5Ws and 1 H. Given that you intend to do several shorter pieces, you could do one more generic piece and several others, each of which could deal with a particular aspect of the fair that you and/or your audience might be interested in.
It seems like you should be able to put several interesting pieces together.
If you know anything about golf – and I presume that you do – if you answer the questions I outlined (What is this story about and what do I want to show you) it should be rather simple to come up with some interesting questions to ask. You can ask the equipment vendors about gear, the players about form and playing tips, the visitors about ther expectations for the new season, etc., etc.
From what I imagine you'll find there you should be able to put togteher some visually interesting and exciting stories. Try to put some nat sound pieces together.
I can already visualize dozens of stories. Try to imagine YOUR stories visually and that should help you figure out what to shoot.
Chris, quickly read through your proposal. Leaving aside the odds against pulling it off, are you aware of a feature doc that came out a few years ago called My Date With Drew? If not, check into it. It was a small but charming film, came and went and barely made a blip commercially.
In all honesty, hard to imagine any established docmaker being tempted by your proposal. In the end, though, who are any of us to tell someone not to dream?
Thanks for your kind words, Matt. As for the mic, I used a Senheisser ME 63 mounted on the camera. It has the ability to screw on a number of mics with different patterns. I used one with a figure 8 pattern, that captures sound equally in front and behind the camera. So one mic was able to record both of us talking. Came in very handy. Only problem is if I film verite for long stretches without talking myself (and I never know when I might), it picks up a lot of extraneous room noise from behind.
In reply to Chris Hinrichs's post on Mon 28 Jan 2008 4:16 UTC :
Chris, I'd make a couple of quick suggestions. First would be to reframe your proposal in tone and presentation.
By tone, I'd suggest not looking at all the reasons why it shouldn't work. I noticed on your site that you're an architect. Think about the proposal in the same way you propose something to a client. You don't tell them all the things that will go wrong (being overcharged by contractors, termites, fire, water damage, floods, famine, family arguments, etc...).
By presentation, while it's okay to have a paragraph teaser, I want to know what the story is. If it's not part of the story, don't tell me. Currently the way you build it up I'm expecting the greatest idea I've ever heard and no idea can live up to that. Obstacles that need to be surmounted are not part of the story, unless...
...that is the story. Which would probably make a very interesting documentary – "Guy faces insurmountable odds to make incredible idea a reality. Does he or doesn't he?"
I would also recommend trying to hook up with someone in your area, a friend with a camera or an aspiring filmmaker, and work together on moving the project forward. As Doug mentions, it's unlikely that established docmakers would be tempted, or being tempted, it may not be in the way that you're envisioning.
You also may want to start smaller. Instead of an A-list star, why not a local celebrity in your area. They're much more approachable and the idea would be the same. It might make the idea more attractive to more established filmmakers and celebrities.
Doug, Thanks for taking a quick look. If you read the whole thing I specifically address My Date With Drew and how the two are very different films. Perhaps I need to do a better job of articulating just how different it is. Believe me, I know it's an incredibly tough sell. I know the chance of it ever getting made is next to zero. That's what intrigues me the most – the impossibility of it. I hope you find the time at some point to look at more of the material, but I completely understand that it's not for everyone.
By the way, I wanted to compliment you on 51 Birch Street. I saw it a while back and thought it was excellent. I recommend it often.
Boyd- Thanks a lot for your thoughts. It's the kind of feedback I'm looking for. I will consider the things you've said. Your comments about the tone are well-taken.
I suppose the best thing is for people who have thoughts to e-mail me directly so I don't hijack this forum. You can e-mail me @ firstname.lastname@example.org
chris, in an effort to procrastinate from further fundraising activities, i read your entire proposal for your "dream doc".
i can safely say that you're CRAZY! having said that, i think it's a good kind of crazy, and the shared gene that most of us aspiring and established docmakers possess. plenty of people have been told their projects have absolutely no chance – and a fortunate few have actually persevered and finished their projects with great success.
however, i would really challenge you to re-evaluate WHY you are doing this project. at the same time, i would challenge you to think about why you are not doing a DIFFERENT documentary project. To me, this project seems too frivolous and insubstantial for someone like you, who admits to admiring the direct cinema and verite work of masters like Maysles, Kopple, James, etc... i'm no psychoanalyst, but you seem like you might have a more "worthy" doc in you to produce. by "worthy", i don't mean that it has to be intensely depressing or socially conscious – it can have humor and spontaneity and whatever else fits your personality – but it has to have something at its core that inspires you.
The "impossibility" of making something is not reason enough to try. You need to combine "impossible" with "irresistible" to really have a film worth making. if you write a proposal that convinces everyone why you "can't NOT make this film", then you actually might have a chance. right now, i read your proposal, and just see a guy who says "why not make this film"? there's a big difference.
i don't want to discourage you, just refocus you... btw, if i didn't think you had it in you to actually make a doc film, i wouldn't have wasted my time writing this reply. good luck!
In reply to Doug Block's post on Mon 28 Jan 2008 :
I'm intruiged by those Sennheisers. I like the modular concept very much, the interchangeability. It did an excellent job of picking up your voice from behind!
When you didn't speak for long periods and extraneous noise made it on to the sound track, did you squelch it in post?
What do you think of my proposed setup of a Sennheiser shotgun mike (i.e. unidirectional) with a lavalier corded mike on myself, since I will be tethered to the camcorder anyway?
I was thinking this might solve the problem of excess noise coming from the back end.
Your thoughts? Thanks for your help!
A response to Christopher Wong:
Re- looking for an editor,collaborating at a distance, transcription.
Boyd, thanks for your suggestions.
Everybody else- thanks for the tips.
Question: everybody seems to agree that it's a good idea to have interviews transcribed. Have people had luck going on Craigs list? I know there are professional services but they seem to run $150+ per hour of tape, and we have a lot of tape. Since the transcripts are just a searchable tool not a finished product, I am wondering if this is one case where cheap = good??? Thanks!
Matt, your setup sounds fine. Probably better than mine, actually. I just like to put the camera down from time to time.
dean, no reason to have to pay $150/hr for transcription work. i've found quite a few for $115/hr and under. in fact, there are some who charge per hour (only $20-25) and since they usually don't take more than 4 hours to transcribe each tape, it's the most affordable for me to be billed per hour of labor.
it also depends on what kind of footage you have. if it's all interviews, then pretty much anybody who can type fast (and who has the capability to insert TC simultaneously) can do it. if it's verite footage, and you actually want descriptions of how people are moving, what kind of shots are being employed, and every single comment noted, then i do think it matters who your transcriptionist is. but most people either don't have that kind of footage, or don't need it transcribed.
if you need some references to transcriptionists, i'd be happy to email them separately to you. you can then contact them yourself, and have them send you samples that you can review to see if they're a good fit.
You might try going to Craigs list and doing a search for experienced legal secretaries between jobs/assignments.
They are highly literate (having worked in law offices) and are used to doing lots of transcription from recordings that I know are lower quality than yours.
For example, the average legal secretary salary in the SF Bay Area is 75,000/yr. which works out to $37.50/hr., assuming you work 2000 hours a year.
This should save you big bucks and provide very high quality.
Hope that helps!
Hi, I'm very interested in United States documentaries/political movies from the 1930s, most especially US depression era cinema with political content. I need them to be US only; my studies of Soviet montage and Riefenstahl is a separate and intense study.
I just saw Our Daily Bread (1935) which had some excellent cinematic qualities and the climax with the irrigation ditch being completed is truly fantastic cinematography with some real live action surprises.
Any other recommendations?
I just transcribe 2 hours of interview footage using an app called MovCaptioner. It was 20 bucks or so. Here's the link:http://www.slidesnow.com/movcaptioner/
The great feature is that it has a loop function so it plays over and over again sections until you get them right. One idea is to put all your footage (copies) and a copy of the application on a drive and let the person you get to transcribe your stuff use it. Then have them give the drive back to you.
Not sure how others work, but I transcribe much of my material, since a lot of it is in Chinese and I need to translate it at the same time. I find it's helpful to note pauses, repeat words, cross talk, etc. as it helps in the paper edit. I'll even mark specific sections that I know are definitely going into the film.
One thing to remember, even with a transcript, you still need to sit and watch everything – how a thing is said is as important as what is said.
Christopher – when you have your stuff transcribed, to you get a verbatim transcript?
boyd, when you say "verbatim" transcript, what exactly do you mean? do you mean one that includes notations for all the pauses, stuttering, and other odd noises that occur during the subject's interview or conversation? do you also mean one that describes each shot as it changes?
for my project and my budget, i only have interviews and the most important conversations transcribed. my transcribers generally include notations for long pauses, "uhs", and stammering in their transcripts. i do not have them include shot types or any background conversation that happens simultaneous to the subject's voice(s). incidentally, i also send hard drives to my transcriptionists – it's slightly more expensive in the short run, but it really pays off in the end in convenience and in the number of clips i can include in one mailing.
btw, that app MovCaptioner sounds great. i really like that play over function that you described...
Dean, I've done this before for translations/interpretations and break it down a little differently than for an elaborate shot list that requires lots of visual cues. But if you need mainly spoken and audio cue text, with some key visual cues, you're welcome to email and perhaps we can work something out. Please use email@example.com if so. What are your deadlines? I am not operational 01 â€“ 17 Feb, and a colleague needs help (I will start on his as soon as it arrives â€“ not expecting it to take too long).
Dean It's too late for me to go into the previous message and make a change: if working directly from tapes, I can't help you. I would need DVD(s) with burned in time code (or could improvise from the player's time code – not ideal but not a big deal if this is the first cut from the raw tapes: you'd find your place easily enough).
Christopher, I'm thinking exactly what your transcribers are doing, with the uhs and long pauses. Do they or can they notate when there is a change in tone within a sentence? I've noticed sometimes that a person will start a sentence, have a thought and change gears in the middle. It still looks like one sentence on paper, but is actually two distinct thoughts (and couldn't work as a sentence.)
As for shot descriptions, I do that myself when I log the tape, and I'll highlight things that standout, even with dialogue that might be transcribed later. The type of shot within an interview doesn't matter, only if there's unusable camera movement.
I've also done variations, with no transcription, but more detailed logging – where with an interview I'll write down what topics they are talking about, with timecode, and transcribe specific passages that come across well. In FCP I'll use markers and subclips to divide things up into specific bins.
One cool side benefit of doing translations – with the workflow I use – is that towards the fine cut stage, I end up with dedicated video tracks with subtitles using the FCP outline text generator. I can actually export those and come up with a word document with all the text and timecode. That way as I near a finer cut, I can basically export a "script". It's great to be able to read it and see how the cut I have is developing as a story or where there may be gaps.
Matt, try The Grapes of Wrath and Sullivan's Travels.
Thanks for all the suggestions about transcribing. I don't think I need super-detailed transcripts, just the basic dialogue in a searchable digital format so when I want to find every comment about "subject X" I can easily locate them.
But I am a little confused about the best format to use for the clips – I want something easily shared, with reel# and timecode, visual as well as audio, and easy for the transcriber to start and stop. I was going to just make low resolution QT clips with timecode burned in and assume the transcriber can play them back and forth as needed. Does that work? That way I could share everything by ftp. Thx!
boyd, i haven't asked for the transcriber to notate any "tone changes" in a subject's speech, but i'm sure that would be helpful to have somewhere. but i'm assuming that would add time and money to the transcription. the only tone change that would be easy to note would be a "..." between words.
dean, what you've described would definitely work. the only disadvantage of that method is that it's going to take you awhile to render BITC to each clip, and then export out each compressed file. but if you've got the time, any transcriptionist should be able to handle your footage perfectly well.
one alternative is to buy a cheap hard drive, load all of the full resolution QT clips you want transcribed on that drive, and then send that to your transcriber. using that method, you don't have to include BITC, b/c QT can automatically bring up each clip's native TC in the viewing window. (btw, if you compress your clip, we've found that you lose that track that remembers the native TC.) if you choose to do this, then just be sure that your transcriber has the same system (Mac or PC) that you have. if you have a Mac and they have a PC, then you'll have to buy a copy of MacDrive ($40) so that they can read your drive properly. That's what we ended up doing, and MacDrive works like a dream (despite what some of the reviews said).
Matt, presume you already know most of Pare Lorentz' work:
Dean, wish I could offer you advice beyond the great ideas others have already shared here. I actually transcribe my own films...which is one of many reasons they take so long. I don't do it out of thriftiness alone but also because it makes me more familiar with the nuances of the material. What you may want to do with all your footage is to do a first look-through and jot down notes of key quotes you like maybe with a system of keywords (your "subject x"). Then narrow that down to the tapes you know you want to use and give that to a professional transcriber.
I'm back . . . well, not really back . . . I'm shooting this week and next, and things are going really well so far. Better than I could expect, yet there are things I didn't anticipate, like how hard it is to direct when you don't speak the language!
So, now that I'm working in a context, I need to revisit a question I posted a few weeks back. I'm shooting in small village in Italy and while the Italian spoken here is not necessarily dialect, it's . . . well, it's its own thing.
But my dilemma was that my DP goes back to Milan when we're finished, and I go back to the States. I'd like to begin editing when I get back but I'll need to hire someone fluent in Italian (and especially astute to pick up this particular Italian spoken here).
How does it work with you're shooting in a language that's not your own in terms of translation? How does the editor work in another language?
I'm back to wondering if I should just work with my DP on this – like stop the shoot a few days early and sit with him and edit (it's the only way we can be together) (otherwise, he goes back to work the day after the shoot is over) . . . or do I go back to the States and find an Italian-English speaking editor?
We'll have about 20 hours of footage on PAL (we don't need to go into that again).
Darla, why not simply find someone who understands the dialect to help you make english transcripts from the footage? Plenty of editors cut footage referencing the transcripts but without speaking the language.
Good idea, Doug. That's what I'm thinking – so I'm going to ask a very basic question now. . . how would I do that? Give them the footage? Sit down with them? Would they type it out? Record it (so essentially it would be like dubbing?)
Darla, I've edited extensively in Chinese and my grasp of the language is really poor so I've come up with a method that works for me (and your mileage may vary).
Not sure what system you're using, I use FCP, but this method should work in other NLEs. I put each captured tape or clip in its own sequence. I then go into the Text Generator and select Outline Text. You may want to spend a little time here playing with the font, size, and outline. Don't make it too big or too small. And watch your placement in the canvas – you want to stay title safe.
I then drop that onto track 2. I try to work in small increments, with 3 seconds being about average. In longer sentences, I could have 2 or 3 or more text clips. On the timeline, these are very easy to duplicate with Option+drag. If there is more than one speaker, I dedicate separate tracks for each one. I try to stay with one line, maybe two lines of text, but never more than 2 lines per subtitle.
I start each text clip on the frame they start speaking, and end it on the frame they end speaking. While that's not what I'd necessarily do for the final subtitling, it's important for the initial edit.
The text generator is very graphics intensive and I find after about 10 minutes or so, each clip needs to render and my computer starts running slow. At this point, I'll split up the clip (depends on how long your captured media is).
The last thing I'll add is the TC reader. Once that's in, I'll export each sequence out as a QT movie. Then I"ll reimport that movie back into the project. I now have my translation on the media and I can edit it like any other dialogue footage. I don't need to reference back to a paper translation and try to figure out which word means what.
As I near a fine cut, using the time code on the QT files, I can go back to the original sequences, and cut in the original footage with the subtitles. Again, depending on how many subtitles you have, this may be graphics intensive. For my last project that was 45 minutes long and had a ton of subtitles, I created sequences for each chapter, then nested them, so my main sequence had 9 nests in it.
Some additional thoughts. You may want to have more than one translator look at your footage. There are subtleties in language that are really important in editing. What a person says and what a person means can be two different things and a straight translation often doesn't help you with that. Speaking only for myself, I base a lot of editing decisions, and story development, on the meaning and subtext of the words, not only on the words themselves.
The other part of this equation is that a verbatim translation may be disjointed in English, so there is a trick to constructing the English phrasing, that sounds good, with good word choices, that is faithful to what was actually said. It depends how good the translator is, and how fluent they are in both languages.
Anyways, just one workflow option. May not be the best, but it works for me.
Can anyone recommend digital production software for a PC. Adobe and Avid seem to be the top of the line. I'm a newcomer, so maybe I'd be able to get by with a prosumer version, before moving on to the higher level professional grade stuff.
I suppose the most important features would be multiple video/audio track import and editing (with storyboard interface) and a comprehensive selection of web conversion tools.
Whoever writes your translation needs to transcribe the material exactly as you'd do if it were in English. This means that you need to write the timecode corresponding to the begininng of each sentence (or paragraph, then you write the text corresponding to the sentence or paragraph and immediately after you write the timecode corresponding to the end of this bite of dialogue/commentary.
In this manner, your editor has the "in" and "out" points for each sentence/paragraph just as she/he would if they were editing in English, so it makes no difference at all.
This is a sample of a transcript in Italian of commentary by actor/director Nanni Moretti (he's telling a story in a theater in Pescara (from a documentary of mine about Nanni Moretti).
MORETTI A PESCARA 1/3
00.12 Alloraâ€¦ Io proverÃ² a raccontare il mio rapporto con la politicaâ€¦ Poi [â€¦] mi interromperÃ² tra un pÃ² quando arriverÃ Luciano Dâ€™Alfonso per il suo saluto. ProverÃ² a raccontare il mio rapporto con la politica in questi ultimi trentâ€™anni, naturalmente soffermandomi di piÃ¹ sullâ€™ultimo anno e mezzo che, imprevedibelmente soprattutto per me- mi ha visto in prima persona persona impegnarmi in politicaâ€¦ Non me lo sarei mai aspettato da me stessoâ€¦ 00.54
00.54 â€¦ Ecco quindi incomincerÃ² molto da lontano, andrÃ² molto veloceâ€¦ Naturalmente ancheâ€¦ E andrÃ² veloce anche perchÃ¨ il mio rapporto con la politica Ã¨ stato cosÃ¬â€¦ Intermittente come quello di tanti cittadini, a volte piÃ¹ interessati, a volte menoâ€¦ A volte delusi, a volte impegnati in prima personaâ€¦ 1.18
1.20 â€¦Ecco, il sessantotto â€“credo che molti di voi siano nati dopo il sessantotto- il sessantotto Ã¨ arrivato un pÃ² troppo presto per me, io ho fatto politica un pÃ² a scuolaâ€¦ gli ultimi tre anni di liceo dal â€˜70 al â€™72. Nel sessantotto la mia giornata tipo era la mattina a scuola dove abbastanza mi annoiavoâ€¦ 1.50
1.50 â€¦Il pomeriggio al cinema Nuovo Olimpia, che era un cinema dâ€™Essai molto famoso a Roma â€“ ogni giorno cambiava film, vecchi film, classiciâ€¦ – e la sera in piscine: giocavo a pallanuotoâ€¦ Tra parentesi: la mia ultima partita di pallanuoto lâ€™ho giocata proprio qui a Pescara nellâ€™estate dellâ€™86, chiusa parentesi. 2.13
2.13 Ecco quindi questa era la mia giornata tipo nel â€™68 eâ€¦ Diciamo che ho cominciato un pÃ² a interessarmiâ€¦ Un pÃ² a fare politica qualche anno dopo: gli ultimi due o tre anni di liceo. E devo dire che almeno per quanto riguarda cosÃ¬ laâ€¦La Sinistra extra-parlamentare di cui io facevo parteâ€¦ 2.41
Here's an example of a transcript in English (from my documentary on The Transition).
Wilton Wynn â€“ part 1
00.28 WOLF: Ok, go ahead Wiltonâ€¦
00.30 WYNN: I was in the piazza the evening that Pope John died, watching his window, and the contrast – he was very loved, as you know: a lovable Pope, very popularâ€¦ he had been ill a long time and now he died, butâ€¦ There was a crowd in the corner of the Piazza- â€¦Nothing, nothingâ€¦ Nothing to compare with the vigils over there during John Paulâ€™s last illness as a reflection of the tremendous impact of the person, of the manâ€¦
1.35 WOLF: You were mentioning that with the death of JPII something changed in your life too, what exactly were you talking about?
2.04 WYNN: Wellâ€¦ Iâ€™ve been a newsman for more than forty years, a foreign correspondent. I retired twenty years ago but Iâ€™ve continued to keep an eye on things and to do some writings, contributions to different magazines. But my last great story was Pope John Paul the Second and with his death, that brought an end to my career. That was it.
2.35 There is nothing more. I donâ€™t follow things as a newsman anymore, I read the newspapers and watch tv, but Iâ€™m not there myself, Iâ€™m not in contact myself with these news sources. And I hadnâ€™t realize that it would make such a difference, but I see it now!
2.58 WOLF: But Pope John Paul made a great difference even in your life. I remember once you told me you became Catholic after covering JPIIâ€¦
3.11 WYNN: Very interestingâ€¦ The newspaper USA TODAY at the time of the Popeâ€™s funeral carried, half a page, a story about how an old newsman like me became a Catholic after covering trips of the Pope and getting closer to him. It wasâ€¦ he never tried to convert me, weâ€™ve talked together about his thoughts, his ideas and so onâ€¦ he neverâ€¦
3.45 WOLF: Tell me how it happened.
3.48 WYNN: I started with his first trip to Mexico, just two months after he was elected Pope, and you knowâ€¦ Iâ€™ve flown with Pope Paul before him – a couple of trips and Pope Paul used to come to the press section of the plain and his secretary would read our name-tags and introduce us and the Pope would say â€œHappy to have you on board. Thank you. Welcome,â€ and go on.
4.18 And Iâ€™ve wondered â€œWould this Pope be the same?â€, but we heard he was coming back to talk to us. And we all were lined up to meet him, one at a time. I happened to be there, I think I was number 2. When he came in, I didnâ€™t know: should I ask a question or should I just do the greeting? I decided Iâ€™ll ask him a question to see if heâ€™s ready to talk.
4.45 I asked an innocuous question: â€œWould you ever like to visit United States?â€ He stopped, he looked down at the floor and thought a moment, and then he said: â€œI think it will be necessary though the date has not yet been set.â€ 5'00
When you get to the editing stage, you arrange the translated paragraphs of transcript in the desired order just as you'd do if it were English dialogue. You write the tape number and the timecode of every selcted sentence/paragraph, that way, your editor just cuts and pastes each soundbite as though it were English. Working in such fashion, there is no need for you – or the editor – to understand the foreign langueage in which your subjects have spoken.
The "In" and "out" points also give you precise reference points for the beginning and end of corresponding subtitles or translated dialogue.
Herewith you can see a small bit of version 1 of the script of The Transition. In this case, there were 7 different versions of this script, in others there have been many more.
WORKING TITLE: â€œTHE TRANSITION: FROM THE DEATH OF POPE JOHN PAUL II TO THE INSTALLATION OF POPE BENEDICT XVI.â€
Copyright by Wolfgang Achtner
FIRST DRAFT: DEC 10, 2005
Thursday, March 31, 2005 – Graphic re Vatican statement
Wilton Wynn 1
17.28 WYNN: At the beginning I thought he would recover, because I had gone through so many of these cases where, [as you say], he would collapse or he would have to be rushed to the hospital. And then there would be days of uncertainty. And then, in the end, he would emerge. And I, somehow, had the feeling he would come through this one, as well. I kept vigil when he was shot back in 1981, I guess it was. Well, we didnâ€™t know then: he was between life and death. And then he went on and on. All his illnesses, his operations, his falls, and so on, 18.12 So that we were kind of used to his going to hospital and having medical bulletins every day, and all that. And then, heâ€™d slowly emerge.
18.24 So, it was of course â€“ as days went by, you know – it became clearer that this probably would be the end. Especially when the Vatican made no secret of the fact that it was extremely serious. But at the beginning I thought he had pulled through.
John Thavis 1
4.30 [I think it was interesting because] even the Vatican, at that point, was preparing everyone for the Popeâ€™s death. And yet as the Pope hang on, for another day or day and-a-half, we in the Vatican press-room began looking at each other and thinking â€œIs this gonna be another round? Are we going to see him come back to the window one more time perhaps?â€ Well, it was not to be.
4.56 But the fact is: this Pope bounced back from so many physical adversities that weâ€™d become kind of used to it. And there was a sense, even among reporters – who had been waiting for the end for so many years – that maybe they werenâ€™t there yet.
John Allen part 1
30.26.0 Well, for one thing, John Paul II hadnâ€™t been just suffering in the last 6
months of his life, heâ€™d been suffering for the last several years of his life. f, at all the different times people had written him off, that he had actually gone off the stage, he would have died a thousand deaths. So, I think part of it was, it wasnâ€™t clear until the very very end that this was going to, in fact, be the end. A lot of us who had been tracking this fully expected him, even in February, when he went to the Gemelli, even in March, when he went back, we fully expected that he would pull through and continue. I fully expected to be accompanying him to Cologne, last August. 31.00.04
And so, I think one point is that he, I donâ€™t think that he himself probably understood until 48 hours, 72 hours before his death, that this was, in fact, his final act. This has always been a very determined Pope and so on. Probably, the most fundamental variable here is that John Paul was determined to allow his suffering to play out on the public stage because he saw it as a teaching moment. That is, he thought he understood himself to be teaching the world how to accept death. With grace and with dignity. 31.35.03
John Thavis part 1
2.18 THAVIS: I think really thatâ€™s how his entire pontificate was lived. On the worldâ€™s stage from the very beginning. And it would not have been in character for him to go and hide behind the curtain in the final stages. I think he also had a spiritual message here and (â€¦) he knew that he was going to be suffering. He knew he had a disease that was going to keep him down, if not out, for several years. And I think he probably made the decision that he would not hide behind the Vatican walls, that he would allow the world to share in this as well as it shared in the early more energetic phase of his pontificate.
John Allen 1
31.35.03 In a culture that worships youth, and worships efficiency, and worships beauty and so on, I think he probably felt that this was a powerful counter example. 31.45.04
Here you can compare – just for your curiosity – the final version of the feature-length version (105 minutes) of the documentary; I also did another 52 mnute version. As a matter of fact, whenever I do a feature-length version of a documentary, I also ALWAYS do a 52 minute version. There are different markets for the different types of durations.
SCRIPT: â€œTHE TRANSITION: FROM THE DEATH OF POPE JOHN PAUL II TO THE INSTALLATION OF POPE BENEDICT XVI.â€
Â© 2006 by Wolfgang Achtner
Attn.: English translation included under original text (in Italian) of homilies.
Crowds in St. Peterâ€™s Square
SUPER: Friday, April 1, 2005
John Irvine, ITV correspondent â€“ standup
IRVINE â€œHere in St. Peterâ€™s Square, where the Pope so nearly lost his life to an assassinâ€™s bullet,â€
SUPER: John Irvine, ITV
IRVINE â€œat the start of his papacy, there is a growing certainty that that life and that papacy are now growing to a close. A remarkable life, ebbing slowly away, up there, in the papal apartment, where John Paul has lived for the last 26-and-a-half years.â€
SUPER Wilton Wynn, Author, â€œKeepers of the Keysâ€
WYNN: At the beginning I thought he would recover, because I had gone through so many of these cases where he would collapse or he would have to be rushed to the hospital. And then there would be days of uncertainty. And then, in the end, he would emerge. And I, somehow, had the feeling he would come through this one, as well. I kept vigil when he was shot back in 1981, I guess it was. Well, we didnâ€™t know then: he was between life and death. And then he went on and on. All his illnesses, his operations, his falls, and so on. So that we were kind of used to his going to hospital and having medical bulletins every day, and all that. And then, heâ€™d slowly emerge.
WYNN So, it was of course â€“ as days went by, you know – it became clearer that this probably would be the end. Especially when the Vatican made no secret of the fact that it was extremely serious. But at the beginning I thought he had pulled through.
THAVIS Even the Vatican, at that point, was preparing everyone for the Popeâ€™s death. And yet as the Pope hang on, for another day or day and-a-half, we in the Vatican press-room began looking at each other and thinking â€œIs this gonna be another round? Are we going to see him come back to the window one more time perhaps?â€ Well, it was not to be.
ALLEN Well, for one thing, John Paul II hadnâ€™t been just suffering in the last 6
months of his life, heâ€™d been suffering for the last several years of his life. If, at all the different times people had written him off, that he had actually gone off the stage, he would have died a thousand deaths. So, I think part of it was, it wasnâ€™t clear until the very very end that this was going to, in fact, be the end. A lot of us who had been tracking this fully expected him, even in February, when he went to the Gemelli, even in March, when he went back, we fully expected that he would pull through and continue. I fully expected to be accompanying him to Cologne, last August.
ALLEN Probably, the most fundamental variable here is that John Paul was determined to allow his suffering to play out on the public stage because he saw it as a teaching moment. That is, he thought he understood himself to be teaching the world how to accept death. With grace and with dignity.
Crowd at night in St. Peterâ€™s Square
You will notice that in Version 1 there are NO indications regarding video and that's because I've mapped out the video on a separate sheet(s) of paper. After the logging process, I have memorized EVERY SINGLE SHOT – in this particular case it was more than 60 hours of video – and I've written the script in accordance to the rough video outline that I've drawn up indicating how the video should be used.
I have noticed that, as a rule, once I've memorized all the video and transcribed all the dialogue it only takes me a few hours to write the script of the documentary. Once I've written the script, I may later make minor changes in to it in several places (leading to different versions) as I go along, but I've already constructed the documentary in what pretty much corresponds to its final shape.
It can take me 7 to 10 days or up to two-and-a-half weeks to log all the video, but then the first part of the hard work is done. Equally important is obtaining a complete transcript of ALL dialogue. That's the second part of the hard work. Once I have all the transripts, I usually need only one or two days to write the script. As I wrote earlier, the actual writing process only takes me a few hours, once I decide how to use the video. With the video outline in mind I build the script paragraph by paragraph picking form the transcripts of all the dialogues and writing eventual commentary (in those rare cases it might be necessary).
At that point, I can usually edit the first cut of a documentary in under three weeks if I'm in a hurry (I usually edit approximately 10 to 12 hours a day), and – in most occasions – make the final cut in 6 weeks time.
Initially, with regards to the video, I write down a note referring to a rough sequence and once I start editing I cut every sequence in detail, that means I lay out every shot in the desired order.
Usually, I start editing at the beginning, even though the beginning may sometimes change (in certain documentaries it changed several times), and I keep editing on a straight progression towards the end; the end may change itself several times. Actaully, on documentaries where the story is ongoing, I have often continued to shoot after I'd already started editing and usually the end was discovered during this additional shooting phase. In the case of my last documentary, this was true also for the beginning.
re translation Boyd wrote:
"Some additional thoughts. You may want to have more than one translator look at your footage. There are subtleties in language that are really important in editing. What a person says and what a person means can be two different things and a straight translation often doesn't help you with that. Speaking only for myself, I base a lot of editing decisions, and story development, on the meaning and subtext of the words, not only on the words themselves.
The other part of this equation is that a verbatim translation may be disjointed in English, so there is a trick to constructing the English phrasing, that sounds good, with good word choices, that is faithful to what was actually said. It depends how good the translator is, and how fluent they are in both languages."
Translation is a vey important item. Working in Italian and/or English I don't have any problem because I'm fluent in both (I write books in both languages). If your grasp of a language is not this good you need to get the best translator you can; it may cost you but it's definitely worth every cent. Unfortuneatly in Italy they always try to save money – but you get what you pay for – so I've heard terrible translations even on important channels like Dicovery or History channel in Italian where the translation completely missed the point.
You need a great translator and this person also needs to know how to write extremely well in English so your English dialoge will be perfect.
What I mean is, one doesn't take liberties with the meanings but you need to render dialogue exacly as if those people were speaking in English themselves.
That means understanding complex sentence constructions that might be the opposite of English, with the verb at the end or vicevresa and it also means understanding complex techncial verbiage (medical or legal) if need be, and last but not least, the abilty to render in proper English the correct equivalent of Italian idiomatic expressions, proverbs, syaings, etc.
Your dialogue in English must be perfect, exactly as if the people had been speaking in English. Get the best, most competent, professional translator you can find!!!
Question for those producing docs, how much of your work falls under WFH (work for hire)? and how much of your work do you retain copyright too? I'm just trying to figure out (mostly for myself as a freelancer) when work for hire is okay and when i should be demanding better terms. I'm mostly referring to producing a full piece from start to finish. I know work for hire is fairly standard if you are working as a shooter, or editor, but what about when you are doing it all and the original story idea is yours? Does it make a differents who the client is? whether it is a NGO or network? Any insight on this would be great!
Paul...go with Adobe. I'm not sure if they have a Premiere "lite", but if you stay on a PC you'll eventually work with Adobe software. Better to invest your time and energy in one interface that will be the standard for years to come.
Or, this might be the time for you to switch to a Mac....
wolfgang, i'm sure you've got some very solid advice there for darla, but i think it might be better if you use the "Hide" function next time (especially for the super-long transcripts you included). thx.
andrew, if you are doing signficiantly more than just shooting/editing, but actually directing and producing the entire piece, you should definitely be demanding better terms than your normal work-for-hire rates. that could be whatever you negotiate (e.g. back-end points). of course, your client always has the option of saying "no", so be prepared to respond appropriately... if they don't want to give you a share of the project, then ask for a higher dayrate.
I'm getting ready to buy my first Mac. Some have told me that a macbook will suffice for what I want to do, which is basically to gather and store footage and images for my editor and eventually work on a rough-cut for him. Others say that I should invest in a macbook pro. Since I'm not the editor, would anyone like to weigh in on why I might need a pro in the future?
Thanks. I wasn't sure how the hide feature works. What do you do? Just click Hidden section?
The basic Macbook works fine as a FCP machine if you're working with DV and/or HDV material. I have a first generation Macbook set up with an external keyboard and trackpad, and a 24 inch Dell monitor. It's much faster than a 3 year old G5 workstation, and feels very close to the Mac Pro for most functions.
But Motion won't run on it, and it doesn't have a card slot or Firewire 800 so expansion possibilities are somewhat limited.
Wolfgang, simply click on the "Add hidden section" link below the text box.
what doug said, wolfgang. clicking "add hidden section" will open up a new text box for you – everything that goes in it will be hidden. everything in the normal text box will still be visible to all.
Sorry about that guys,
since I actually don't like writing that much, I'd only intended to knock out two sentences re translations, then the keyboard just went on by itself....
Yes, well, I appreciate these explanations. I understand better now. Seems my dp would be the best translator, since his Italian is great and his English is excellent (and he gets the meaning of what these people – older people in a remote village often speaking in proverbs, etc...) are saying. But I don't know that I'm going to have him actually edit b/c after we finish shooting, I go back to NYC and he goes to Milan. I think it would be offensive to ask him to log/translate (obviously I'd pay him) but not edit . . . so I'm a little stuck. Well, not stuck. Just feeling in a bind. We're here for 10 more days and we've got a lot of good material (and information) already. I want to cut a trailer to enter into a grant/contest for April 1, so just wondering if I should cut our shoot like 4 days short and translate/log . . . edit . . . with him . . . (for the trailer, perhaps). I can still come home with all my footage and work with another editor down the road. This is only going to be about 20 hours of footage . . .
unless your DP is very unusual, he shouldn't object to doing the logging and translating with you (and not the edit). he might object to logging and translating in general, but he'll certainly understand that you need to edit this locally back in NYC.
one thing to keep in mind is that logging and translating almost 20 hours of footage (or even 10 hours) will take a LONG, LONG time. for every 1 hour of footage, i would estimate at least 4 hours to turn that footage into a transcribed, translated, timecoded document – and i believe that is a very conservative estimate.
If he is willing, you could ask your DP to do the transcriptions and translations for you. There is no need for him to log the tapes to do this. Otherwise, you might find someone else in Italy.
As I explained in a previous post, you should do the logging of all the tapes WITH the editor with whom you are going to edit your documentary because you BOTH need to be aware of all the video.
This way you'd only need to copy onto VHS tapes or a DVD with burnt in timecode (in order to be able to transcribe beginning end ending times for each sentence/paragraph) the tapes (or sections there of) with the interviews. You'd still need to capture this material onto a computer – and this takes place in real time – but you could return home with the tapes and your DP or whoever will be doing the transcription and translation could work at it over here and then e-mail you the finished transcripts.
Darla, if you can afford a professional translator, that would be your best bet. It really is an art and the challenge with working with someone who doesn't do this is that it can go much more slowly and either not accurate enough or too accurate.
With Crucible of War, we had a lot of material, so split the translations of the transcripts between the director (who did speak the language while the editor didn't), two student friends, and two professional linguists. The quality of the translations was best with the two professionals, followed by the students followed by the director. He was simply too close to the material and his translations took a painstakingly slow amount of time and were too literal in text. Once we got to the point of editing, we brought in one of the professional linguists to work with us on the subtitles, both to help the editor get the cuts exactly right, improve the linguistic construction, and dare to lose some of the exact words to fit the space and still retain the meaning.
Since we're specifically on the subject of translation – can someone give me an idea of price ranges (per hour, I assume) . . . and were you finding that it's about 4 hours per 1 hour of footage?
Also, do I need it written first in Italian, and then translated to English, or just written in English? I assume both.
Finally, the thing with my DP is that he really loves these people, and their stories, and he knows the context for some of the wacky things they're saying . . . so while he may not be a professional translator, I think he might offer some good insight. Perhaps I can just ask him to do the work (instead of cutting our shoot short, I'd probably send him back to Milan with DVD copies) and then have it looked over by a professional translator.
Maybe your DP can do the Italian translation with notes, then you can have that transcribed here in the states.
Sounds good, Boyd . . . (Maybe I'm just tired) but can you spell this out for me a little more? So he'd write everything out in English? And then . . .
You need to transcribe the dialogues first in Italian so you have a record of what was really said and also to allow another translator to check the translation (if necessary).