Kyle Higgins wrote:Film school isn't for everyone. For me, personally, it was the right move. I started at the University of Iowa, then transferred to a film school in California (in a small town outside of LA). I made a series of short films, interned in LA at a prominent production company, and finally raised money and shot my thesis film. I put my thesis online and began marketing it (doing interviews, publicity, etc), which caught the attention of a couple studio execs. They helped me get an agent and a manager, which in turn put me on the path of meeting a ton of execs in town. Currently, I'm writing a script to direct as my first feature, and also developing a couple others with different writers. I'm also writing comic books for Marvel.

As for the argument about film vs video-- at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter (and this is from someone who loves shooting film). At the stage that most people are at, video is going to be easier to work with (particularly on the post production end) That said-- high production value IS important. Make your material look as crafted as possible-- solid lighting, interesting compositions, some telephoto lenses to vary your depth of field, and for the love of god-- pay attention to your audio.

Congratulations on your success, I will watch your movie when it comes out you can count on that You seem to know what your talking about.

I'm anxious and nervous about making it as a film maker. I'm starting Film school in Hollywood in about a month, hopefully, and I'm hoping that will be of help. Also I've been writing a lot, and I have screenplays that I'm constantly rewriting. Lastly I have a manager and an agent for acting and I'm trying to get my name out there that way as well. I figure getting into the film biz is gonna take using all talents I have to take it from all angles. It's a tough business, and very much a gamble, but it's the only thing I've ever had a passion for and I'm hoping for the best.

My first screenplay. I sent it to this independent production agency. They are releasing a independent film called "HOWL' starring James Franco. I was in talks with the VICE PRESIDENT of the banner via email. I emailed him my screenplay which fits the budget of a independent film as there are no need of any kind of affects, but just strong acting. He replied to me saying that it is perfectly written and it's emotional, but they can't sit on it and put it in production as they are stuck with few of their own projects and advised me that there is high chance for me getting sold to another studios as its written well.

That alone was a big relief for me as a writer someone professional praised my work and gave me more motivation to proceed forward and never call it quit.

Kyle Higgins wrote:, and for the love of god-- pay attention to your audio.

Got any good tricks on the audio part. Audio is 50% of having a good looking film. And after a few productions my audio still seems not to be that great. Is it the mic im using or what? The dialogue is just not as clear as I would want it to be. btw Im using this shotgun mic: http://www.rodemic.com/microphone.php?product=NTG-2
- Thank you in advance

I wouldn't say its necessarily the mic-- Rodes are solid. This is kind of a big question, as production audio is really, really tough. You're often at the mercy of traffic, generator noise, neighbors, weather, etc, etc. A good rule of thumb-- if you hear it on set, you're going to hear it on the recordings. That said, the dialogue is what you should be most concerned about capturing clean-- everything else can be (and is) recreated in post (hence SFX libraries, foley, etc). Production sound is usually captured with a combination of boom mics (like the Rode you have), and wireless lavaliers. And its all about signal to noise ratio-- you want to maximize what you're trying to record, and minimize your background noise.

The boom mics have better fidelity, and are narrower in their pickup patterns, but they have much more throw-- they'll also pick up sounds that are further away (meaning they can be more sensitive to background noise). Lavs, on the other hand, have lower fidelity, and wider pickup patterns, but don't have as long a range-- which means they have a better chance sometimes of capturing just your actor's dialogue (not to mention, the signal to noise ratio is quite high as the microphone is typically incredibly close to your actor-- on their body). However, radio interference is a big issue with wireless lavs-- and like I said, the sound quality isn't close to what you can get with a boom. For me, I'll take a good boom mic RIGHT on the edge of the frame, as close to the actor as possible or lavs any chance I can get.

Also, Keep in mind your locations-- pay attention to background noises during location scouts, pick where you park your generator carefully, etc.

I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that Hollywood films do a lot of post work to clean up dialogue. Dialogue editing (making sure the sounds transition from one to another smoothly and without calling attention to themselves) is an artform. Often times dropping in an ambience recording will help mask noise in the dialogue tracks. And noise reduction tools like Waves, Izotope, and Cedar Boxes can (with proper use) do a great job at sampling the noise, creating a sonic "blue print" of it, and then removing it from your recordings (its super, super easy to overuse noise reduction though-- and the result is NOT pretty. Often it sounds very chirpy, like a low quality mp3).

Finally, when all else fails, there is always ADR.

Oh, and one more thing-- wild lines. SUPER, SUPER important. When you're on set, after you capture the scene, take a few minutes and perform the scene for audio ONLY. This does a couple things-- first, it allows you to get the mic nice and close (often you can't get boom mics as close as you'd like because of camera and light placement). Second, it allows a better performance then ADR because the actors are still in the moment of performing the scene. Finally, it allows you more control over the recording-- you can turn off the generator, or whatever is making noise, you can take the actors somewhere more isolated, and the dialogue will sound much more natural then being in a recording booth (and having to apply reverb and equalization to try and fake it).

Wild lines have saved my ass dozens of times in post production. I just cut them up and resync them with the picture (which easier then you might think), or use a program to help match them to the original recordings (the program will slow them down/speed them up where need be to make sure the line matches the lip movement).

Thanks for taking you time to write this Kyle. It was a great read! You know any good books on the subject?

I haven't read it in several years (I believe I have the first volume lying around somewhere), but I feel like there was a lot of great stuff in this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Producing-Great-S ... gy_b_img_a

Kyle Higgins wrote:I haven't read it in several years (I believe I have the first volume lying around somewhere), but I feel like there was a lot of great stuff in this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Producing-Great-S ... gy_b_img_a

Seems like a great book, great reviews, I think Ill buy it in my next Amazon order

Erik wrote: I'm a student Mechanical Engineering, so no film school for me. Besides that, I have no money, nor the equipment, nor the cast and crew to make my own short films. My way into the film industries is a whole different way, because right now I am writing.
I already wrote a lot screenplays. A few features, but more shorts. I stopped writing features because I can't manage to get them produced in the near future. The shorts I write are most of the time for other people. In the last months I have written 4 short films for people here on the board. It's just a matter of time before production starts. And then there is the collaboration project for which I am the leading writer for.
The people who I wrote for, all say that my screenplays are from a descent quality.

I write for a lot of different people and projects. It does not really matter for who I write.
By doing this writing, I get credit for a lot of short movies. If I keep doing this, my name will turn up more and more. This must be a good way to start. The only thing I rely on is the short film itself. If the people I wrote for make a bad movie out of it, the writer looks bad too. But if my screenplays stay from a good quality, the director has a good foundation.
Right now, I have a writing job, to write a feature length script for a friend. I haven't started yet, because I miss some details he wants in the movie. It's gonna be a low budget drama film about some kind of 'gang'-war between two different races on a high school. Perhaps this can be a kick start for me as a writer (even though the movie is gonna be Dutch).

That's great. I would say this, though-- focus on features. Shorts are great to train on and develop skills for working within scenes, but features (as I'm sure you're aware) are another beast entirely. Not to mention, when you're eventually in a position where producers are willing to look at your work, they won't care about shorts. They'll want to read a feature. A solid spec feature is what lands you an agent, which then opens doors to producers, etc, etc. In my opinion, it's never too early to start writing features (IF you're comfortable enough as a writer, and ready/willing to put 6 months in on a single script)