withoutabox - lets hear your experience?

I'll be interested to hear the reponses as well. I have a short film in post that I hope to get out to some festivals soon. I've read good reviews in Filmmaker Magazine and a friend used it. Their main complaint was that they spent a lot of time entering all the necessary information but this became an advantage when they realized that they didn't need to do it more than once.

cyan said:

I'll be interested to hear the reponses as well. I have a short film in post that I hope to get out to some festivals soon. I've read good reviews in Filmmaker Magazine and a friend used it. Their main complaint was that they spent a lot of time entering all the necessary information but this became an advantage when they realized that they didn't need to do it more than once.

Click to expand...

You answered your own question there!

The great thing is that you enter everything once, and that's it. It's also very nice to click a couple of buttons and there you are. Put your work in an envelope, and send it off.

But I've never done it the other way, so I'm not a great person to ask.

Chris

Thank you guys!

One question though, lets say a deadline for a festival in rapidly approaching within a few days. If I send off WAB it will be there immediatly, but if I send priority or 1st class mail, it won't be there for a few days.

1) is it better to send off the screener 1st, wait a day and then send WAB, or send WAB and then send off the screener?

2) If the screener's mailing package is postmarked before the deadline is that accepted or is it when the screener actually gets there?

Thanks again for your opinions

WideShot said:

Thank you guys!

One question though, lets say a deadline for a festival in rapidly approaching within a few days. If I send off WAB it will be there immediatly, but if I send priority or 1st class mail, it won't be there for a few days.

1) is it better to send off the screener 1st, wait a day and then send WAB, or send WAB and then send off the screener?

2) If the screener's mailing package is postmarked before the deadline is that accepted or is it when the screener actually gets there?

Thanks again for your opinions

Click to expand...

I'm a Submissions Director for a festival and I love without a box, we didn't go as far as to not take paper submission forms though. I'm a database junkie so I like the fact that I can manage and even download all the submissions data and do what I need to from there.
It does save a lot of time; I can update it online as soon as it comes in so the submitter knows it's been received. Also they can pay online, WAB gets a good sized cut out of the submission fee, but we do connect with people we wouldn't otherwise and get some great submissions in turn so we can't complain.
- there are several other advantages too, but you can't only use WAB, there is a long set up time and if someone just has in mind a couple of festivals in their area they want to apply to, they won't want to go through that.
Q1: What other websites or means do you use to find out where to apply to festivals?
Q2: Is there anything else like WAB?

Ok sorry about that - to try to answer your questions.

1) With WAB you should submit to WAB first, it's set up where it assigns it a WABsubmission# to send with and write on the review copy, also a print out screen (kind of invoice) to make it easy.

2) Postmarked date is fine for deadlines, as long as it gets there sometime before a week, I can only speak for our festival though, We set the initial review panel date two weeks from submission deadline date to give time for everything to be in.

Thanks a ton for your reply. I don't mind the long setup time, just knowing I only have to enter it once it great.

I used WAB a lot. You get some extended deadlines that are not available on the festival sites, and the process is easy. Plus, all of the deadlines are postmarked deadlines, but on the festival sites they may not be. You can also add a cover letter, but I include my cover letter with my actual submission. They call it withoutabox, but you still need a box to send your screener!

Man what a crazy world we live in

All good info. TY. When I started this thread I was just unsure if this service was too good to be true, it just sounded that way, and none of my friends had heard of WAB. Now that I know its not only legit but its preferred, I'll be utilizing it. Unfortunately, the very first festival I tried after the GWFF doesn't take WAB, they're kind of... different... but the rest do

some festivals are geared up for growth

When a festival fiirst offers WAB registration, submissions often swamps all expectations as well as the workflow. (i.e. not enough screeners for official selection, not enough screens for all of the entries that the festival would wish to be able to show, not enough sponsorship to cover the upfront costs of stepping up the scale on many fronts).

If you are a first-time producer and/or director, consider submitting only to festivals which make room for first-timers. WAB does indeed support some festivals with sections for first-timers. If you are in this category, you might do well to concentrate on the youngest festivals (less than 4 years running) who have yet to automate fullly to WAB.

If you are already established as an independent filmmaker, have a track record of previous work officially selected (and better still, recognized with awards and mentions), WAB is definitely the way to submit.

I used WAB almost exclusively for the short I've just sent out to fests, and it is a great system once you enter all the data the first time. Although, it would be great if they modified the data fields for shorts - as some of them are overkill or even redundant for the wee films. Also, keep an eye on the deadlines as the submission fees can step up quickly. Otherwise, it rocks.

I also used WAB for my 'Night of 100 Films' festival (shorts of 30 seconds or less). The data management is impressive for the commission charged - those tracking numbers are really useful. Unfortunately, it yielded very few entries for my fest and it currently looks a bit dodgy - a challenge many folk liked the idea of but not, apparently, the actual doing of. I was also hesitant about using WAB for a second year as they can/will charge you the full $2400 (?) fee for their service - the first year being an introductory freebie, ouch.

I've never used WAB for submitting, but I do know their CS is pretty good.

There was a very shifty "call for entries" several months back, here on the boards... claiming a WAB affiliation.

I e-mailed WAB, detailing my concerns.

A few hours later I received a reply, informing me that they were looking into it.

The next day, this particular fake film-fest had been removed from their lineup of new CFE's.

I didn't get a followup e-mail about it, but I did know that WAB was on the ball for scam fests.

I just used WAB for the first time two weeks ago. I am very pleased with it, very smooth!

Domhilton - I didn't know they charged so much for the service to festivals. Which explains why smaller fests don't join as quickly.

I think their fee to festivals is based on performance.

Recently, I signed up for a membership for WAB. Like you and everyone else here, it sounded too good to be true. Turns out it has a myriad of problems, at least for me.

First off, when uploading production stills, it didn't allow me to upload them in any order. It switched from chronological to reverse chronological every few minutes. Then the resumes/bios worked the same way, except when I finally got my bios in the order I wanted them, I went to view my press kit and it organized my entire cast alphabetically by first name.

I emailed their tech support about it and called the number once I got a response. One person, named Mauricio is all they have for tech support. He said they would work on fixing it. I asked to talk to his supervisor and he said that he'd give her my number.

A couple of days later, the search engine and the shortlist stopped working for me. Viewing my presskit led to an error page. I emailed Mauricio again asking why in the past few days things have gotten worse and why I still haven't heard from his supervisor. I left messages on the number given to me.

Because so many of the festivals I want to enter had immediate deadlines, I had to submit a press kit I can't view, in an order I know is wrong, and can't look up any other festivals to submit to.

Moreover, so many of the festivals that I'd like to enter are no longer members of WAB. The $5 discount on entries was one of my main incentives for becoming a platinum member. One has to ask themselves why so many major festivals stopped using WAB if everyone else compliments it so highly.

Considering I paid $100 to be a platinum member, I'd have to say I'm incredibly disappointed with the service thus far.

registration and press-kits are only the tip of the iceberg

Hi Thatrader,

Can you tell me which of the festivals have stopped using WAB?

The acceptance rate on non-WAB festivals has been, for my film, much higher than it has been with the WAB festivals. Does your experience go the other way up?

I hope to see process improvements in the screening, scoring, official selection, and notification at all festivals. The decision date is a slippery beast. Most festivals notify only the selected entries. WAB could be a consolidated back-channel, and thus improve their value to the whole festival community.

Jelly Pilgrim

Off the top of my head, Telluride, Slamdance, Los Angeles Int'l Short Film Fest, Chicago International, some of the Asian ones, the list goes on.

I don't know about my acceptance rate yet as I have just only now begun submitting my short. So far, I've applied to Telluride and LA Int'l as non WAB, and about 11 others WAB.

Whether or not I get in I'd like to think has more to do with the quality of my film then whether the festival is WAB or not.

Sundance is non-WAB and there is no doubt in my mind that it is harder to get into than any other WAB fest.

How has your experience been in getting into fests? I'm a newbie to this circuit so any knowledge you care to bestow upon me is greatly appreciated.

benoni said:

Hi Thatrader,

Can you tell me which of the festivals have stopped using WAB?

The acceptance rate on non-WAB festivals has been, for my film, much higher than it has been with the WAB festivals. Does your experience go the other way up?

I hope to see process improvements in the screening, scoring, official selection, and notification at all festivals. The decision date is a slippery beast. Most festivals notify only the selected entries. WAB could be a consolidated back-channel, and thus improve their value to the whole festival community.

Jelly Pilgrim

Click to expand...

WAB is a connection for festivals an audiences, but the service takes a big cut of the entry fee. So festivals on that service are probably just looking for films from different places and using the service to spread thier festival. Sundance wouldn't need to use withoutabox because it's already huge. Why would it want to loose it's submission fee money that way?

WAB is just a service for festivals. The festivals themselves determine who gets in. You have to find the right festivals for your flick, and WAB's a good way to find them. If anything, it's a great directory.

Younger festivals are more likely to officially select films from first time producers, directors, and writers. They’re quicker to premiere novices than the older, more established festivals.

Most filmmakers who gain acceptance in the mature and established festivals have a track record of official selections and awards from earlier projects in their filmography.

For more details on my own experience, visit the Jelly Pilgrim website at
Http://www.jelly-pilgrim.com

Best wishes, and keep your spirits whole!

as a festival producer, I too am dissappointed

We are couch fest films a shorts film festival that happens in strangers' houses. As we were continuing to grow we were at a point to consider withoutabox. I went back and forth on the decision. The reviews seemed good and I figured that I would give it a go for one year and make a informed decision from there.

Man, I don't know how they are in business. It has been a horrible experience. That we didn't receive even close to the percent of submissions that I thought we would receive isn't even the problem.

Oh, god. The site is clunky and slow and the interface is so so so so bad. It feels so 1998. It is far from intuitive.

As a filmmaker I know that other filmmakers would throw a hissy fit if they saw the online viewer they force us to use. It has terrible compression, doesn't resize for the the variety of film ratios they accept, takes forever to buffer and then skips. If a filmmaker knew that I was trying to watch their film that was skipping and was squeezed into the wrong viewing box they would egg the HQ of withoutabox.

What else? They have so many hoops to jump through to do the most basic tasks. It is so unintuitive. I dread thursday as that is the day that I set aside to manage the account. Basic tasks take 10 times longer than they should. Using the site they have pop up windows that either pop up for no real reason or pop up with the wrong movie information. This is a gross and basic flaw.

What else? Their fees? Oh, god. They take such a huge percent chunk of the submission fee and then basically ask for a free banner ad on your website to direct traffic to their bank accounts. Insane.

What else?

There are like 7 steps just to watch and rate a movie. Pointless! It's so poorly designed I dread this process.

There are too many pages I have to drill down to see the basic information that I need. Frustrating.

Many times the site just flat out doesn't work. Links are broken, page load but are missing key elements, videos crash. I know what you are thinking...oh, he's using an old tandy PC trying use mosaic browser to view the site. Wrong. I am using chrome and firefox on multiple computers...all with the same problem. Oh, it must be my internet connection. Wrong again. I have used multiple internet connects with the same problems while other sites run just fine.

It is clear to me that they don't use the site themselves. If they did they would shut it down immediately and start over. It is so clunky, inefficient, broken, outdated, and problematic. Sadly as there is no real competition there is no incentive to fix the glaring problems.

I doubt I will use this site next year and wish others would stop using them too. Next year I will accept submissions directly and have filmmakers send a private link of their film on vimeo (on vimeo it will look perfect) as I have done in the past.

And, dear god, I hope they don't this read this review (unless they see this as free marketing feedback and fix their site). It is shocking to read that other festivals that have been banned from using withoutabox for making a comments about the festival industry that withoutabox didn't like. The gall of them.

http://www.badlit.com/?p=2135

Oh, god, please someone compete with them..it would be so easy to do it as they suck so so so bad.

craig

thatrader said:

Recently, I signed up for a membership for WAB. Like you and everyone else here, it sounded too good to be true. Turns out it has a myriad of problems, at least for me.

First off, when uploading production stills, it didn't allow me to upload them in any order. It switched from chronological to reverse chronological every few minutes. Then the resumes/bios worked the same way, except when I finally got my bios in the order I wanted them, I went to view my press kit and it organized my entire cast alphabetically by first name.

I emailed their tech support about it and called the number once I got a response. One person, named Mauricio is all they have for tech support. He said they would work on fixing it. I asked to talk to his supervisor and he said that he'd give her my number.

A couple of days later, the search engine and the shortlist stopped working for me. Viewing my presskit led to an error page. I emailed Mauricio again asking why in the past few days things have gotten worse and why I still haven't heard from his supervisor. I left messages on the number given to me.

Because so many of the festivals I want to enter had immediate deadlines, I had to submit a press kit I can't view, in an order I know is wrong, and can't look up any other festivals to submit to.

Moreover, so many of the festivals that I'd like to enter are no longer members of WAB. The $5 discount on entries was one of my main incentives for becoming a platinum member. One has to ask themselves why so many major festivals stopped using WAB if everyone else compliments it so highly.

Considering I paid $100 to be a platinum member, I'd have to say I'm incredibly disappointed with the service thus far.

Click to expand...

esophagus said:

We are couch fest films a shorts film festival that happens in strangers' houses. As we were continuing to grow we were at a point to consider withoutabox. I went back and forth on the decision. The reviews seemed good and I figured that I would give it a go for one year and make a informed decision from there.

Man, I don't know how they are in business. It has been a horrible experience. That we didn't receive even close to the percent of submissions that I thought we would receive isn't even the problem.

Oh, god. The site is clunky and slow and the interface is so so so so bad. It feels so 1998. It is far from intuitive.

As a filmmaker I know that other filmmakers would throw a hissy fit if they saw the online viewer they force us to use. It has terrible compression, doesn't resize for the the variety of film ratios they accept, takes forever to buffer and then skips. If a filmmaker knew that I was trying to watch their film that was skipping and was squeezed into the wrong viewing box they would egg the HQ of withoutabox.

What else? They have so many hoops to jump through to do the most basic tasks. It is so unintuitive. I dread thursday as that is the day that I set aside to manage the account. Basic tasks take 10 times longer than they should. Using the site they have pop up windows that either pop up for no real reason or pop up with the wrong movie information. This is a gross and basic flaw.

What else? Their fees? Oh, god. They take such a huge percent chunk of the submission fee and then basically ask for a free banner ad on your website to direct traffic to their bank accounts. Insane.

What else?

There are like 7 steps just to watch and rate a movie. Pointless! It's so poorly designed I dread this process.

There are too many pages I have to drill down to see the basic information that I need. Frustrating.

Many times the site just flat out doesn't work. Links are broken, page load but are missing key elements, videos crash. I know what you are thinking...oh, he's using an old tandy PC trying use mosaic browser to view the site. Wrong. I am using chrome and firefox on multiple computers...all with the same problem. Oh, it must be my internet connection. Wrong again. I have used multiple internet connects with the same problems while other sites run just fine.

It is clear to me that they don't use the site themselves. If they did they would shut it down immediately and start over. It is so clunky, inefficient, broken, outdated, and problematic. Sadly as there is no real competition there is no incentive to fix the glaring problems.

I doubt I will use this site next year and wish others would stop using them too. Next year I will accept submissions directly and have filmmakers send a private link of their film on vimeo (on vimeo it will look perfect) as I have done in the past.

And, dear god, I hope they don't this read this review (unless they see this as free marketing feedback and fix their site). It is shocking to read that other festivals that have been banned from using withoutabox for making a comments about the festival industry that withoutabox didn't like. The gall of them.

http://www.badlit.com/?p=2135

Oh, god, please someone compete with them..it would be so easy to do it as they suck so so so bad.

craig

Click to expand...

Though I haven't shared your experiences, I'm not surprised. Yeah, the website is slow as hell, and definitely "clunky". I used the secure online submission for a couple fests, then never again. Holy shit, I was appalled at how horrible (and small) my online submission was to be viewed in.

Thanks for sharing your experience, and good luck with your fest.