Filmmaking can be any combination of a (mildly to vastly) expensive hobby to an actual income generating occupation.
Technical this and principle that aside, no matter the scale of production, in breadth and depth, a film is going to cost something to make.
Lettuce begin by establishing some fundamental accounting terminology: Direct and Indirect costs.
A camera w/ accouterments, tripod, computer, NLE, & work space can be used for more than one film project.
Think of these as a business/enterprise's overhead.
Whether or not you make a single film or 100 films you're not getting outta these expenses.
Make one film and all the indirect costs can be allocated to that single film.
Make three films and those indirect costs can be proportionately attributed to each of them.
Make ten films and the expense is distributed even further.
Permits & insurance, location fees, cast & crew pay, project specific costumes & props that are generated BECAUSE of a single project are DIRECT costs.
Film project A generates $X in expenses. High risk, high reward film.
Film project B generates $Y in expenses. Low risk, low reward film.
Film project C generates $Z in expenses. Low risk, high reward film.
In order to better understand risk/reward in determining if pursuit of a film project has merit, this thread is created for the purpose of guesstimating not only the budgets of recent films generally available but also of the resources required.
Becoming more cognizant of the scene resource requirements should lead to a better budget estimation so that we may better fulfill our deliverables.
Guesstimating resource requirements and budget for a few hundred dollars may not matter, so this thread's not really interested in exploring that level of filmmaking.
Guesstimating the same for a $30K or $50K film leaves an awfully wide margin for error.
Private Equity + crowdsourcing for a $20K difference (that's a fairly decent car in my garage, folks) becomes a legit point to address, not just "consider."
Well... which is it?
Will the project cost $30K or $50K?
How do you know?
Just make it up as you go along?
Scale the production as finances allow?
Why?
Because it's too difficult to plan ahead and stick to the plan, even with contingencies?
No.
How about we put some mild effort into crafting better budgets.
Lettuce try this through breaking down films by guesstimated filmmaking resources and their corresponding budgets.
Even if we're wrong, even though we're scaling to resource levels we believe we could sensibly attain, we'll be better off than just spitballing guesses.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
The first film we're going to break down is 'Juno.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_(film)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0467406/
Budget estimated/reported between $6 to $7million.
Quality of the film and its content aside, this film should be simple to shoot without helicopter shots, car crashes, explosions, and excessive use of CGI, (there's often more than you'd suspect, watch the extras on the 'You Kill Me' DVD!)
Now, there are a few different ways to go about figuring a budget.
http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?p=264223#post264223
Honestly, I'd be interested in seeing different variations of how it could be done.
Take your time.
You get to it when you get to it.
We'll move onto another film eventually. And another one after that.
Debate and argument are encouraged, of course.
Education and elucidation are prized above all else.
And jussferfun...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvXUKtgR_oE
Technical this and principle that aside, no matter the scale of production, in breadth and depth, a film is going to cost something to make.
Lettuce begin by establishing some fundamental accounting terminology: Direct and Indirect costs.
A camera w/ accouterments, tripod, computer, NLE, & work space can be used for more than one film project.
Think of these as a business/enterprise's overhead.
Whether or not you make a single film or 100 films you're not getting outta these expenses.
Make one film and all the indirect costs can be allocated to that single film.
Make three films and those indirect costs can be proportionately attributed to each of them.
Make ten films and the expense is distributed even further.
Permits & insurance, location fees, cast & crew pay, project specific costumes & props that are generated BECAUSE of a single project are DIRECT costs.
Film project A generates $X in expenses. High risk, high reward film.
Film project B generates $Y in expenses. Low risk, low reward film.
Film project C generates $Z in expenses. Low risk, high reward film.
In order to better understand risk/reward in determining if pursuit of a film project has merit, this thread is created for the purpose of guesstimating not only the budgets of recent films generally available but also of the resources required.
Becoming more cognizant of the scene resource requirements should lead to a better budget estimation so that we may better fulfill our deliverables.
Guesstimating resource requirements and budget for a few hundred dollars may not matter, so this thread's not really interested in exploring that level of filmmaking.
Guesstimating the same for a $30K or $50K film leaves an awfully wide margin for error.
Private Equity + crowdsourcing for a $20K difference (that's a fairly decent car in my garage, folks) becomes a legit point to address, not just "consider."
Well... which is it?
Will the project cost $30K or $50K?
How do you know?
Just make it up as you go along?
Scale the production as finances allow?
Why?
Because it's too difficult to plan ahead and stick to the plan, even with contingencies?
No.
How about we put some mild effort into crafting better budgets.
Lettuce try this through breaking down films by guesstimated filmmaking resources and their corresponding budgets.
Even if we're wrong, even though we're scaling to resource levels we believe we could sensibly attain, we'll be better off than just spitballing guesses.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
The first film we're going to break down is 'Juno.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_(film)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0467406/
Budget estimated/reported between $6 to $7million.
"After minimal rehearsal, filming spanned from early February across to March 2007 on a six-week schedule, of which 30 days were designated to filming."
Quality of the film and its content aside, this film should be simple to shoot without helicopter shots, car crashes, explosions, and excessive use of CGI, (there's often more than you'd suspect, watch the extras on the 'You Kill Me' DVD!)
Now, there are a few different ways to go about figuring a budget.
http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?p=264223#post264223
- We could try to figure out how the producers actually spent their $6-7M.
- We could try to figure out how we, as producers, would budget and spend to make an approximation of the film.
- We could make a $10K version, a $50K version, or a $500K version.
Honestly, I'd be interested in seeing different variations of how it could be done.
Take your time.
You get to it when you get to it.
We'll move onto another film eventually. And another one after that.
Debate and argument are encouraged, of course.
Education and elucidation are prized above all else.
And jussferfun...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvXUKtgR_oE
Last edited:
