Commercial filmmaking requires resources. Obtaining those required resources is one of the fundamental abilities/skills of modern indie filmmaking. Mike W pointed out that if one lacks this fundamental ability then by definition one is an amateur filmmaker rather than an indie filmmaker. So, pointing out that you don't have the required resources (and therefore obviously lack this fundamental filmmaking ability) is neither enlightening Mike W nor putting "him in his place", it's actually agreeing with him!! I tried to explain this to you previously but you don't seem to get it, neither do you seem to appreciate that by continuing to state that you have "enlightened him" and "put him in his place", you're only making yourself appear more foolish.
Judging from the likes I got, other "Professional" film and TV members agreed with me. Even "amateur" films require resources. However, knowing that "amateur" filmmakers can and do get little to unskilled help for the low pay we can offer sets the limits as to what we can make. My day rate for a sound guy is $100 a day. When some guys respond to my ads saying their day rate is $350 per day and their work is very studio-like, I realize I will not be getting studio results. And, I will not be working with these guys because they are beyond my budget. However, I can get someone who has worked as an intern in a post audio house, so they have some experience with sound, have some or all of their equipment, likes the genre I'm working in, and will work with me. So, I am far from foolish. I realize the limitations I have to work with. And, pointing out these limits in his thread makes the information more comprehensive to new people.
You obviously don't know many professionals in the TV/film industry! The vast majority are under financial and schedule pressures and are simply too busy/engrossed to even think about newbies, let alone actively share their knowledge and help them. In my experience, Mike W appears to be an entirely typical example of a professional in the TV/film industry and indeed, considerably less harsh than many!
I know them well enough to see them on their good days and bad days. One editor, in particular is a god to all of the postproduction companies in my area because he started out as one of them and made it in Hollywood.
I don't know how arrogant that is because I don't know exactly what business you're in or how good you are at it, but there are two problems with this approach as far as commercial filmmaking is concerned: 1. You obviously have not found the best sources of information! You might have found the best sources of information available on the internet or in books, but in many essential filmmaking areas the best sources of information are not available on the internet or in books. 2. Information can be self-taught and is a vital ingredient but on it's own it's virtually worthless. There is far too much information for any one person to ever learn, so to be useful, it's a case of prioritising information, relating it to other (often not so obvious) pieces of information and knowing how and when to apply it. This cannot be self-taught or at least cannot be self-taught sufficiently.
It's for these two reasons that Mike W suggested that there is no real alternative to apprenticeships/internships + training with practicing professional/commercial filmmakers.
Filmmaking is also an artistic field. Having a natural talent for art cannot be taught. Either you have it or you don't. It is also a technical field. That must be learned. Back in my high school days, I was an art major. I was put their by a councilor who was also an art teacher because she saw potential in my doodling and pencil drawings I used to make. As I said early on, I would take an internship with the right professional. We would need the right chemistry to work together. Putting together cast and crews, I know how important good chemistry between everyone is.
I worked well with an editor who worked in two world--Professional and "Amateur." How professional was he? He worked for Canal+ as an editor for a good dozen years, did post work for the James Bond movie "Tomorrow Never Dies," worked on lots of TV commercials, and cut trailers for "The Siege" and did the titles for the first "Matrix." I learned a lot from him. He came to NY to start up his own postproduction company where his customers were both professionals and "amateurs" with films that needed to be put together. Through him, I met many other industry professionals. So, I recommend everyone work with a mentor.
Not any "big company" I've ever worked for or heard of! Big companies actually rely on professional experts or teams of professional experts, in various fields. People who can learn on the fly are useful under certain circumstances but big companies don't rely on them, there are various options available to big companies if new skills/knowledge is required. In the vast majority of cases, a business which has to "rely on people who can learn on the fly" tends to indicate poor management/planning and limited prospects for long term survival!
Welcome to corporate America. They are all of the above. They are so big the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing too often. I am a troubleshooter with everything I do. I have my degrees in electrical engineering technology and was a few credits away from a second degree in computer technology engineering. That has helped me with what I have to do troubleshooting electrical, mechanical, and software problems with equipment my company makes in the field in customer locations. I have had to travel with design engineers to identify problems in both design and manufacturing of our products. These days, I troubleshoot network problems as well. I had 2 years of architecture in college as well, taking photography, mechanical drawing, and model building classes. That helps me to understand the disciplines of my crew. Studying servo control systems in electronic helps me not just with electronics, but in understanding inter-department communication breakdown in corporation that are the equivalent of feedback control systems in electronics and how to resolve problems to get things done. I am using that right now to resolve a problem between departments where one does not know why progress is not being made because another department is not doing something to enable the progress both departments have to make for everyone to be on the same page to help a customer.
That's maybe a good philosophy for "others here" who ultimately just want to be average/decent amateur filmmakers. It's a poor and naive philosophy for anyone wanting to be a commercial/professional filmmaker or even someone wishing to gain success/recognition as an amateur filmmaker! Commercial filmmaking is not just a competitive market, it's a highly competitive market. Not taking this fact into account throughout the filmmaking process is effectively turning a relatively slim chance of success into pretty much a zero chance of success. Even in amateur filmmaking, one is competing for the time and attention of viewers on say Youtube and/or competing against other amateur filmmakers to be accepted into film festivals then, if accepted, competing to win a prize and then hopefully, making another film and doing it all over again at a more respected/higher tier festival. On the commercial/professional side, small or large improvements, however noticeable, are literally worth nothing whatsoever unless you first meet market demands/requirements and compare favourably with the competition!
G
"You have to crawl before you walk."
My philosophy is good for anyone starting out. It applies to everything that appears to be too big and impossible to do. Breakdown something that looks too big into something small enough to understand and set goals of achievements which becomes a game plan to succeed. For something as everyday as organizing a flat, apartment, or home that looks like too much of a mess to manage, it starts with breaking it down into smaller steps of achievements to make a great leap forward.
