working out who / what is required for your feature film crew

D

derek smith

I have been using IMDB to see the 'Cast & Crew' lists for Independent Films. It has surprised me with the difference in the numbers of Crews in such films. Some films were I thought would have few people working on, actually had dozens, and vice versa.....

My question is, how do you really know, what is required for your Independent Feature Film. With me, I covered the main roles first (Director, DOP, Sound etc)...then thought about additional roles (location manager, Key Grip).....Do you personally try and look for someone who can multi task???
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
My very minimum crew:
DP/operator
1st AC
1st AD
script supervisor
gaffer
dolly grip/key grip
grip/electric
grip/electric
grip/electric
makeup/costumer
set dresser/props
audio recordist
boom op
craft services/caterer
5 PA’s who each have specific tasks
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The right crew depends on 2 things:

1) Your budget
2) What kind of movie you're making (for example how much equipment you need, how many actors, locations, etc.)

If you budget is low (like very low < 100K) and you're shooting with few actors, maybe no more than 2 or 3 per scene, you can use a very reduced crew. I have shot shorts (and even a feature) with a crew of 7 (and even less). Myself (as DP and direction), a good gaffer, a couple of good sound guys and 2 assistants, plus a makeup person. Also is imperative to have a script supervisor. It's very doable and the key is experience. You don't want a small crew and they're all clueless. I personally like to move fast and with minimum lighting setups. I try to utilize natural lighting as much as I can. I don't use any new gadget that is available either, so i keep equipment to the basics. In that case you can use a small crew.

if you're using a lot of equipment you'll need a larger crew, but if you're on a small budget why do you need so much equipment?

If your budget is larger and the demands of the film are greater (like many actors, action scenes, shooting in restaurants, etc.) you need a larger crew.

Also, some indie filmmakers just follow the convention and think they need to make a movie like hollywood does it so, so they come up with these long lists. Nonsense. Every movie has its needs, including crew requirements.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I have a friend who has shot 4 feature films. One if his films he had a crew of 4 or less. Another film, he had no more than 5 people. Without giving out too much info, he is now in Los Angeles and is in talks to shoot a studio film with a famous Producer leading the project.

Some people can make a feature with 15-30 crew members. Some can do it with just a few people during production. Some people get married to the way studio films make their work, some try to combine roles or go against the grain. You'll have people who will vehemently disagree with me (and that's fine), but I think it's very possible to have a crew of a handful.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Jay, no one will vehemently disagree with you. Every one of us knows
it is very possible to make a movie with a small crew. Every one of us
have made movies with a small crew.

It is not married to the studio way to use a crew of 15 to 20 people.
Having a person dedicated to each necessary job makes the shoot
smoother and is lees difficult on each person. A grip crew of four will
move lights and equipment faster than a grip crew of the director, DP,
sound person and PA. But it can be done and the finished product can
look great.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
directorik said:
Jay, no one will vehemently disagree with you. Every one of us knows
it is very possible to make a movie with a small crew. Every one of us
have made movies with a small crew.

It is not married to the studio way to use a crew of 15 to 20 people.
Having a person dedicated to each necessary job makes the shoot
smoother and is lees difficult on each person. A grip crew of four will
move lights and equipment faster than a grip crew of the director, DP,
sound person and PA. But it can be done and the finished product can
look great.
Click to expand...

I should have been more clear. What I mean is there are people out there that feel they need to have four grips, 5 PA's etc on their feature because that's how the studios do it and they want to mimic that to a T. And there is nothing at all wrong with that. I was just pointing out that it isn't the only way to make a feature and that many successful features had only a handful of crew members. There is no wrong or right way, it's whatever you think you need to make a quality feature within your budget.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
derek smith said:
I have been using IMDB to see the 'Cast & Crew' lists for Independent Films. It has surprised me with the difference in the numbers of Crews in such films. Some films were I thought would have few people working on, actually had dozens, and vice versa.....

My question is, how do you really know, what is required for your Independent Feature Film. With me, I covered the main roles first (Director, DOP, Sound etc)...then thought about additional roles (location manager, Key Grip).....Do you personally try and look for someone who can multi task???
Click to expand...

You will get an idea of what you personally need by experience shooting shorts
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JayRuz said:
I should have been more clear. What I mean is there are people out there that feel they need to have four grips, 5 PA's etc on their feature because that's how the studios do it and they want to mimic that to a T. And there is nothing at all wrong with that. I was just pointing out that it isn't the only way to make a feature and that many successful features had only a handful of crew members. There is no wrong or right way, it's whatever you think you need to make a quality feature within your budget.
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree with you, the productions that have four grips, four electrics, 5 PAs etc generally have them to streamline the shoot, ensure everything runs smoothly and to have everything run quicker.

When you're shooting on 35mm motion picture film, and have a truck full of lighting and grip gear, you want a crew of more than 4, at least if you want to shoot more than one shot per day.

That's not to say that a film shot with a small crew without all that gear won't also look good or be a potentially good film, just don't get the wrong idea about the reasons we use larger crews - it's not because we're trying to copy anything or anybody, it's simply the most efficient way to work when it comes to a set of that scale.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JayRuz said:
I should have been more clear. What I mean is there are people out there that feel they need to have four grips, 5 PA's etc on their feature because that's how the studios do it and they want to mimic that to a T. And there is nothing at all wrong with that. I was just pointing out that it isn't the only way to make a feature and that many successful features had only a handful of crew members. There is no wrong or right way, it's whatever you think you need to make a quality feature within your budget.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean. And no one here will vehemently disagree with
you. I'm one of those people who feel I need a full crew including four
grips, 5 PA's etc. Not because that's how studios do it, but because in
my experience the shoot goes faster and each person isn't doing the
job of two, three or four people on those long twelve hour days. I would
rather have a dedicated boom op than one of the actors not in the scene
holding the boom. I would rather have a dedicated make up artist than
have the actors do and touch up their own make up. Not because that's
how the studios do it but because things move faster and more efficiently.

We all agree that there is no wrong or right way. No one is going to vehemently
disagree with you on this. My list is what I think is the bare minimum of crew
needed. I did not say a quality movie can not be made with fewer people.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It always comes down to the quality triangle.

triangle.jpg


If it's good and fast, it ain't gonna be cheap.

If it's good and cheap, it ain't gonna be fast.

If it's cheap and fast, it ain't gonna be good.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
directorik said:
I know what you mean. And no one here will vehemently disagree with
you. I'm one of those people who feel I need a full crew including four
grips, 5 PA's etc. Not because that's how studios do it, but because in
my experience the shoot goes faster and each person isn't doing the
job of two, three or four people on those long twelve hour days. I would
rather have a dedicated boom op than one of the actors not in the scene
holding the boom. I would rather have a dedicated make up artist than
have the actors do and touch up their own make up. Not because that's
how the studios do it but because things move faster and more efficiently.

We all agree that there is no wrong or right way. No one is going to vehemently
disagree with you on this. My list is what I think is the bare minimum of crew
needed. I did not say a quality movie can not be made with fewer people.
Click to expand...

I actually wasn't even referring to your post, I'm sorry if it came across like that. I honestly think your bare minimum crew is actually a great thing to have. My post is sort of a separate thought as I've had people tell me before that you can't make a film with a small crew. It will take longer and it will be harder, but I'm mainly trying to re-enforce the idea that it's possible, echoing others statements here.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
directorik said:
.... Not because that's how studios do it, but because in
my experience the shoot goes faster and each person isn't doing the
job of two, three or four people on those long twelve hour days. ... .
Click to expand...

To me the question is "what are you doing that you need such a large crew in a low budget." If you're going to set up 400 lights, dolly shots, jibes, etc. and you have 2 ton of equipment to move around, of course you need "bodies", and lots of them, to move quickly.

I think that in a low budget you have to think differently from a technical POV and concentrate more on the story. Ultimately that's what the audience will see and judge. Of course this is my opinion, you can disagree, but I have helped several low budget filmmakers focus more on the narrative and make more use of natural lighting, fixed lighting, etc. and less gadgets, to reduce the crew size to a handful and move very quickly.... And it's in the use of a million pieces of equipment, and it's consequences, where many filmmakers follow the "studios" blindly.

I rather put my money on the flow of the story and the acting, then perfect lighting, or perfect camera moves, etc. And that requires a smaller crew. My two cents.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
danielp said:
I think that in a low budget you have to think differently from a technical POV and concentrate more on the story. Ultimately that's what the audience will see and judge. Of course this is my opinion, you can disagree, but I have helped several low budget filmmakers focus more on the narrative and make more use of natural lighting, fixed lighting, etc. and less gadgets, to reduce the crew size to a handful and move very quickly.... And it's in the use of a million pieces of equipment, and it's consequences, where many filmmakers follow the "studios" blindly.

I rather put my money on the flow of the story and the acting, then perfect lighting, or perfect camera moves, etc. And that requires a smaller crew. My two cents.
Click to expand...

You assume that a good story and high production value are mutually exclusive. The fact that one has dollies, jibs, lights etc. does not mean that the story is not top notch. In fact, lighting and camera movement are major storytelling tools that should not be neglected.

Using an appropriate amount of equipment and crew to enable you to get a film looking and sounding exactly as you want, at a standard you want it to be, does not mean you're 'blindly' following the studios, nor that your story is no good. There are bad stories regardless of how many lights or crew you have, just as there are good stories.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jax_rox said:
You assume that a good story and high production value are mutually exclusive. The fact that one has dollies, jibs, lights etc. does not mean that the story is not top notch. In fact, lighting and camera movement are major storytelling tools that should not be neglected.
Click to expand...

I'm not assuming that "story" and camera work are mutually exclusive at all.

But if you're on a low budget something has to give...

... and just because you may have a camera and a tripod only (for instance), and nothing else, doesn't mean the movie will be sloppy or neglected in the camera department. You still have angles, composition, depth-of-field, lighting and the right cuts to craft your film, and that doesn't require a large crew. You don't need a ton of equipment to make a compelling movie, and that's my only point.

De Sica made incredibly compelling films with only a heavy and noisy 35mm camera. Not only that but he used a lot of natural lighting and you rarely see a dolly shot.

In fact, to me, the best movies are those that you don't even notice the "camera", just the story... and yes, the camera has to tell the story, but my point is that you don't need every gadget in the planet to do so, just a good "eye."
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
danielp said:
To me the question is "what are you doing that you need such a large crew in a low budget." If you're going to set up 400 lights, dolly shots, jibes, etc. and you have 2 ton of equipment to move around, of course you need "bodies", and lots of them, to move quickly.
Click to expand...
400 lights, dolly shots, jibes, etc. and 2 tons of equipment are not necessary
for a low budget film. I thought we were talking low budget. Why go to such
an extreme to make your point? You saw my crew list. That crew would not
be able to handle 400 lights and 2 tons of equipment of equipment efficiently.


danielp said:
Of course this is my opinion, you can disagree, but I have helped several low budget filmmakers focus more on the narrative and make more use of natural lighting, fixed lighting, etc. and less gadgets, to reduce the crew size to a handful and move very quickly.... And it's in the use of a million pieces of equipment, and it's consequences, where many filmmakers follow the "studios" blindly.
Click to expand...
We do not disagree. We are in full agreement. There is no need for a huge crew
400 lights, dolly shots, jibes, etc. and 2 tons of equipment . I, too, have helped on
several low budget films. I have directed and/or produced several low budget films.
I have never seen any low budget filmmaker follow the "studios" blindly - even
here in Los Angeles.

danielp said:
I rather put my money on the flow of the story and the acting, then perfect lighting, or perfect camera moves, etc. And that requires a smaller crew. My two cents.
Click to expand...
To me it isn't one or the other. Story and acting to me is just as important as
perfect lighting and camera moves. I would rather put my money equally in
both. Not a disagreement - just a different method of making movies.

Out of nothing more than curiosity: What positions on my list would you remove
in order to put your money on the flow of the story and the acting?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
directorik said:
...
Out of nothing more than curiosity: What positions on my list would you remove
in order to put your money on the flow of the story and the acting?
Click to expand...

We're practically in agreement but the problem is that we're "discussing" a generic production and every production has its own needs. So discussion any "list" makes little sense if we don't know the details - wouldn't you agree? Your list may be fine depending on the requirements of script, the amount of equipment you had in mind and other factors, such as budget, etc., so I won't comment. You can make a movie with half the number of people in your list or with twice that number.

However, the point I tried to make is that with a reduced budget you need to make compromises and I would favor putting all the money on a what's in front of the camera, rather than the other way around. For that you need an experienced DP that is comfortable working with a reduced crew and equipment, and talented enough to make it work.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
derek smith said:
here'a a further question...in terms of finding out exactly the equipment required...would this be done by discussing with each of your Crew, for their recommendations what they need
Click to expand...

You start with a vision of how you see the movie being told and then you discuss it with your DP (not with every crew member). The DP knows folks he or she has worked with and he'll suggest a crew and equipment. In some case the DP may suggest ideas and you go from there. It depends on many factors, like what type of movie it is, budget, how many locations, etc. etc.

If you're looking to shoot a movie with a small crew and minimal equipment I would suggest you find someone with experience working like that. There are guys who can do amazing things with very little.

I have no idea what budget you have in mind or what kind of movie you're thinking about (action, horror, drama, a love story, etc), or what the setting is (are the locations complicated or you can get away with minimum lighting? Are the acoustics right? etc.), so it's difficult for me to give you any concrete opinion.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top