August 27th, 2002, 11:32 AM | #226 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 69
|
You might also want to take a look at Robert Rodriguez's short film Bedhead (on the desperado DVD). It's got kind of a strangeness to it and, being Robert Rodriguez, it's definitely got the no-budget, high-ingenuity thing going on. He is, as someone else on this board proclaimed him, The Patron Saint of DV.
-Shawn
__________________
"Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great." -Mark Twain |
August 27th, 2002, 07:01 PM | #227 |
Woodyfang
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London/Nicosia
Posts: 125
|
nice ideas guys, I'll definitely check em out. Thanks for the advice.
|
August 30th, 2002, 03:41 PM | #228 |
Wrangler
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Vallejo, California
Posts: 4,049
|
Sales tax in California
You may be interested in this Board of Equalization document concerning sales tax. There are a lot of instances when you don't have to charge sales tax.
In California, the State Board of Equalization, in Regulation 1529 spells out the tax code fairly clearly to we videographers. A 'Qualified Motion Picture (includes video) is not taxable. This includes training, corporate and other works. All to the point at which you deliver the master. Copies are taxable. Partial quote from SBE web site "(1) QUALIFIED MOTION PICTURE. A “qualified motion picture” is any motion picture or portion thereof, whether finished or not, which is produced, adapted, or altered for exploitation in, on, or through any medium or by any device for any purpose, including, but not limited to, any entertainment, commercial, advertising, promotional, industrial, or educational purpose." Weddings are specifically stated to be taxable. "(B) Qualified motion picture does not include motion pictures produced for private noncommercial use, such as motion pictures of weddings or graduations to be used as family mementos, accident reconstruction videotapes to be used for legal analysis, or student films to be used for class projects." See http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/reg1529.pdf for the referece. I learned this when I cut a contract with University of California at San Francisco.
__________________
Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel! |
August 30th, 2002, 09:46 PM | #229 |
New Boot
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9
|
Digital projection vs. film
If all theaters had digital projection also, would it still be best to transfer to film or does the quality look better when transfered to film no matter what?
Confused! Please help! |
August 30th, 2002, 10:21 PM | #230 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 87
|
If all theaters had projection systems...I would imagine costly 35mm blowups would be a thing of the past. Instead movies shot on Mini DV would be transferred to HD for screening.
From what I've seen...video views best on VIDEO. Transferring DV to film isn't going to make it look better, or even make it "look like film". In many cases transfer will make a DV flick look worse, well, depending on who you hire to do the transfer. The only reason to blowup to film would be for theatrical screenings. My two cents... |
August 31st, 2002, 01:56 AM | #232 |
Obstreperous Rex
|
It's going to be a long, long time before "all theaters" transition to digital projection. This is happening very sloooowly. Rest assured, movies are going to be shown to audiences through 35mm motion picture projectors for quite awhile yet. Hope this helps,
|
August 31st, 2002, 06:15 AM | #233 |
I recently viewed two different films, both shot in digital. One, ADANARJUAT, THE FAST RUNNER, was sgot in digital and presented on celluloid. The image quality was excellent! A trailer for the movie is available on the web. The second, Tony Hillerman's SKINWALKERS was shot in digital and presented in digital. The image quality was horrible, with blockiness, checkerboard patterns in the sky, blown out highlights and jittery motion. I'm not sure why this digital movie looked so amateurish. Fortunately, the storyline carried the day.
I submit that a videographer used to filming on celluloid needs to be retrained to shoot in digital, but, that's a different topic.. |
|
August 31st, 2002, 06:29 AM | #234 |
Warden
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Clearwater, FL
Posts: 8,287
|
Mikey,
I believe the city of New York may have something similar. I worked on several documentaries that filmed in NY in the late 90's and we had some kind of exemption for some taxes. It was my department, so to speak, so I can't give you any details. But it may be worth looking into. If your doing more guerilla style productions it may not be worth it. The producers paid thousands in permit fees. If you don't have the permits I'd bet you can't get the tax breaks. Jeff |
August 31st, 2002, 12:20 PM | #235 |
Wrangler
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Vallejo, California
Posts: 4,049
|
In California, it means that your client doesn't pay taxes on anything in the production, including the master tape.
This does not include items that may be purchased for the production including props or equipment by the client or as a pass-through billing from me to them. If I buy a new camera for the production, I pay taxes on it but the client ony does so by paying my fees. If you shoot the production on the clien't property and don't use public land, the only thing one needs is a business license and perhaps a Board of Equalization number (for collecting taxes from those who have to pay) Another tax break in California was and still may be that any equipment purchased for a Post Production business can be State Sales Tax exempt (for the state's 5% portion of the tax). All one had to do was furnish an executed copy of the exemption certificate to the supplier. I don't know if this exemption is still in force.
__________________
Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel! |
August 31st, 2002, 12:26 PM | #236 |
Wrangler
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Vallejo, California
Posts: 4,049
|
Another Sales Tax exemption in California
Another tax break in California was and still may be that any equipment purchased for a Post Production business can be State Sales Tax exempt (for the state's 5% portion of the tax). All one had to do was furnish an executed copy of the exemption certificate to the supplier.
I don't know if this exemption is still in force. I certainly enjoyed purchasing my last editing suite without paying the 5%.
__________________
Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel! |
September 1st, 2002, 10:34 AM | #237 |
Hawaiian Shirt Mogul
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: northern cailfornia
Posts: 1,261
|
in laymans terms i think it means you do NOT add taxes to your clients bill for the master tapes , production tapes , sound tapes, labor
if i remember correctly taxes are ADDED for the end product ( ie: they ask for 10 copies of finished tape) so if you charged 2500 to shoot a wedding . in that 2500 it incudes 10 copies of finished video ( you should specify how much much you sell copies for - 19.95 ) .. you only charge client tax on the 10 copies (199.50) |
September 1st, 2002, 04:19 PM | #238 |
Posts: n/a
|
Dv Movie
Just finished production of "Anti-Horror" and are now going into post. Please come by and visit us and check for updates. We are trying to figure out how to stream the demos, so please feel free to give advice or ask questions in the form of email.
www.trilliumpictures.com I am very happy with the results of the xl1s. We made Anti to be a STV release and shot accordingly. So much thanks to Mr Hurd and this site. I have spent many a long night shifting through tech advice of how to achieve the film look and its has paid off. Thanks again Mr Hurd Don B |
September 1st, 2002, 05:52 PM | #239 |
Wrangler
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 8,314
|
Cool.
What's STV? |
September 1st, 2002, 06:03 PM | #240 |
Posts: n/a
|
STV
STV= straight to video
DON B |
| ||||||
|
|