Is FrameForge worth buying for storyboarding?

[Pete Cofrancesco]

Originally Posted by Josh Bass

Thats KINDA what HBO’s Project Greenlight was except it was probably heavily manufactured.

Since I don’t have cable or any of the streaming services I’m pretty out of touch with current state of tv and multitude of reality shows. Recently someone was discussing the future of the Emmys being on broadcast tv. The divide between broadcast tv and cable/streaming has grown so large that the broadcast audience would have no idea of what all these shows that live on paid tv.

yeah I wouldn’t be surprised if my idea has already been done but I’m still trademarking “Reel World”

[Paul R Johnson]

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder

Oh well i wouldnt be under the dop. My idea was to have a contract in place to address such matters. I just thought a co-director would be good to handle the acting sides of it.

Confused - I thought you were more into the cameras/framing/image?

How on earth will you decide when a situation arises which Director is correct?

[John Nantz]

Originally Posted by Ryan Elder

Well my biggest weekness is directing good performances out of the actors so i thought i could get a co-director to direct the acting while i direct the shot decisions with the dp and the crew.

Someone who is good with directing the actors will, after a short time, probably have the actors on his side with regard to any issues, and once that happens, probably some of the other staff. In effect, the actor-director could easily wind up running the show.

It isn't necessarily how much one knows but how the personalities play out. Based on my past experience I've seen it so often when the "Boss" knows less than the people under him but because the boss is a good talker, schmoozer, (what ever), he runs the show (office, department, etc.).

It would not be a good situation if someone was brought in with a decent title wound up getting everybody on his or her side.

Even in the military where one has to follow orders, there have been cases where the troops under the leader have sabotaged or done away with the one above them. This problem even happens in politics (many recent cases for example in the media). Not a nice scenario.

The co-director better be someone who is a known quantity and who will never undermine your direction.

Don't think I'd want to start with someone on a feature film. Maybe start with some commercials and work the way up over time.

Something to consider.

Edit: Case in point. Captain (that is, CAPTAIN) Vancouver performed a remarkable voyage for the crown by charting the Pacific Northwest to Alaska and actually charting much of the Pacific Coast down to Chilie under the most arduous conditions. A crew of mostly convicts and some passengers who were along to do science and hopefully make big names for themselves. Five years away from Great Britain, almost lost his ship on a rock in British Columbia. This at a time when many voyages into the unknown resulted in the death of many of the crew due to illness from things like scurvy or work related accidents. Climbing a tall mast in a gale going through the Strait of Magellan is not for sissies. A remarkable accomplishment charting the coast and much of the charts that were made were used even up until relatively recent times.

Question: Why wasn't Captain Vancouver ever rewarded what he deserved? A little back story. One of the passengers was a son of a highly placed person in the British government (House of Lords? don't remember what but had a lot of pull). This passenger did not get along with Captain Vancouver and caused a lot of hate and discontent between the other passengers and, I think, even crew. On the return voyage this passenger jumped ship (not an exact term) in one of the Spanish ports and got back to England before Captain Vancouver's ship did and arranged to put Captain Vancouver on trial. Captain Vancouver managed to escape a court martial or worse but his reputation was severely damaged.

In this case it was nearly all about personalities. Once leaving port [f.e., starting the movie] there was no changing the situation until the return [the movie is completed]. I'm admittedly biased because Captain Vancouver is one of my heroes and from what I've read was done wrong. Never the less, there are many example throughout history where the boss got s*****d.

An interesting side note: Back then the higher-ups often wore wigs and the wigs had lead in them. The constant wearing of the wig caused the wearer to "go mad". Pictures of Captain Vancouver show him with a wig. Not saying this was the cause of a personality problem but may have been a factor. Being stuck with a passenger problem bordering on mutiny for five years would cause anybody to have problems.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh ok thanks that makes sense. There has even been some sabotage on some sets i worked in as well. One time some of the the actors and crew lost confidence in the director and the DP started running the show.

But if i don't have a co-director, can another person help with the performances like the AD then perhaps?

[Brian Drysdale]

You could employ a dialogue coach, the AD has nothing to do with directing actors, only the background action, not the main cast. However, the risk is that the actors may look more towards them than you, if your communication skills are poor..

In the longer term, you won't have much of a career as a drama director if you can't direct actors. It's something you have to learn if you wish to be a feature film director. There are other types of productions you can direct without needing to work much with actors, but with feature films it's mostly what the job is about.

Writer/Producer is not unusual, with the director doing the directing. Some co-directing credits are actually this, but the people involved know each other extremely well, so blur the edges,

[Ryan Elder]

Yeah, that makes sense. I can just do my best to direct the actors then, if that's best.

[Paul R Johnson]

"If that's best?"

Ryan, if you want to be a director, then for goodness sake, direct!. Be in charge, be authoritative and in your case where the money is yours, YOU are paying these people. They are working for you, you are paying their personal bills by providing funds. If you really want to be walked over, disregarded, overruled and ignored then let it happen, otherwise you have two options. Take charge. Accept no compromise and follow the vision. Your cop out of having somebody else co-direct is a 100% cop out. You're actually saying I'm no good with confrontation or instant decision making and have little confidence in yourself. If this is correct you are ill suited to direct anything. You seem to want the best bits and have somebody else do the worst bits, but the director is the centre of the world, and ego bashing between two directors won't work. If one of the two can control things and one can't, what's the point of being outmanoeuvred at every decision stage.

Years ago I discovered a problem with how I managed. I wanted to not be the bad news person, so I'd make a decision that X had to change but I'd say something like "a couple of people have pointed out this, or even say that the producer won't like this, we have to change" and the big famous person would preen and say " I'll get my agent to call John, I think it's fine" John being the producer. I suddenly realised that the buck stopped with me, so I changed and started like this. "I don't like this bit, we need to change it to this" and oddly the highly paid, well known people said " oh, OK, how about this?" When you want things done, you're the boss, so just make decisions, don't try to rationalise them, they'll fight back with alternatives. Just state it. "We're going to cut that last bit of your speech, and move straight to the door opening" it's weird but silence, hesitation and pauses invite discussion and you lose control. It doesn't even matter if your idea is bad, because it's your call.

[David Knaggs]

That is really great advice, Paul. In fact, it's great advice for anybody looking to direct (not just Ryan).

Originally Posted by Brad Kraus

You need to stop giving even weight to every single comment that is made about your script ...

Originally Posted by Brad Kraus

Remember, when all is said and done, the only feedback that really matters is whether the audience likes it or not.

Also great advice!

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay. Well I didn't think that a co-director was a cop out, since some movies that are successful have had co-directors working together. Plus it was said that I am not ready for a feature, so I thought that might help.

But I already got other people interested in it now, and I feel I should do it after years of working on other sets, and I feel the time is just now, with the money I have rather than spend it on more shorts. But I guess that's just me. I feel I can do it if I have really good actors and a really good DP, since I was told the acting and cinematography are my weaknesses.

I am actually much more authoritative on set, and act much more confident, and that I know what I want. Is it bad for director's take suggestions from others though, if the suggestions are good?

[Paul R Johnson]

Not at all, it's like the armed forces, the number two is expected to offer suggestions to the commanding officer for consideration, and only a stupid no. 1 would ignore a better suggestion - but the problem is you won't know if it's better and have to get on your computer to ask us with the usual 'I've been told ........."

We're not picking in you Ryan, but trying very hard to make you consider your abilities and make progress - but it's painfully slow, often stuck in loops and frequently a bang head against a brick wall moment.

I'd be an impossible person for you to direct. How long does it take people to work out your unsureness, or reluctance to make a plan and stick to it? I'd be one of those throwing continual 'better' suggestions, because many of us are really good at making decisions of people's capabilities. I do it all the time. Speak to somebody new for five minutes and then decide if I can just leave them to it, or will I have to keep checking?

When I was a teacher we did this all the time in college - first impressions, first day and it was very rare to have got it wrong. I used to have three private categories Leader, follower and no hope and I'd make the selection the first day and get it right most times. When I got it wrong it was usually not noticing a follower had grown into a leader. I don't think I ever labelled somebody a leader, and had to change this in 14 years!

[Ryan Elder]

Oh ok, thanks, i know you are helping and not oucking in me, thanks ☺.

I just thought it was a good idea to take suggestions if i felt someone had an idea better than mine. One time an actor asked if he could change a couple of lines for example and i though his lines were better than in the script.

Or one time the DP recommended a shot that was unplanned for more coverage so i said sure since we had time.

Is that bad of me?

[Brian Drysdale]

No, as director, it's your job to grab ideas from where ever you can get them. This happens regularly on films.

[Paul R Johnson]

These changes are not a problem Ryan - taking on good ideas is a sound policy.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay. Well when it comes to coverage and getting shoots done rapidly, I was thinking for all the major characters that need coverage, I should give them no more than two shots each. So if I have a scene between two people for example, two wide shots and two close ups. Unless I really need other shots for this scene during certain moments.

But what do you think, is that enough? So far it seems to have worked, unless people mind a minimal amount of shots like that?

[Paul R Johnson]

Rather defeats the idea of your storyboard? You don't allocate shots like this, you choose them to tell the story!!

We are just wasting our time here - you have gone straight back to your needing a rule for everything.

Do you honestly think any of the movies we've used as examples ever had a rule about how many shots they'd need for each scene?

Running time, divided by scenes, multiplied but the inverse of the quantity of lead characters divided by supporting cast, multiplied by the number of times the 1st AD went to the toilet!