welcome to UK Film Forum .co.uk - Shooting People .org - another view - Powered by ForumCo.com

7 Posts

Posted - 04 Jun 2005 : 12:33:53 PM

I thought I'd add some balance to the absolute endorsement offered by UK FILM (who I note also bans comments on SP).

You will not find SP;

Promoting rates of pay or increasing actors pay online - in the same issue as the advert for this very forum there is a UK Film Finance funded film that isnt paying Equity rates. Plus there is a commercial film for distribution by a blue chip company which is also paying low pay - from a Ltd Co!

Neither do I see SP educating students that they ought to pay for professionals.

SP do charge for every event they organise yet dont invest in the long term future of the profession by promoting better pay, conditions insurance and generally educating their readers. Happy to swan about in Cannes but no real impetus to ensure films are insured, students are using low Pay contracts etc etc. this makes readers easy prey to the corporate vulutres who are aware of their inexperience.

Add to that a doese of censorship to anyone who dares criticise them - they even had the audacity to comment on the advert for this site.

No SP could do a lot more to raise the worth and livelihoods of its readers. Sadly it chooses not to (and you wont read about it online). Someone even told me that one of its owners works for C4

ukfilm

119 Posts

Posted - 04 Jun 2005 : 1:10:37 PM

"who I note also bans comments on SP"

Where do you get that from? We haven't banned anything about SP - or have I read your post wrong?

We're actually very grateful to SP for allowing us to post news of this site there (though you could argue that they were kind of obliged to). That posting gave this site a real kick start.

As to the rest... Hmm, I hope you'll understand if we don't comment. Best not to get involved in this one, suffice to say that I think SP are really very good at what they do, which, let's face it, is the best any of us can aspire to. We don't see ourselves as being in competition - SP chose not to adopt this format, so we're giving it a go.

BTW I should add that if we get postings here simply slagging off other sites (or people) they will simply be deleted. Constructive criticism is another matter, which I take it the above is meant to be..?

7 Posts

Posted - 04 Jun 2005 : 2:14:51 PM

Your original posting about SP is locked - thus preventing anyone offering any other perspectives.

>>>Hmm, I hope you'll understand if we don't comment>>
You then dont go on to say 'they are good at what they do.' If you do want to comment please avoid generalising and do back it up with specifics and proof. SP does not support Equity rates for commercials and is actively working against union instructions. The amount of paid work they advertise has not increased significantly in the 4 or so years they've been operating and they do precious little to promote it.

Please dont start censoring posts just because you dont agree with them or what they stand for. My posting is backed with examples and evidence -it isnt a simple slagging , it acts as a cautionary tale and asks readers to view the wider context of forums, their usefulness and effect in a marketplace awash with inexperience.

I'm all for impassioned debate, please lets make sure we remain open minded to contrary points of view. You cant write this type of posting on SP which is exactly why you have such a good idea here, please dont spoil it.

ukfilm

119 Posts

Posted - 04 Jun 2005 : 2:39:18 PM

The original posting is certainly locked - it's an informational sticky. There's no other way of putting them in here. But still you posted this thread, so we hardly ban comments about SP. I would say that you were generalising...?

Well, enough of this sophistry. Your points are acknowledged. I think the problem SP has is that up to now they are the only service offering the kind of thing they do, they started up from a guerilla-ish perspective, and they can't be everything to everyone.

But I'm not happy about UKFF becoming the place to allow people to go and have a moan about SP, especially since we regard them as our friends, so I'm going to let this thread run for the weekend, and then lock it and offer up a solution to maintain freedom of speech. You'll see what I mean when I do it.

SP folk, if you're reading this, do offer a response here. Could get lively.

BTW Any genuinely offensive posts WILL be deleted (if any of us are around).

7 Posts

Posted - 04 Jun 2005 : 3:36:06 PM

Thanks for responding UKF

>>>But I'm not happy about UKFF becoming the place to allow people to go and have a moan about SP, especially since we regard them as our friends

Oh dear. How disappointing. We really value freedom of speech but please dont touch our friends - we are quite happy to endorse them and you cant quibble with our viewpoint. This debate really isnt about who can say what to whom, its about the wider issue of a passive acceptance of low/no pay and the part that forums play in perpetuating this concept. Why cant we have that debate and cite examples? Is there no place to discuss the broader issues I express here? Do you care about them? Is it right that film finance money is not being ploughed back to support livelihoods? Actors and production crew are exposed to uninsured working conditions?

I really didnt want to have to go down the educating the moderators route or the philsophics of 'who moderates the moderators.' But if you want debate and seek viewpoints at the very last be prepared to accept them. As a user I'm always wary that the moderators is self appointed from a power vacuum, unelected, unable to be usurped by his/her population, can censor anyone and doesn't have to implement their views - that's a dictator - however altruistic ;-) I'm sure you set up this site for equally altruistic reasons but if the only people that can speak are those that agree with your viewpoint then thats terrible.

I put a serious well argued note of caution to counter your informational sticky (lets call it an advert hey?) and all you do is prevent debate at the first opportunity. A forum is a world of dichordant voices and its ok to call those in charge to account - thats called democracy - some of the worst abuses of mankind are as a direct result of the prevention of expression, please learn from this.

UKfilm Please come up with some reasoned arguments to support your opinions and please allow the debate banning it because of personal loyalties is exactly what repression is about.

And thanks for keeping it pleasant, debating is tough but that doesnt mean we close down ;-)

Jules

1 Posts

Posted - 04 Jun 2005 : 4:49:43 PM

Peter the Greek has a point, you are wrong to ban a subject just because you are personally sensitive to it. If the posting concerned the UK Film commission (which it does refer to obliquely) then I dont think you'd be removing it with such speed. One cant be selective about the topics one debates, many inexperienced forum moderators fall into this trap, trying to be all things to all men but actually not realising its our diversity and differences than make our strengths.
I know of many who do not support web based forums for castings and have concerns over their influence on the marketplace. Youngsters are all to willing to readily accept all they have to offer without querying why the multi-national doesnt want to pay for their services, the training video (on sale worldwide and sold to schools) will only pay expenses and why the student film demands nudity and a night shoot but no pay and their colleges thinks the issue is nothing to do with them.
Why cant we be demanding better? Why do forums not acknowledge the part they have to play or give anything tangible back apart from a passive acceptance of low/no pay?

One cant criticse many of the online forums for their tactics (you try) or ask them to account for their actions -despite paying them a subscription - the irony isnt lost on me here either. Yes web based forums have grown from a guerilla-ish perspective -the trouble is they still try and project that 'independent network' feel - its simply doesnt fit when they are themselves Limited Companies (no Ltd company I ever came across has a list of 'patrons') and the likes of KFC and Proctor and Gamble use their sites to attract actors at below market rates. I know many, many actors agree with this perspective and just dont bother with certain web based forums, perhaps UKF hasnt heard this becasue he/she may be too close to them, all the better reason to let this debate continue to educate readers. Its not wrong defend your way of living.

ukfilm

119 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 12:24:14 AM

Hold on - I haven't censored anybody yet! Why this torrent of abuse?

"some of the worst abuses of mankind are as a direct result of the prevention of expression, please learn from this."

And what exactly qualifies you to give me such lectures?

I smell a crank or two.

Chelsea Girl

17 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 01:09:57 AM

Wouldn't worry. IMHO a pair of sad losers bitter about the world. Probably spend their spare time arguing with librarians and car park attendants. Yawn.

7 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 01:41:14 AM

Hi,

Thanks for writing UKF. No torrent of abuse just concern that you will close the thread "I'm going to let this thread run for the weekend, and then lock it."

I see no torrent of abuse, simply concern and a request that you justify your responses. I suppose what qualfies us to give lectures (if you read it that way) is absolutley nothing - you do request viewpoints and debate and that is what you've got. A polite request that I have read your guidelines and stayed within them, one would hope this is justification enough not to ban a contrary viewpoint.

Please dont abuse the users of your forum by calling them cranks simply because you disagree with them, its perfectly reasonable to ask you to justify your response. Please learn tolerance and acceptance of other viewpoints.

Chelsea girl your response is abusive, adds nothing and is outside the rules of the forum. Debating is tough, if you're unable to take part then please dont.

153 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 01:52:58 AM

On the night shift then Pete? What do you do? I've just got home to find this amusing barney. Heh heh.

7 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 04:32:05 AM

>>>What do you do?

I make my living from commercials. The internet is global, at the moment I'm not in the UK.

153 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 09:59:22 AM

"not in the UK"? That's a bit vague. Where exactly? What's freedom of speech like there?

4 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 10:26:25 AM

Wow, is this for real? I didnt know that stuff, thanks for sharing it Pete. I hadnt thought about it much/enough. I guess I should do.

7 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 11:08:12 AM

Hi Peter,

I'm in South Africa, it had a bit of a history of as regards Freedom of Speech. Any comments on the industry issues raised??

153 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 11:17:36 AM

I'm more interested in you. So last night you were posting at (local time) 3.41 a.m.? Interesting. When I'm working abroad, I'm not usually on the net at 4am posting mails back home about freedom of speech. You seem extraordinarily dedicated to this issue. You post this stuff elsewhere?

7 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 11:31:24 AM

Cheers Pete,

I'm more interested in you>> Thanks but I think my wife would object. :-)
I wont be getting into a conversation about me, my work or my schedule. If you're not interested in the subject thats fine. Enjoy the weekend.

153 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 11:40:35 AM

Did SP piss you off in some way? Not accept your posts perhaps? You jumped to the conclusion that you'd been censored here very quickly. And you don't seem to like moderators per se.

Tom Durden

1 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 12:02:12 PM

He doesn't want to talk about his work? Maybe he doesn't work in the film industry at all then?

4 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 12:31:43 PM

This site is crap all you do is abuse and harrass each other and the moderator doesnt remove it. I thought it would be better than other sites. Its early days but this isnt a good advert for this fledgeling site and not at all welcoming.

Copies of my book "How to play the topic, not the man" are freely available.

Speaking personally (and on the topic) I'm fed up with the number of colleges turning out 'mejia' students given a camera and nothing else for their graduation project. The crew never get a video and once they leave the student goes to work in marketing admin and has no long term wish to work in the industry. Are the colleges helping the passage of newcomers into the industry or are they just out for a quick and trendy buck?

153 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 1:12:38 PM

"... and the moderator doesnt remove it"

So now you're advocating censoreship?

quietly_myself

13 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 1:15:46 PM

And I'm sick of people slagging off "mejia" students, who have chosen to take the college route in order to help give themselves a start in the industry, and then find that people who haven't taken that route are hostile to them. Colleges do what they can to help students into the industry, it's people in the industry who seem to try to stop them!

As for the comment at the top about SP not "educating Students that they should pay for professionals", I find that statement extremely offensive. As a postgraduate about to begin production on my MA Project, I cannot afford to pay professionals or anyone else. I rely on the goodwill of others to help me to make my project the best I can - so far folk on SP have been extremely supportive. I have been given several thousand feet of film stock for free from SP members I've never had any contact with before. I have been offered the use of thousands of pounds of film equipment and lighting for free, and have several key crew-members already installed who are going to work for free. It all adds up to allowing me to punch well above my weight, and that is what SP is for. It is an excellent resource for students, amateurs and professionals alike (which is something I'm sure this forum would like to become). If people don't like requests that appear on SP, they don't have to respond to them. Thankfully for me, several generous people have (despite knowing that they will personally not profit from it).

And to the creators of this forum, thanks for setting up another avenue of possibilities for folks like myself. I hope one day I can become successful and help out other people who are in weaker positions than myself.

4 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 1:31:35 PM

>>>>As a postgraduate about to begin production on my MA Project, I cannot afford to pay professionals or anyone else.

I think there are two issues here. Firstly do you agree that colleges should be paying professionals for their professional services (they pay their tutors and cleaners)? If you do, then leading on from this then it seems reasonable that forums should promote/enhance and educate subscribers that this is what colleges ought to do. It allows professionals to maintain their livelihoods, feed their families and promotes the view that all crew deserve to be paid for their work, rather than creating an environment where professional work is expected to be unpaid.

Secondly I appreciate you dont have the money, some producers use their own money others raise it, it does seem unreasonable for a college to expect a student to fund a film themselves. However the issue of whether the college should provide funds is far more pertinent and it is curious that colleges and perhaps students dont behave more responsibly here. Who ever heard of college students demanding that their tutors do their work unpaid? Why not ask your college to support Low/Pay contracts thus enabling one to employ and attract previously unreachable talent?

We create our own solutions. Just a thought.

153 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 1:34:40 PM

You haven't answered my question - by asking moderators to delete postings you don't like, are you advocating censoreship?

quietly_myself

13 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 1:58:44 PM

We weren't discussing whether the college should pay, we were discussing whether students should pay. As it happens, much as I'd like some funding from my Uni there is no possible way they could afford it (certainly not in any meaningful sense). What Uni would be able to put up funds for student projects that would allow them to pay for professional crew? My Uni has done amazing work in getting professionals in to lecture and teach us, but it would be way beyond their ability to actually fund professionals to work on Student projects. So the answer is "no", I don't think colleges and Uni's should be spending money in that way, simply because they can't! Professionals get paid for doing professional work, that's where their livelihoods are made. If they choose to help out for free on a student flick then that is up to them - they are perfectly entitled to, and we are perfectly entitled to ask. SP is a great place that provides the opportunity for both sides to do that.

The fact is most colleges do expect students to fund their own projects. I did my first degree at Bradford Uni and they gave groups a budget of up to �1000 for their major projects, but my group still had to raise extra finances (and were expected to). My current course provides no financial assistance at all, so I have no choice but to either shoot on the DVCAM equipment they provide or raise my own finances to do it better. I've chosen the latter, and as I say thanks to much goodwill from individuals (some from SP) I am able to make a film considerably beyond the means of my projected budget. The talent is not "unreachable", they've provided their services for free. Why should that be a problem?

As you say, I HAVE created my own solutions, but with a little help from SP and some very nice individuals.

4 Posts

Posted - 05 Jun 2005 : 2:12:53 PM

>>>>as I'd like some funding from my Uni there is no possible way they could afford it

Have you tried?

>>>What Uni would be able to put up funds for student projects that would allow them to pay for professional crew?

Quite a few already use Low Pay/ Film school contracts, its well worth investigating. They can afford it a low budget contracts start at �36 a day aside from the kudos gained by having an 'ethical' stance. Leading one once students had left they could perhaps afford to gain a foothold in the industry and work on other low pay college projects instead of resigning themselves to further struggle with no pay.

>>>If they choose to help out for free on a student flick then that is up to them.
It is professional, a contract is offered, a workplace is used and a professional is engaged for their services over a term. Otherwise it be called amateur, whether or not student films shoud be relabelled as amatuer and not student is a new debate.