SHORT ZOMBIE MOVIE CHALLENGE - Possible Contest

[DjfunkmasterG]

There has been some discussion about a possible zombie movie challenge, which started via another discussion. I have started this thread to get some buy in on the subject.

I have sent Neil an email about this to get his thoughts, and details will be forthcoming very very soon.

So far this is what is shaping up to be. THESE ARE NOT THE OFFICIAL RULES YET!

The Movie will be a short film: No Longer than 5-10 minutes with credits.
All music must be legally cleared, meaning licensed or 100% original.
All audio must be original
Footage/Audio from any Zombie film already released will be prohibited, this includes Night of the Living Dead.
Films made previous to the contest are prohibited.
Films must be in the English language, or at least contain english subtitles if in a foreign language.
Your budget should not exceed $250.00 USD
Films must be framed in one of the two cinema aspect ratios (1.85:1 or 2.35:1) Meaning, no 4:3 films.
Your film must contain zombies.
They can be runners or shamblers.
Films with Explicit language, Gore, Nudity, or Sex must contain a warning to warn viewers.
Films can be any genre format.(Romance, Comedy, Action, horror, Documentary, Western, etc)

MORE TO COME STAY TUNED

The winner of the contest will be awarded a zombie prize pack. it will include all available editions of the Romero Dead films on Blu-Ray, courtesy of Gary Ugarek and WETNWILDRADIO Films.

As of yet we do not know how the films will be judged, or who the judges will be. That will work itself out in due time.

Thoughts and opinions below.

OFFICIAL RULES AND CATEGORIES TO BE LISTED ON MARCH 16th 2009.

[Danny]

hmm, i did just get my swank ass new pro camcorder.


I did write something almost 6 years ago that i put off using due to lack of equipment.:sneaky:

[Mike70]

i'd further suggest that anyone who wants to enter the contest has to have been a member of HPOTD prior to a given date - maybe something like 1 feb 09. people that pop in here just to show off their films and then never post again really irritate me (and not to speak for anyone else, i'm probably not alone in that feeling).

i'd be willing to help organize this, so DJ let me know how i can help out.

i think judging should be done by the members of the forum and to keep it fair, moonsylver's idea of a blind viewing, where each film is given a letter or a number so no one but the organizer (who wouldn't be allowed to vote) would know who made an individual film, is probably the best way to go. that would help prevent any voting shenanigans.

[Danny]

i'd further suggest that anyone who wants to enter the contest has to have been a member of HPOTD prior to a given date - maybe something like 1 feb 09. people that pop in here just to show off their films and then never post again really irritate me (and not to speak for anyone else, i'm probably not alone in that feeling).

i'd be willing to help organize this, so DJ let me know how i can help out.

i think judging should be done by the members of the forum and to keep it fair, moonsylver's idea of a blind viewing, where each film is given a letter or a number so no one but the organizer (who wouldn't be allowed to vote) would know who made an individual film, is probably the best way to go. that would help prevent any voting shenanigans.

aye thats a good idea, but i'd say maybe base it on post count and not date joined. I think it would be more fun to have people who contribute more to enter, see there work yknow?. not just some douche whos been registered for years but only posts once in a blue moon to advertise there stuff yknow?

[kchertu]

Well, I agree that it'd be cool to limit the entrants to people who are members of the forum as of today or some point in the past. But as far as number of postings, I definitely don't like that one for obvious reasons. :) Just because I'm not posting doesn't mean I'm not lurking and reading up and checking out everyone's posts and videos nearly every day.

I hope this happens because I've been dying for a reason to make a zombie movie!!!

[3pidemiC]

I may contribute my failed attempted at a zed movie from a few summers ago.

[MinionZombie]

I may contribute my failed attempted at a zed movie from a few summers ago.
I believe it has to be a brand new short.

[krakenslayer]

Man, I hope I get a new job soon so I can purchase a camera and get to work on it.

I'm looking at this model - it looks like it has about the right balance of cost and features for my needs/budget: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Panasonic-HDC-SD9EB-S-HD-Camcorder/dp/B0013XWY52/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1230746347&sr=8-1

What do you guys think? I've seen some footage shot on the camera and it really does have very good picture/colour quality, almost film-like.

[DjfunkmasterG]

My thoughts are if you are just starting out save money and do not shoot with HD cameras, however, since a majority of the market is HD that is hard, but save some money.

You can achieve the film look through most editing programs if you have the right tools, and know how to adjust your cameras settings. In order to get a film like look you need a camera that shoots at least 30fps, UK people should try to get anything that shoots 25fps. Then you need to adjust gamma and chroma levels in the camera, lighting on set is another factor and then the rest of it is post production.




Also, Neil sent me back a PM and is interested in doing the contest. We are hashing out the details. I will put up the prize, for the winner. Still undecided if the films should be judged by a panel, or by forum members. I am leaning more towards judges because of forum friends backing people up, and people can sometimes get a mass rush of friends to come vote for thier stuff, so that will be worked out in the next two weeks.

[MinionZombie]

But then - who would be the judges? Although aye, it's probably a better way of doing it, and the judges would not have to have done a film of course.

...

As for cameras - I agree, I don't get all this fuss about HD cameras - and starting out, SD is perfectly good, if not groovy, on a good camera (*cough* DVX100B *cough* :cool:) - Magic Bullet and a 2.35:1 can do a whole lot more with SD footage, than just some HD on it's own.

I don't really see a lot of point in HD at an indie level at all, to be honest. It feels more to do with the cache of having the label of "HD" attached to it, than it actually being necessary at an indie level.

But then - looking at the link - you probably couldn't go far wrong with that. Although being able to have a shotgun microphone connected would be good (didn't look at the spec directly, but I assume that would be tricky) ... and if that's your budget level, then it probably is quite hard to find a good SD camera in that range - which is more a consumer level, so the trend goes toward the gadget-obsessed HD angle, rather than anything else particularly.

So you'd probably get a decent camera out of that - a good tripod would be necessary though, a cheap one can never deliver, so that could run you an extra £100 to £150 perhaps.

...

And then it's not just about the equipment - as you know, of course - it's also (I'd say mainly so) to do with coming up with a good idea, getting nice shot compositions and presenting it well on the back end in editing.

It's also about working within your means (because trying to do something too big, with not enough/nowhere near enough, just looks cringey or flat-out awful), and using what you have at your disposal - kind of like what Rodriguez said about El Mariachi - he had access to a bus and a guitar, so both of those things were going in his movie.

...

Back to your budget level, aye, you'd most likely end up going HD - because finding a 3CCD SD camera at that budget range, which is of good enough quality, will be tricky.

Hope my ramblings have been of some use. :cool:

[krakenslayer]

My thoughts are if you are just starting out save money and do not shoot with HD cameras, however, since a majority of the market is HD that is hard, but save some money.


I agree with you on that. The fact that the camera is HD was just incidental really - it's basically the cheapest camcorder I could find that was 3-CCD, was able to save directly onto SD card (to save pissing around with tapes) and had enough features to play with to get things looking nice.

You're right though, maybe I should just buy an el cheapo shitty camcorder for the competition and use it to practice with...

[kchertu]

The reason to do HD at the indie level is because, from what I've heard, distributers don't want to buy a low-budget film unless it was shot on HD.

But of course if you aren't looking to distribute, then it really doesn't matter.

Krakenslayer,

The SD9 is a GREAT camera for the price. My company bought me one when I went to Romania for Perkins 14 so that I could document the experience and it has been nothing but awesome!

Not a GREAT example as we were rushed (2 days of filming) and this isn't my ultimate edited version, but here's a link to a film I made with the camera:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAJpwM-48kw

And here's one of my Joker films that was done with the camera (we actually had to make the footage look way worse than in its raw form so that it would be believable that it was a handheld camcorder... it really looked unbelievable):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf5_cr-DH3k

The fact that it saves to the SD card is one of my favorite things and that I can just delete a bad take if I want, never to worry about it again is really nice.

One drawback, as MZ pointed out, is the lack of input for a mic. However, the mic on the SD9 is surprisingly good (all the audio from my films linked above is from the camera itself).

[krakenslayer]

But then - who would be the judges? Although aye, it's probably a better way of doing it, and the judges would not have to have done a film of course.

...

As for cameras - I agree, I don't get all this fuss about HD cameras - and starting out, SD is perfectly good, if not groovy, on a good camera (*cough* DVX100B *cough* :cool:) - Magic Bullet and a 2.35:1 can do a whole lot more with SD footage, than just some HD on it's own.

I don't really see a lot of point in HD at an indie level at all, to be honest. It feels more to do with the cache of having the label of "HD" attached to it, than it actually being necessary at an indie level.

But then - looking at the link - you probably couldn't go far wrong with that. Although being able to have a shotgun microphone connected would be good (didn't look at the spec directly, but I assume that would be tricky) ... and if that's your budget level, then it probably is quite hard to find a good SD camera in that range - which is more a consumer level, so the trend goes toward the gadget-obsessed HD angle, rather than anything else particularly.

So you'd probably get a decent camera out of that - a good tripod would be necessary though, a cheap one can never deliver, so that could run you an extra £100 to £150 perhaps.

...

And then it's not just about the equipment - as you know, of course - it's also (I'd say mainly so) to do with coming up with a good idea, getting nice shot compositions and presenting it well on the back end in editing.

It's also about working within your means (because trying to do something too big, with not enough/nowhere near enough, just looks cringey or flat-out awful), and using what you have at your disposal - kind of like what Rodriguez said about El Mariachi - he had access to a bus and a guitar, so both of those things were going in his movie.

...

Back to your budget level, aye, you'd most likely end up going HD - because finding a 3CCD SD camera at that budget range, which is of good enough quality, will be tricky.

Hope my ramblings have been of some use. :cool:

Thanks MZ, I missed your post the first time around because you posted it between me replying to DJ's post and actually clicking "submit". I really appreciate the good advice and will take it on board.


The reason to do HD at the indie level is because, from what I've heard, distributers don't want to buy a low-budget film unless it was shot on HD.

But of course if you aren't looking to distribute, then it really doesn't matter.

Krakenslayer,

The SD9 is a GREAT camera for the price. My company bought me one when I went to Romania for Perkins 14 so that I could document the experience and it has been nothing but awesome!

Not a GREAT example as we were rushed (2 days of filming) and this isn't my ultimate edited version, but here's a link to a film I made with the camera:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAJpwM-48kw

And here's one of my Joker films that was done with the camera (we actually had to make the footage look way worse than in its raw form so that it would be believable that it was a handheld camcorder... it really looked unbelievable):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf5_cr-DH3k

The fact that it saves to the SD card is one of my favorite things and that I can just delete a bad take if I want, never to worry about it again is really nice.

One drawback, as MZ pointed out, is the lack of input for a mic. However, the mic on the SD9 is surprisingly good (all the audio from my films linked above is from the camera itself).

Both films were GREAT, and visually they looked even better than the footage I had previously seen from this camera. I might have to cough up for the SD9 after all ::D

[DjfunkmasterG]

I think Minion used to use a Hi-8 camera when he made the first I am Zombie Man. I would look around, you should be able to find a good used SD camera for what you're going to spend. 400 pounds is about $800 here int he states, you should be able to grab at least a canon Gl1, which would be a great camera to start with.


The reason to do HD at the indie level is because, from what I've heard, distributers don't want to buy a low-budget film unless it was shot on HD.

But of course if you aren't looking to distribute, then it really doesn't matter.

Krakenslayer,

The SD9 is a GREAT camera for the price. My company bought me one when I went to Romania for Perkins 14 so that I could document the experience and it has been nothing but awesome!

Not a GREAT example as we were rushed (2 days of filming) and this isn't my ultimate edited version, but here's a link to a film I made with the camera:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAJpwM-48kw

And here's one of my Joker films that was done with the camera (we actually had to make the footage look way worse than in its raw form so that it would be believable that it was a handheld camcorder... it really looked unbelievable):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf5_cr-DH3k

The fact that it saves to the SD card is one of my favorite things and that I can just delete a bad take if I want, never to worry about it again is really nice.

One drawback, as MZ pointed out, is the lack of input for a mic. However, the mic on the SD9 is surprisingly good (all the audio from my films linked above is from the camera itself).

That is not entirely true about Low Budget distributors wanting HD content, as most won't even fork up for a Blu-Ray release, and although shooting in HD will give you a good master, it will be degraded as hell because most won't fork up for anything more than a DVD-5 transfer. Try cramming a 90 minute flick, plus features on a DVD-5 and what do you get? Shitty picture quality.

[Mike70]

Also, Neil sent me back a PM and is interested in doing the contest. We are hashing out the details. I will put up the prize, for the winner. Still undecided if the films should be judged by a panel, or by forum members. I am leaning more towards judges because of forum friends backing people up, and people can sometimes get a mass rush of friends to come vote for thier stuff, so that will be worked out in the next two weeks.

i am all for the forum judging the films. make it a blind viewing where no one knows who did a particular film. a panel is way too impersonal (and smells of elitism) and removes one of the main reasons for members to give a shit about this contest. if they can't vote on the winner, why would anyone pay attention to the contest. far better and far more inclusive to have the forum membership at large do the judging. there are ways of limiting shenanigans.

again, i'd be willing to help out on this in any way. i don't plan on making film (i barely know which way to point a camera), so i'd be available for any behind the scenes duties.

[3pidemiC]

I believe it has to be a brand new short.

What if it's never been shown publicly before and it meets all of the criteria listed?

[tkane18]

I hope this contest doesn't start for a few more weeks because the weather in Chicago is still really crappy as it is in most places in the northern U.S..

[DjfunkmasterG]

Probably around mid march is when it will kick off.

[MinionZombie]

I think Minion used to use a Hi-8 camera when he made the first I am Zombie Man.

Close, but not quite.

"my NIGHTMARE" was shot with a Hi8 camera (ah, those were the days :)) ... but IAZM was shot on my Canon MV700i 1-CCD miniDV camera (the last film to be shot on that camera, if memory serves, before I ponied up the cashola for my lush-as-fuck DVX100B :cool:)

I got by with that MV700i for a bit - I even had a couple of shorts made with it shown on television - but I quickly became limited by it (lack of options, inputs, visual quality etc) - but it was ideal for that stage in what I was up to.

Thus far the DVX100B is everything I could need - and I'll be shooting a black comedy with it this year with some local chaps (more news on that as-and-when :cool:). Also shot an educational DVD with it last year too - currently on sale to the thus-far-recession-proof public sector. :p (But it's a damn useful film, even if I do say so myself, and it certainly went down well with the students we showed it to personally).

...

As for distributors, they're probably more fussed about it looking and sounding good - regardless of HD (it may be a bonus, but indeed, you won't get the full use out of it - and many don't at an indie level I'd say).

Good compositions, editing, production and colouring are all more likely to get a distributor wanting to pimp out your stuff. You can get a "film look" with SD and some good colouring (as well as a nice 2.35:1 ratio :cool:)

If 28 Days Later can be shot and released large scale from SD cameras, then so can anything else of quality I'd say. :)

[DjfunkmasterG]

One thing with Video footage of any type, I have found that using 2.35:1 makes the projects feel more film like, something 1.85:1 just doesn't seem to capture.

[krakenslayer]

Yeah, but just to add to DJ's comment on aspect ratio (although I'm sure he knows a lot more about this than me) - as a rule of thumb, choice of 1.85 or 2.35:1 depends on whether your movie is going to be using lots of deep panoramic shots or lots of close intimate character shots. It also depends on where you're shooting and the visuals of the location - for example, movies shot in LA are slightly more often shot on 2.35:1 to maximize the Southern California's more airy "hoizontal" look and feel, whereas movies shot in New York often use 1.85:1 to emphasise the claustaphobic, tall "vertical" style of the city. It depends what "look" you are trying to achieve - gritty and intimate, or sweeping and cinematic.

Although, as DJ said, a low budget movie can gain a lot from the added cinematic look that 2.35 gives.

[MinionZombie]

Indeed - hooray for 2.35:1 in indie filmmaking!

Now that 16x9 (a hair larger than 1.85:1, but essentially the same) is the default ratio for things these days - aka the "academy ratio" (which was once 4:3), I think it's gotta be 2.35:1 when making a film - like Deej said, it just has that "film look" about it - and it does indeed look far more impressive I think - something unlike the norm (which is now widescreen ... unless it's certain American television programming which is still, for some unfathomable reason, broadcast in 4:3).

I've done it myself on my own shorts - it looks alright in 16x9, but it looks a lot better in 2.35:1 - even in close ups, because it allows you to almost get closer than your camera's lens is capable of ... ... it feels more focussed, and basically just suggests "film" more than 16x9 does now because it's become the norm.

Slap some Magic Bullet on there, and you're golden. :cool:

[DjfunkmasterG]

CONTEST UPDATE:

I have hammered out some details and mailed them off to the Neil, and the other judges. Once I get everyones buy in we can start very soon.

And don't worry member participation is one of the details i put in. So members will get to vote.

Gary

[EvilNed]

Interesting that I stumbled upon this. I will actually film my very own zombieshort come the end of the month. However, there are possibly two things that prevents me from joining this contest... :



The Movie will be a short film: No Longer than 5-10 minutes with credits.

While it may be my goal to have it clock in around 10 minutes, if it goes into 11, or 12 minutes, I will not change it for this contests sake.


Your budget should not exceed $250.00 USD

Our budget isn't calculated yet, but it may exceed 250 dollars by maybe 50 bucks or so. Which means it's disqualified, right?

[DjfunkmasterG]

Interesting that I stumbled upon this. I will actually film my very own zombieshort come the end of the month. However, there are possibly two things that prevents me from joining this contest... :



While it may be my goal to have it clock in around 10 minutes, if it goes into 11, or 12 minutes, I will not change it for this contests sake.



Our budget isn't calculated yet, but it may exceed 250 dollars by maybe 50 bucks or so. Which means it's disqualified, right?


I am not 100% on everything yet Ned, I maynot have a budget clause, because how can we prove what people spent?

However, the time limit is for us to keep the bandwitdh down in case the films are hosted on my site or Homepage, however, we maybe starting a You Tube Channel just for this... Gary

[EvilNed]

These days you can upload high def stuff on Youtube. My film will be shot either in HD or HDV, so maybe that works out.

[DjfunkmasterG]

CONTEST UPDATE:

We now have a You Tube Channel. This is where the videos will be hosted.

http://www.youtube.com/user/ZOMBIEFILMCONTEST

More Information coming this week.

[Debbieangel]

Dj did you pick all your judges? I am not making a film and I have never made a film but I love the zombie films.
But, if you need any help let me know.
I don't know much about making films but I love watching them so, if you need help give me a pm.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Hi Debbie,

yes I did pick the judges, but you as a member still get to be a judge, HPOTD members will vote on the films as well.


Details to follow very soon.


Yeah, but just to add to DJ's comment on aspect ratio (although I'm sure he knows a lot more about this than me) - as a rule of thumb, choice of 1.85 or 2.35:1 depends on whether your movie is going to be using lots of deep panoramic shots or lots of close intimate character shots. It also depends on where you're shooting and the visuals of the location - for example, movies shot in LA are slightly more often shot on 2.35:1 to maximize the Southern California's more airy "hoizontal" look and feel, whereas movies shot in New York often use 1.85:1 to emphasise the claustaphobic, tall "vertical" style of the city. It depends what "look" you are trying to achieve - gritty and intimate, or sweeping and cinematic.

Although, as DJ said, a low budget movie can gain a lot from the added cinematic look that 2.35 gives.

I use 2.35:1 for everything. it is the only aspect ratio I enjoy and am comfortable with using. I tried to do 1.85:1, especially for Deadlands 2, but I just couldn't do it, I felt it needed to be 2.35:1. Well in this case 2.21:1, which is true cinemascope.

[Debbieangel]

Cool Dj, this sounds like a very good competition everyone should take advantage of it.It will give people a chance to see the hard work you filmmakers go through making movies.
I got the chance to watch another movie being made in our town "My Bloody Valentine" and wowww the work they were doing behind the scenes.
I can only imagine the minute details that filmmakers have to go through just be on location. You should have seen all the trucks, lights, trailers, etc...
I took pictures it was sooo cool, that gives me even more respect for anyone trying to do it
I won't be contributing a film due the lack of resources, but, GOOD LUCK to all that enter the competition.
I can't wait to see your films.
Oh, and Dj if you need any kind of help just hollar. :)

[Mister Chrome]

Guys,

I like the idea of a HPOTD Short Movie Challenge. However, I see some flaws with some of your initial rules. Let me review:

The Movie will be a short film: No Longer than 5-10 minutes with credits.
This time limit is very arbitrary. Most festivals have just a limit (15 minutes maximum), rather than a window of time like you have suggested. Also, 15 minutes tends to be the maximum for many national festivals for the short film category, so if you follow that rule then the people who make a good short for the HPOTD Challenge could also consider submitting to other festivals, which creates even more incentive.

All music must be legally cleared, meaning licensed or 100% original.
All audio must be original
Footage/Audio from any Zombie film already released will be prohibited, this includes Night of the Living Dead.

I have no problem with any of the above rules. Original material is pretty much standard for festivals anyway.

Films made previous to the contest are prohibited.
No problem with that.

Films must be in the English language, or at least contain english subtitles if in a foreign language.
This rule is totally disciminatory. If the zombie movie is awesome, who cares what language it is in? I would seriously drop this rule, as it is totally biased for English speakers, and Homepage of the Dead has lots of users from other countries whose native language isn't English.

Your budget should not exceed $250.00 USD
Bad bad idea to set a budget limit without more specific rules attached. Why? Let me tell you. What does budget mean? Does it mean you can only use a total of $250 worth of equipment? Does it mean only $250 for make-up, wardrobe, or props? Does it mean only the cost of tapes?

I have access to a television production truck with 4 HD cameras and 2 jibs. I also own dolly track and a dolly and a Steadicam rig. I have 3 Apple Final Cut Studio suites, fully loaded. So, could I spend my $250 on food for the crew? If so, I'd still be using better equipment than anyone else here, without exceeding my budget of $250. See my point?

Films must be framed in one of the two cinema aspect ratios (1.85:1 or 2.35:1) Meaning, no 4:3 films.
Again, why? Is this requirement just so that the submissions seem more film-like? What if I actually shoot on 16 mm film and it is formatted 4:3? Technically, my film would be more of a real film than your video that is formatted for widescreen.

Now then, who am I to offer all of this advice and criticism? To some of you I'm just some douchebag with a low post count. To others, I'm an old friend who's been on HPOTD since 2001 and comes here to read things and only posts when he has something to say.

To others, I'm a guy who has helped you make your zombie films. I've provided equipment, locations, actors, budget, supplies, and post-production facilities.

So, that's me. Those are my thoughts on your contest. I'd love to see this happen, but I think you need to really consider those rules before you launch this thing.

MC

[DjfunkmasterG]

Guys,

I like the idea of a HPOTD Short Movie Challenge. However, I see some flaws with some of your initial rules. Let me review:

The Movie will be a short film: No Longer than 5-10 minutes with credits.
This time limit is very arbitrary. Most festivals have just a limit (15 minutes maximum), rather than a window of time like you have suggested. Also, 15 minutes tends to be the maximum for many national festivals for the short film category, so if you follow that rule then the people who make a good short for the HPOTD Challenge could also consider submitting to other festivals, which creates even more incentive.

All music must be legally cleared, meaning licensed or 100% original.
All audio must be original
Footage/Audio from any Zombie film already released will be prohibited, this includes Night of the Living Dead.

I have no problem with any of the above rules. Original material is pretty much standard for festivals anyway.

Films made previous to the contest are prohibited.
No problem with that.

Films must be in the English language, or at least contain english subtitles if in a foreign language.
This rule is totally disciminatory. If the zombie movie is awesome, who cares what language it is in? I would seriously drop this rule, as it is totally biased for English speakers, and Homepage of the Dead has lots of users from other countries whose native language isn't English.

Your budget should not exceed $250.00 USD
Bad bad idea to set a budget limit without more specific rules attached. Why? Let me tell you. What does budget mean? Does it mean you can only use a total of $250 worth of equipment? Does it mean only $250 for make-up, wardrobe, or props? Does it mean only the cost of tapes?

I have access to a television production truck with 4 HD cameras and 2 jibs. I also own dolly track and a dolly and a Steadicam rig. I have 3 Apple Final Cut Studio suites, fully loaded. So, could I spend my $250 on food for the crew? If so, I'd still be using better equipment than anyone else here, without exceeding my budget of $250. See my point?

Films must be framed in one of the two cinema aspect ratios (1.85:1 or 2.35:1) Meaning, no 4:3 films.
Again, why? Is this requirement just so that the submissions seem more film-like? What if I actually shoot on 16 mm film and it is formatted 4:3? Technically, my film would be more of a real film than your video that is formatted for widescreen.

Now then, who am I to offer all of this advice and criticism? To some of you I'm just some douchebag with a low post count. To others, I'm an old friend who's been on HPOTD since 2001 and comes here to read things and only posts when he has something to say.

To others, I'm a guy who has helped you make your zombie films. I've provided equipment, locations, actors, budget, supplies, and post-production facilities.

So, that's me. Those are my thoughts on your contest. I'd love to see this happen, but I think you need to really consider those rules before you launch this thing.

MC


Well those are just initial rules. I am working on the final rules now. One of which I dropped was the budget clause. Because it is unforceable. That retty much came up because another member claimed they could do Deadlands 1 on a $500 budget, so I was trying to see how creative people could get on low budgets, however, because I really don't want to be nitpicking over every line item in a budget I am dropping the clause, and again it was a personal thing, which again wasn't fair to everyone.

Running time will not exceed 10 minutes total (this is so the movie doesn't have to be split up on You Tube.

Aspect ratio will stay, simply because most stuff today should be 16:9 or WIDESCREEN. This is something I am sticking with because even the academy rules are now 1.85:1 at a minimum. Originally I was going to require 2.35:1 only, because that is my preferred ratio, but I didn't want my personal preferences to overshadow everything.

The language thing, is not that bad of a rule, I am just asking that foreign films contain english subtitles, so if the story is something we need to follow people understand it. A lot of film festivals require this in foreign films. I am trying to stick to film festival and some academy rules.

If people want to be filmmakers, they have to understand that as you progress there are certain aspects you will need to run with, and follow. it is nothing personal, just trying to make sure everyone is all on the same page.

Thanks for your input Chrome, its good to know you still haunt the boards. Cheers, Dj

[Eyebiter]

If your going to make it a short, instead of five to ten minutes film how about two minutes max? Something that can be put together easily in a single day of filming.

[Danny]

If your going to make it a short, instead of five to ten minutes film how about two minutes max? Something that can be put together easily in a single day of filming.

give someone 2 minutes and pretty much everyone will say "mines 3 or 4 is that okay?"

[DjfunkmasterG]

If your going to make it a short, instead of five to ten minutes film how about two minutes max? Something that can be put together easily in a single day of filming.

Hence again why I am changing the rules so that running time cannot exceed 10 minutes. if they want to turn in a two minute short thats fine as long as they do not run longer than 10 minutes.

[EvilNed]

I think it's very silly that the running time-rule is directly linked to how many minutes fits on Youtube. The film we're making fits all the rules except this one (by 1 or 2 minutes!), and It's just idiotic that I can't participate because of YouTube's limits...

I'm with Chrome all the way on all his points. My film will not be in English, but english subtitles aren't that hard to write.

Oh, and as for the aspect ratio rule, that's equally silly. While my film will be in 16x9, I don't even see the point of this rule. Why is it even there? Some filmmakers prefer 4x3, and that's just how it goes. This is a contest for short zombiefilms, not a contest about aspect ratios. For example, what if someone is trying to emulate video-cam feel? Sorry, not in this contest... Widescreen only. :p Kinda silly, right?

[kchertu]

I would assume that the time limit is directly related to You Tube time limits so that the contest can be hosted on You Tube. It's free, easy, accessible, that doesn't seem so silly to me.

Aspect Ratio, I can see the argument there.

But rules are rules and they are there for different reasons. One reason for rules for a contest is so you can't just grab any movie you have laying around and upload it to the contest and didn't do the work for the contest.

As far as your film EvilNed, it's 1-2 minutes more than the rules? So, cut a version just for the contest. I had a 9 minute movie that I had to cut down to 3 minutes for an After Dark contest and I ended up winning! It was VERY VERY VERY difficult to cut it down to 3 minutes and still have a semblance of a story, but I did it and it paid off. I'm sure you can find 100 seconds of fat to trim.

[Danny]

I think it's very silly that the running time-rule is directly linked to how many minutes fits on Youtube. The film we're making fits all the rules except this one (by 1 or 2 minutes!), and It's just idiotic that I can't participate because of YouTube's limits...

I'm with Chrome all the way on all his points. My film will not be in English, but english subtitles aren't that hard to write.


i dont mind alternate languages, but prefer english subs with them, as for youtube, F-it, i'll stick with vimeo anyday.

[Eyebiter]

Films must be framed in one of the two cinema aspect ratios (1.85:1 or 2.35:1) Meaning, no 4:3 films.

I'm not going to buy a $600+ lens for a zombie short contest where the prize pack is a couple of DVDs.

[EvilNed]

I would assume that the time limit is directly related to You Tube time limits so that the contest can be hosted on You Tube. It's free, easy, accessible, that doesn't seem so silly to me.


It's easier to split em' up and show the film in it's entirety. 10 minutes just isn't a reasonable time to me, especially not since it's sole purpose is "It fits on Youtube". 15 minutes, like Chrome pointed out, is usually the festival standard and cutting a film is work enough not having to cut it down to below 10 minutes when you hit 12 or so.

[MinionZombie]

Films must be framed in one of the two cinema aspect ratios (1.85:1 or 2.35:1) Meaning, no 4:3 films.

I'm not going to buy a $600+ lens for a zombie short contest where the prize pack is a couple of DVDs.
You don't have to buy a lens Eyebiter, you just crop the image in your editing software/use "widescreen mode" on your camera. But personally, I'm not fussed about aspect ratio at all. I prefer 2.35:1 for indie flicks (and flicks in general), but that's just my personal preference and nothing more.

With language - all the judges speak English, therefore English subtitles are a must if it's a foreign language film, if English speaking isn't possible.

Film length - not only does it fit on YouTube (thus making the contest easier to organise - something that everyone is organising for FREE, I might add), but it also helps contain the time. Also, it helps provide certain parameters in which to work, otherwise someone could run off and make a 45 minute long drawn out thing, while someone else makes a really snappy 10 minutes or less film.

Again, we're organising and/or judging for free in our own time, so you've gotta have a time limit at some point - besides, countless fests have time limits for a whole wide array of reasons, so what's the big deal?

If you're doing another film around this time, and it's only a smidge longer, just trim it down for this competition. It's amazing how something can be trimmed without affecting the film. It certainly wouldn't be the first time, nor the last time that someone's trimmed their flick for a fest/competition. I myself have done it.

Anyway, just chipping in some thoughts which came tumbling out of my brain...

[EvilNed]

You don't have to buy a lens Eyebiter, you just crop the image in your editing software/use "widescreen mode" on your camera. But personally, I'm not fussed about aspect ratio at all. I prefer 2.35:1 for indie flicks (and flicks in general), but that's just my personal preference and nothing more.

Films filmed in video-cam mode (such as Blair Witch) look best in 4x3 if you ask me. Otherwise, the ratio you use is always a personal preference. Werner Herzon filmed many of his films in 4x3. Again, I won't film my film in 4x3, so this rule makes no to me. It's just fun with diversity.


With language - all the judges speak English, therefore English subtitles are a must if it's a foreign language film, if English speaking isn't possible.

I guess I have to agree. As long as English subtitles are provided, there shouldn't be any problem really. But I'll be damned if I'll have my film dubbed! :P


Again, we're organising and/or judging for free in our own time, so you've gotta have a time limit at some point - besides, countless fests have time limits for a whole wide array of reasons, so what's the big deal?


This is indeed true, but as Chrome pointed out, that time-limit is in most cases 15 minutes. This is not a huge deal, but it's sad when films are not allowed to be viewed in their entirety.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Some online film contests are 8 minutes or less. The 48 hour film project, a worldwide film fest sets th elength to no longer than 8 minutes, with credits.

This is done to see how creative people can get within strict parameters.

In regards to Eye Biter, every single deadllands film was shot open Matte, and framed in Post Production. A similar process is used when shooting Super 35.

[MinionZombie]

I entered competitions and festivals with a variety of lengths as the target, there's been things for films that are 1 minute, 90 seconds, 2 minutes, 3 minutes, 5 minutes, 10 minutes ... there's no standard law about film entry length. :)

But if everyone did a 15 minute film, instead of a 10 minute film, and you had five entries to look at (for example), that's a whole extra 25 minutes the judges have to spend of their free time they're giving up for free so this fun little competition can happen. My point being, it all adds up - factor in the YouTube limit (which is part of how the competition works), and just finding a nice balance between "not too long and not too short", and there we are - 10 minutes.

This said, if folks wanna make a 1 minute, 2 minutes, 3 minutes, 5 minutes or whatever long film, then by all means. We just have to cap the ceiling somewhere, and 10 minutes makes a lot of sense for a variety of reasons, which I think is fair.

[EvilNed]

Well, aw shucks. What's so special about YouTube anyway... Anyway, looking forward to seeing entries but this sadly rules out mine.

[MinionZombie]

Well, aw shucks. What's so special about YouTube anyway... Anyway, looking forward to seeing entries but this sadly rules out mine.
Again, why don't you just trim out a couple of minutes - I bet you you could manage it, just for the competition.

Regardless of folks' views of YouTube, it's the online video sharing website ... first stop shopping, kinda thing.

Anyway...I look forward to seeing what folk come up with as-and-when.

[EvilNed]

Again, why don't you just trim out a couple of minutes - I bet you you could manage it, just for the competition.


The script is trimmed as it is, and I don't like having two versions floating around. There'll be one definite version, and it'll be the length I feel is suitable for the pacing. I understand other people like to recut films to make them shorter... But I don't. When I'm finished with a cut of my film, that's the one I'll be sticking with and that's the one I want people to see, because I made all those cuts for a reason.

If possible, I'll of course have it uploaded and show it anyway. That's the important part, I think, to see each others works!

[MinionZombie]

Thread closed, as per originator request - new Zombie Short Film Contest thread is now stickied at the top of the Filmmaker's Forum.

Thanks, MZ.