Budgeting Questions for Indie...

[Tom Lowe]

Based on my finished script and the realities of location scouting, I have been able to trim my 30-day budget from $200K to about $160K, to shoot SAG Ultra-Low. A couple of questions.

1) I have set aside $10K for Sound Design + ADR. Considering my overall budget, and assuming the mixer gets some decent sound on location, will this be enough to spruce up the sound design and make the picture sound pretty good? I don't think I can afford a higher percentage of the budget? I'd be willing to work with an up-and-comer for sure.

2) I want to do an industry screening in LA once it's done. I know I can rent a theater for a decent price, but what about PR? Should I budget something for general PR? Press releases? Trying to get some help attracting legit people to come to the screening? What will basic PR cost? My main goal for the picture is to get it into Cannes, Venice, Sundance, Toronto, Berlin, Tribeca, etc. Is a screening really helpful?

3) Casting director. There are only three actors in the picture, plus two smaller, one-day roles I'd like to get character actors for. Do you think I could talk a decent casting director into helping me for like $2K? I remember meeting a woman on an AFI thesis short, and I think she cast that short (6-day shoot) for like $1,500, and she got the director some really great names - real actors. She's probably the first person I will call, but I hope $2K is not an insult. I guess it depends whether she likes the script and project.

4) Steadicam. I know some people who know some people, but I'd like to get a up-and-coming steadicam guy for all 30 days (probably 25 days of actual shooting... but it's a roadtrip picture far away from LA). If I budget $5K for the Steadicam rental, and $3K for the Op (100 day), do you think I'll have any luck? This Steadicam is vital to the picture, since we are foregoing the Fisher dolly. That would be $8K overall for an Op with his own rig. Is this enough? 9K? 10K?

Thanks!

[Dean Bull]

For your budget, 10 grand for post sound is pretty good in my opinion. Heck, I did a 100 grand feature and only spent 2k, but I did have to interview lots of people. Casting for 2k for 3 parts is also pretty reasonable for your budget. Back to my 100k feature, I spent 5k to cast approx 17 parts, but she worked for a month and half straight. (she was also C.S.A and very experienced) so don't feel coy about your offer. Steadicam Guy is worth asking, worst that happens is somebody on craigslist flags your ad!

Industry screening probably doesn't need PR, but if you got into sundance or something it might be useful. 200k features are a tough nut, you got enough money to be serious, but hardly enough to do as much as you think.

Try and find a sales agent before you spend on PR, they will be able to advise.

[Tom Lowe]

Tell me about how a sales agent works, if you wouldn't mind.

Also, what about AFM? A thread on cinematography.com got me to thinking about that. Do I need to budget for a screening or some kind of booth or pass or something at the film market?

[Rudi Herbert]

Tom,

Try to put all your money ON the screen, however important PR and other offscreen sectors are. Keep in mind that most festivals receive submissions all year long, they basically have screeners watching VHS' or DVD's for hours every day. So, depending on what kind of response you get from that, then a pre-festival screening with some interested types might be worth it. Also, keep in mind that many of the festivals do monthly private screenings and activities for their paying members where, sometimes, they screen promising projects. Your film might get picked up for that and generate buzz even before actual festival screening. Other than that, the only thing of your budget that sounds a bit off is the steadicam fee for such long time, but hey, asking never hurts, especially if you do it with respect, and you might get the proverbial luck out. For what you say, it seems that is the most important part of your budget so everything else should revolve around it, including sound mix and ADR, which you could definitely do for less...

Other than that, as soon as you're wrapped, get pristine looking DVD's pressed and get them out there.

[Tom Lowe]

Thanks, Rudi. Yeah, after axing the dolly from the show, I'm willing to spend what it takes for a good Steadicam Op and rig, within reason.

[krd]

Unless the film is a commercial genre piece (and it doesn't sound like it!), don't waste your money on market fees. The buyers there are not interested in art or festival films.

Unless you have industry friends who'll swear in blood they'll attend or drag others along, don't waste your money on an L.A. screening. No one will come, no matter what you spend on PR.

If the film gets people excited and looks salable, you might be able to secure a producer's rep. The premiere one, at this point, is Cinetic Media (John Sloss, who's made many 7 figure sales), based in NY. But these folks take very few projects, and most of them are already high profile (stars, etc.)

You'll probably have to do what most unconnected people do: start working the festival circuit. In North America, that means Toronto, Telluride, Sundance, San Francisco Int'l, L.A. Int'l, SWSW, New Films/New Directors and (the worst long shot of them all) New York Film Festival. Plus loads of regional film festivals, where (unfortunately) few or no sales take place. But you may have to face the fact that the "best" festivals aren't interested. Some festivals prefer (or demand) North American premieres, so you'll have to plan your submissions accordingly.

Abroad, the chances of getting into Cannes or Venice are microscopic, even in the lesser categories. Berlin is better, but the foreign festival scene is another subject.... If you get high-profile American festival screenings, you're likely to get invitations, to both foreign and domestic festivals.

For the rest, it really comes down to what you, personally, can get out of people. Also, whether the project is good enough, in their eyes, to merit their attention and their time, and whether they have faith you can pull it off. A lot of this is also luck -- meeting the right people at the right moment of their careers.

[Tom Lowe]

Yeah I have to agree that an LA screening could be a real waste.

Are you sure buyers at AFM have no interest in quality small/arthouse pics?

Regarding microscopic chances... never tell me the odds, my friend! Publishing a first novel, the odds are about 100,000-to-1 against you, but I wrote my first novel and sold it within a month to Simon & Schuster.

If you don't believe 100% percent in yourself and your picture being something special, why bother?

[krd]

Yeah I have to agree that an LA screening could be a real waste.

Are you sure buyers at AFM have no interest in quality small/arthouse pics?

Regarding microscopic chances... never tell me the odds, my friend! Publishing a first novel, the odds are about 100,000-to-1 against you, but I wrote my first novel and sold it within a month to Simon & Schuster.

If you don't believe 100% percent in yourself and your picture being something special, why bother?

Best thing to do is look at an AFM catalog, and see what's coming in. Never heard of anyone selling a festival film at AFM, but you never know.

You're right, if people were concerned about odds, no one would ever make a movie. But just be aware that Cannes and Venice might take maybe 1 or 2 American unknowns in any given year, and not necessarily the best ones. There's a lot more insider trading and influence peddling at festivals than people want to admit.

What's your novel, by the way -- if you don't mind saying?

[David Mullen ASC]

An art film doesn't head straight for AFM after completion. That might happen much later as you attempt to sell it in some foreign DVD markets and whatnot.

More likely will be to hit the festival circuit and get art house distributors interested, either from festival screenings, or distributor screenings, or sending out the DVD.

I'd budget as far as completing the film to a digital master that can be used for screenings, or a later film-out, or for later making any home video masters and dubs. But don't take that final step until you get some distributors interested. Just get the movie in a shape that it looks (and sounds) good enough to show people.

As far as the tiny salaries, that is par for a tiny budget and all you can see is tell people that this is what you can afford to pay... and see who bites before you start raising rates to get someone interested if no one will do it for what you are paying.

Just avoid overpaying some crew people at the expense of others because that is politically bad, like when the DP finds out that you are paying the sound recordist more, or the First AC finds out that the dolly grip is making more money. That's why some art films I've worked on propose a flat $1000/week for everyone, high and low. That's what happened on "Northfork" for example.

You could tempt a Steadicam person, for example, by paying more for his rig rather than raising his salary out of proportion to everyone else.

[Tom Lowe]

Yeah, that's what I was hoping to do with the Steadicam op and the sound mixer, to put more of their money into the "rental" and keep their daily rate the same as everyone else.

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

It's only natural some people are going to make more than others, though, no? I mean I'm budgeting for a low budget feature hopefully about half of the price of Tom's, also only a few actors, one location in my case, I own enough equipment not to have to rent much at all, but I would expect to pay the DP more than anyone else on the shoot. I can't afford to pay grips much money, probably have to pay the production designer more and that person has to be creative since he/she might also be the set dresser basically, along with a few PAs who can grip when needed too perhaps. It's always tricky figuring out how to make a movie for a reasonable budget. There's basically no way to make it cheaper than $3,500 per day and even that I'm skeptical about. I thought originally I could probably make a feature like this for $50K but now I think it'll be nearly $100K by the time post production expenses are factored into the final budget. Mine isn't arthouse, though, I want to sell it commercial, straight-to-DVD or whatever, low budget horror movie, I want it to be very good but I'm not looking to make high art with my first feature, just a good, solid thriller with a nice story and great visuals.

[Dan Blanchett]

Yeah the budget can be tricky. Tom, the quotes I was getting for reasonable quality sound design was $15,000 to $25,000. If you find a place to do it for 10K please let me know! It's one area I do not want to skimp on. I'm budgeting about $5000 for scored music and another $5000-$7500 for VFX.

I'm also planning on a standard daily rate for each crew member and even the actors-- everyone will be in the same $100/day boat. Now that plan may change if more money becomes available or I need to ante up for a particular actor, but that's the current strategy.

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

I did some basic budgeting for my feature the other day and the numbers were definitely a bit depressing. I need to hire on set security for the location (the house is an $8 million location with lots of valuables, I can't secure permission to film without probably two security guards on location at all times), which will add to the cost, and I think insurance will be expensive, even more depressing.

I'm really not sure what I'm going to do at this point, I have some options. I know I could film it really skeleton crew for $50,000, but the final product would suffer greatly. I'd also most likely have to cut an editor into the profits, probably I'd have to arrange something where the crew got paid but really minimally, then got more in the back-end. I don't want to do that, basically, so that's not an option for me. I have two other sources of funding and could easily raise up to $300,000 I'm sure, giving away percentages to two other investors, and I'm actually ok with that because those two investors would give me complete control. I'm just hoping instead that I can make enough cash to finance the project myself, and now I'm thinking January 2010 instead of 2009, because if it's 2009 that means I have to start locking things down by late summer next year and I'm not ready for that. There is too much else going on with us doing music videos and starting a rental company, so I'd rather wait it out.

It's not hard to spend $4,000 per day even on an indie project on crew, rentals, insurance, and food. A 90 page script in one single large house can be filmed in 20 days, but even that's $80,000. If you set aside $20,000 for editing and audio work, that still might not be enough. Usually the post budget would be higher than that, compared to the production budget. So I figure I'll need a minimum of $100,000, maximum of $150,000, and that's with most all of the equipment already owned (except I, too, will need a steadicam owner / operator) and the location for free (that particular location would easily cost $10,000/day if I didn't have access to it). With myself taking no salary as a writer-director, and the producer also taking no salary (profit sharing), the project would probably be a half-million dollar feature done normally. For taking that kind of risk I would definitely be looking to sell the project for a few million minimum, wouldn't be too happy with anything under $3 million. Considering the large risk of features going unsold at all, you have to have a really good return on investment to make the risk worthwhile...

[Dan Blanchett]

...now I'm thinking January 2010 instead of 2009, because if it's 2009 that means I have to start locking things down by late summer next year and I'm not ready for that.

It's too bad you can't get this in production before 2009, then you can take advantage of IRC section 181 and write off 100% of the budget in the year you make the film. That's saving my ass next year! :wink:

[Tom Lowe]

Just as a cautionary tale, guys. I was planning to shoot my first feature last year. I had $65K of my own money, in cash, in the bank, and I thought I could just go for it and do it super low budget. Big mistake. I got about 2 days into the shoot and realized there was no way I could do it, so I pulled the plug and ate a significant loss. When you are shooting that low budget, you are at the mercy of every single person on the crew and cast, because most of them are working for free. So basically, your entire time is spent trying to keep people happy, instead of making the movie.

I vowed then I would not try again until I had a lot more money. Money is very important. It can buy you out of problems that arise on the set. Money solves a lot of problems on an indie shoot.

As far as daily rate, I agree with what David said about paying everyone the same, but I will have two tiers - 100 a day for DP, AC, mixer, steadicam, etc. And 75 or 50 a day for PAs, etc. I will cut everyone in on the back end with points as well. All my crew are longtime friends. The only positions I need to fill now are sound mixer and steadicam op.

[Jeremy Torrie]

Being at the mercy of the crew sucks big time. You're mind gets off the task at hand creatively, and then you become afraid of asserting yourself in the way you need to be to get your day.

If people dig the project it really helps. We had a situation where money wasn't coming in at the end of the week, and I had to stand up in front of everyone as executive producer (thought I was writer and director) and tell them what was going on, and to ask them to stay, with the promise that the money was real and simply delayed. Everyone did stay -in large part because everyone loved the project...they said, 'hey, I have kids, and this is a film I would love to take my kid to go see.'

[Tom Lowe]

Making it worse, I had dragged all of them up to the mountains, 8 hours away from LA, so I was really at everyone's mercy.

[James T Mather]

Being at the mercy of the crew sucks big time...

If people dig the project it really helps.....Everyone did stay -in large part because everyone loved the project...they said, 'hey, I have kids, and this is a film I would love to take my kid to go see.'

That's a nice story - but from my perspective as a Cameraman I can say that all directors think the crew "dig" the project - because the directors do. I have yet to meet a director who doesn't think this way.

IMHO most crew are looking for two things - 1. Can they get experience above their work grade and 2. will they get rehired by the director and producer come the "bigger" gig. I know most crew would rather work on something prestigious like Gladiator or Star Wars.

Dp's working for low/free read a script to see if it's something (a) they have not done before (something new on the reel) (B) if it's something that will yield nice pics by and large and (c) to get rehired come the bigger gig. Actors for the meaty role. Production Designers for a script that isn't set in a car. (so they can show off a set or two). Costume people like period or sci-fi.

In your story above I think personally that everyone stayed out of a sense of personal loyalty and out of a sense of professionalism - but that's nice too. Rehire them come the bigger gig - but trust me on the sunscreen. :)

[Jeremy Torrie]

We had remote location on a lake. So the only way in or out was by boat for forty minutes.

So transpo had a lot of the power, and were the toughest to deal with. All they see is the cash owed to them, and had to be brought in line by others who wanted to keep working, including my actors and key crew -camera department was awesome.

It was amazing that these drivers (and I'm not saying all of them, just a few) took no responsibility for the fact they did damage to more than $150,000 to the boats they were driving that we had given to us for use in the film as product placement. Yet I was not allowed to hire local drivers who knew what reefs and shorelines to stay away from.

[James T Mather]

I don't know anything in heaven or hell that would motivate a teamster to work for under scale.

[Jeremy Torrie]

JTM: that is one of the intagibles one carries as a director -the ability to bring a legion of people along with you because they believe the vision.

I admit I am a good producer -as far as doing a film from start to finish, get it done on time and budget, and the pitches, and getting financing lined up via pre-sales, etc. but I don't like doing these task so much because the money and administration stuff gets in the way of allowing me to be most useful, and that is executing on the creative vision -at least when we're talking about pre-production and production. But I do think that the producing background is to some degree a benefit to me as I understand that money is finite. I understand why I can't go into turnaround, or get three days of helicopter.

It is true that a lot of crew do work on big shows, whether in Manitoba or Toronto or Vancouver, and they work on these projects for much of the motivations you have described. The big shows pay them well, but they don't get to flex their creative muscle.

With the script in question, I had my main star say that the script was one of the very best he ever read, and it clearly stood out among the others that routinely come across his agent's desk. The challenge for all of us is to get to these actors, as its way easier to get the money and/or distribution/presales deal with name actors attached. Sales agents can run estimates and basically identify whether the investor's money is at risk. So getting a casting director who can get to the right people is money well spent.

[Jeremy Torrie]

Luckily we don't have Teamsters up here yet. They have definitely tried.

[Dan Blanchett]

I won't be able to afford scale for crew positions, but I am determined to pay everyone something, even the PA's. Hopefully, for the reasons JTM mentioned, it will be enough to keep people invested for the 25-30 days of production. I'm also going ultra low budget SAG, which has very specific requirements that the actors will be aware of and have agreed to. And I will try my best to have no single point of failure, since I have heard many a tale of last minute defections of key personnel hamstringing the whole project.

[James T Mather]

I won't be able to afford scale for crew positions, but I am determined to pay everyone something, even the PA's. Hopefully, for the reasons JTM mentioned, it will be enough to keep people invested for the 25-30 days of production. I'm also going ultra low budget SAG, which has very specific requirements that the actors will be aware of and have agreed to. And I will try my best to have no single point of failure, since I have heard many a tale of last minute defections of key personnel hamstringing the whole project.

That sounds commendable and with that attitude I'm sure you'll have no trouble - crews btw - usually want to help ( a certain kind of altruism which is quickly burned when the director shoots til three AM / re-lays the dolly track over and over for the same shot cause he can't make up his mind etc/ shouts at people etc). Based on your post it doesn't sound like your deal. Good Luck with your project.

[Dan Blanchett]

Thanks. Some trouble seems unavoidable and par for the course, but hopefully there won't be any showstoppers!

[donatello b]

" write off 100% of the budget in the year you make the film"

to take full advantage in the current that you make the investment you need income /profit equal to the investment ..IE: you invest 100k - you would need 100k of profit/income to take full advantage of the 100% write off in current year .. if not then you are going to be writing it off over years ( number of years depends on your income/profits) ...

[Dan Blanchett]

"to take full advantage in the current that you make the investment you need income /profit equal to the investment ..IE: you invest 100k - you would need 100k of profit/income to take full advantage of the 100% write off in current year .. if not then you are going to be writing it off over years ( number of years depends on your income/profits) ...

Actually, this is not true. IRC Section 181 is a special clause that allows a write off of all expenses (except reusable gear purchase) with no profit. It's an incentive to encourage film production in the U.S. that expires January 2009.

Caveat: You can't write off all that RED gear you bought unless you have an equal or greater profit, per section 179. That's standard stuff. 181 applies to all other expenses, such as actor/crew fees, permits, marketing, rentals, etc. There seems to be no requirement that the film even gets distributed, much less make a profit, to take advantage of this. But don't take this as legal advice-- talk to an accountant that's familiar with section 181.

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

I would not shoot unless I had a decent enough budget to pay everyone. DP would get $300/day, not great, but ok, most other positions $100 to $200, including on-location security guards because I won't be able to shoot without their presence. It's a condition of using the location, basically.

I won't shoot until I have the money I think I need, which is about $100,000, but on the plus side I always have a reserve fund of twice that much money for emergencies and several people who could bail me out easily should I get into budgetary problems. I don't think -- unless you're a total moron -- that you could go more than $50,000 over budget on a $100,000 film. I mean, if that happens, what it means is either you really didn't do your homework and figure out what each element would cost from pre to post production, or you encountered major problems while shooting that you couldn't figure out a creative way to deal with effectively.

I don't intend to shoot my first feature until I have that $100,000 from money I've made in the film industry, however. I have already invested a lot of money in this industry and will put in a ton more next year when my REDs come and I start buying up the necessary accessories and start a second company for rentals.

[Jeremy Torrie]

Be thankful you have SAG Indie down there. We've been through a few budgets up here and are finding it almost impossible to do anything with integrity for under $1 Million (23 day shoot). And this is very few unit moves, limited extras, no blow up scenes, and shooting RED -if we get it in time (Otherwise we'd go F900R and record HD-SDI signal to SRW5500). The costs for Actra buyout are big. Completion bonds are expensive, and you have to have at least 7% contingency.

It's all about cash flow. If your PM is good, then he/she will be on top of everything in conjunction with the AD dept. and should be able to predict how things are progressing. If you aren't getting your days, then there is a problem, and it starts to add up quick. If the spreadsheet for cash isn't realistic, then the costs are going to rise in a hurry. Production bleeds money, so make sure there is enough at the start.