How to Organize Your Material

So, you are an assistant and you want to impress your new boss (the editor) with the material you've been asked to digitize.  Or, you might be an editor at the beginning of the biggest project you've had to date -

You're just starting out what could be a long project: How best to Organize it?

Well, let's go back a step, How to you label the materials as you bring them in?

I think it's always best to avoid wasting crucial information place holders with notations like:

Tape - 12

So Don't.  One option is to name it after the over all project - so a project about Bible Storyland might always be BSL - but even better - is the name of the person you are interviewing:  Pierce - 001

Why put extra numbers?

ALWAYS put 001, 002, 003 etc.  Why? Because otherwise, your single numbers get mixed up in your 20's and 30's etc.  so if you number 1,2,3,4,5, etc. when they are listed in the bin or on the drive it will be, 1, 10, 11, 12...2, 20, 21, and so on.  THUS the use of 001, 002 003, and everything ends up where it is supposed to be.

So let's presume you have everything properly labelled (no small feat)

You are looking at an empty bin in FCP - where to start?

Okay - you should have just five folders:

FOOTAGE, and within that, you might have two folders, INTERVIEWS and B-ROLL. And within those - particular interviews, particular b-roll divided by folder.  YOU CANNOT have too many folders at this level.

Though there will be shows that are strictly verite - you can use big categories:  MONTANA, FLORIDA to group the material.  You might use DATES:  SEPTEMBER etc.

But what should go along side FOOTAGE?

ARCHIVAL (if you have it)
PHOTOS (if you use them)
MUSIC
S F/X
(or just Audio and split those two up)
GRAPHICS
And what ever other categories you might accrue.
But must importantly - you have a folder JUST for SEQUENCES.

Sometimes, depending on the size of the project - folders within folders of Sequences - but at least one folder.

And there you have it - the beginning of a well organized bin....

Please, if you have other suggestions or thoughts, post them.

Best,

Stephanie Hubbard.

Content vs. Capability

I notice I have two very different kinds of workshop participants/students.

Profile #1: A person has a very specific idea about what they want to do their documentary about.  It may be about gay marriage, or a spiritual journey, a lost story of LA.  Some do know how to make docs, and want an outside point of view to help them get clarity on how to proceed, others don't know how to make docs yet, but they want to, and they are starting with this story.

Profile #2: A person who doesn't really have a strong idea about what they want to tell, but has a strong desire for the skill set.  Something in them wants to be able to make documentaries, and they come to me to learn the skills so they can apply them as they journey through life.

What is interesting to me:
In the case of #2's I can help them look for good subjects. They can begin to know what it is they are looking for - essentially a story with a strong transformation - or the hope of one.  Of course, there is the idea of choosing someone who might be a good subject, and I would refer them to my interview with Kirby Dick http://tinyurl.com/38t95a8.  


In the case of #1's I help them see where the transformation is within the story they want to tell.  My favorite example is of a filmmaker that came to me with years of verite footage shot depicting people who went through the experiences around the subject he wanted to portray.  He came into my office in our first class, and told me he only had to get about 12 interviews of experts to tell the story.  But when we broke it down, we found he already head the story in his verite footage - ready to be a powerful compelling story.   


I also find #1's who become #2's.  They find they love the process of making films, and go on to make more. 


I personally, love working with all my students and clients whether it be helping them find the story they've already started, or learning how to set up an interview, or how to capture verite footage for a film they don't even know they are going to make yet. 


I just started a new workshop this week, there are spots still available.  The time is 12:30 Wednesday afternoon.  There may also be an evening slot open.  If you are interested, please email me at huranghu@gmail.com

Thanks for reading!  Stephanie.  

Structure Makes Your Improvisation Work!

So, going to see a performance of Improv at IOWest is amazing.  I suggest going Tuesday nights at 9 to see USS Rock and Roll and Local 132.  There have been several times I've brought friends fresh to improv and they could not believe that every word was made up - had never existed before this performance, and will never exist again (unless, the performance was filmed of course)   It is an amazing feat, as improvisors move, speak, emote, seemingly plot, and express theme, broader meaning, the whole deal, with NO discussion - nothing more than eye contact.  These teams I'm recommending do a form called The Harold.  This is a form developed at IOWest (when it used to be Improv Olympic) by Del Close, the original IOer.

What is the Harold?  An opening, three "first scenes" a game, three "second scenes" where the characters or locations of the first scenes come back, another game, and the final coming together of all three plot lines as they affect each other in often hilariously and profound ways.    A couple of details, the second beats may often be the longest beats in the piece, time to develop characters, situations etc.  The third beats are where everyone's story gets wrapped up. ; - )

Well what have we here?  Yes, we have structure.  What else might we have?  How bout a want and a need.  The way to have powerful themes is to begin with a callow character who actually changes in the third act.  The way I teach my students now is that this transformation occurs when the want collides with the need, and the Hero has to relinquish her want or "die".  In improv, it may be as simple as, girl who wants friends and tries to get them by being mean, realizes she should be nice.  But once we meet her in the first act, we want to see her come back in the second "beat" and see the consequences of her meanness.  It's only in the third act, as we wrap up in improv that we see our hero transformed, see her realize that because she needs friends, she needs not to be mean any more.  Okay, that's a super basic example, but improv CAN be simpler than Doc, but also can be more more challenging and complex.

Okay - so how does this apply to me and my doc you may be asking?

First of all, what this means, no matter how organic your doc (cause improv is the epitomy of organic) you will make it better by having a structure.

Let me tell you.....I always used to think that you just start shooting right?  Well after years of working on trying to edit docs for people who "Just Started Shooting" I realized that they had spent their valuable time and resources - and often the time of others - and even if the filmmaker started with a GREAT idea, if they didn't fully develop the structure for their film BEFORE they start - if they didn't think about who could take us into this world and have a transformation - then - unless you are INCREDIBLY f-ing lucky - you won't get that.  Sure, some people are in the right place at the right time, but you're too smart and too good to leave it all to chance.

So, number 1, step out on stage with all the players knowing the structure.
number 2, choose characters with strong wants, and strong needs.  Know they will stick to those through the first two acts.
number three, make theme - or saying something about something, more than the immediate scenario at hand - a goal.

If you can take these three things and apply them to your documentary BEFORE you start shooting, or at a far distant least, AS you shoot, then you have a shot to have the main elements that make a great film.

 To review - you want:

1) a hero who has a transformation   and 2) a film that transcends it's subject, that is about more than it appeared to be at first.

(What do Want and Need have to do with Structure?  That will be the next post! )

These are there things that make great documentaries delightful, and if you know about them, and are looking for them, even PLANNING where they will emerge BEFORE you choose a subject, or start shooting, BEFORE you're done shooting and start editing.

Some examples: Times of Harvey Milk and Unknown White Male along with When We Were Kings are terrific examples of Want Need, Structure and Transformation, and that delightful moment when you realize that this documentary you are watching is about more than what you thought.

So, take your check list, think about what you are doing, and really have fun with it, and make your film with more than "just" a good idea.

These are all the things we work on in the Doc Workshops - so please feel free to send an email for more information about the next workshops.

Kisses from Anvil & Werner

I just had my students watch Grizzly Man because, for what I want to work on with them, it represents the collision of archival footage and poetry. (And I love the foxes.) And I've had them watch many great films.  But what prompted me to write this post was what I found in researching Werner Herzog:  He just taught a three day master class called Rogue Filmmaking two weeks ago, and eager for material I might share with my students I fell in love with what one of his students wrote about his class:

Attend if you love and feel an affinity for the following statements:
Forget successful, think compelling
Fascination drives film-making
Delving into the hearts of humans
Be ruthless with your material
Respect the natural authority of the people you collaborate with
You are not part of the culture of complaint
Your work is based on the soul, not the plot of the story
You are willing to earn money in a basic way
You are willing to determine the moral borderline of your film-making
Sense undoable projects
If you think that there are more important things in life than movies
If you read poetry and novels
If you know that there is only ONE taste...good taste.
If you NEVER WAVER
-Asimakis Pagidas (“Alfa P.”)


And despite it's roving subject and syntax, I wanted to share it because I think it captures the essence of filmmaking - of art making, of living.     Just these four are priceless: 
Be ruthless with your material
Respect the natural authority of the people you collaborate with
You are not part of the culture of complaint
Your work is based on the soul, not the plot of the story

Though I trust each reader to bring their own interpretation to these, I will grudgingly offer mine: 

Be ruthless with your material:  This is what an editor must do.  I have been with filmmakers who want to keep something in because of how they got it, or who they promised, but at the cost of the film.  No, that is not acceptable.  The film must stand on it's own.  Be ruthless with your material. 

Respect the natural authority of the people you collaborate with:  this is a good one.  If someone is good, let them be good.  It will make your film better, it will make you better.  

You are not part of the culture of complaint.  Reminds me of my Bar Method class.  When I started, I didn't get it, the teacher was making us do the most painful things, again and again - and no one was complaining.  Now I get it.  Again and again in my life, I get to leave behind the culture of complaint, and when I do, things seem really quiet for a while, then quiet is good - a good place to make work.   Finally: Your work is based on the soul, not the plot of the story:  Again and again, I learn it, I see it, I internalize it - plot is just a diversion away from the soul.  Stick to the transformation - the conflict between the want and the need, and you have a way into the soul.  Get into plot, who said what, where is the gun now, the other tape, the maguffin, and there is no soul.  But throw in a soul, in this case, an opera singer, and you've got my favorite French film of the 80's, Diva. 

In line with this, I was honored to go see the DGA documentary honorees on Friday. They included the directors of The Cove, The English Surgeon, Food Inc,. Beaches of Agnes, Garbage Dreams and Anvil! The Story of Anvil.   So during the moderated Q and A, the distinguished moderator asked Sacha Gervasi, the director of Anvil! how he handled his production plan, especially considering that he was a first time documentary film maker.  At first he answered by talking about his connection to the subject, his absolute LOVE of the guys in Anvil.  Then she asked again, "Yes, but this was the first time you'd ever directed a film, or a documentary,  what sort of provisions did you make for that?"  That's when Sacha looked out above our heads and said this, 
        
"You know, I was in agents offices, they were telling me I should write this or that, (He had just written "The Terminal" for Steven Spielberg) but I told them I wanted to make a documentary with my own money.  So I hired a good producer, got a good cinematographer, the best I could find, and we went to shoot for three years."  


He then went on to tell how Anvil! was shown at the Sundance Film festival in 2008 but didn't get distribution.  They just kept entering it into festivals, and kept sending the subject of the film to the festivals.  It was the following year, at a tiny film festival in Prague, where two MTV executives on vacation went to the basement of the pub where they were drinking to see the the film - and fall in love - that the film got distribution.    Sacha told this story, and I believe it so fits the sentiments of Herzog's student I wanted to share here. 


Oh, and the kisses:  So I went up to Sacha at the DGA reception later, thanked him, and told him I was an editor and that I liked his material very much, and that I would like to work with him.  We shared a few more words, or an understanding or a moment.  He took me seriously, and said thank you, and gave me a kiss on the cheek as if we knew each other.  


It was later reported to me by one of my university students that Sacha then said, "The best part about being in this business is the ladies...." 


So whether or not I get a call to edit "Anvil II, The Comeback" I want to dedicate this blog to the spirit of all of the filmmakers out there - whether they are struggling to make a film as they work a 9 to 5 job, as they face down fears of unemployment, if they come from being a poor German teenager, or are challenged by  the demands of a family, or choose documentary as they walk away from a Hollywood screenwriting career,     let us all leave behind the culture of complaint, and enter that magical poetic world of truth and love that documentary filmmaking is all about. 


Namaste, 


Stephanie. 

The Art of Improv and the Documentary Part I

Happy Solstice Dear Reader,

Some of you may know that I, Stephanie Hubbard, the "Documentary Insider", also actively study and perform comedy improv at one of the best schools in the country, iowest, formerly known as improv olympic.

This morning, I started thinking about the two art forms, Improv and Documentary and why I'm so involved with both.

And the most obvious thing is that they both rely fully on improvising: being able to create art on the fly, as it happens, being alert and involved, reacting in the moment - or rather the millisecond.

So, how might we apply principles of improv to documentary filmmaking?

1) Even though, in the art form of comedy improv, "Nobody knows what anyone will say," we do learn and agree on the form we will do. This typically involves structure. What is the structure? In the most successful long forms, (Here I will refer to "The Harold" a long form of improv developed at the Improv Olympic under the beloved Del Close, recognized as the father of improv by many) First, there is an OPENING, which will inspire, and in so doing actually encompass all that follows it. (A great opening in an documentary should both be at the beginning AND encompass all that is to follow.) Then there are three different SCENES. They are unrelated but inspired by the opening, and are typically two person scenes. The most important thing in these scenes is to establish RELATIONSHIP, who are these people to each other - from this comes all else. Then there is a GROUP GAME - typically inspired by the opening. Then we have second beats of each of the SCENES in the first beats - in these second beats you can have more people interacting with the characters established in the first beats. In improv we follow CHARACTER, not plot. These beats can be longer, developing aspects of the characters. Then we have one more GROUP GAME, then SCENES - or Third Beats, that have each of the story lines merge - it turns out that the woman in 2A is actually married to the mail man in 1C and so on. This is also the time that the characters TRANSFORM according to our point of view about the themes that have emerged from within the Harold.

Each scene is developed by the improvisors listening to each other and responding in the moment, but each improvisor is working according to the structure of the piece, moving towards transformation, and a conclusion.

Now how does this apply to Documentary? Well, just as we can really listen to our subjects and to the issues and themes arising from what it is we want to say in our documentary, we might benefit from having a structural road map we are following. And the road map we choose for a Documentary, might be strikingly similar - we have first act - that establishes our characters and their relationships. Our act two is longer, has more ins and outs, more characters perhaps, then we have our act three, or transformation act - also, we have a time when we know it will all come together to say more about the whole than we expected. This is because on some physiological level, the audience is satisfied by transformation and by elevating the conversation to more than they expected. And by doing this in your documentary, you will create a more powerful film.

Stay tuned, tomorrow - the importance of Not Judging, Being in the Moment, and Listening, all key elements of successful improv & successful documentary filmmaking.

To see the sort of improv shows I'm talking about, check out the schedule at www.iowest.com

List of Documentaries to View for Filmmakers

I chose some of these docs just because I LOVED them - and all of them I think should be seen by anyone planning to make a doc. Why? Listen, whether you are spending your time and money or someone else's, there is no cheaper way to spark your imagination than to learn and see what others have done. Also, it gives you a shared language to communicate with your collaborators - your dp, your editor, your graphics person. Watching these can also open up the way you can bring to light an issue - from "Manufacturing Consent" to "Titicut Follies" or "Roger and Me", it's a clear illustration that there are many ways to bring consciousness to an issue.

But what about plain old fun? "American Movie", "Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill" and "Spellbound" take us inside parts of our culture we can be glad we know about because they are fun and wonderful. As for making art, "The Gleaners and I", "Rivers and Tides" and "Visions of Light" won't disappoint. For Characters, "Gray Gardens", and "Keep the River on Your Right" are great choices. But for sheer chutzpah in filmmaking - check out "Grizzly Man", "Tarnation", and the only narrative film on the list, "Le Jetee" (easily found on YouTube)

Then there are my standards - films I use in class all the time to talk about structure and different approaches to doc story telling, "Times of Harvey Milk", "Unknown White Male", and "When We Were Kings". Now I'm about to watch "King of Kong", and I have an inkling I might be adding one more..... Enjoy! Stephanie.

Oh, and of course "Man on a Wire".

“The Farmer’s Wife” (1998) Directed by David Sutherland

http://www.amazon.com/Farmers-Wife-Juanita-Buschkoetter/dp/B000CPHABK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260167997&sr=1-1

“Rivers and Tides” (2004) Directed by Thomas Riedelsheimer

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_0_6?url=search-alias%3Ddvd&field-keywords=rivers+and+tides&sprefix=Rivers

“Grizzly Man” (2005) Directed by Werner Herzog

http://www.amazon.com/Grizzly-Man-Franc-G-Fallico/dp/B000BMY2NS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260211627&sr=1-1

“Salesman” (1968) Directed by Albert Maysles & Charlotte Zwerin

http://www.amazon.com/Salesman-Criterion-Collection-Paul-Brennan/dp/B00005KHJY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260168361&sr=1-1

“Murderball” (2005) Directed by Dana Adam Shapiro & Henry Alex Rubin

http://www.amazon.com/Salesman-Criterion-Collection-Paul-Brennan/dp/B00005KHJY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260168361&sr=1-1

“The Up Series” Seven Up, 7 Plus Seven, 21 Up, 28 Up, 35 Up, 42 Up, 49 Up

Director Micheal Apted

http://www.amazon.com/Up-Seven-Plus-21-28/dp/B000SAGGLO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260169382&sr=8-1

“Keep the River on Your Right – A Modern Cannibal’s Tale” (2002) Directed by David Shapiro and Laurie Gwen Shapiro.

http://www.amazon.com/Keep-River-Your-Right-Cannibal/dp/B00006CXH4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260169516&sr=1-1

Le Jetee Sans Soleil (Criterion Collection) (1963) Director Chris Marker

http://www.amazon.com/Jetee-Sans-Soleil-Criterion-Collection/dp/B000OPPADS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260169638&sr=1-1

Hoop Dreams (1994) Directed by Steve James

http://www.amazon.com/Hoop-Dreams-Criterion-Collection/dp/B0007WFYBG/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

A Question of Color (1993) Cathe Sandler

http://newsreel.org/nav/title.asp?tc=CN0073

Belfast, Maine (1999 ) Titicut Follies (1967) Directed by Frederick Wiseman

http://www.zipporah.com/

Roger and Me (1989) Directed by Micheal Moore

http://www.amazon.com/Roger-Me-James-Bond-IV/dp/B00009YXAS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260171938&sr=8-1

Night and Fog (1955) Directed by Alain Resnais

http://www.amazon.com/Night-Enhanced-1955-Michel-Bouquet/dp/B001NFSP08/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260172126&sr=1-2

Manufacturing Consent (1993) Directed by Peter Wintonick

http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Noam-Chomsky-Media/dp/B00005Y726/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260172191&sr=1-1

Gray Gardens (1976) Directed by Albert Maysles and Ellen Hovde

http://www.amazon.com/Gardens-Edith-Little-Bouvier-Beale/dp/B00005KHJX/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260172464&sr=1-4

The Gleaners and I (2002) Directed by Agnes Varda

http://www.amazon.com/Gleaners-I-Bodan-Litnanski/dp/B00005Y727/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260170107&sr=1-2

Tarnation (2003) Directed by Jonathan Caouette

http://www.amazon.com/Tarnation-Greg-Ayres/dp/B0007Y8ABK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260170168&sr=1-1

When We Were Kings (1997) Leon Gast

http://www.amazon.com/When-Were-Kings-Muhammad-Ali/dp/B00007ELEK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260170255&sr=1-1

Thin Blue Line (1988) Directed by Errol Morris

http://www.amazon.com/Thin-Blue-Line-Randall-Adams/dp/B00094AS72/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260170294&sr=1-2

Cheap Fast and Out of Control (1997) Errol Morris

http://www.amazon.com/Fast-Cheap-Control-Dave-Hoover/dp/B00003CX9Z/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260170362&sr=1-7

American Movie (1999) Director Chris Smith

http://www.amazon.com/American-Movie-Mark-Borchardt/dp/0767846869/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260209865&sr=1-1

Iraq in Fragments (2005) Director James Longley

http://www.amazon.com/Iraq-Fragments-James-Longley/dp/B000R4SKEM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260209916&sr=1-1

The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill (2005) Director Judy Irving

http://www.amazon.com/Parrots-Telegraph-Special-Two-Disc-Collectors/dp/B001DXS4GA/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

“Still a Brother: Inside the Negro Middle Class” (1968) William Greaves

Spell Bound (2002) Director Jeffrey Blitz

http://www.amazon.com/Spellbound-Angela-Arenivar/dp/B0000WN13Q/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260170423&sr=1-2

Jesus Camp (2006) Directed by Heidi Ewing & Rachel Grady

http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Camp-Becky-Fischer/dp/B000KLQUV2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260170821&sr=1-1

Stronger, Bigger, Faster (2008) Directed by Christopher Bell

http://www.amazon.com/Bigger-Stronger-Faster-Christopher-Bell/dp/B001B7CNW4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260170466&sr=1-1

Visions of Light (1993) Directed by Todd McCarthy and Stuart Samuels

http://www.amazon.com/Visions-Light-Cinematography-Néstor-Almendros/dp/630583685X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260171854&sr=1-1

“Pressure” (1976) directed by Horace Ove, (Seems to be only in PAL)

http://www.amazon.com/Pressure-Baldwins-Nigger-NON-USA-FORMAT/dp/B001IF1PWI/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260171751&sr=8-2

“Unknown White Male: A True Story” 2005

Director Rupert Murray Distributed by Imagine Entertainment

http://www.amazon.com/White-Male-True-Story/dp/B000GBEWIY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260115368&sr=1-1-spell

“Times of Harvey Milk” 1984

Director Rob Epstein Distributed by Cinecom International & New Yorker Films

http://www.amazon.com/Times-Harvey-Milk-1984/dp/B0001Y4LDW/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1260116070&sr=1-1-spell

What does a person really need to know to make a movie?

I'm preparing to teach a documentary class for students for my alma mater here in Los Angeles, and have been faced with a tough question: What is more important in learning how to make a documentary - focussing on what you want to do, and making it internally coherent and workable/fundable or looking at what experienced artists working in the realm of documentary have done?

When I was at University, I never took a documentary class, but even in my narrative classes it didn't really seem that we did either. We would be sent out in teams with very little (none) technical training. The person who already knew how to run camera would end up running camera the person who already knew how to edit would edit etc. There seemed to be very little room for either experimentation or failure. I found that the atmosphere of university, knowing my work would be presented for all to see put me in the mind set of perfection.

Of course our society tends to take this thing, Film Directing, which is one of the last great arts that requires the sort of apprenticeship and time to develop that our society doesn't seem to allow - and kind of imbues it with a sort of, "Either you are or you aren't" thing.

Thus you have a bunch of 19 year olds, who are film directors by virtue of the fact they say they are, and a lot of other people, no longer students, trying to look perfect at the beginning of their career, who once maybe pronounced their director nature, but now realize that doesn't work, and are now really learning, and making mistakes on their own dime. After they dedicated person has experimented and failed, finally, they really learn the ropes and are able to make a really remarkable film.

I believe the number one thing I can teach to a person to make them a documentary filmmaker is to do what will spare them the years of heartbreak and oodles of money. And that thing is: To actually THINK about what you are going to do, and how you are going to do it. And then make it better, and better and better.

I feel like I say this a lot, but I keep being confronted by people making films, even directing films who haven't really thought too much about what they really want to say or how they want to say it. They are drawn into the technical aspects - the shooting, the chase for the right interview, the research, the money, the travel.

It almost seems like the largest challenge to being an excellent documentary filmmaker is that there is always a distraction that will make you feel productive. And while it may actually have a positive impact on your film - there is NO replacement for sitting still, and really writing about what you want to say and how you want to say it, and ideally, working through your structure in a way that leads to a satisfying transformation.

Sitting down and working through your subject matter is necessary to find the really big ideas that give the viewer that absolute satisfaction when they realize you've taken them on a much bigger journey than they expected, and finally, really imagining your tone and your style, finding the poetry of your shots and if you use it, the poetry of your voice over, your edits, and your texture. Then you are free to experiment, because you know where you are going. If you have hiccups or failures, it's not fatal, because you actually have structure, and a plan, so you can identify your issues right away.

Other wise the whole thing becomes a chase to the goal of not having wasted all your time and money on a film that you can't sell.

Watching other people's work can serve as windows into ways to do things, but doesn't substitute for doing your work yourself.

And of course it's that work that we do in the Documentary Insider Workshop.

I must have learned something back in grad school, because it served as the benchmark between my life as a sales person and my life earning a living making film, but it was after making films for over ten years, and closely observing people spending millions of dollars on their projects that I internalized what needs to happen to make a film so good, it hurts. And what I went through in the last twelve years, is exactly what I teach, and that is how to do the work of an artist. All of which we do in class.

I'm continuing to teach privately at my office in Los Angeles, and if you are interested in working with me remotely we can do that too. If you are making a documentary, start your artistic investigation now, in my workshop, and start cutting down on the years, and mistakes you will have to make to get to where you want to be.

Best,

Stephanie.

email me at huranghu@gmail.com if you'd like to sign up for the private workshop.