Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | modfodder's commentslogin

Considering the amount of work, the number of people and the cost of equipment it takes to make a motion picture, $1m is absolutely low budget. The average cost for a Hollywood feature film is $65m+. It's difficult to make any film with a medium size experienced crew for less than $1m. If you have any recognizable talent, it's difficult to make for less than $5m. Once you get below $1m, the terms "micro budget" and "no budget" start being used. Mini-budget, Indy budget, Ultra Low budget are also used. It depends on who's is using the term and in what part of the industry they are working in. If you are outside of the industry with no money, the terms mean little to nothing because everything is low or no budget, but if you are working with crews, talent and investors that have experience, those terms have specific meanings.

SAG (Screen Actors Guild) uses Ultra Low Budget (0-250k) Low Budget Modified (250k-700k) and Low Budget (700k-2.5m) to differentiate projects from their normal union rates.

Toward the edges of the industry I've seen the following breakdown. No Budget = below 40k Mini Budget = 41-80k Micro Budget = 81-150k Ultra Low Budget = 150k-250k Low Budget = 251-400k Indy Low Budget = 401-500k Classic Low Budget= 501k-999k Hollywood Low Budget = 1-5m

But more often I just hear the terms No Budget, Micro, Indy and Low.


thank you for the information.


Muting is still one key press.

I especially like the way the toucher handles dual screen brightness, 1 press and it brings up a brightness control for each screen.


As a video editor, I'd say you are close. imho, to me it doesn't say that Rob was making his leadership of the company all about the product (you'd really have to go back and look at past photos to see if this is true) but more that he is now fading into the background of the company, while Bryan is "focused" on future of the company (looking towards the viewers right which is typically the future). Although many decisions like that in films often tend to be happy accidents (or subconscious choices), it is pretty clear that they are deemphasizing Rob.


Are those the only stocks you have picked? Have you picked any that didn't do as well? Or any that were losers? What led you to miss on Apple or Priceline?


I picked one OTC penny stock loser in 2009 that went completely out of business. Something associated with vertical farming.

I missed out on Apple because almost NOBODY used Apple in the Midwest in the mid 2000's -- everything was MS. That's a great example of me living in a bubble (which I just said in another comment that I didn't, but there ya go)

I missed out on Priceline even though the tech support center I was working in had a whole division dedicated to doing their customer support! Basically, they just never seemed "legit" to me, they seemed like a scam, who the hell wants to "choose your own price" for something important like a flight and then wait and see if it gets accepted? Very weird to me. People also never seemed too excited about them in general... extremely hard to predict they would become the acquisition masters that they did.

Both solid examples of blind spots in my strategy.


“Everyone using their tech support” doesn’t appear to be a viable purchasing decision for a company’s stock.


A tweet from my lone experience on AltspaceVR.

"I spent an hour in VR watching Reggie Watts perform live. The future feels suspiciously like a 90s version of Second Life."

The experience was about as underwhelming as possible and I never went back.


60fps is not yet good. The Hobbit at 48fps did not look as good as 24fps and Billy Lynn's long Halftime Walk at 120fps 3D was one of the worst looking films I've ever seen.

I do believe someone will crack this nut (as Cameron did with 3D). But it's going to take the right project and very creative filmmaking techniques. Personally, I think the first one that works will be a sci-fi in a sterile setting, so the HFR will work with the narrative, not be a distraction.


The Canon C series (100/300/500/700) are popular among documentary filmmakers. And this in mainly for projects produced by Netflix in the pre-production stage. Not for projects that have already been shot (but not yet distributed).

I'm in post on a project shot mainly on the Canon C100 (not on the approved list). We will be talking to Netflix at some point about picking up the project and I have no worries about in not being in 4k or shot by an approved camera. If they like the project and want it, the camera format won't matter.


I would assume that the document is only in regards to productions that they have a hand in during production. (Self produced)


What cameras would you prefer shooting on that isn't listed? I'm not seeing anything that I'd prefer to shoot on (other than film).

Cameras like the Sony A7s or the Panasonic GH5 are great for the low budget film, but if Netflix green lights your project, you can afford much better cameras. Unless the project calls for really small and unobtrusive cameras, in which case Netflix would most likely approve the use of whatever camera best fits the project.


I would say that the Arri Alexa SXT is a better camera than most of the cameras listed there.


I suspect the Arri Alexas are not on the list because they do not have "a true 4K sensor (equal to or greater than 4096 photosites wide)." The SXT has a 3404 x 2202 resolution when used in open-gate format.



The Alexa SXT doesn't match the first requirement - a true 4K sensor. It has a 3424x2202 sensor.


That's valid. And kinda surprised it's not listed. Any other cameras that would make sense to be on the list?


The projects i am involved are only being paid $1mi by Netflix for long feature. It is hardly money that takes you out of low budget line. Granted, it is "free" 1mi since they still keep box office and rights....

If you are not filming in a place where equipment rental is free like the US, GH5's become very inviting as your second (and third) camera.


Is this for projects funded (at least partially) by Netflix before production? Would love to hear more about your experiences (both with Netflix and general filmmaking outside the US).


For a film they green light, probably not. But if the film is already shot and they want it, I don't see that getting in the way.


In a way it did. Now instead of installing the BlackMagic Decklink cards, I can buy the Blackmagic UltraStudio or Intensity and get the same function over Thunderbolt or USB3. What was once locked to one machine is usable by every machine I have, including taking it on the road and connecting to my laptop.

Apple saw where the market was going and that an iMac or MacBook Pro with Thunderbolt/USB3 peripherals can do the work that required a fully decked desktop machine 6-7yrs ago, which is great for the vast majority of creatives. But in doing so they have left a segment of the creative community without the expandability, upgradeability and speed necessary (3D, CGI and some VR, etc). But some of these were never really strongholds for Apple anyway.

As a 20+yr veteran editor who has used just about every NLE on the market, my money and time goes to FCPX unless my clients specify otherwise. It's the fastest, most versatile and most stable product out there and the only one that feels like it is truly evolving away from the original late 80s NLE paradigm. And while its use in the high end market (film, tv and commercials) in the US is minuscule, it's global footprint is growing.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: