Comments on: Money http://blog.ninapaley.com/2007/10/09/money/ Formerly America's Best-Loved Unknown Cartoonist, now independently animating a feature film, "Sita Sings the Blues." Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:42:02 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.2 By: ddj http://blog.ninapaley.com/2007/10/09/money/#comment-1275 ddj Wed, 10 Oct 2007 05:31:48 +0000 http://blog.ninapaley.com/2007/10/09/money/#comment-1275 Hi Nina I remeber 40 years ago the Canadian dollar was always higher than the American.WE used to think it was monoply money. they all looked the same but had different numbers on them. I remeber I had a little sports car, and a friend and I went to San Fransico from Vancouver Canada, with the top down all the way, a slow leak in the front tire ( had a nail in it ) On a long week end (3 days). I quess we were in SF 3 or 4 hours got bored, and went home. Gas was 30 cents a gallon. ( Canadian gallon ) I think at that time a Canadian dollar was about $1.25 US How do you manage to get that much money to get your film out? You must have contacts. Maybe a little east of New York. ddj Hi Nina
I remeber 40 years ago the Canadian dollar was always higher than the American.WE used to think it was monoply money. they all looked the same but had different numbers on them.
I remeber I had a little sports car, and a friend and I went to San Fransico from Vancouver Canada, with the top down all the way, a slow leak in the front tire ( had a nail in it ) On a long week end (3 days). I quess we were in SF 3 or 4 hours got bored, and went home. Gas was 30 cents a gallon. ( Canadian gallon ) I think at that time a Canadian dollar was about $1.25 US
How do you manage to get that much money to get your film out? You must have contacts. Maybe a little east of New York.
ddj

]]> By: Ms. Laaw-yuhr http://blog.ninapaley.com/2007/10/09/money/#comment-1289 Ms. Laaw-yuhr Wed, 17 Oct 2007 02:10:41 +0000 http://blog.ninapaley.com/2007/10/09/money/#comment-1289 I'm curious why you want a 35mm print made (not attacking I'm just curious). So many theaters have digital/DLP technology at this point it seems like you could still get exposure even without a print. Not to mention most film festivals do not require 35mm prints. But if you're dead set on that, have you tried to apply for any grants? I’m curious why you want a 35mm print made (not attacking I’m just curious). So many theaters have digital/DLP technology at this point it seems like you could still get exposure even without a print. Not to mention most film festivals do not require 35mm prints.

But if you’re dead set on that, have you tried to apply for any grants?

]]> By: admin http://blog.ninapaley.com/2007/10/09/money/#comment-1290 admin Wed, 17 Oct 2007 03:39:19 +0000 http://blog.ninapaley.com/2007/10/09/money/#comment-1290 Good question, Laaw-yuhr: Some of the most important festivals, like Berlin, only show 35mm. My film is likeliest to get a distributor if it's seen at a major festival; and it's likeliest to get a distributor if it's seen on film. I'm aiming for major festivals first, which means Berlin first, which, in the event "Sita" is selected, means it has to be on 35mm by the end of January. But even if Berlin doesn't happen, having "Sita" on 35mm qualifies it for other major festivals, and if it only ends up at a "second-tier" festival it will still look better and be more attractive to distributors on film. Also, the digital projection in mainstream theaters uses a proprietary codec, as deigned by the Motion Picture Association. I've heard that obtaining the license for that codec is more expensive than outputting to film. It makes economic sense as an alternative to striking a zillion 35mm film prints, but for a tiny independent production like mine, 35mm is cheaper. Art houses, the likeliest theatrical destination for "Sita," seldom have the fancy new digital systems anyway, relying instead on inferior Beta tape and DVD projectors, or good ol' gorgeous film. Good question, Laaw-yuhr: Some of the most important festivals, like Berlin, only show 35mm. My film is likeliest to get a distributor if it’s seen at a major festival; and it’s likeliest to get a distributor if it’s seen on film. I’m aiming for major festivals first, which means Berlin first, which, in the event “Sita” is selected, means it has to be on 35mm by the end of January. But even if Berlin doesn’t happen, having “Sita” on 35mm qualifies it for other major festivals, and if it only ends up at a “second-tier” festival it will still look better and be more attractive to distributors on film.

Also, the digital projection in mainstream theaters uses a proprietary codec, as deigned by the Motion Picture Association. I’ve heard that obtaining the license for that codec is more expensive than outputting to film. It makes economic sense as an alternative to striking a zillion 35mm film prints, but for a tiny independent production like mine, 35mm is cheaper. Art houses, the likeliest theatrical destination for “Sita,” seldom have the fancy new digital systems anyway, relying instead on inferior Beta tape and DVD projectors, or good ol’ gorgeous film.

]]> By: Jym http://blog.ninapaley.com/2007/10/09/money/#comment-1302 Jym Tue, 23 Oct 2007 20:40:04 +0000 http://blog.ninapaley.com/2007/10/09/money/#comment-1302 =v= Ooh, I love patronizing the arts. "Look at the great big picture that this little girl drew allll byyy herselfff!" =v= Ooh, I love patronizing the arts. “Look at the great big picture that this little girl drew allll byyy herselfff!”

]]>