The Toronto International Film Festival is more about watching movie (and schmoozing at parties) than attending panels but there are a couple of things geared towards documentary filmmakers that would be worth checking out during all the glam.

The Doc Conference
Sunday, September 13, 2009
University of Toronto’s Victoria College (93 Charles Street West, behind the Isabel Bader Theatre), Room 323
An all-day meeting, with this panel a highlight for filmmakers interested in new directions in funding/sales:
1:30pm – Financing in Tough Times
Franny Armstrong, Director, The Age of Stupid
Dan Cogan, Impact Partners
Lois Vossen, ITVS

*Doc Conference is open to all Guest Relations, Sales & Industry and Press pass holders.

Doc Roundtables

“Now in its fourth year, Doc Roundtables create a rare chance for filmmakers to meet with industry leaders for an informal networking session. This year, industry participants include representatives from Sony Pictures Classics, HBO, Films Transit, Submarine Entertainment, SnagFilms, Zeitgeist Films, IFC Films, Emerging Pictures, Oscilloscope Laboratories, Lorber Media, and more.”

Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 through to Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Time: Twice daily sessions from 2:00pm to 3:00pm and 3:30pm to 4:30pm
Location: Match Club (5th Elementt Restaurant, 1033 Bay Street)

I recently got a chance to check out RiP: A REMIX MANIFESTO, the Canadian documentary that takes a look at copyright (and the mashup artist Girl Talk) in a kind of method way- the producers, EYESTEELFILM, and director, Brett Gaylor decided that since the costs of licensing all the expensive music in the film would be prohibitive, and since the film was about these costs, it would essentially be fair use to go ahead and use whatever they wanted (including network footage, usually very expensive) and just see what happens.

It’s a pretty interesting concept, and though the film does paint the issue in overly black and white terms (the CopyRIGHT vs. the Copy LEFT), by the end, Gaylor has raised some interesting issues about the state of copyright, though I’m not sure many of them are answered. Hope to have a discussion with one of the producers which will be here soon.

It’s definitely worth seeing especially if you enjoy the Girl Talk phenomenon- I met him a few weeks ago at a show and was impressed- he’s totally into giving a great performance- which is all the more remarkable given that his performance is pushing some buttons. And, in keeping with the mashup philosophy, if you don’t like the film (or especially if you do) you can make your own version at OpenSourceCinema.

I’m a little slow on the uptake here, but man-on-the-beat Scott Kirsner of Cinematech has a great resource on the ITVS site where he interviewed a number of documentary filmmakers about their experiences using new technology to reach an audience.  Scott told me:

Among the folks I spoke to were Tiffany Shlain (“The Tribe”), Katy Chevigny (“Election Day”), Hunter Weeks (“10 MPH” and “10 Yards”), Byron Hurt (“Hip Hop: Beyond Beats and Rhymes”), and Curt Ellis (“King Corn”). Not everyone is a filmmaker who is funded or supported by ITVS… our sole criterion was to find folks who were experimenting.

He also came up with a list of 15 recommendations, many of which we’ve agreed on in the past.  The one cautionary addition I would make is to his suggestion to “Make sure DVDs are available when audiences are most interested in the film: during the theatrical run, during festival screenings and at the time of the first TV broadcast.” This is fine if you have no plans to work with a distributor and you’re not planning to work with quite a number of theatrical venues and TV Broadcasters- but you should be aware that at this point in time, distributing DVDs or placing the fim online will definitely endanger your deals with many if not most major players.

The D-Word is an essential resource for documentary film folks- an online community of filmmakers, writers, and broadcast/distribution types. Doug Block, the founder and co-host of the site, is an experienced filmmaker whose breakout film 51 BIRCH STREET, a personal documentary about family relationships, benefited from a grassroots marketing campaign that included utilizing the internet. Infinicine asked him about the transitioning state of distribution for documentarians.

[I]nfinicine: In your experience, are independent filmmakers making a transition to online forms of distribution? Are streaming and/or downloading viable revenue sources for a filmmaker who has essentially self-financed their film?

Doug Block [DB]: Like it or not, I think indie filmmakers are being forced to make a transition towards online distribution, but so far it’s mostly taken the form of promotion and self-distribution of dvds. Streaming and downloading of feature-length films just doesn’t seem viable until it can go right to your tv set rather than your computer monitor, and it’s not quite there yet. And even if it were, there’s the issue of how to make your film stand out from all the rest, which we’ve traditionally done via a theatrical release. So for now we’re talking mainly about shorts and serialized content driven by ad revenue, which is a pretty interesting concept with some real artistic potential from a filmmaker standpoint, but it’s just not the same thing as making a feature intended for a live audience.

Personally, I’ve long been excited about the potential of online distribution. Back in 1999, my documentary Home Page was the first feature film ever to be streamed for free and sold on home video online at the same time it opened theatrically — talk about day-and-date! I learned the hard way that it’s not always lucrative being a pioneer (especially when you don’t have a marketing budget), but it was a fun experiment.

It’s almost a decade later, and if any indie filmmakers are making gobs of money streaming or downloading their feature film I’m not aware of it. All the business “models” I’ve seen so far are models for the businesses but not for the artists. I’m sitting back and waiting for a wave of filmmaker success stories before I’ll go ahead and call anything a legitimate model for online distribution.

[I]: How does a network like the D-Word facilitate distribution channels for independent filmmakers?

[DB]: We’re basically a free online discussion forum for documentary professionals and enthusiasts from all over the world (over 4,000 members from 80 countries, currently). We don’t facilitate distribution channels for doc filmmakers; we facilitate discussion about distribution channels. Lots and lots of discussion. That said it’s always been part of our long-term plan to have our member’s work go online, both as a way to promote it and to facilitate collaboration across geographical boundaries. And we’re very close to getting there.

We’ve been approached by any number of online distribution/exhibition entities over the years, many claiming they want to be the main online portal for documentaries. Being able to bring a thriving, ready-made community of people who work in the documentary field, or just love seeing docs, is an incredibly valuable thing to bring to the plate. If you don’t believe me, just look at all the attempts that have been made at building film community online that haven’t taken off. It takes a ton of time and energy and passion, and we have a 9-year head start. So far we haven’t found the right match, but we’re certainly open to someone who recognizes the value in what we’re doing and is willing to make us part of their business plan.

[I]: How can filmmakers negotiate the various markets and content delivery companies and know when they are getting a good deal?

[DB]: It’s very difficult because it’s hard to predict how well the online market will do over time, it’s still very early. Is having a 50/50 split of advertising revenue a good deal? It sounds like one, but there’s no way of telling in advance how much advertising your film will generate and how much revenue that will ultimately bring in. And I don’t see any companies offering sizable minimum guarantees in the way that theatrical distributors often do. It’s obviously important to keep VOD rights if you can, they’re becoming increasingly valuable. But again it’s hard to quantify just what that value is. It’s more about keeping your distribution options open until things between home video companies like NetFlix, online distributors and broadcasters shake out.

In general, you want to either fully retain your online rights or have them be as non-exclusive as possible. That way you can have a number of online companies working with you while doing your own DIY distribution. Until downloading really becomes viable, dvd sales are still the main online revenue stream for indie and doc filmmakers. So it’s always good if a filmmaker can get some kind of theatrical or tv distribution and still retain dvd rights. And a good online deal would allow the filmmaker to get a link from wherever their film will be downloaded directly to a site — preferably their own — selling their dvds.

[I]: Can a filmmaker today “just a filmmaker” or is it necessary for them to develop fundraising, networking, producing and distribution skills?

[DB]: It’s always been necessary for indie filmmakers to develop those other skills. And it’s probably more important now than ever. But in the end, it all comes back to the fact that the best way to get your film distributed and seen is to make the very best movie you possibly can. So maybe the most important quality to develop these days is focus. To know when it’s time to do all that other stuff and when it’s time to shut out the distractions and make the film.

[I]: How has your personal experience changed as far as your engagement with digital distribution, both online and in theatres or other public venues?

[DB]: I’m very aware of the need for audience building early on and at the grassroots level, and that’s something that can be done very effectively online. From the moment you start a film, it’s hugely important to collect the email addresses of everyone who’s ever shown any interest in your work, your film or your subject. And to keep in communication with your growing email list as the project develops. There’s a lot of potential in online fundraising, which is something I’m currently exploring. Even if you don’t raise a lot of money in total you want to collect a lot of donations, for each person who donates is now invested in your film, which will pay off many times over in getting the word out about the film when it’s done.

I also love that we don’t have to deal with film prints any more. 51 Birch Street played theatrically in over 60 cities and all of it was done through digital cinema. The cost savings were so profound that we managed to actually make money on our theatrical release. Not a huge amount, but then the main idea with theatrical is to somehow cut through the clutter of films and get it on people’s radar without losing your shirt.

[I]: Do you feel things are “good” for filmmakers now? Why/why not?

[DB]: It’s certainly a great time for beginning and ultra low-budget filmmakers because the cost of shooting and editing films can be so ultra low. And there are lots of options for getting your work seen online, especially if you’re more interested in having a calling card than in making a lot of money back.

But for established indie filmmakers who work at higher budget levels it’s pretty tough going because of the economy and the seismic shake-up in traditional distribution. It’s very hard to show investors how they’re going to recoup their money, especially when there’s so much “product” out there and distribution companies are folding left and right. It’s all well and good to talk about the potential of downloads and streams, but it’s hard to back that up with realistic projections. So it takes a greater leap of faith on everybody’s part.

In the end, the truly committed filmmaker will always find a way to make his or her film. This is a funny business. You need to be aware of everything that’s going on, but you kind of need to have blinders on, as well.

The educational market is an often overlooked source of revenue for independent filmmakers, and has a lot of models that may be used by more “commercial” vendors in the future. Rachel Gordon has a background as a director, producer, ad writer. Her consulting business, Energized Films, helps filmmakers access the educational market.

[I]nfinicine: How are streaming/digital downloads changing educational distribution?

[R]achel Gordon: The process of change in education is pretty slow, but what is happening is that some colleges and universities have been able to experiment. They’ve
started licenses to stream on servers they’ve created and maintained. Or, though less frequently, they are assigning films that are available for streaming online to students, especially in social service departments.

Unfortunately, however, technology is inconsistent and I can’t say that even these two options are the only ones taking place, but people are definitely experimenting more thanks to these new options. Some still buy VHS, believe it or not. Since there is not a singular form of technology that people use with their media so, while it’s important to keep track of the delivery
systems out there, it’s also important to be flexible about how end users receive content.

Secondarily, the new modes of delivery also alleviate storage issues as a server can be better than 100s of units. Perhaps the best impact so far is that downloading and streaming are useful for opening up more class time. Professors and students can be setup to take distance learning classes, or not use up lecture space, or do web conferences that play media where you
check in and view the same material, and that’s a pretty exciting leap.

[I]: What kinds of revenues can an independent filmmaker get in the educational market in general, for a title with a strong educational angle?

[R}: This really depends on how much they are willing to invest in it, in many
cases. I can't give you figures because people don't come looking for a film unless information is put out there, constantly and repeatedly. What an independent filmmaker should be on the lookout for, however, are advocacy groups - such as not-for-profits who have similar goals - as acknowledgement from them helps with other groups and with conference income. There are
conferences that filmmakers can be paid to go and present at with their films. They also can do re-selling at a discount to thematically related catalogs. By getting reviewed in educational publications, they can use quotes and pass their information to readily available contacts on the web.

It's time consuming and you might send out 100 emails to get 5 sales, but you also learn about your audience and how to reach them and build on them.

It's important to stress that income from sales alone may not be enough to live on for a full-time basis, but it could certainly help generate interest in your work and even provide you with people who might invest in your next project.

[I]: How can filmmakers access the educational market? Do they need a distributor?

[R]: You do not need a distributor to access the educational market, but distributors are good if you do not have the time, patience, and commitment you need to do it yourself. It can take from 6 months to a year to get reviewed by publications and really start getting through to educational libraries.

[I]: What do you think will be the evolution in educational sales from DVD to other technologies?

[R]: I don’t think DVDs are dead by a long shot. Laserdisc didn’t last, but DVD
will be sticking around for a while. I am seeing more cable and local network channels that are either connected to a school district, or college/university. I am also seeing more consortiums arise to do bulk purchasing. I do think downloading is becoming much more popular, though
most independent filmmakers are afraid to go that route.

[I]: Is it still worth it for filmmakers to make their own DVDs and sell them online? Do you see online downloads and streaming as displacing DVDs as a delivery mechanism for independent filmmakers?

[R]: I think it can still be worth it to make DVDs and sell them online, though it depends on what your priorities are. There are plenty of DVD on Demand platforms out there that will make your product for you and bill/ship it, but they also tend to take a large percentage of any sale you might make.

At the same time, if you make a 1000 DVDs for $5000, you may not want to store them and it will probably take you several years to get rid of thembut you’d technically be making more per unit on every sale.

The internet has made copyright issues complicated enough for filmmakers wanting to make money distributing their films. For documentary filmmakers, the issues around fair use and copyright have always been a counterbalance to their own impulse to protect their creative work. At SILVERDOCS this past weekend, panelists tried to sort out some of the emerging issues in the complicated arena of copyright law.

One issue that emerged is the challenge to actually get proper licences for works that because of digital duplication are now often difficult to trace to a legal source. USC School of Law Professor Jack Lerner suggested that a more streamlined version of copyright law that treated film and music in a unified way might be more effective for digital media.

Digital media could be an amazing resource tool if there were a way to digitize the many obscure, orphan, or rare film prints to create a kind of super media library. In a way, this seems like a natural project for the ever-expanding internet. However, as panelist Mark Lemmons of Thought Equity Motion suggested, it is unclear how it could be financed, given that the current paradigm seems to be internet=free (or at least, hard to monetize).