Clyde Butcher Kickstarter just failed :(

[Drew Wiley]

Stone - numerous award-winning documentaries have been done on shoestring budgets. Not every project needs a significant support staff, fancy props, or huge
travel and accommodation expenses, let alone paid actors. A bigger hurdle is getting something distributed after editing.

[Tin Can]

Stone - numerous award-winning documentaries have been done on shoestring budgets. Not every project needs a significant support staff, fancy props, or huge
travel and accommodation expenses, let alone paid actors. A bigger hurdle is getting something distributed after editing.

+1

[DennisD]

Good to know. So, why did someone post that the funds were used to reimburse previous expenses???

That comment was purely conjecture -
Someone assumed there might be reimbursement of previous expense.

There was NO statement to that effect in the original KS Writeup.

[Light Guru]

Yeah ... you'd think that a documentary film maker would at the very least make a compelling kickstarter video.

Exactly. If I find your kickstarter video to be bad why would I want to give you money to do more video work.

[Tin Can]

KS does advise a homespun personal video.

Read their tips, before doing anything.

Always read the rule book, is my rule.

[Old-N-Feeble]

That comment was purely conjecture -
Someone assumed there might be reimbursement of previous expense.

There was NO statement to that effect in the original KS Writeup.

I hate rumors and am ashamed that I bit that bait and added to the confusion.

[CropDusterMan]

Stone - numerous award-winning documentaries have been done on shoestring budgets. Not every project needs a significant support staff, fancy props, or huge
travel and accommodation expenses, let alone paid actors. A bigger hurdle is getting something distributed after editing.

+2

[StoneNYC]

I think that's absolutely right, unless (as Randy demonstrates) we stretch our ideas of film production into what's possible today. We live in an era when surprisingly good looking movies get made by a pair of people who do everything themselves, using cheap gear that they already have, fueling the whole project with fast food. It's not an imperative ... there are reasons to have a real crew and to work at different levels. But technology has enabled some crazy possibilities.

(I just looked up Lena Dunham's Tiny Furniture—a really good feature film from 2010. Budget $65,000. And yes, it helps that it stars the film maker, and that the main character's mom and sister are played by the film maker's mom and sister)

And that she has rich successful parents who are already in the industry.

I've met her, she's earned her spot and as talent of her own for sure, but she got off the ground because she had the $ and access backing her.

[StoneNYC]

Stone - numerous award-winning documentaries have been done on shoestring budgets. Not every project needs a significant support staff, fancy props, or huge
travel and accommodation expenses, let alone paid actors. A bigger hurdle is getting something distributed after editing.

Yes, I agree, HOWEVER as artists, are we really going to defend getting a whole crew together that we don't pay at all just to keep the cost down? Like someone asking you to do their wedding for free or low cost because they are your friend, it's insulting.

Yes it can be done, if everyone's a producer and they split the profit in the end, but it's very hard to get it right. Only one movie I can think of has ever truly been a "success" that was on a shoestring budget, and that was "Clerks". Shot on B&W film it because it was cheaper than color film, because lighting equipment wasn't needed for B&W to balance color of the Florescent lighting or increase the lighting as B&W could handle the darker environment.

AND the person who helped fund the project WAS the director who threw his own money in the pot, including I believe selling his car to help cover some of the cost.

It's do-able, but rare.

[ScottPhotoCo]

In defense of Clyde.

He is an ultimate DIY Artist. I believe he prints all his work directly himself with help. He setup and made his Darkroom himself.

Most likely he is very idealistic and wanted to pay his young minions. Good for him, maybe bad for him and them.

While a great traditional photographer and wet printer, he is in danger of weakening his position with his recent DSLR adventures.

I think he should keep on with his traditional methods even if he must work from a wheelchair directing his crew in his continuing life work.

His Documentary needs a good 30 second elevator pitch, a script writer and and most of all a genius editor. The raw materials exist already.

For Burroughs, I watched endless days of footage and marked sections for the editor to look at. Post production is time consuming. Then I spent a lot of time watching Ilko edit, free lessons for me.

And yes Paul, very few even got airplane tickets or a beer.

I would add more, but at this point on, it's political.

Randy is right on here.

As a marketing and communication guy (25 years working with some of the most successful companies in the world) this effort failed from the start and has nothing to do with Mr. Butcher. After seeing the promotion video and reading the KS set-up I couldn't bring myself to support it.

If the filmmaker is a good documentarian, editor and story teller then his film promoting the piece should be incredibly compelling and engaging. If he didn't have the knowledge himself he should have worked with a writer and a communications specialist to make sure his message was well planned, written and delivered. This COULD have been a great film and it is still a good idea. It seems that the filmmaker just didn't have the expertise to communicate, or perhaps even execute, that idea well.

In regard to weakening his position with his "DSLR adventures" you are 100% correct. It makes me sad, as both a lover of quality photography and as a respecter of Mr. Butcher's work, every time I see the digital work on his page.